Cajunluvie

Yes, but I'm not about to budge on my convictions to keep 0.5 of one percent of a minority group happy

Well said.

Thanks for the reply Botz!

I think I need to clarify a bit .Here is the passage I read that prompted that question

1 Chronicles 9:17-44

New King James Version (NKJV)

The Levite Gatekeepers

17 And the gatekeepers were Shallum, Akkub, Talmon, Ahiman, and their brethren. Shallum was the chief. 18 Until then they had been gatekeepers for the camps of the children of Levi at the King’s Gate on the east.

19 Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, from his father’s house, the Korahites, were in charge of the work of the service, gatekeepers of the tabernacle. Their fathers had been keepers of the entrance to the camp of the LORD. 20 And Phinehas the son of Eleazar had been the officer over them in time past; the LORD was with him. 21 Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was keeper of the door of the tabernacle of meeting.

22 All those chosen as gatekeepers were two hundred and twelve. They were recorded by their genealogy, in their villages. David and Samuel the seer had appointed them to their trusted office. 23 So they and their children were in charge of the gates of the house of the LORD, the house of the tabernacle, by assignment. 24 The gatekeepers were assigned to the four directions: the east, west, north, and south. 25 And their brethren in their villages had to come with them from time to time for seven days. 26 For in this trusted office were four chief gatekeepers; they were Levites. And they had charge over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God. 27 And they lodged all around the house of God because they had the responsibility, and they were in charge of opening it every morning.

So it looks like they were assigned and it was a Trusted Office... So it was important, but why for?

Aha....now I get a better picture...thanks Isaiah will get back to this later.

Looks to be an interesting thread. I hadn't noticed the significane of it before.

Seems she means "deselect" as in "dismiss or reject". I looked it up on Merriam-Webster dictionary. In other words, if I understand her premise- she sees no reason within evolution to reject it.

I don't think many people actually use that term anyway. (deselect)

Btw- you, Old Shep, and Cobalt are doing great, IMO. I'm just reading along but thought I'd comment on the vocabulary.

BTW, welcome to the board. It is great to have you here!

Lol, Cobalt. Nice to see someone I already know!

Since the percentage is not threatening for us as a species, I do not see any evolutionary reason to deselect it.

Umm... correct me if I am wrong, but evolution is supposedly a mindless directionless process, it is not guided by someone purposefully deselecting anything. Hoe do you "deselect" homosexuality? Perhaps you mean something else?

You make it appear as something you will intentionally do to our current population.

Bewildered,

C

Seems she means "deselect" as in "dismiss or reject". I looked it up on Merriam-Webster dictionary. In other words, if I understand her premise- she sees no reason within evolution to reject it. I don't think many people actually use that term anyway. (deselect)

Btw- you, Old Shep, and Cobalt are doing great, IMO. I'm just reading along but thought I'd comment on the vocabulary.

Yes and no: I meant natural de-selection, when a certain genetical or biological characteristic is not part of the gene pool anymore. Maybe "extinction" would be more appropriate... sorry for my English.

There is no intentionality in extinction (de-selection) as there is no intentionality in success (selection). For instance, according to evolution theory, our far ancestors had a tail which has been almost totally eradicated from our genes pool since no more useful. I say "almost" because sometimes babies can be born with a tail, still.

Ciao

- viole

Well, I am an English major. Maybe you meant that, however, the way you wrote your sentence does have an inherent logic based on supporting or not supporting a premise. That's why I looked up the word and the meaning of that word.

Since this subject isn't geared to evolution so I won't go there.

Since the percentage is not threatening for us as a species, I do not see any evolutionary reason to deselect it.

Umm... correct me if I am wrong, but evolution is supposedly a mindless directionless process, it is not guided by someone purposefully deselecting anything. Hoe do you "deselect" homosexuality? Perhaps you mean something else?

You make it appear as something you will intentionally do to our current population.

Bewildered,

C

Seems she means "deselect" as in "dismiss or reject". I looked it up on Merriam-Webster dictionary. In other words, if I understand her premise- she sees no reason within evolution to reject it.

I don't think many people actually use that term anyway. (deselect)

Btw- you, Old Shep, and Cobalt are doing great, IMO. I'm just reading along but thought I'd comment on the vocabulary.

Isn't the Crown the head of the Church of England?

What impact would this have in this regard?

Good question, Nebula!

I believe it is so to a certain extent.

In any case, it is Jesus who is the real Head of the Body.

Netanyahu will be gracious but firm, will affirm his friendship with the States but remain firm to the position of Israel and her defense.

Remember how he dealt with the protester when in Congress?

He's a smart man.

Agreed.

Too bad we don't have someone in the White House like that.

And I would think the feeling might be mutual.

Lol, Mizzdy!

I read about this. I think it stems from their inability to "control" Bibi Netanyahu and I also think it ties to anti-semitism.

