Tired_Old_Man

And my spelling is screwed up too. I started to write "Mother Nature" and attempted to change it to "Mother Nurture" and would up with "Mother Narture".:faint:

You got me!!:faint: I should have checked Snopes, but the pictures were so beautiful, that I posted them without checking. :help: I am a bad boy.:embarassed:

I purposely wrote my last post so as to be so confusing that no one would dare challenge it. Even I don't know what it means.:mad:

Churches can do wonderful things to help people. That is one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is that while they are helping people, they are also enlarging their membership through proselytizing. I read a few years ago that Russia was one of the prime targets of the US Christian movement and was considered both fertile group and contested ground by the Christian denominations. Of course the churches claim they are going there to help the poor, but they are also helping their membership roles, both short term and more importantly long term. When I read the article, the Mormon church was making huge inroads and was the leading denomination in signing up previously God-less Russians. I also welcome MsDad, both as a new member and as one with a different perspective, maybe even a more unique (oxymoron) perspective than most. I am always glad to hear new ideas from people with different backgrounds. I am tired of bashing the same old types of members.:mad: I hope that was taken as the joke it was meant to be.:embarassed: But if not, I will still put my foot into my mouth and state my opinions. One of those opinions is that even when people are doing their best to do good, they can cause harm. And that goes for both sides of the spectrum. Because a group fights for freedom for another particular group, doesn't mean that group will use that freedom wisely. Just because a person gives to charity, doesn't mean that the charity will be beneficial to its intended recipients. And just because someone feels like they have made a difference, doesn't mean that the difference was for the best. Big churches can be overpowering, but small churches which are part of a large denomination can also be dominating, but by doing things in a smaller way, they may appear more benevolent. Of course, it is human nature (the good side) to believe that you vote and do things for your values which are moral. But there is a certain immorality in forcing your moral values on to others even if you believe that it is for their own good. I do not know of any decent person that can totally help themselves from doing it, myself included. There is however, another side to human nature (the dark side) which manifests itself in trying to change other people's values for their own benefit while pretending to be doing it for them and worst of all are the ones who trick people, from the good side, into helping them change values for others while having them believe that they are doing it for people who are the targets of change. These manipulators are the Satans of our society, while often thought of as the most reverent.

Tell that to Elliot Ness.

Mother Nurture:

Mother Nurture:

Mother Nurture:

In a zoo in California, a mother tiger gave birth to a rare set of triplet tiger cubs. Unfortunately, due to complications in the pregnancy, the cubs were born prematurely and due to their tiny size, they died shortly after birth. After recovering from the delivery, the mother tiger suddenly started to decline in health, although physically she was fine. The veterinarians felt that the loss of her litter had caused the tigress to fall into a depression. The doctors decided that if the tigress could surrogate another mother's cubs, perhaps she would improve. After checking with many other zoos across the country, the depressing news was that there were no tiger cubs of the right age to introduce to the mourning mother. The veterinarians decided to try something that had never been tried in a zoo environment. Sometimes a mother of one species will take on the care of a different species. The only orphans that could be found quickly were a litter of weanling pigs. The zoo keepers and vets wrapped the piglets in tiger skin and placed the babies around the mother tiger. Would they become cubs or pork chops?? Take a look. You won't believe your eyes!

Before it Starts

A woman was walking down the street when she was accosted by a particularly dirty and shabby-looking homeless woman who asked her for a couple of dollars for dinner. The woman took out her billfold, extracted ten dollars and asked, "If I give you this money, will you buy some wine with it instead of dinner?" "No, I had to stop drinking years ago," the homeless woman replied. "Will you use it to go shopping instead of buying food?" the woman asked "No, I don't waste time shopping," the homeless woman said. "I need to spend all my time trying to stay alive." "Will you spend this on a beauty salon instead of food?" the woman asked. "Are you NUTS!" replied the homeless woman. "I haven't had my hair done in 20 years!" "Well," said the woman, " I'm not going to give you the money. Instead, I'm going to take you out for dinner with my hubby and me tonight. The homeless woman was astounded. "Won't your hubby be furious with you for doing that? I know I'm dirty, and I probably smell pretty disgusting." The woman replied, "That's okay. It's important for him to see what a woman looks like after she has given up shopping, hair appointments, and wine."

I will not call you a Nazi, but this is a medical problem that has been made into a police/law enforcement crisis. And the only people that gain anything from the problem are the people who work in the government. There has to be a better way that killing our own children. Who will the community (that needs safety) be when the children of the community are dead? It didn't work with alcohol and it will not work with drugs.

I guess there was a lot more than a touch of sarcasm in mine.:deadhorse:

:boy_hug::mad:

I was 99% sure that you did know how it works, but since we have non-US citizens on this forum and most US citizens, according to a recent survey, do not understand the system, I was just putting everyone on the same page. As the first line of my explanation stated, "Of course the majority has to rule", so yes, if enough people put pressure on their congressmen and state legislatures to do what I said was needed to pass a constitutional amendment, then porn would be outlawed and I would abide by it, of c:rolleyes:urse. But, since porn grosses more money that legit movies, we know the chances of that. We could even pass an amendment to outlaw Islam, but they might have to outlaw freedom of religion to do that. If some people got their way and enough politicians who believe in the literal Bible were elected, I guess we could pass enough amendments and laws to make the USA a theocracy. If we have an attack similar to what has been going on in "24", that might not be far behind. Porn grosses more money that legit movies, so who is watching all the porn? Could it be that most Christians and MANY females are liars?

