What on Earth is a 'citizen', let alone a 'Sovereign citizen'?
A Sovereign is a feudal position. A Citizen, is.... well..... actually I dont know. It probably is some sort of label that is associated with the 'Society' fiction.
Humans are almst always slaves - its just the way that the State (feudalism) has to function.
Richtig was a prick for doing that.
Potency is a red herring. Average use today may be of marijuana that is about 2 to 3 times as potent as decades ago but users simply use less to get the same effect with less smoke. Even 30 years ago, much more potent strains than are normally used today were available, but were seldom used. As with alcohol and tobacco, users generally prefer milder versions.
The owls are not what they seem.
"Christians" is the modern sense, most definately did NOT get thrown to lions in Rome!
THEY DID NOT EXIST IN ANCIENT ROME!
Monotheistic sun worship was popular in Rome and these monotheistic eastern sun worshippers are what get called "christians" in ancient Rome,they have in fact NO CONNECTION WITH MESSIANIC JUDAISM ,which is the belief system we call christianity today
Constantine the Great was a monotheistic sun worshiper,there is NO evidence that his mother was a "christian".In 321, Constantine instructed that "Christians"(sun worshipping monotheists) and non-Christians(Rome pagan gods) should be united in observing the venerable day of the sun, referencing the esoteric eastern sun-worship which Aurelian had helped introduce. Furthermore, and long after his oft alleged "conversion" to Christianity, Constantine's coinage continued to carry the symbols of the sun, even after the pagan gods had disappeared from the coinage. Even when Constantine dedicated the new capital of Constantinople, which became the seat of Byzantine Christianity for a millennium, he did so wearing the Apollonian sun-rayed Diadem; no Christian symbols were present at this dedication.The Council of Niceae was NOT to form a christian creed BUT to form a Roman State Religion and many gods where debated, Mithras and Asian zoraostrainism where the main influences .This is a documented fact and is proven by the coins that where minted after 325AD baring Constantine on one side and Sol Invictus on the other.
"Tertullian doesn't claim he witnessed any martyrdoms-by-lion personally, and anyway he was a Christian himself."
Tertullian was an Asian zoroastrian influenced monotheist not a "christian"
Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, anglicised as Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 225 AD)
He is the first Christian author to produce an extensive corpus of Latin Christian literature.
He wrote his trinitarian formula after becoming a Montanist. Montanism originated in Phrygia, a province of Asia Minor, and flourished throughout the region, leading to the movement being referred to elsewhere as Cataphrygian (meaning it was "from Phrygia") or simply as "Phrygians". It spread rapidly to other regions in the Roman Empire at a time before Christianity was generally tolerated or legal. However, unlike many Church fathers, he was never canonized by the Catholic Church, as several of his later teachings directly contradicted the actions and teachings of the apostles.
Actually ALL Abrahamic monotheism is just origianl fascism.
Invented by men with greed in thier hearts and swords in their hands,
Cyrus the Great for judaism ,
Constantine the Great for christianity
and Othman the 3rd Caliph for islam.
No, Dave's not here.
@zelot: How, precisely, am I irresponsible? All of my pets are spayed or neutered, and I've never had one get hit by a car.
I've worked at an animal shelter and rescued more dogs and cats than you ever will; the people who claim they're going to make sure their non-neutered/non-spayed animal won't get loose are always the ones who show up at shelters with litters of puppies or kittens that they hadn't planned on.
Just do us all a favor and don't have another pet.
J to the G: you are an the idiot, because you think that everyone is irresponsible as you are.
@zelot: You're an idiot - just remember that when you're begging animal shelters to take the puppies you didn't want to have and have no means/intention of taking care of. Also, if you want your dog to live longer, don't let it run around outside unrestrained.
I decide not to have my new female dog fixed, because I had my old female dog (which was kill by a car) fixed and at that time I said to myself; I would never put another female dog through that pain, I will go through the pain of taking care of things two months out of the year.
"Categorization of persons is part of our evolution."
yes, but i was talking about the accuracy of such categorizations. i wasn't describing their origin or purpose. human beings naturally organize information into a mental framework but that doesn't mean the categorizations are accurate. we think tall people are capable and that tomatoes are vegetables
"gender 'disorders' are based in the erroneous human need to neatly categorize people who fall on a spectrum."
Categorization of persons is part of our evolution. Unless you plan to rewire the encoding of the human mind it will exist at the least through the rest of our lifetimes, and quite likely much longer.
gender 'disorders' are based in the erroneous human need to neatly categorize people who fall on a spectrum. there's really no such thing as man or woman - there are males with male traits, males with mixed traits, males with female traits, vice versa - there are even people of no sex/gender, or mixed sex/gender. there's no reason we should try to impose a false dichotomy on people
" i don't know anyone personally that is transgender (that i know of)— do transgender individuals have the operation and then decide to be "straight" in their new gender, for example would they change from a male to a female, and then date men? or do some change from male to female, and then carry on lesbian relationships?"
it depends on the person
first off, i'll be using the terms sex and gender. sex means the physical genital attributes of a person - if you have a penis, or vagina, or some combination, and the hormones and body structures that go along with that. gender is your relative quantity of 'femaleness' or 'maleness' or both or neither.
