Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lou Weed who wrote (190461)	6/30/2006 12:25:54 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Yes, I realize you admitted you weren't really a pacifist. I would think that every Christian should really take pacifism seriously or is it just that the Texan ones are exempt from this?!? What does "take seriously mean"? You have stressed once again you aren't one. Perhaps pacifism is something that Christians should pretend to be (or "take seriously") when the President is a Republican? I believe you're the one who's having the problem with the gender references You realize that all the major monotheistic religions, like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, have used male pronouns exclusively for thousands of years. In our society, the only group of people who deliberately use terms like "she" for God are either wiccans, new-agey "earth mother" types, or liberals who don't really believe in any God. <<At any rate, I believe we formally forswear torture and we punish people who do it>> Why was Cheney looking for a provision to allow it in certain cases if we formally forswear it and punish people who do it? Excuse me, but logically if Cheney was looking for a provision to allow it in certain cases, that shows that we do currently forswear it and punish those who do it.