Community > Posts By > msharmony

 
msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 04:55 PM

my ex took my kid away from me so i have to be a father from a distince cuz im not aloud to see her. my ex got married and doesnt want me around. so its not alway the man at fault some woman just dont like the babys dad



this is true, but never give up,,, I have a relative whose mother was that way her whole life, but her dad continued to send child support and try to contact her however he could , and even though he was mostly unsuccessful at contacting her,,,once she grew up and was on her own,, she was curious enough to look him up and she then found out the truth and they have a relationship neither would ever trade

never give up , whatever obstacles get in between you and your child,,,

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 04:53 PM

Bestinshow,

I agree with you that men have used the Priesthood throughout the centuries for their own personal agendas. And, I agree with you that there are currently a large percentage of homosexual priests. And, a good percentage of them are pedophiles. But, they were like that BEFORE they became priests. So, what does celibacy have to do with it? They were pedophiles before they became priests. Marrying a woman is not going to satisfy their sexual desires. It doesn't stop a pedophile from being a pedophile.

As far as there being no man who would give up sex for his life to serve God, I'm wondering what you think your Jesuit priest friend did? Did he have a girlfriend? Boyfriend? Are you absolutely sure that there have never been men willing to give up sex for the love of God? Granted they are fewer in number, but I assure they exist. That's why the Priesthood is a calling and not fo everyone. Just because there are men who abuse the privelege does not mean real priests don't exist.




you said it sister

we live in a culture that has the masses brainwashed to feel entitled to or required to have sex as if its some consequenceless means of entertainment

people give up all kind of addictions that actually cause physical havoc on the body when they stop using them

Im sure people , when they have the calling, dont find it difficult to give up sex,,,

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 04:49 PM

Which means Insurance should either pay for birth control, or pay to deliver AND RAISE a child to adulthood.

How do you think they would like them apples? rant rant



insurance shouldnt HAVE to cover our sexual activities,,,


sex is not mandatory

or required for life

insurance SHOULD be able to have the OPTION to cover them though

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 04:48 PM


IMHO birth control should be handled just like every other medication.
No special exceptions just because its a contraceptive.





I'm fine with that. I don't see why it should be handled differently.


medication is to treat illness or prevent illness

birth control is to back up those who wish to have sex but not get pregnant

few people have as much control over 'illnesses' as they do over whether they get pregnant

so, its a BIT different

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 01:02 PM


msharmony said:


relevance?

explain how someone can steal without taking

but taking is not a crime

and STEALING is


If I take the camera out of my desk, that is not illegal
if I take YOUR camera, without your permission, that is illegal
and called 'stealing'





Chocolina said:

Till here you didn't explain " how someone can steal without taking"

You explain the difference between 'take' and 'steal'

Now pls one more try ...

How someone can steal without to take it ?




msharmony said:

you can kill without murdering,, just as you can take without stealing



Here I'm lost in your logic twist Msharmony thinksurprised








my logic is this

because an apple is a fruit, does not make all fruits an apple

because to steal one must take, does not make all taking stealing

because to murder one must kill, does not make all killing murder


etc,,,,,

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:57 PM



msharmony said:


relevance?

explain how someone can steal without taking

but taking is not a crime

and STEALING is


If I take the camera out of my desk, that is not illegal
if I take YOUR camera, without your permission, that is illegal
and called 'stealing'





Chocolina said:

Till here you didn't explain " how someone can steal without taking"

You explain the difference between 'take' and 'steal'

Now pls one more try ...

How someone can steal without to take it ?




msharmony said:

you can kill without murdering,, just as you can take without stealing



Here I'm lost in your logic twist Msharmony thinksurprised







It is true, you can "kill" without murdering. But you can only take without stealing if what you're taking is your own.

Reason you can kill without murdering is because you can kill a cow for dinner.

It's only "murder" when it's illegal. The taking of one's life is murder in both man's law and God's law. But also have to keep in mind the time span something is written. In those days our language wasn't as complicated then as it is now.



not true, I can also take something down that isnt mine if its on my property

I can also take something from someone if they have given me permission

neither is the same as stealing


the bible mentions both killing and murder and they dont use them in the same context because one is against the law and one is not,,,

as in 'a time to kill'

as opposed to

'thou shalt not MURDER'

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:53 PM
speaking for myself

no crap intended here

but if the OP actually wants to communicate with people on a forum, it is helpful advice to share with him some of the things he could correct to make that a bit easier

again, the space bar and the enter key are not taking any more effort than the letters he uses to type the words,,,,,


not a rag on anyone, just honest and helpful advice

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:48 PM

There,the Nation's going to poop,and Obama worries about Birth-Control!
Not in his Jobdescription!


Is Obama worrying about birth control? HE already has two BEAUTIFUL girls and I wouldnt think Michele was planning anymore,,,,,


lol

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:46 PM

Personaly I think they should do away with that celibacy thing let the priests marry women and lead a normal life.


I dont think people become pedophiles because they cant get married

sex and marriage dont have to go together anymore and if breaking rules were a concern, they would be CELIBATE

having sex with children is just as much a violation as having sex with a woman

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 07:23 AM
its sad really

I imagine its this way with any position of 'authority'
some become cops because they are bullies
some become politicians for the same reason
some become stepdads/stepmoms to abuse children
and so it is, unfortunately, in the church


...perhaps they could do psychological evaluations on priests before they are ordained,,,just to diminish the odds a bit

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 07:20 AM

I don't. I love being alone.



lol,, me too

well, I loved it when I was,,, Im now a single parent and I can barely remember what things like

alone
privacy
space

....are anymore,,,,lol

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 07:19 AM



What i don't understand is in this country we have a government full of Jesus freaks,a country with "In God We Trust" on the money and yet according to their believes if you accept Jesus as your lord and savior odds are you go to heaven,plus didn't their God say thou shalt not kill?So their supposive creator said this and a christian on death row will go to heaven likely,where exactly is the punishment except for the ones who did Gods will by executing them,according to believers they should be the ones going to hell.
I'm for the death penalty because it makes room for more cold blooded murderers,hopefully George Bush Jr. is next.


Executions are carried out by the state. The government is secular and some of the largest groups of anti death penalty advocates are religious groups.



every governor we had in florida was a Jesus freak and this state is like Texas "it likes the Death Penalty".Lawton Chiles was a executing junkie.Theres religious groups who are anti-death penalty i'm just typing how it's weird our motto is "In god we trust" or "God bless America" but not nessarily "in god we obey"laugh




trusting is a much looser standard than obeying

obeying would require agreement over what there was to obey (which God, which rules, etc)

trusting 'god' is a very general statement that requires no REAL effort by anyone and cant truly be forced,,,

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 07:17 AM

What i don't understand is in this country we have a government full of Jesus freaks,a country with "In God We Trust" on the money and yet according to their believes if you accept Jesus as your lord and savior odds are you go to heaven,plus didn't their God say thou shalt not kill?So their supposive creator said this and a christian on death row will go to heaven likely,where exactly is the punishment except for the ones who did Gods will by executing them,according to believers they should be the ones going to hell.
I'm for the death penalty because it makes room for more cold blooded murderers,hopefully George Bush Jr. is next.


Speaking for myself, whom I consider christian, death would not be a penalty, but that still does not mean I would look forward to or be happy about someone KILLING me. Im praying for a natural death, honestly.

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:31 AM



I don't want or need healthcare and the government should not be able to mandate that I have it. I hope the supreme court throws it all out! The judical is the only branch of government making decent decisions.


how do you possibly know you will never need medical assistance?

thats like my son saying he didnt want to get auto insurance because he was never going to have an accident......frustrated frustrated


But if you son doesn't want it he doesn't have to drive or own a car. He isn't forced to have auto insurance.



but because he does have a car and drive it, there is always the possibility he will have or cause an ACCIDENT and incur financial expenses or cause someone else to

the same is true of his body and his health, unfortunately, there is always the possibility he will become ill, have an accident or injury, etc,,, and incur financial expense and/or cause additional expenses for a doctor or establishment who are responsible to care after him

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:29 AM
three types of people

those that dont believe in God
those that believe a God exists to serve us
those who believe we exist to serve God

msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:28 AM

just wondering how people view the future now that eastern philosophy and living has entered the west


whats entered the west?


msharmony's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:02 AM
Edited by msharmony on Mon 03/05/12 12:09 AM


no need to explain what noone but you has posted

the issue is whether the bible says not to murder or not to kill
the issue of whether murdering involves killing is a distraction

and irrelevant , as you CAN kill without murdering,,,


you deem it irrelevant only because you couldn't explain how someone can murder without killing

the same as you wouldn't be able to explain how someone can kill without murdering... murder and killing is the same ....even if one commit suicide they have both murder and killed theirself, even if someone ask you to kill them they are in fact asking you to murder them

you can't do one without doing the other

this is why the bible states "Thou Shalt Not Kill" ..if not then you will have people out there doing the same exact thing that is taking place in this forum... making excuses and trying to find legal ways or terminolgy so they can kill and justify it as not being murder



you can kill without murdering,, just as you can take without stealing


the same way you can have sex, or fondle, or kiss, without RAPING(although you cannot rape without doing one of those things)

the same way you can take money from the bank without ROBBING it(although you cannot rob without taking money)

the bible says not to steal, but it does not say not to ever TAKE
the law says we cannot rape someone, but it does not say we cannot have sex

these are different degrees of an action, its not about excusing, its about looking at things in a balanced and realistic way

we kill for food, we kill in defense, BOTH are justified in the bible so therefore would be foolish to say not to 'kill'

murder refers to 'unlawful' killing


msharmony's photo
Sun 03/04/12 11:56 PM
I am against any intentional and planned taking of a human life

msharmony's photo
Sun 03/04/12 05:48 PM
love is possible, and sometimes quite necessary...

FROM A DISTANCE.....

msharmony's photo
Sun 03/04/12 05:46 PM



Peter_Pan said:




NO, you asked: "explain how someone can murder without killing "


Answer: funches murders logic, yet logic still lives...





Where is the corpse then ? :thumbsup: glasses

As I know murder and killing always left a dead body shadessurprised




it appears that MsHarmony and Peter_Pan, Cowboy and a host of others believe that you can murder people but not kill them.....unfortunately they can't explain how to accomplish this feat






no need to explain what noone but you has posted

the issue is whether the bible says not to murder or not to kill
the issue of whether murdering involves killing is a distraction

and irrelevant , as you CAN kill without murdering,,,

1 2 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next