sex and gender are not the same thing! also, they both exist on a spectrum. i can be a big burly manly man but also like 'feminine things' like makeup and fashionable clothes and little dogs and that's ok. i can be the nicest dressed dude at the logging camp. it's my life to live as i please
brains are sexed. brain structure can be 'male' or 'female' or both. this structure impacts the gender of a person. but, brain sex does not always match physical sex. it's possible to be born with a female brain in a male body. depending on the individual's brain structure and the breadth of the brain/body discrepancy, this can result in trans/cisgender 'disorders' where a person literally feels uncomfortable in their own skin. therapy, hormone treatments, and surgery can assist a person in modifying their body to better match how they fundamentally, deeply, feel about themselves
it's important to note that these gender issues are decoupled from sexuality. there is a common myth that trans/cisgendered people are just perverts. but just because sex is involved does not imply that sexuality is the root cause. it's about self-perception and self-esteem
so, back to your original question. since gender issues and sexuality are decoupled, then it follows that being transgender does not necessarily make you homo, hetero, bi, or any other sort of sexuality. there is some correlation, because the hormone/genetic factors which trigger transgenderism overlap to some degree with those that determine sexuality. but is a person born with a straight male brain in a female body really a lesbian?
" it's not that i'm not accepting, it's that i'm not sure that they don't have another underlying problem. for example a bisexual person might just be obsessed with sex or maybe decided to "try out" being gay. honestly i don't understand bisexualism, to me it just says that you aren't going to be satisfied unless you have both, which rules out monogamy. "
sexual identity is fluid. think of it like politics - democrat and republican are artificial labels we construct to attempt to group like-minded people. some people are strong democrats, some people are weak republicans, some people are centrists or independents.
the same is true for human sexuality. some people are strong hetero - basically uninterested in same-sex encounters. some people are more towards the center - they don't pursue same-sex, but might not say no if they're horny and like someone. some people (bisexuals) are in the middle, and don't care either way. some people are asexual, some people only like petite sassy latinas, etc. so on. human sexuality is weird
also your logic doesn't follow re: "which rules out monogamy". bisexuality doesn't preclude monogamy. it just means that you could be in a committed relationship with a man or a woman. being sexually fluid doesn't mean that you're unsatisfied if you only screw people of one sex in a given period of time. it's not like bisexuals have a quota or anything
"wanting to have multiple sex partners, eschewing monogamy, having to have surgery to "correct" the body you were born with— i sympathise with these people, i really do. but i don't think it should be something we as a society want to promote."
these are two distinct concepts you're confusing here
a person can have multiple sex partners without being a bad person, or without being monogamous. monogamy is a state of mind and a negotiated condition in a relationship, not a law. trans/cisgenderism is a gender issue, not a sexual issue. and if anything, society should promote freedom of expression and acceptance of how an individual chooses to define their gender
i'm not sure. i guess it's different than being gay, it's not that you're attracted to the same sex necessarily, but that you feel that you are the wrong gender? i don't know anyone personally that is transgender (that i know of)— do transgender individuals have the operation and then decide to be "straight" in their new gender, for example would they change from a male to a female, and then date men? or do some change from male to female, and then carry on lesbian relationships?
call me close-minded or whatever, but i'm accepting of gay and lesbian couples, but when it comes to bisexual and transgender— it's not that i'm not accepting, it's that i'm not sure that they don't have another underlying problem. for example a bisexual person might just be obsessed with sex or maybe decided to "try out" being gay. honestly i don't understand bisexualism, to me it just says that you aren't going to be satisfied unless you have both, which rules out monogamy.
the reason i say i'm still accepting is because i don't want to pass laws against people who want to do this sort of thing, but i'm not sure it should be societally encouraged to have multiple sex partners— if you want to do that, whatever, but it's like alcoholism.
to me two gay people wanting the right to marry the love of their lives is one thing— if you're gay, you can't change that and society should accept that.
wanting to have multiple sex partners, eschewing monogamy, having to have surgery to "correct" the body you were born with— i sympathise with these people, i really do. but i don't think it should be something we as a society want to promote.
"But the day will come when we'll aspire to nothing grander than the comfort of friends and family and a quiet place to sit."
Kind of depressing lol
Rewriting a character in "more realistic terms" makes the story less of a fable? Okay.
there you have it, folks.
please point me in the direction of the scriptures that foretold of Jesus during the time of Adam and Eve.
Genesis 2; 1-3
"There are many supernatural events in the Bible for which there is archaeological evidence"
Also, senses this debate will be pointless. As a good friend of mine pointed out recently: "How many stupid Atheists do you know?"
The life of Jesus and Christianity in general borrow prodigiously from other religions.
One simple example is Easter. Hint, that day was celebrated far before the resurrection. Ever wonder why it just happens to fall right around the first day of Spring? Rebirth and all that.
That holiday in particular was celebrated in some manner or the other a thousand+ of year before Christ.
BTW please point me in the direction of the scriptures that foretold of Jesus during the time of Adam and Eve.
(Why do I sense this debate is going to be utterly pointless)
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation