vatican decided to strike down us bishop deecision about how too handle pedophiliac priests.
what yall boys think bout that?
steph
you wont say dat when the wts come after you. and methanks you need to get outta the policing business. the nameless one done run circles round you. you wrongly think the nameless one is dunscot. you believe the nameless one a ex jw. wrong again. wanna make another mistaken guess? let see. next you gonna think i's a man.
vatican decided to strike down us bishop deecision about how too handle pedophiliac priests.
what yall boys think bout that?
proplog
i not sure catholics show enough concern for molested children. we need to hear a little bit more from vatican.
dutchie
the nameless one is used to hanging out with good ol boys. jest think of "boys" as a geeneric term.
butal
what dinner got to do with the vatican?
steph
cant say we did not tell you so. LOL.
vatican decided to strike down us bishop deecision about how too handle pedophiliac priests.
what yall boys think bout that?
vatican decided to strike down us bishop deecision about how too handle pedophiliac priests. what yall boys think bout that?
do they still make family movies?
it look like things that get produced these days by holyywood filled with f word, sex, violence, drug use and hurling.
no movies hardly to take your kids to or that a christian can watch.
stinky
you still confuse.
$$$What about men selling their brother into slavery? Or two sisters seducing their father to get pregnant? Why are these okay to read about, but someone getting killed on a movie screen is so horrible?$$$
God not approve of selling brother into slavery. he didnt like Lot's daughters having sex with there father either. it is history. things happened and to understand latter events, you need to know about things that preceded latter events. and the story about lot aint explicit. no bad language or graphic descriptions of sex. just history. and the nameless one aint said it horrible seeing somebody git killed on movie screen. but it terrible that 40 or 50 more get killed on movie and they make it as gross as possible, when there aint even a need for violence. it just for shock value. the bible aint like Terminator or The Bourne Identity. no comparison.
do they still make family movies?
it look like things that get produced these days by holyywood filled with f word, sex, violence, drug use and hurling.
no movies hardly to take your kids to or that a christian can watch.
$$$The cases classified as seduction are technically and realistically cases of rape also; the difference is that the girl in question is neither married nor betrothed. Why, in such cases, was not the death penalty invoked? In the former cases, marriage was already contracted; the offense was against both man and woman, therefore, and required death. In the case of a single girl, unbetrothed, the decision rested in the hands of the girls father, and, in part, the girl. If the offender, cited simply as a seducer in Exodus 22:16, 17, and as a rapist in Deuteronomy 22:28, 29, is an acceptable husband, then he shall pay 50 shekels of silver as a dowry and marry her, without right of divorce because he hath humbled her (Deut. 22:29); but If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins (Ex. 22:17). If a man thus is rejected as a husband, the girl is compensated for the offense to make her an attractive wife to another man, coming as she will with a double dowry, his own and her compensation money.
To understand the background of this law, let us remember, first, that the Biblical law-order requires the death of incorrigible delinquents and criminals. The seducer and/or rapist of an unbetrothed girl was thus presumably not an incorrigible youth, although at this point clearly in guilt. No gain was possible from his offense. If he were allowed to marry the girl, he did so without right of divorce, and at the cost of a full dowry. If he were refused, he still had to pay a full dowry to the girl, a considerable loss to his own future.$$$
R.J. Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law (Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1973), pp. 396-397.
have put january 2002 km up on my site, and archived earlier uploads:.
http://jsefton.users1.50megs.com/kmscans.htm.
thanks again to dmouse for the scans - he's already sent me all of 2002 so far - it's just a matter of time for me to get them up on my site.
you might hear from society. steph, we urge you to bone up on usa law.
have put january 2002 km up on my site, and archived earlier uploads:.
http://jsefton.users1.50megs.com/kmscans.htm.
thanks again to dmouse for the scans - he's already sent me all of 2002 so far - it's just a matter of time for me to get them up on my site.
refiner
there is such thing as fair use law. wt has not violated that law. if they had, you know peeps be all over the society.
do they still make family movies?
it look like things that get produced these days by holyywood filled with f word, sex, violence, drug use and hurling.
no movies hardly to take your kids to or that a christian can watch.
larc
thanky your consideration. sorry you aint studied the matter much. some literature we read said that there seems like it be a strong correlation between tv violence and agression in children. tv violence aint the only factor. you right. but you can see why a parent that considered what psychical literature say might not want there kids to watch Terminator. somebody told the nameless one that there was a study done by some person named Wilson in 1996 that show tv violence is linked with aggression in kids. we think this study ran in the la times.
have put january 2002 km up on my site, and archived earlier uploads:.
http://jsefton.users1.50megs.com/kmscans.htm.
thanks again to dmouse for the scans - he's already sent me all of 2002 so far - it's just a matter of time for me to get them up on my site.
we do not see how you fight on wts terms. to infringe copyright is to break the law. the wts dont break law as long as there no conflict with god's law. let the lawyers decide.
have put january 2002 km up on my site, and archived earlier uploads:.
http://jsefton.users1.50megs.com/kmscans.htm.
thanks again to dmouse for the scans - he's already sent me all of 2002 so far - it's just a matter of time for me to get them up on my site.
steph
aint you read the latest kingdom ministry? not even jws can post society material on a website. it is called copyright infringment. that free material you talkin bout has a copyright to it.
