Equippers

oh ok, thanks for letting me know

are you saying she has been banned from the forum?

she has not been around since 4th of January, it is unlike her.

so you don't think Born again believers can be bullies? you are wrong. years ago i know this female pastor, who openly proclaim the love of God on stage, but is an unrepent bully make it what you will. but i know for a fact she is a born again believer, just like many other born again believers i have met.

i have been "ran over" by many Christians over the years and have not seen any justice from God at all i think i am the worst person to answer this.

how can you be sure Sarah Sanders is a Christian. is not one way of telling if someone is a Christian is by their fruit?

wonderful poem. anyway, happy birthday

oh no, i didn't mean you trashed the men in the photo i simply meant the men in the photo should not be bashed for not giving up the seat as they did nothing wrong. i mean the guy who posted this photo originally seemed to suggest they are bunch of male chauvinists, and i think that is wrong.

i agree, giving up one's seat is indeed a gesture of kindness but there is difference between obligation vs choice. not giving up one's seat to a non pregnant, non elderly, abled bodied woman is not morally wrong. the men in the photo should not be trashed for it.

it's a culture thing nowhere in the scripture, including one you cited, state men must give up their seat for a woman like i mentioned earlier, in my culture, the only situations where a person should give up their seat are for children, elderly, and women, but only if they are pregnant

don't you find it a bit ironic that many feminists might consider male chivalry like opening the door for women as patronising and condescending? i am not saying this is what i think. i just think there is no pleasing the modern day feminists.

are you serious?

i should also add i have zero respect for the so called modern day feminist, especially if they are men. it seems they love to cherry pick situations to support their own skewed narratives. if they really care about gender equality, then they would acknowledge situations where men are at a disadvantaged. for example, in many colleges in the US now, there are more females compares with males at undergraduate level. where is the outrage of the so called gender equalrists?

what is wrong with this photo? what does it have anything to do with gender equality? this Otlhabane guy is stupid. so those men who got on the subway before this woman and managed to secure a seat for themselves should give up their seats for this woman? is that what Otlhabane is implying? i comes from an Asian culture where we do believe it is warranted to give up one's seat in certain situations, those includes for children, elderly and women, but only if they are pregnant. is the woman in the photo an elderly or pregnant. Does not seem like it.

i think in Joseph's case, there was jealousy involved. He was their father's favourite, and Joseph was foolish enough to tell his brothers that he had a dream that one day they will all bow down to him. i suspect the jealousy had been brewing for a long long time, until it finally boiled over. never underestimate the potential destruction power of jealousy, especially long term jealousy. so it is not just Joseph was annoying.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12300797 just to give you guys a gist of what's been happening. basically Meghan Markle filed a lawsuit against British tabloid Mail on Sunday for publishing parts of a private letter she wrote to her father. Now the released legal documents seem to suggest Meghan's father is part of Mail on Sunday's defense and may be called in to testify against her case. Meghan's half sister Samantha, who she is estranged from has said if their father is called to testify, he will do it. i don't know, i think there seem to be a lot of problems between Meghan Markle and her dad. but here is the thing though, a parent should love their children unconditionally, even when your child "may" have done things that is hurtful to you. on the other hand, the scripture does teach (though in all fairness, Meghan is most likely not a Christian) that a child need to honor their parents no matter what. what do you guys think?

wow, your mom must have been a die hard fan of the Royals!

no worries.

i just looked at Wikipedia again, it appears nothing in there supports your conclusion.

according to Wikipedia, Daily Beast and Newsweek were two separate entities that merged in 2010, and "unmerged" in 2013 when the company sold off Newsweek.

i didn't know what Daily Beast meant either. the publication is founded by Tina Brown, who is rather well read i think.

Daily Beast is a US publication actually. i think it is intended to be more high brow than the National Enquirer

according to the wikipedia, Daily Beast is the name of the fictional newspaper from Evelyn Waugh's novel Scoop.

yes, i read this as well, but the problem how would the tabloid know this? unless the royal family confirmed this, and they would never confirm such thing. i would not pay attention to everything tabloids says, because they do have the tendency to make things up, alot!

https://www.thedailybeast.com/queen-says-she-would-have-preferred-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-to-remain-full-time-royals?ref=scroll below is a excerpt from Daily Beast "The statement adds that Harry and Meghan “have made clear they do not want to be reliant on public funds.” But it does not make clear what public funds they will be receiving, and what public duties they will be expected to perform to earn that money." for me the question is whether they will continue to be paid out of public fund and how much. i also read in another article that they get to keep their house, which was refurbished with 2.4 millions dollars from the tax payer's money? i also think Meghan and Harry should give up their HRH titles as well.... i would have problems with it if Meghan and Harry want to have their cake and eat it too otherwise it is their life, they should be allowed to pursue it the way they want.