LadyRaven

I have a peanut butter, tuna fish and black olive cassarole that always a hit a parties.

By that I mean it usually "hits" the garbage can before anything else.

No way!!!!

That HAS to be a joke ......what a thing to do to black olives!!!

I fergits, is Shiloh single? if so, this might explain it. If not, don try to feed that to the wiffy.

I hope that the first part of your post was sarcastic. I do not believe we need to fret or be alarmed about anything. There is nothing new under the sun. In the end, Christ wins, so it's all good.

You know Speckles...there are "bad" people out there...and every once in a while a police officer will do something inappropriate or illegal. The problem is...most of the time BTS posts items that are simply untrue, written by alleged reporters, who have a goal of making authority figures look bad. The vast majority of her so-called news pieces are so full of holes that ALL IT TAKES is a simple Google search to find a more thorough and truthful article. Articles that BTS REFUSES to post or acknowledge for reasons that can only be described as profoundly biased against truth.

That information is out there floating about the net and yes sometimes it is not true. However, people are reading and believing it even if it isn't done here. You would rather she believed it but didn't post it for you or others like you to provide evidence to the contrary?

It may or may not be her aim for you to do this, however the opportunity is there for you to find the truth and post it should you feel led to do so. Which is a good thing. I believe all of what speckles said. I also believe that in a free society, one must seek the truth.

Take for instance my opinion of Sheriff Lott (the guy with the APC in SC). I still think he's a duffus, however speckles rightly pointed out that most of the abuses I'd seen on the news were not even related to him. Because he's in the news so much, I pinned it all on him, it's easy to do when you dont pay close attention.

If BTS hadn't posted the article about the APC, I would not have realised that the troopers running over suspects with their cruisers and joking about it were not his. Refuting gossip and slander are also the work of a free people, dontcha think? I dont know whether she intends the articles to be used for that purpose (I dont know here, cant read her mind), but they can be just the same.

The other issue is that many people don't understand BASIC law enforcement. They post these outrageous articles without any understanding (or care) about the good men and women they are dragging through the mud for no good reason. Then when someone like me comes along...who is familiar with the topic...and gives a rational thought out explanation of how things work I am insulted and considered like another "bad cop."

You are correct that most of us do not understand law enforcement completely, some of us even less than this. Some of what police have to do will offend our sensibilities.

That being said, I do believe that, as we should with anyone in power over us, not just law enforcement, we should always question the why of things. We may not end up in disagreement with those in authority, but human nature is fallen and men seek power, that is how it is. The whole concept of checks and balances in government exists as a means to keep that to a minimum. A tyrant executive cant unleash his army against the people without the consent of the people's representatives in the congress, for example.

When it comes to the local issues though, the best check and balance is a people who refuse to be abused for any reason, even if it's in our 'best interest.' So when people fail, we need to know why, we need to know how, and we need to know if it was something the system approved of or looked over or if it's something the failed individual regrets. And when something looks abusive, if it's not we deserve to have the explained as well.

(For example, in the case of the troopers running over suspects who were fleeing the scene of a crime. When I was coming up, police would shoot individuals like this in the leg. I have no idea which is worse really, being shot or being hit with a patrol car. But the issue here in SC isn't just the fact that they are being bumped around, but that the guys doing it are whooping it up and using racial slurs. I have a firm belief, Axx, that if it were you that felt the need to bump someone with a cruiser to prevent a flight, you would not do that, you would feel at least a supreme sense of how serious the act is, that it's not a joke. Am I right?)

I have a record ON THESE FORUMS of speaking out when I see "bad cops" and bad examples in law enforcement. BTS will ONLY post negative anti-law enforcement diatribes and is biased in the extreme. I think Ovedya's questions deserve HONEST answers.

Well, to be honest, even reputable newspapers rarely print good cops doing good things unless they die in the line of duty. News tends to always be bad news. Even the good stuff related to what happened in the wake of 9/11 with the cops and fire-fighters was in the shadow of great loss.

I honestly do not follow people around on the boards keeping track of what they are posting regularly, I try to deal with the issue as it is presented, when it is presented. And when I am not in the mood to be alarmed or angry I dont read it. I believe that these types of topics tend to be emotive and when the sources are questionable it can be frustrating, however, they need to be discussed even if the information is wrong, just so the wrongness is pointed out.

Think of it like a discussion over heresy or other political stuff. It is important.

Perhaps she really wants to believe that this stuff is just odd. Maybe she just wants to have a discussion about what is and is not appropriate. I have been gone for several years before I came back a few months ago, I do not remember BTS from before. However, since she has a habit of posting these sorts of things, perhaps she has explained it before and we haven't seen it.

As in any lie from Satan, the lie is very close to the truth that it will and does deceive many. This is an growing ministry for those whom God has called to step into this realm to save those who can be saved.

True, that. I used to be a solitary Wiccan (or at least a pagan, but they didn't make distinctions like that back then. I didn't go for the goddess as such, I had a whole pantheon, mostly Celtic and Norse). If I weren't a Christian I would still be one. It is very appealing to the mind of man...or at least any one who does not by into materialism or a technological world view (or Christ, of course).

I do not believe in dating, pairing off as a couple, until one is ready to be married, as that is the sole purpose of that activity for believers. Does your son really want to be married? Of course if this is something you never brought up before or never taught him, it's going to seem like a concept from outer space because the world does not see dating that way. The world sees dating as a recreational activity whereby you learn who you are and learn what you prefer and do not prefer in a person. Unfortunately it also tends to have daters treating the people they are dating as if they are the spouse when they are not.

However, even if you agree with me, now that you are in the fire, being confrontational might not be a good idea. But, you can always help HIM find the truth. What I would do is buy him two books about courtship (I recommend "I kissed dating goodbye" one by Douglas Wilson called "Her hand in Marriage") and two which refute the idea from a Christian perspective (such as the book written to refute I kissed dating goodbye which I think is "I kissed dating hello" or some such thing). Have him read them completely and then work out his own theology about how one finds a spouse. Make it a requirement before dating. Explain that you dont get a DL without taking a test, you dont graduate without learning certain things and you are not dating until you know what it is you are doing.

Dont just let him read the books and have no interaction with you. During the reading sessions, ask him his thoughts, maybe ask a question or two but in general say very little. Wait until he's worked it out formally. As for how that actually is, you can have him write out a paper, do a presentation or make a webpage, or something else that suits his personality and talents, which will describe and explain the results of his spiritual study. You then would ask him questions, deep questions.

If you find that he has worked out theology about marriage and finding a spouse for himself, and it is well presented and understood, then obligate him to behave according to his own standards. The two of you then would work out a contract to that effect, and the result of failure to abide would be the withdrawal of permission to date as it would prove him to be untrustworthy, which would make him an unfit match for any woman.

My son is 19, and engaged. I personally believe it is too early. I squirm, but you know, I raised him and he's behaved according to the way he was raised. He believes what I taught him and he believes this is the one. And he could be right, which is why I inhale and say very little. He asked me if it was because I didn't like her, I said no, I think she's a very sweet girl and so far seems to get on with him well. I said it was because he was still in college and she was not done with HS. He let out a sigh of relief and said that they would wait for a while and not to worry. So, I try not to.

But you know, letting the birds fly on their own is nerve-wrecking.

Was that the bill that was turned down?

whatever it is, it sounds disturbing. It doesn't have to be Marxism, government control of anything without oversight is a scary thing.

Well, here is some wisdom from the failed side of things. These are the mistakes I made when i got married the first time, things I will never do again and things which I believe doomed me.

1. Dont unequally yoke yourself. You should not ever date an unbeliever, as you cannot marry one. Dont marry one, regardless of how you feel.

2. Dont jump before the flush is gone. Whether or not it has drifted off into sin or not, if the primary focus of your relationship is physical or the 'in love' feeling of mush you get...the attraction...you are not ready to make the decision. You have to get past that and know what is left when that is not present, because it is something that comes and goes repeatedly throughout your relationship.

3. Do not marry or consider someone who has a completely different set of goals or a lifestyle you cannot handle. Some women are fine with over the road truckers for husbands, some of them are not. Some families are highly charged and wound very tightly, others are not. If you are someone who must have a good and busy social life and your man is a recluse there are going to be issues. Some people cant hold onto money any more than the human hand can hold water with open fingers, if you cant deal with that, you shouldn't marry.