I'm not in the least bit surprised at the exchange. To me, it is the pot calling the kettle black.

IMO whether or not these allegations are true, or as bad as the press will make it appear, Herman Cain's candidacy is undoubtedly done for. GOD can forgive him but the press will never let it die.

The lesson is, if you lead a Christian life from the git go you won't have to worry if you run for office.

Actually, no, the real lesson is that the Left, and our main-stream media are blatant racists. The reason Herman Cain is being lynched by the media is because he is Conservative, Black, and leading in the polls, and that scares them even worse than Sarah Palin did. Because if Herman Cain wins the primaries, he renders every single pat defense that the Left uses to negate a conservative candidate moot, and useless. They can't play the race card after that and it is the one tactic they rely on time after time. Since the Left, and the media is constantly hinting that there is still so much closet racism in our society and blaming absolutely every problem in society on racism, you would think they would be over-joyed that Herman Cain is doing so well. Strangely, that's not what we see. Because what they say, and how they actually feel are two different things. They do not like Herman Cain doing well at all, because he is conservative and that stands everything they are always carping about a racist country on it's head. So they have to find a way to get rid of him, and there are few options, because they can't play the race card at all.

A woman cropping up here and there to make claims, most of them anonomous is supposed to be a trail of bread crumbs. But we aren't biting, Cain isn't going down, and the left is getting frustrated. Were Herman Cain a cronic sexual harrassment junkie, victims would be coming out of the wood work. The fact that they are having to turn over rocks to find someone willing to say he sexually harrassed them and they don't want anyone to know who they are says a great deal. It says the allegations are bogus. That part is not hard to figure out and it is actually helping him because a great many people see it for exactly what it is. The media is going to have to re-think their strategy because the same tired tricks they've used for decades just don't work anymore.

Agreed, Cobalt. If that happened to a real victim, she would not be backing off and the whole procedure seems fishy to me.... kind of strained, if you ask me.

Clinton was a whole 'nother matter. I knew from the get-go that he was no good and I was only in the 5th grade at the time. No one discussed him to me. I was just sitting with Papa watching the debate and I knew something was "off" with that man. I even understood what was going on in the debate and I turned to my Papa and said, 'That does not make any (logical) sense" and he was dumbfounded a 5th grade girl could see through all of that smoke screen. Added to say, Papa was a registered Democrat who lived in Arkansas at the time of CLinton's governship and he never really "cottoned" to the guy. I even said to a liberal speech teacher of mine who was "arguing" with me that he was going to embarrass himself and sure enough, I was right later on. She was a supporter of his.

That said- I didn't get the same vibe with Cain so far. I'm not "voting" for him but I'm watching as it unfolds- some things I think he say is excellent..

Fox News had some more information on this issue.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/04/obama-administration-opposes-fdr-prayer-at-wwii-memorial/

Oh, the irony!

One hopes people will learn from this.

Personally, I do not believe this will shoo away the homeless. Free food is after all free food!

It is not just irony; it is hypocrisy. They don't like freeloaders any more than the rest of us, yet they want to create a nation full of freeloaders, yet complain when people freeload off of them, particularly when it is the kind of people they are supposedly fighting for in the streets.

You could cut the hypocrisy with a knife. To quote one person in the article:

“We need to limit the amount of food we’re putting out to curb the influx of derelicts,”

The protesters themselves are derelicts. And they are there by choice. A good many of the homeless are not homeless by choice, but we can't help them. Protesters whining about Wall Street and squating in a public park, them we can help. Yet another blatant example of liberal "tolerance" but no one notices, or says a word.

Yup.

U.S. Will Withhold Funds For U.N. Agency After Vote to Grant Membership to Palestinians

Published October 31, 2011

FoxNews.com

The United States will not pay $60 million to a U.N. cultural and educational agency after it voted Monday to accept the Palestinian mission as a full member, triggering a U.S. requirement to cut off funds.

<snip>

Washington is required by law to cut off funding to any U.N. agency if the Palestinian Liberation Organization is granted membership in any group at the international body.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization voted 107-14 with 52 abstentions on Monday granting Palestinians full membership in the organization. The U.S. voted against the nomination. Eighty-one votes of the 173 UNESCO members were needed for full membership to be approved.

<snip>

The U.S. funds about 22 percent of UNESCO's budget, or roughly $80 million annually. Nuland said the $60 million was scheduled to be sent in November.

Full report here

Good.

Wow! So awesome!

I've been in car accidents where I just walked away without any serious injuries. One of them was when my car was totaled from all sides. I had been hit TWICE as it flipped around! Papa (my dad) couldn't believe his eyes when he came to pick me up at the scene- he said something about me being forunate to be alive. The other one was when my stepmom was driving me and my kid to the airport and there was a construction going on at the merge right before the highway goes under the bridge.. well, when she got on the merge to onto the road- a SUV was going too fast and slammed into our tiny rental car. There was absolutely no damage on ours- not even a scratch. We were lucky we weren't plowed into the side of the bridge!

I know it was God's protection both times!

Unitarians and Episcopalian - yep.

Uniting religions under a banner that is not Jesus.

One world religion, anyone?

Mmmm.... verrrry interesting.

I like it! I would like to share that on my Facebook page but wanted to ask first if that was ok with you?

Let's pray for Alex Baldwin. Really.

His brother is a strong believer and there may be a spiritual battle going on for him right now.

Yes, Stephen is. I've had the pleasure to read his autobiography and also "listened" to his testimony several times on TBN.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a battle for Alec. I do pray that he does come to Christ. I'm surprised Alec went to the bat against those. I vaguely read something about some Hollywood folks who are supporting this ridiculous behavior at OWS.

Good! Finally they are banning something satanic instead of Godly! I am not sad to see it go. What saddens me is that so many parents are complaining about the schools banning Halloween, but no one stood up when they banned the Lords prayer or any Christian ideas in Christmas concerts.

Agreed. I do not care for Halloween but I do think schools have become so politicially correct that they lose sight of what schools are really all about: EDUCATION.

Get back to teaching children what is absolutely necessary. Sometimes I wonder if we have allowed so much into the schools with celebrating every thing in the first place. Shouldn't it be done in the home/community/neighborhood? All of this political correctness is gone amok. We can't please everyone at all times and we shouldn't apologize for it either. They have to understand it doesn't always go THEIR way.

I could understand if schools have a celebration for the 4th of July holiday because I believe that would be a good way to have kids connect the holiday and how it is relevant to American History.

Ulsterman: Who did they speak to? At the White House?

WSI: I don’t know. What I do know is the message that came back to them was…unfavorable. Certainly very inconsiderate to the concerns of these events unfolding into something terribly violent and increasingly dangerous to a lot of people working and living in this city. And it could very well spread across the country. It’s already started in other parts of the world of course – the violence. The instability to the system. The Obama White House wants us gone. All of us. Anyone of us not fully supportive of his policies.

Ulsterman: What do you mean “gone”?

WSI: Just what I stated. Gone. Out of the way. Our ability to make a living eliminated......

http://theulstermanreport.com/2011/10/17/wall-street-insider-the-obama-white-house-wants-us-gone-all-of-us/

I remember this site. I think this guy supposedly was an insider who worked at one time in the WH admin or somehow knew what was going on BEFORE some events transpired : read the fallout on the who /what/ how regarding Osama Bin Laden's death and there was an internal struggle at least some time BEFORE it actually happened. And then I believe there were some mainstream articles that mentioned the issue between Obama and Leon Panetta (worked under Clinton admin, btw) after OBL's death hit the news.... If it was concidential- it sure was very well done!

I remember at the time, I was basically "hmmm-humm" with the whole thing until the OBL incident transpired.

October 18, 2011 2:40pm ? Comments

Team Obama sells Birth Certificate mugs

byCharlie Spiering Commentary Staff Writer

Follow on Twitter:@charliespiering

President Obama is still bugging birthers by rubbing copies of his birth certificate into their faces. Now the campaign is selling "Made in the USA" coffee mugs for Obama supporters. The mugs cost $20.

"There's really no way to make the birth certificate conspiracy completely go away, so we might as well laugh at it -- and make sure as many people as possible are in on the joke." reads the description on the Obama 2012 website. "Get your Made In The USA mug today."

Picture of mug on site

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/team-obama-sells-birth-certificate-mugs

That just tells me how they disregard the issue.

Muslim Syria Full of Christian History

By George Thomas

CBN News Sr. ReporterSaturday, August 20, 2011

The image of Christians sharing their faith in a Muslim-dominated country may come as a surprise to some, but Christianity has actually had its roots in Syria since early in the first century.

Following his conversion on the road to Damascus, Paul established the first organized Christian church at Antioch in ancient Syria.

John the Baptist's head is said to be located in Syria's Omayyad mosque, which was a church at one time. And up the road from the mosque is the Chapel of Ananias, where locals say the Lord used Ananias to cure Paul's blindness.

"This is the place where the apostle Paul received his calling to share the gospel across the Roman world," a Syrian pastor said. "Today, Christians have the freedom to worship openly here. And we are proclaiming the name of Jesus Christ everywhere in Syria."

Christians make up 10 percent of the Syrian population. The majority are Muslims. Most of the Christians live in the cities of Damascus, Aleppo, Hamah and Latakia.

<snip>

"The church today in Syria is living in its Golden Age. We see a hunger for God among the youth. And many families are expressing openness to the message of Christ," he explained. "The church is also moving in freedom."

Full report

Wonderful to hear these news.

So sad. We need to remember our brethren in other places of the world who are being persecuted and forced to stand strong in their faith against extreme opposition. The Gospel is indeed an "offense" to those who do not believe.