Posted on 06/08/2005 7:39:02 PM PDT by wagglebee
And what has Dubya been reading lately? Hmmm...seems to me that his recent choices would have people on here shun him. After all, he has admittedly been reading questionable material...and not being repentant of that! Better not let Dubya into the dinner with the President! </sarc>
Sorry but I don't relate to this young woman a'tall. She's living in delusion. Being a Christian also involves turning your life away from the world and its sinfulness and at least attempting to live a righteous life. There's nothing righteous about what she does. If she really believes all she says, I feel very sorry for her.
Yes, I can see Robert Byrd now, slipping away after gazing at her buxomness.
Liberals believe in the utilization of government's enforcement mechanisms, whether they be taxation or the barrel of a gun, to force societal change, in an attempt to achieve what they believe would be utopia. Those who would censor or ban certain forms of free speech "for the benefit of society" seem to me to be far more liberal than those who'd let the free market dictate the same.
You saying once saved, always saved doesn't apply? What about those who have personalities that are such that they are cruel instead of loving in their relationships with people, or overly controlling. Those too qualify as sins, are usually knowingly and habitually committed, yet are overlooked by the church.
Nope. The free market is not perfect, but it's a much better than a government ruling by arbitrary fiat. And I'm not suggesting that government should have no power to regulate in certain arenas, if a compelling case can be made for regulation, and as long as said regulation is respectful of individual rights.
Let me guess your a libertarian.
Correct. Now I'll guess about you: you're a liberal who thinks he's a conservative because of his stance on certain issues.
True freedom is not advanced in the permissive society, which confuses freedom with license to do anything whatever and which in the name of freedom proclaims a kind of general amorality. It is a caricature of freedom to claim that people are free to organize their lives with no reference to moral values, and to say that society does not have to ensure the protection and advancement of ethical values. Such an attitude is destructive of freedom and peace.
Pope John Paul II
You have it backwards.
Your the Liberal.
And besides, Arafat has darkened the doorstep of this fine building. The presence of a porn star could only go towards purifying the place!
Wonderful, but the last time I checked, the United States of America is not ruled by a sovereign Pope.
Yeah? How so? And by the way, it's "you're."
Accepting a practicing porn star as a member: no.
But associating with her, ministering and witnessing to her; not only would a REAL church do this, it is their responsibility to do this. Of course with this particular young woman's beauty and, shall we say attributes, only women and the strongest of men should work with her, certainly not alone, and preferably with their spouses along, to eliminate the appearance of impropriety.
She's still a Christian? She sure isn't following the biblical instructions to women of faith.
If she truly is a Christian, she would be miserable living this kind of life. God chastises those He loves. If we remain in sin, He will be continually convicting us.
She seems far too happy doing what is wrong, so I'm having a hard time believing she is any kind of Christian.
"I probably have less sex with those guys than any college girl [typically has]. It doesn't make me less moral,"
Doesn't make her any MORE moral either.
She maintains pornographic movies don't harm anyone, and are beneficial in a way, providing safe fantasies for the "lonely" public.
Clearly, she's never bothered to actually investigate this. Many families have been torn apart by porn 'addiction.' Many singles have found themselves hardpressed to have an actual, lasting relationship because of the same.
Main Entry:2liberal
Function:noun
Date:1820
1 : a person who is liberal: as a : one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways b capitalized : a member or supporter of a liberal political party c : an advocate or adherent of liberalism especially in individual rights
2 : lacking moral restraint : LICENTIOUS
3 : not literal or strict : LOOSE *a liberal translation*
4 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by
authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
5 : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
Not the same thing at all. A wife whose husband looks at porn frequently begins to feel cheated on. A wife whose husband watches boxing doesn't begin to feel beaten.
I believe some of our founding fathers said very similar things.
you're
It is in the dictionary.
Main Entry: you're
Pronunciation: y*r, *y*r, *y*r, *y*-*r
Date:circa 1590
: you are
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.