BJean

Yes, Wasa. She often puts that in her posts. The fact that she's fat and that's a sin, etc. She likes to say that she's a sinner and that she tries to not sin but that God forgives her. Only when a person knows they're sinning and they continue to do it, is it a bad thing. Because God knows we're all sinners and he forgives us if we are born again, accept Jesus Christ as our own personal savior, etc., etc. So because she admits that she's a sinner, as with most evangelicals, that gives them the right to judge others and take it upon themselves to be an instrument of God to let the sinner know who they are, what they are, and how they should be punished here on earth for being a sinner and not knowing Jesus. Did I get that right patty? Because I am sure that you can't wait to set me straight if I didn't.

Thank God that there are people like Nursemelly, who really do care and are big enough and kind enough to help people who are down.

battygreen: "If women choose to have sex with someone other than the one she is married to, for whatever reason, like to make money, then the consequences go along with that. All I'm saying is that you reap what you sow. If you do the 'right' things in life, you can usually avoid things like aids, STDs, unwanted pregnancies, etc. I had a tenant who would go to the local food bank every week, cause she had no money for food, but she had a 2 pack a day addiction to cigarettes. If I was running that food bank, I'd tell her she couldn't receive any food because if she would quit smoking, she would easily be able to afford her own groceries. It's not right to enable people, because when you do, you keep them bound to their sin. In order for them to DO something about their circumstance, they need to hit the bottom sometimes, so they can bounce back. It's called 'tough love'. It's not about 'hating' anyone." BJean: I have some friends who use your same logic. They believes that after every drug bust in the United States, the drugs that are confiscated should then be laced with poison and put back out on the street. Those darned drug users would then reap what they sow - death from drugs. They claim that would help everyone out. Puts the drug user out of his misery. Gets them off the dole since they're probably wandering up to food banks for sustinence. Helps the vice squad clear out the street riff raff. The police don't have to have as many officers dealing with the drug problem, etc., etc. I think that's hateful and mean and clearly judgmental and intolerant. As several here have said, you can't know what the circumstances are for someone's prostitution, or drug use for that matter. I believe that if these things that are wrecking people and our country, the victimless crimes, were leagl and dealt with in some kind of sane way, then the perpetrators would reap what they sow without any help from self-righteous, judgmental, intolerant boobs. If people get hooked on drugs or if they can't make a living any other way than prostitution, then so be it. Who are we to pass judgement on them here on earth by doing things like you did, refusing a woman food because she smokes? If a person chooses behavior that is a sin or detrimental to their health, it is their choice. They have to suffer any consequences. It isn't up to you or my friends to pass judgment and inflict punishment. Don't try to pass your behavior off as "tough love" because what you did was pass judgment, be intolerant of someone with different beliefs than you, and inflict punishment. Don't tell us that you don't consider yourself God. Or at least God's tool. Don't tell us that you don't hate. Your behavior and your words clearly expose what you are all about. We're just going by what you tell us. And what you tell us everyday on every thread on which you post, is that you are judgemental, consider yourself an instrument of God, and you believe that you are well-equipped to inflict punishment whenever you have the opportunity. Tough love my booty.

plain gets what? plain, the information about the illegal things that went on in the first election were all over the news 24/7 and are still being discussed. I can't imagine that you said what you did about it. That fisco was the furthest thing from a "conspiricy theory". Just because you didn't experience it, didn't read about it and KNOW the truth from your own experience, doesn't mean it didn't happen and that it is a "theory." You people really ARE good at trying to re-write history. Amazing, simply amazing. Please do go have some more wine and pickle your brains further.

