Dorcas wrote: Heard you had slurpee type waves come ashore... Global warming indeed..
I live where the snow gets as thick as fog sometimes, what with the cold air coming over the "warm" lakes. Now that they are mostly frozen over, we're just getting regular snow. Almost daily. If tomorrow is March, someone tell the weather.
Dorcas wrote: We are getting a winter mix in my neck of the woods. Is expected to last till Wednesday. Much needed though...we are most grateful, as we live up in the high country among all the beautiful pines. Stay warm~
Speaking of winter, in this area February has set a record as the coldest February ever. Where is global warming when you need it?
pennnned wrote: how can you all debate a 300 page document..... that has been written in SECRET, that even your own "representative government", that is Congress has not seen? and yet this Nazi investor who is also funding Ukraine destabilization has his money all over what you the people cannot even know what it is?? rhetorical question.
Another rhetorical question. How many self justifying documents from the same self justifying sources do we need to read before we know where they lead?
Barry from KY wrote: Actually Mike, it is the government that protects liberties, if not for our government, you or I would have no liberties. They have accomplished this by wielding the army, navy, air force and marines. It's not the NRA that gave you liberties! From what I've seen of the net neutrality thing, isn't it dealing with band width and has nothing to do with content, or am I reading it wrong???
Unprofitable Servant commented on the net neutralty thing much more ably than I can, Barry. Mine basically is that it works well without FCC help, so why "improve" it?
I might make issue with one thing, for clarity. The government as understood does not protect our liberties, we do. It's our job. We enable the military to do so for us, through, but not for, those we hire to serve the people. Govt, i.e. hired public employees is composed of fallen men and women, who lust for power. It is in the nature of them to take liberty away. That's why the Constitution, which some bemoan, was written, to place limits on the ability of our employees to gain excess power. It's us who are actual govt, and it's us responsible for keeping our liberty. Govt of, by, for the people is more than a nice phrase. PS I enjoy your thoughtful posts
John UK wrote: Dorcas, I do thank you for being willing to pray for her. I will tell you her middle name is Liz, so if you pray, the Lord will know who you mean straightway. And please do pray for me also, that the Lord gives me wisdom beyond my means, and needed strength, as I am not in the best of health myself. If anyone else would care to pray for a successful outcome tomorrow, and that the Lord would do graciously in his maidservant's heart, and wipe away her tears, do please do so. Thanks in advance, as I know many on here are filled with love of the Holy Ghost and are true friends in Jesus.
Jim Lincoln wrote: What no one even congratulated me for putting up why the Ford foundation might have been so liberal! This was a conservative article, (The Very Foundation of Conservatism). It explained how an actual conservative foundation did its thing and then did a planned self-destruction. You might enjoy that one Mike of NY? Users of SA, and SA itself should be supporting net neutrality because it makes sure they get equal treatment in getting bandwidth with the likes of Amazon and Netflix, who no doubt have a lot more economic muscle than SA --- Government might protect liberties, companies won't, Anne.
Have you convinced anyone yet? I keep forgetting you like to have government fix problems that don't exist. Keep talking, though. It becomes more revealing with each post.
solutions wrote: "the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic" "top-selling" rifle??? This won't curb the daily application of the "Right to Kill" ideology in America. More killings of children at schools or the daily murder total will continue to rise. It is the mind-set of 'right to kill' and lynch mob justice which needs to be treated before this carnage is overcome in the US. With over 53,000 gun shop arsenals distributed in all the shopping centres of the country a prohibition style control is needed to modify the gun-totting mentality that grows in Americans.
You know not of which you speak. But continue- In these dark days of criminals in high places, we get the humor of those who support them in their quest to save us from criminals by taking ammunition from non-criminals.
s c wrote: I feel compassion for Jessica but I'm not seeing where Jim was so cold in his previous post. Jessica,did you understand that he was not suggesting that you eat fast food in the previous post? When he mentioned fast food,he was suggesting that it may be problematic if you did just eat it.And he may not have been well enough acquainted with your specific condition to know that exercise might be a challenge to you.I don't think that he was being cruel there. Not everyone is familiar with all who post on here. It might help to keep that in mind. We all have a propensity,from time to time,to read things through subjective eyes and miss what was actually intended.
It's too bad his post has been deleted. We could then see why nearly all came to the same conclusion. But this you may not know, Jessica and Jim have both been on SA for many years. Her affliction has long been known to be serious to any who are paying attention. For Jim not to be acquainted with it is a stretch. Perhaps that is why people reacted negatively. I might give him the benefit of the doubt, for being misunderstood, but lack of apology for saying that which was misunderstood is missing. Perhaps his post on neuroses reveals what he thinks?
Anne wrote: Trading liberty for security has NEVER worked!! Even God told the Israelites to trust Him and not establish a king over themselves - look where it got them!!! Perilous times are set before us but we serve the Ruler of kings. I look forward to the day when our current president must bow before His Creator and acknowledge His "Executive Orders" supersede his own.
Amen, Anne. Hope Jim heeds this wisdom before it's forced on him.
Jim Lincoln wrote: John, when was the last time you used your AR 15? We have the evil clown, His Unholiness Franny to worry about q.v., The Pope and the Papacy to be more concerned about. It's a good thing that he suffers from foot in mouth disease or all we would have to comment about him would be gallows humor.
Nice footwork yourself. Why deal with the subject matter, when you can toss in the pope?
Christian Obedience wrote: God commands ~ 1Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; 14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. 15 For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: 16 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. 17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king. No Excuses!!
We have no king. Be that as it may, I hope you read v14 again. It's the verse in this context that lays out precisely what authority the king, and his governors have from God. Contrariwise, they have no authority from God that calls for punishment of them that do well, and praise for evildoers.
Hosea 8:4 "They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off."
pennnned wrote: --- this is an interesting point, I see you didn't get any other takers on this topic, but it has bothered me that scriptures say not to take oaths but let your yes be yes....
There are oaths, and there are oaths.
John Gill's comment on James 5:12
Verse 12. "But above all things, my brethren, swear not,.... As impatience should not show itself in secret sighs, groans, murmurings, and repinings, so more especially it should not break forth in rash oaths, or in profane swearing; for of such sort of swearing, and of such oaths, is the apostle to be understood; otherwise an oath is very lawful, when taken in the fear and name of God, and made by the living God, and is used for the confirmation of anything of moment, and in order to put an end to strife; God himself, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and angels, and good men, are in Scripture sometimes represented as swearing: and that the apostle is so to be understood, appears from the form of swearing prohibited,
neither by the heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath; of the like kind; such as are forbidden, and cautioned, and reasoned against by our Lord, in Matthew 5:34 to which the apostle manifestly refers;"