Closing down the Internet

[Phoenix]

Someone posted this on another forum, and I just knew I had to post it here.

Amarillo,TX --Gladis Haralski, founder of United Confederacy Against WWW (UCAWWW) announced last week of her ongoing campaign to shut down the internet.

In an interview Gladis proclaims the destructive way in which we use the internet degenerates society's standards. "The internet is nothing but filth to steal our children from God and truth", says Gladis...



Currently the UCAWWW holds 43 members, all of which reside in Texas. When Gladis was asked by reporters how she planned to reach out to others across the country she said, "We have many ongoing projects, and soon we'll be proud to announce the grand opening of our website."

website: http://www.rbales.com/modules.php?na...rder=0&thold=0

[Araznal]

Irony is a beautiful thing. I was having a pretty bad day today. Thanks for lifting my spirits .

[jokerjoe12]

"Currently the UCAWWW holds 43 members, all of which reside in Texas. When Gladis was asked by reporters how she planned to reach out to others across the country she said, "We have many ongoing projects, and soon we'll be proud to announce the grand opening of our website."

Ha that is so stupid. ^^^ they are going to avrotise there shut down the internet scam on the internet

this will never work

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by jokerjoe12

"Currently the UCAWWW holds 43 members, all of which reside in Texas. When Gladis was asked by reporters how she planned to reach out to others across the country she said, "We have many ongoing projects, and soon we'll be proud to announce the grand opening of our website."

Ha that is so stupid. ^^^ they are going to avrotise there shut down the internet scam on the internet

this will never work

I'm pretty sure that's why Phoenix highlighted that same statement in the initial post.....:

[Westley]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

I'm pretty sure that's why Phoenix highlighted that same statement in the initial post.....:

Ooohh! Zinger!

[esskreemr]

Arrgghhhh. Another rightist nut-job group coming out of Texas... What the Hell do they put in the water over there?

What's next? The surgical removal of all sex organs at birth, because they could be used in fornication.

I suppose in addition to the website, they'll also eventually higher some spammers to get the "Word of God" out quicker...

[Araznal]

[quote=esskreemr]What's next? The surgical removal of all sex organs at birth, because they could be used in fornication. [quote]

Yeah, I never could understand that whole Christian thing. Why is it so sinful to procreate? In my religion (that would be Judaism), sex is considered a beautiful act with childbirth an added bonus (of course protected sex is another matter). Could a Christian clear up that "original sin" stuff for me?

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by Araznal

Yeah, I never could understand that whole Christian thing. Why is it so sinful to procreate? In my religion (that would be Judaism), sex is considered a beautiful act with childbirth an added bonus (of course protected sex is another matter). Could a Christian clear up that "original sin" stuff for me?

Apparently, from what I gather. There was this deeply troubled man called Paul who was probably a self-loathing closet homosexual. For some reason the Church decided to adopt just about all his views on the dirtiness of sex. Next thing you know it you have a bunch of butt-ugly heffers running around screaming "Sex is bad!! Sex is evil!!" I think we could solve most of the problems concerning religion by ensuring that these people get laid frequently.

After all, we have Adam and Eve who ran around naked. Then they had Cain & Abel (what do you expect when you pretty much have the entire earth to....errrm... roam in?). Who married Adam and Eve? They obviously weren't married in a Church by a dully appointed representative of the Church. They were living in sin!! They had sex out of wedlock. We're all doomed!! Doomed I say!!! Hey wait I get it now!!! Hey, did you know that Lot (after fleeing the destruction of Sodom) impregnated his virgin daughters while he was drunk? Good stuff... if you tried writing this today, you would have been sued or arrested for distributing pornography... but since it's in the Bible, it's ok...

[Araznal]

Yeah, I know the Lot story. I read it as a source of some cheap laughs: best guy in Sodom gets drunk and rapes his daughters. Sounds like an article in the Post (New York Post that is..)

[esskreemr]

I used to read the "Song of Solomon" during church service while I was growing up.... .... they really shouldn't be allowed to expose children to stuff like that at such a early age...

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

What's next? The surgical removal of all sex organs at birth, because they could be used in fornication.

Look on the bright side: If they remove their children's sex organs, they guarantee their own extinction.

I love self-correcting problems, don't you?

[epeeisky]

Somehow I think that natural selection will take care of Gladyis. I am no longer shocked when something comes on the news and it leads in with, "Today in Texas," or, "Today in Idaho." No offense to anybody that lives in either one of those states, but some crazy stuff comes out of those states(e.g. Pres Bush)



I half kid

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Araznal

Yeah, I know the Lot story. I read it as a source of some cheap laughs: best guy in Sodom gets drunk and rapes his daughters. Sounds like an article in the Post (New York Post that is..)

That is not how the story goes. It was after their city was destroyed by God and the girls thinking that they needed to have a surviving line, get their father drunk and have sex with him so that their race could live on. Very distrubing. And the original sin thing: Supposedly all people are born with original sin because Adam and Eve ate the apple of knowlegde and disobeyed God. And that Baptisim washes it away.

This is what you learn from 9 years of catholic school .

[Inquartata]

Yyyyyeah, right---it was the girls' fault. It always is in paternalistic cultures, isn't it?

But if he was not complicit how did Mr. Lot manage to...?

[Phoenix]

That's the same thing I was asking myself....

[Moonitic]

[quote=Araznal][quote=esskreemr]What's next? The surgical removal of all sex organs at birth, because they could be used in fornication.

Yeah, I never could understand that whole Christian thing. Why is it so sinful to procreate? In my religion (that would be Judaism), sex is considered a beautiful act with childbirth an added bonus (of course protected sex is another matter). Could a Christian clear up that "original sin" stuff for me?

Oooh kay...Time to clear up some common misconceptions about Christianity. Why? Because it's kind of annoying to see people try to explain it, but get it wrong.

It is not sinful to procreate...in marriage. That's the whole deal. Christianity finds sex to be so holy that it is only for a married couple because it truly is "two becoming one." It's not for cheap thrills. Marriage is a very serious matter, & so is sex. To step out of Christianity for a moment, to have premarital (or extra marital) sex opens a person up to many diseases, unwanted pregnancy & emotional distress.

Original sin came about in the Gardnen, as stated before. But it is NOT just the woman's fault. Man is just as guilty. The fact that both men & women lie, cheat, steal, etc. shows how imperfect we are as humans.

Many people seem to think that Christians live under so many rules that they can't be happy with life. That couldn't be further from the truth. There are some Christians who feel the need to beat themselves daily for one thing or another, but that's not how it's supposed to work. God didn't give us rules to punish us, just like we as parents don't give our children rules to punish them. They're for protection. It's not a "if it feels good, it's a sin" thing. While some sinful things tend to be more attractive, there are plenty of things that feel good that are NOT a sin. When done within the boundaries of what God wants us to do, we can live a very happy, peaceful life.

Something to remember, even though a Christian says, "I can't do that," it's not because they're brainwashed or anything. They simply want to follow God. Same as other religions. Muslims, Jews, etc. want to follow their gods & stay within their boundries (I'm not talking about the lunatic fringe, mind you). In a way, it's like someone on a diet saying, "I can't eat that chocolate cake." Sure, they COULD eat it & it would taste great, but it doesn't mean it's good for them.

I hope some of this makes sense. I'm very tired & in desperate need of sleep right now. If anyone has any questions, or wants something clarified, please ask, rather than assume. Assumptions are not a good thing in life. It's just better for everyone to ask if you aren't sure.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Moonitic

It is not sinful to procreate...in marriage. That's the whole deal. Christianity finds sex to be so holy that it is only for a married couple because it truly is "two becoming one."

That was the ultimate rationalization. Historically, though, doctrine at first labelled ALL sex as sinful, even in marriage. Spouses were supposed to remain chaste, saving all their love and attention for God, as in the archetypal first marriage between Adam and Eve in the Garden. At some point, though, the early church fathers realized that this was at best an unrealistic standard to which to hold common men and women, and at worst disastrous for the growth of Christianity. Accomodation was therefore made, by which sex in marriage was, though still sinful, forgiveable and not to be punished. It is still deemed nobler and more admirable in the eyes of God for the married couple to live as brother and sister in Christ, and celibate, like the clergy.

Sex is ALWAYS sinful, it's just constructively condoned in marriage. ( How could it be otherwise, if marriage is a sacrament equal to Holy Orders, where celibacy is strictly required? )

[Moonitic]

I'm not interested in twisted church doctrine. It's not "always" sinful. Obviously, there is a good reason for it, or God wouldn't put into us the drive, as well as the appropriate parts.

Not going to argue this.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

At some point, though, the early church fathers realized that this was at best an unrealistic standard to which to hold common men and women, and at worst disastrous for the growth of Christianity.

There was some some debate as early as First Nicea (325?) that it was desirable to enforce a celibate clergy. I believe it was Athanasius that argued, in effect, "That's a stupid requirement and nobody will go for it." Ultimately, they dropped it.

It wasn't until Second Laterine in 1139 that celibacy for the priesthood became mandatory.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by Moonitic

I'm not interested in twisted church doctrine.

"Twisted" church doctrine? I guess it depends on whose "church" you're talking about...

In the early days there was only one church, and doctrine as proposed and developed in the early centuries was the only doctrine judged legitimate.

It was only in later centuries that doctrinal differences caused schisms and reformations, so it seems to me that it's an open question as to who has "twisted" the doctrine--those who originally developed it, or those who changed it later.