I am stunned by some of the answers to rodriguez's questions and comments. I am so very glad that you are such an intelligent and loving person, rodriguez. You are generous of spirit and kind and I think a whole lot of you. I believe that since you won't have to have a D&C, you will recover physically even quicker, yes? If there is a problem with a malformed egg or sperm that have joined and will eventually (if it lives) become a malformed fetus, I believe that it is intelligent to make the choice to abort. I think it is unfair to that potential child to bring it into the world where pain and suffering, hospitals and medicine are its' life. If IVF is okay with God, then abortion is okay too when it is necessary.

plain, you should watch politicians sometime. They are able to dance around a political subject without lying. I think that lying is wrong. Not exposing yourself to criticism when it is not in your own best interests is what we do for self-preservation. That's not wrong, that's intelligent. It is often used when a lady is with friends and a controversial topic comes up and she doesn't start a heated argument because she disagrees with the point her friends are making. You know... the opposite of what happens here at R&Rs. What's going to be the death of us is all this friggin' intolerance, finger-pointing and name-calling.

If prostitution were legal and there were some controls and guidelines put into place, the public and the prostitutes would have some protection. As it is now, it's a very seedy, filthy business and it isn't going away. Saw the movie. Quite the thriller. Liam Neeson is always great.

No more than you, dear. And jack.

Terridoodozle, I WAS in the room. It is hilarious to read Beth's post. The left didn't attempt to steal anything in the 2000 election. In fact, they were stunned by the stuff the Republicans pulled off. We all were. And you should have been watching instead of drinking the kool-aide. This time, our man did win, or hadn't you noticed? We went to task on the two former elections and since Bush had blocked every attempt to have a ligitimate election process, the Dems got real busy. Paybacks are hell, eh?

Guess misunderstandings are to be expected when people are at loggerheads. There's no way out of this discussion because we're talking apples and oranges and you really don't care. Whatever.

Beth are you just intentionally being silly about the election or do you really not know what went down? There sure is a lot of information readily available about all the improprieties that went on. Perhaps you didn't live in a state where the election was stolen. Many of us did and we know the reality of what happened. It isn't a theory. It's not something we had to go somewhere and research like you must need to do. We lived through it, watched it happen right before our eyes. We've had this discussion on LBT many times, specifics were cited, questions were asked and answered. Guess you weren't around then. Anyway, there are probably some valid instances you can use to accuse people of "drinking the kool-aide" but you really should let the election one go. I'm not saying you have to of course, but just making a suggestion because I care so much about you and the image you project.

Please be careful rodriguez! As we all know, people can be very passionate when it comes to this topic. You feeling physically okay today?

Nope you're not a statistician. And we don't need a non-statistician to "translate" anything for us. If a study of any kind isn't relevant to the discussion at hand, then tossing it out there as if it is has just gotta make you wonder what the motive is. You should be more concerned with real condom failure rate. You should be demonstrating on street corners on how to properly use a condom if you're so concerned about the abortion numbers. In fact, birth control methods of all kinds should be more out in the open with full disclosure of side effects and failure rates. (And it doesn't take the mentality of a teenager to understand that if he doesn't use a condom, it won't work.) And by the way, since you're so harpy on this topic, I've known for nearly my entire adulthood how our ob/gyns gathers data on birth control "failures." I know that there is a classification for failure rates based simply on what the couple's normal choice of birth control is, whether they used it properly or not. There is also a classification of failure rates when birth control was thought to have been properly used. As in whether the IUD was in place as it should have been, if the patch had fallen off, if a pill has been missed, etc. Which is what is relevant when sex education information, including the various birth control methods, is being assessed for composing a cirriculum.

Hells yeah, I'd like a toddy. But I won't drink your kool-aide without some 101 proof vodka.

That is a great post, terridoogle. The old "the president is a socialist" conspiracy theory is a prime example of how irrelevant the truth is to that claim. The election process of 2000 is not a "theory" however. There is plenty of factual data that has been made public from the night of the election into the years that followed. But I do think what you posted is a theory that might explain why people like to debate theories here on LBT. And might also tell us why those who oppose the beliefs and ideas of a poster, would insist repeatedly that the poster "prove" their beliefs and ideas. And it would also explain why those who share common beliefs, ideas or theories would not ask for proof from each other. They use each others' posts to become even more "behaviorally committed" and "the more impossible it becomes to change your [their] mind."