I love the hypocrisy of people who have the free will to say "no" to over-eating, but can't, so they have their bodies mutilated, saying that people addicted to drugs have the free will not to take the money to have their bodies mutilated.:frusty:

I just used pornography to illustrate the point, first because of the constitutional argument and then also the 60 votes to get out of conference rule in the Senate. Besides with Tina gone all this time, what do you think is left for me to do?

How about if I hold a gun to your head and give you the right to decide if you want to sign this contract?

Where should we start to line up the 10,000,000 people that you would like executed?

Of course the majority has to rule and in all "free" countries of the world, the majority does rule, BUT, the USA was and is supposed to be special, because besides majority rule, we also have "minority rights". The "minority rights" part is accomplished in two ways. If it were just majority rule, then if 218 US Representatives (one more than 50%) and 51 Senators say yes to a "no more pornography" bill, and the president signs the bill, then no more pornography. Right? Not in this country, because our founding father did not want that, so they put into the bill of rights, certain guarantees to allow freedom for other than the majority. That "no more pornography" will be struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court as a violation of “Free Speech”. So what can be done to get "no more pornography" into our social justice system. Well, if they can get 300 US Representatives (2/3's) and 67 Senators to say yes to a "no more pornography" Constitutional Amendment and then 38 States have referendums agreeing, then there will be "no more pornography", but that is a lot easier said than done. For laws that do not violate the Constitution, it still takes more than 218 US Representatives and 51 Senators to say yes , and for the president to sign the bill. It takes 218 US Representatives to bring the bill up for a vote in "The House", but it takes 60 Senators to bring the bill up for a vote in the Senate. That Senate rule is there to stop a simple majority from running ruff-shad over the minority. Many times the majority complains about that rule. Last year, the Republicans were threatening to remove the "60 Senators to bring the bill up for a vote" rule. If they had, then the once majority Republicans would not be able to stop the now majority Democrats from passing their anti-war agenda. The idea of minority rights stops abuse by the majority and smooths the political waves as one side then the other is a majority. Could you imagine if every few years every law was reversed? And there are Christians that vote against the particular type of Christians (Christian Right Political Movement Evangelicals), who try to push their beliefs into law.

Many of the rules of "The Church" that have to do with interaction between people are who do not consent to the behavior described in the rule are ok with me. Thou shalt no kill, bear false witness, steal, etc are fine with me, because their is a victim and victimizer in each of these statements. Thou shalt not kill means the victimizer should not kill the victim. But when it comes to what someone does on Sunday (or Saturday in some religions), or coveting my neighbors house or wife, or having consenting sex, then I am generally against the state putting those Church rules into effect. The positions that Tina and I use in bed are not the business of the state of Florida, nor the Federal government's business. If I want to look at a porno movie before going to bed; my business. If I want to cheat on my wife, with a female of male, as long as they are over 18, then it is only the business of Tina and I. If I want to worship a statue of a Golden Donkey, or tell my parents to "shove it", then the government should not be concerned.

While I agree with much of what you said, you may have inadvertently hit the nail on the head with the statement that I turned red above. It has been said that the main reason for religion is to subdue the masses in order to milk them. In the game of Chess, it is no accident that the Bishops are powerful pieces and are protected by the pawns who are sacrificed for the protection of the King, Queen and Bishops. The people who religion is aimed at may be represented by the pawns in the minds of many.

I agree with the vast majority of what you wrote. Today, with the Internet and TV Channels like the Science Channel, History Channel, National Geographic Channel, etc. available, it is a shame that MTV and similar junk are what children are watching. In the break room where I used to work, we had a TV. I wanted to watch the ABC World News and this other mechanic wanted to watch "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous". This happened almost every night, because that was when we normally got lunch. Sometimes I would get there first, so we would watch the news, sometimes, we watched the "glitz". One night when we were watching the news, this other mechanic was bitching and moaning, "same news every night" until the news anchor said, "after we come back from these commercials, star from the 40's remembered" (translation: Old Movie Star died), and then he couldn't wait to see who it was and to hear all the gossip. We have a nation of dummies because they are only interested in glitz. More people can name all 12 American Idol contestants than came name their 3 Federal Congressmen. Talking about FOX TV shows; has anyone seen "Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader?" People who are stupid are competing for a $1,000,000 by answering questions on math and geography from the first through fifth grades. I wonder where they got their pool of applicants from and how did they keep away the Jeopardy and "Do you want to be a Millionaire" applicants out of the show's contestant pool?

Because they mentioned Benjamin Franklin by name. Even if they had not, they are supposed to be trained at "how to tell counterfeit money from real money" and would therefor be expected to have more knowledge than average people about money. Plus, it says Benjamin Franklin on the bill right under the picture.:faint:

Both tellers knew that Benjamin Franklin was the person on the $100 bill. I even said to one of them, I guess that the movie "Dead Presidents" has had a lot of influence. Note: For those unaware of the term, the movie was called "Dead Presidents", because that was how the thieves referred to the money they were going to steal; "Pictures of 'Dead Presidents'."