4. Dont jump before you know who they really are. Wait long enough to learn how they act when you are not looking, when they are not trying to impress you. It would be best if you know them this way before you ever consider dating, but most people get it backwards so, if you dont know who he is with his friends, at work, on missions or wherever he is not trying to impress you, you do not really know him. (Or her, but remember, I'm a chick)

5. Dont attach yourself until you have seen them face something serious, like a serious illness, a major setback at work, a fight with the parents or a financial problem. It could be a Jekyll and Hyde situation, best to know now.

Ok, thanks. I thought it was a cooking method. Like boiled and then fried or cooked over the fire.

Well, just plain old broiling (as opposed to "a London Broil") is a cooking method. Just high, direct heat, basically.

Ah, ok.

I'm sure my sister cooked broild lamb chops and she did it in the oven....?

Yeah, you can also broil steaks in the oven. There is a setting on the stove.

I lived in Canada (Ontario) for 7 years and for some reason I feel kinda homesick for Canada today though I have always been American at heart. I am trying to recall stuff Canada has that US does not. There was a fast food chicken restraurant that sold the yummiest potato wedges and gravy. Was it called 'Mary Brown's'? Also-SWISS CHALET! We dont have that here! We also do not have Clamato juice.

What else?

We have Clamato juice here in SC??

Some parts of Canada have french...stuff...

There is more snow, and doesn't it have the Aurora Borealis? (Yeah I know AK does too, but...)

when I saw the title of this thread I thought you were talking to scarlet and myself

and who is the mysterious and mythical person who posted about the "fat" ????

You mean the fake ted?

I dont think they're fat...though FA's font is usually bigger than the rest of ours. And less squiggly than mine.

Must mean that FA and gater have been blessed with an abundance of time, which, of course they wisely use here at worthy rather than down at the bowling alley with all the ruffians....

I love pancakes, but my family gave up white flours for just about everything. We also use NO artificial sweetners (like spenda, sweetnlow or whatnot). We use sugar or molasses or honey or stevia or fruits for sweetening things.

I do not have a good pancake recipie that does not use at least one of the items we have given up, can anyone help?

the phrase is also one of my pet peeves. on message boards that i have set up for others, i always set the filter to change "oh my god" to "oh my goodness" (or gosh), and also set the filter to change the shorthand version to OMGosh. maybe someone could suggest that to the man in charge here?

What is a gosh?

Isn't saying Omgosh instead of using the original phrase the same thing as substituting "sugar" for the *s* word? In fact, it's probably worse because...when people say sugar instead of *s* they are deliberately changing the nature of what is said (sugar is sweet, *s* is disgusting). Gosh was a word invented to substitute for the word God in minced oaths is it not?

Why not set the filter to Oh My! ?

However, I do not believe that using references to God as a cuss word is taking the Lord's name in vain. I believe it is making oaths that you dont intend to keep in his name or swearing by his name that what you say is true when it is not.

It is, however, still a cuss word.

For me, what makes something a cuss word is when you use a word of any sort to either bring the idea of something else down in value (calling a woman a *b* or using the word *s* to describe someone's possessions) or to use the name or idea of something of high value (God, Jesus, Holy, whatever) to express something of low value (anger).

And it is also disrespectful to the one Person I should have the utmost respect for. This, IMO is what makes it worse than just saying "sugar" or even *S*. In the end, though, it isn't our words which are so bad, because we could say good gravy and still be just as angry.

The words are a reflection of what is in our heart and if our hearts are angry that is the problem, not the words we use to express it. I haven't always had the cleanest mouth in town, I am also a very angry person (though way better than I was years ago, I still have a long way to go). I never regarded using God's name as any different than any other cuss word, though I used it less because it just seemed more wrong. Then I came to the realisation that, out of the mouth the heart speaks means exactly that. If my heart is full of...dung...that is what will pop out when I'm not careful.

I trained myself to say "Sweet Jesus help me I am so angry" and then it got shortened to "sweet Jesus" Then I had to train myself to go back to at least Jesus help me, because people misunderstood me. It wasn't a cuss word, it's a prayer.

no no, i mean yes, it IS ground flax (seed). sorry for the confusion. you can get that at walmart????

Hey, I can make this too, whoo hooo!!

Yes, you can get flax seed at the local walmart, if it is a Super walmart that is well stocked. It's right next to the King Arthur flour and the Hodgson mills graham flour. In fact, I think it was Hodgson Mills...I dunno, I put it in a Jar to keep bugs out, I live in the south, you dont just have open containers of baking products here...

Your WIFE won't ACCEPT your wheelchair around the house?

Well, then I suppose she will not mind carrying you around and fetching for you?

You must do what must be done without her assistance. She is abdicating her rresponsibilities and if she won't help you, you go on and get what you need without her, and in spite of her. This is an abusive situation where she really needs to get out of the house. It isn't a matter of loving her through this and maybe she will change---it is abuse and it's about loving YOURSELF through this. She needs to be out of the home.

I agree with FA here, this is abuse. I could see things her way if you had all the help you needed and you just weren't doing as much as you could, but when you do the best you can and that is not good enough for her, then she is not good enough for you.

Do what you need to do, get whatever assistance you need and can get without her. Maybe she will get fed up and leave. (oh, and make sure she's not taking advantage of you financially too, this happens a good bit).

I am very happy that Tel Aviv has the resources to waste on this project, I wish we did. I would not advocate using the funds that way, but if we had resources to waste the state wouldn't be looking at cuts all over the place.

There are people who pay 11$ per gallon for milk. That's when I'd give it up, quite frankly.

God can and does often save people who have little or know knowledge about any kind of doctrine. It is possible to be saved without knowing or understanding the truth about the trinity. However, once you are saved, the Holy Spirit will lead you to eventually at least apprehend that the trinity is truth (you dont have to get it, just affirm it) and lead you out of and away from any heretical teachings which deny the trinity.

Any organised body which denies the trinity, however, is not Christian, no matter how many of the elect sit in it's pews. It is a heretical sect, a lie, and it is incumbent upon those of us who know the truth to make sure that everyone understands this. The Jesus they preach is a different Jesus, The Father a different father and the Holy Spirit a different spirit. Therefore the gospel they preach is a different gospel.

Are you trying to say that the UPC is not a christian organization, that is absurd. By the way I am not apart of the UPC, I Go to a ''Church of God'' which is a trinitarian pentecostal denom, but the UPC is not heretical it is christian, they just happen to believe differently than you do.

By the way people have accuse this organization and that organization of being non-christian, and sometimes I agree, but in my opinion calvinism are less christian than any of them.

Does the UPC teach the trinity? If it does not then it is heretical, not Christian and teaching a false Christ. This indicates the gospel that they preach is, scripturally, another doctrine. If it does and it embraces all other aspects of orthodoxy (like the virgin birth, etc) then it is one. That is the defining point.

The Holy Spirit is not going to allow believers to embrace heresy for very long after they are saved, He will lead believers away from it. Whether you like Calvinism or not, or whether I like Arminianism or not, they both do, in their original forms, hold to orthodox Christian beliefs and therefore are both Christian in their original forms.

God can and does often save people who have little or know knowledge about any kind of doctrine. It is possible to be saved without knowing or understanding the truth about the trinity. However, once you are saved, the Holy Spirit will lead you to eventually at least apprehend that the trinity is truth (you dont have to get it, just affirm it) and lead you out of and away from any heretical teachings which deny the trinity.

Any organised body which denies the trinity, however, is not Christian, no matter how many of the elect sit in it's pews. It is a heretical sect, a lie, and it is incumbent upon those of us who know the truth to make sure that everyone understands this. The Jesus they preach is a different Jesus, The Father a different father and the Holy Spirit a different spirit. Therefore the gospel they preach is a different gospel.

You know what they say...

Common sense is an oxymoron....

until i saw this post, i'd never even heard of joy behar. guess her opinion doesn't matter much to me!

I'd never heard of her until she was on celebrity millionaire...

I dont care what she thinks any more than I care what Tom Cruise thinks or what Oprah thinks about politics. Just because they have a good deal of money and have made it big entertaining us does not mean they have any brain cells or that they have cells which are firing properly. (Not saying that any of these people are stupid either, but being successful in show biz does not indicate intelligence, just look at Paris Hilton)

If they had never, ever, veered from their original meanings, then they would have no more value to us than the words feces and sex do. Speckles was saying that when we take words from their original meaning and then use them to denigrate something, that is what makes it a cuss word. Therefore, if you use substitutes in the same manner (to denigrate something) then you are still cussing. For instance if instead of saying "I really hate that f-in thing" you say "I really hate that flipping thing" you are still cussing because you are using the word flipping to bring the 'thing' down in your mind and communicate that to other people. You just were less shocking while you did it.

what makes it vulgar is the idea that you can take an idea and make it disgusting by adding a word to it.

Doesn't the F word and the S word sound vulgar to anyone else regardless of the meaning? It does to me. That's part of the make up of foul words - it SOUNDS vulgar to the ears...regardless of whether it's just another "word" for sex or whatever. I heard a word in another language once without knowing the meaning and I just knew it was foul. I was right.

I was told by a co-worker not long ago that there was nothing wrong with the word nigger. That is was ok because it was stating a colour. Go figure that one.

They would sound vulgar to us because they have been vulgar to us since we were...however old we were when we first heard them and had someone point out that they were.

I mean, I could go into a lengthy discussion about the evolution of the *s* word, and I admit that in the American pronunciation it does sound harsh but so do many words which have similar origins which are not cuss words.

As for the F-bomb ... to me...well...other than the fact that I see no reason for the existence of that word and other than the fact that meaning of the word has evolved into something which makes me sick and other than the fact that lately it seems that it's WAAAYYYY overused over and above all other cuss words --- doesn't sound any harsher than fork does. To Me.

But I'm not the measure of profanity either. One day these words will be archaic and some other words will have moved into their place as active cuss words.

As for the last word, once she says that word in the company of people who have been called that all their lives, she'll learn real fast. It might have (I've read plenty of differing accounts of the development of the word) meant a colour at one time, but now it's an insult and it might get you killed around here.

If the *F* word and the *S* word only meant what they meant and not the other stuff, perhaps they wouldn't be cuss words.

Umm....I must be somewhat dim tonight.....

No matter what they mean - you can't seperate the sense of vulgarity from these words.

Not to sound pious at all, but I make a point of NOT using these 2 words in particular.

I think speckles was attempting to explain what makes something a cuss word and using those two words as examples as just about everyone agrees that they are vulgar.

Please help me out...

So if those 2 four letter words were spoken, in the manner of their original meaning, then that would be fine? Is that it?

If they had never, ever, veered from their original meanings, then they would have no more value to us than the words feces and sex do. Speckles was saying that when we take words from their original meaning and then use them to denigrate something, that is what makes it a cuss word. Therefore, if you use substitutes in the same manner (to denigrate something) then you are still cussing. For instance if instead of saying "I really hate that f-in thing" you say "I really hate that flipping thing" you are still cussing because you are using the word flipping to bring the 'thing' down in your mind and communicate that to other people. You just were less shocking while you did it.

what makes it vulgar is the idea that you can take an idea and make it disgusting by adding a word to it.

Here, anyway, it depends largely on the party and who and what was in control. If you are underaged and the party was known to be a drinking party and etc and everyone goes then there might be a concern as a group. However, if a set of parents decide to let Jr hold a party and one or two of the people Jr invites passes a bottle around in a secluded area with a few of their drinking friends, not all of the kids and possibly not even the parents will be busted. or, if the parents are the ones who call/text the police because they found out and asked the kids to leave and they wouldn't do so (they had that happen in England actually). Parties have a habit of being crashed and the LE around here tends to understand that.

Well, it's better than having cameras all over.

When the cops are tipped off, they come over and if there is suspicion everyone blows into the breath thing and the guilty and those who didn't stop them go away and the innocent go home. No problem. Honestly it's not wasting resources, cause most likely there is a trooper already in the area that can drive by and see if there is any indication that the person texting was supplying an actual tip and not a hoax.

If the *F* word and the *S* word only meant what they meant and not the other stuff, perhaps they wouldn't be cuss words.

Umm....I must be somewhat dim tonight.....

No matter what they mean - you can't seperate the sense of vulgarity from these words.

Not to sound pious at all, but I make a point of NOT using these 2 words in particular.

I think speckles was attempting to explain what makes something a cuss word and using those two words as examples as just about everyone agrees that they are vulgar.