gadget I understand your logic and you're right, I sure do not agree with it. You've always been able to come up with statistics that are jarring. You are excellent at sounding credible. Using shock to scare people to make their case could have been invented by the anti-choice movement because they are so darned good at it. Fortunately most people see it for what it is. They are not fooled and they are turned off by it. You cannot say that a condom didn't work if it wasn't used, not when you are citing FAILURE rate for birth control methods. You can say that the use of condoms for birth control failed when you are talking about pregnancies that happen when the people involved use condoms as their regular birth control, but didn't use a condom on the occasion when they conceived. There's a big difference when you are teaching people about birth control. And that's what we were talking about. You must make the distinction that if condoms are your birth control of choice, they will not work to prevent pregnancy if you don't use them. And if you use them, you absolutely must use the equipment properly or they will fail. I wasn't trying to give you a "backhanded" compliment. I was just telling it like I see it. It is what it is. I see you've knocked yourself out. Seriously, right out of the ballpark as far as I'm concerned. A homerun of rebuttal. Wow. Impressive.

Why don't we focus here on Beth's assertion that Obama wasn't born in the U.S.A.? And she compares it to the election steal? Weren't you able to read or listen during the first Bush election, Beth? Had your head in the sand or something? Have you ever known anyone who has been born out of your state? Do you understand how citizenship things work? Do you know what a naturalized citizen is? Do you know how many states we have? You're just mad because the Democrats were able to prevent the Republicans from pulling the same bullshite in the last election that they did in the previous two. I know you're disappointed, but if I were you I don't think I'd go around claiming that those elections relate in any way to president Obama's birth certificate. Of course, I'm not you. And that's a good thing, right?

I believe that DownIn has it right. People don't really understand the term socialism. They toss it around trying to insult the president, but it only serves to make them look irrational.

I'd like to know why Beth isn't being jumped on for not answering the question and not citing specifics. Hmmmmm? She quite often uses the term socialist in the same sentence with the word president. Someone tries to get her to say exactly why, what particular action on the part of the president, makes him a socialist. So far, nothing but conjecture and opinion.

Plain: "That's funny that you're equating being "politically correct" with lying." Is that what you do when you are trying to appear unbiased? Or don't you ever have the need to stay out of the critical limelight? Being politically correct does not mean lying. It means that they're being politically correct, you nut ball. In other words, they aren't saying anything that would be considered controversial. They keep their friggin' yap shut. They play nice. They try to stay above the smell of the crowd and the roar of the grease paint (to quote a politico). Man, I sure am getting tired of having to straighten you out. If you'll quit picking on me, I won't have to do that so much.

I just noticed that you two are at about the same place in your lapband journey. Good for both of you. Impressive weight losses. I've had a recent setback and it gives my morale a boost to see people who are doing so well. :crying:

Stocks drop on economy worries - Stocks & economy- msnbc.com Been there, saw that. What's your point? I don't really understand how that relates to what I've been lambasted for. But maybe, unlike Beth, the economy is not all about me.

The thing about economics is you typically don't know much about whether something's going to work until you try it and it does or it doesn't. It's not an exact science due to all the variables that are at stake here -- one of which is simple human nature. That seems to me to be the most level-headed thing I've seen you post, Beth.

trell, I'm not sure that public speaking and beauty pagents go hand in hand. Public speaking is difficult and an acquired art. Most of the focus in beauty pagents is beauty. Hence the fake hair, boobs, tans, etc. But the one who is crowned is expected to be able to not embarrass herself or her sponsors. Doesn't look like Prejean was up for that.

plain: "Unlike BJean, I think Prejean was right to state her opinion." I don't really think she was wrong to state her opinion. What I said is that if she wanted the crown, she needed to be politically correct. She should have known the game by now. She should have wanted the crown if she was going to go to all that trouble. She probably knew that a question like that was going to be asked and that it might be asked of her. She either thought about it and decided that stating her opinion was more important than the crown, or she was just plain dumb. I don't think you all really read my posts. I think you probably scan them and come up with what you think I mean. I can't say as I blame you. I tend to do that with long posts too - either that or I ignore them altogether. Or were you just trying, once again, to get me to sound off plain? I know how much you enjoy reading my pearls of wisdom. :crying: