Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

You got it, Rick.

It has been my observation that Christians and non-Christians, alike, tend to act as if the words
"Discernment" and "Judgment" are synonymous. And, they are not. Discernment is basically observation. It is one thing to simply observe something, and something else, entirely, to pass judgement on it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

mamabearCali wrote:Moral is applicable across the board. It is always wrong to bear false witness. It is always wrong to commit adultery. Sodomy...is a term applied only to anal intercourse....not cutting of hair.

Aside from acknowledging that morality is inherently subjective and personal, making it nearly impossible to create an "across the board" paradigm, even in homogeneous societies......the term "sodomy" applies to oral sex as well. Making me chuckle anytime someone uses the term both disparagingly and pointedly towards homosexuals. Most Americans, indeed humans, appear to be sodomites.

Mindflayer wrote:

dorminWS wrote:This has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

I believe it does. We're reaching the point where the word "slave" can not be used in any manner; where questioning data in a fact-based discussion is "bullying"; where saying you don't like something/someone is grounds for being arrested/visited by a 3-letter government agency/expelled. In short, we are being told you must speak only the approved lines.

That all said, it's still a freaking reality TV show. I can not believe it is news. Did we forget about the weapons we sent to Syria, which is still in a civil war, now being used by our enemies? How about the overheating of the Chinese economy and the rumblings about a major correction? How about China's saber rattling over the Senkaku islands? How about the still ever-present Taliban forces in Afghanistan? How about our U6 15% unemployment rate - which is probably higher to 23%? This stuff is news. Some guy on a reality show speaking his mind and getting booted? Bah. This, whatever Miley Cyrus did, whatever Kanye said, whatever some idiot wore to yet another Hollywood self-promotion is not news.</rant_over>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

No, it really doesn’t have anything to do with the First Amendment. The First Amendment only speaks to what Congress may not do. It provides that Congress cannot make a law that favors the establishment of one particular religion; that prohibits the free exercise of religion; or that restricts freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people to gather and engage in peaceful demonstrations and to petition the government for redress of their grievances. It does not speak to what private parties may do.

You are absolutely right and I agree with everything else you said, but this is just not a First Amendment matter. A famous man once said that freedom of the press belongs to him that owns one; and that’s what the problem is here. People who control organs of mass communication are using them to control what kind of content the people get to see and thereby shape public opinion. The American public needs to rebel against this cognitive tyranny. Boycotting A&E into irrelevance would be an excellent starting point.

vaeevictiss wrote:

Reverenddel wrote:I'm saying even an ant is smart enough to recognize their is something bigger than them, and should be respected.

But after working with the dregs of society for coming up on 17 years now I have come to three conclusions:
1.) People are not as smart as they think.
2.) People are generally not to be truly trusted until tested.
3.) Stupid people breed amazingly fast.

Like I stated before. It recognized the sun due to the physical warmth it felt. The actual temperature of that ant increased. If something ever happens to where I physically feel God, and somehow know it is he, then ill fully believe. Everything can usually be explained otherwise though.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Do you also recognize the atoms that make up your body? Have you ever seen one? How is it possible that your functioning systems can be made up of a collection of sub-atomic particles that you will never see? Sounds like a hoax to me! Do not believe in the atomic theory!

allingeneral wrote: Do you also recognize the atoms that make up your body? Have you ever seen one? How is it possible that your functioning systems can be made up of a collection of sub-atomic particles that you will never see? Sounds like a hoax to me! Do not believe in the atomic theory!

I have far more faith in the objectivity and critical thinking in science (which created the atomic model) than I do in religion.

If anyone questions religion, they are told that they need to try harder to believe. Blind faith. Just believe. Trust us, and in the meantime, we'll tell you what is right and what is wrong.

Sure there are biases and agendas in science, but at least we try to argue with objective observations.

trailrunner wrote:

allingeneral wrote: Do you also recognize the atoms that make up your body? Have you ever seen one? How is it possible that your functioning systems can be made up of a collection of sub-atomic particles that you will never see? Sounds like a hoax to me! Do not believe in the atomic theory!

I have far more faith in the objectivity and critical thinking in science (which created the atomic model) than I do in religion.

If anyone questions religion, they are told that they need to try harder to believe. Blind faith. Just believe. Trust us, and in the meantime, we'll tell you what is right and what is wrong.

Sure there are biases and agendas in science, but at least we try to argue with objective observations.

Yes - Faith is an important component.

Would you rather take the chance and believe with the possibility of being accepted into Heaven upon your death, or live a life not believing and risk certain damnation if you're wrong? What if you're wrong?

You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by accepting God into your heart.


And I believe that it's these types of discussions that Mr. Robertson hoped would spawn from his Duck Dynasty platform.

Per Trailrunners comment: to "believe" is not meant as to simply trust, but instead, it means w/r/t the bible, to make your best attempt to live as Jesus did. This is why I do not try to encourage laws that force others to do the morally right thing. You should only set as good an example as possible, and if someone asks, that's when you tell them what is right.

Funny, but it sounds just like Robertson's circumstance.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

trailrunner wrote:I have far more faith in the objectivity and critical thinking in science (which created the atomic model) than I do in religion.

If anyone questions religion, they are told that they need to try harder to believe. Blind faith. Just believe. Trust us, and in the meantime, we'll tell you what is right and what is wrong.

Sure there are biases and agendas in science, but at least we try to argue with objective observations.

No one has ever seen an atom(or a photon or an electron etc.); their existence is inferred.

Also by trying to force God/Prime Mover/whatever into our own very limited 3D(4D if you prefer) existence is bound to come up short.

Since the mobile site does not have a quote button I will address things to people by name.

Dontreadonme....I have never heard that being included in the definition of sodomy,,,,but whatever....My point was that hair cutting/ wearing tassels on your cloak/whatever ritual law you want to put in does not fall in the definition of sodomy.


From a faith standpoint...morality is whatever the creator says it is. As I accept the authority of scripture, I accept that the moral law of scripture is the gold standard.....do I live by it all the time....of course not...that is why I need a savior.

From a secular standpoint We do insist on a standard morality here in the US. We have laws...laws are based on an understood common morality. It is in general illegal to steal. In general it is illegal to murder.


Remek I agree with the majority of your post, However as noted above we do force moral behavior union people by law. Stealing is illegal. Assault and battery is illegal. Murder is illegal. Rape is illegal. Now do I think that we need a law for every moral issue...no...just because something is a sin does not make it a crime against the people or the state. So where do we draw the line. That is where the debate happens.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Kreutz wrote:

No one has ever seen an atom(or a photon or an electron etc.); their existence is inferred.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I pretend to absolutely no knowledge of this, but I thought I'd read somewhere that atoms have been imaged using electron scanning microscopes. In fact, didn't IBM write "IBM" in atoms quite a while ago?

mamabearCali wrote:Dontreadonme....I have never heard that being included in the definition of sodomy,,,,but whatever....My point was that hair cutting/ wearing tassels on your cloak/whatever ritual law you want to put in does not fall in the definition of sodomy.

From a faith standpoint...morality is whatever the creator says it is. As I accept the authority of scripture, I accept that the moral law of scripture is the gold standard.....do I live by it all the time....of course not...that is why I need a savior.

From a secular standpoint We do insist on a standard morality here in the US. We have laws...laws are based on an understood common morality. It is in general illegal to steal. In general it is illegal to murder.

Mamabear, I have yet to run across any legal definition of sodomy that doesn't include oral sex.

I partially agree with your statement on standard morality, but the fact that these laws have intrinsic secular value, reinforces my view that faith based morality [sans secular value] is inherently subjective and personal.

"That is where the debate happens."

I agree completely.

@mamabearCali:

Take my advice; accede to dontreadonme's superior expertise on this subject.

dorminWS wrote:@mamabearCali:

Take my advice; accede to dontreadonme's superior expertise on this subject.

Do you really have to play the stale "oh look, he's the smartest guy in the room" card? If you have a difference of opinion, so be it. It doesn't call for projections of dubious maturity.

Yes, everyone considers oral sex as sodomy. It's just another case of someone saying "well hell, I do that! well I'll just pretend that's not part of the definition so I don't look like a hypocritical Christian"

Give me a damn break. Don't sit there and say someone else won't get into heaven for their behavior, but think they will for theirs.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

vaeevictiss wrote:Yes, everyone considers oral sex as sodomy. It's just another case of someone saying "well hell, I do that! well I'll just pretend that's not part of the definition so I don't look like a hypocritical Christian"

Give me a damn break. Don't sit there and say someone else won't get into heaven for their behavior, but think they will for theirs.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Someone point out to me where in the scripture (Bible) it says that sodomy, between a man and woman, is a sinful act.

Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary has sodomy defined, simply, as "a crime against nature".

Merriam Webster's online dictionary is a bit more specific. It implies that the term originally applied to homosexual behavior, and references Genesis, but now defines it as oral and anal sex, both homo and heterosexual, as well as sex with animals.

Now I wish that I had not looked it up.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Vaeevictiss you have not been listening to a word anyone said. No one has said all "homosexuals go to hell".

As DormisWS alluded to I am rather naive , and simply did not realize that sodomy included oral sex...I thought the definition was limited to anal sex. That is not me being an jerk that is me being naive and not ever having a reason to look up the term sodomy in my life.

What all of us have said is that scripture says homosexual acts are sinful. Thus a person who practices them is a sinner in need of a savior. Just like all of us. I will not call evil good in my life or theirs.

As you don't believe in heaven what does it matter to you?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

nor did i say that in my last post. I said they will not go to heaven...which is in the bible...

Corinthians 6:9

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals"

and quite frankly if it was all the same then people would talk bad about people with tattoos or people that cut their hair or eat shellfish just as much as they talk bad about gay people. Its clearly not the same to some people yet it is in the eyes of God.

Widefat I have read the bible cover to cover several times over. I have been in bible studies multiple days of the week for 20 years. I have never heard of a prohibition on anything between a husband and wife.

Sexual acts between anyone other than husband and wife are forbidden. Certain sexual acts same sex/incest/ Etc are explicitly forbidden.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

dontreadonme wrote:

dorminWS wrote:@mamabearCali:

Take my advice; accede to dontreadonme's superior expertise on this subject.

Do you really have to play the stale "oh look, he's the smartest guy in the room" card? If you have a difference of opinion, so be it. It doesn't call for projections of dubious maturity.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You go off half-cocked, much? I meant no more and no less than exactly what I said; that mamabearCali should concede the point because you knew more about it than her. She, as is obvious from her subsequent post, got the message that she was a little naïve on that subject. You, on the other hand, busted both ankles to launch an ad hominem attack on me based solely upon YOUR lack of understanding and misconception. Oh, and by the way, it wasn't about my OPINION, it was about the definition of a word; AND I WAS AGREEING WITH YOU! I suggest you do us all a favor: - next time you accuse somebody of pissing in your cornflakes you should check first to see if they really are salty.