It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Something strange happened at school...

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358
My bad. I just just found it
www.surveymonkey.com...
Just found out they closed the survey. That explains why they were trying to rush us.
Now I got no proof




posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Hahaha I just wanted make up something that may have been interesting. I only go school Monday to Friday. Good one though



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 04:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: waterLaw

And remember, the only thing that one should never tolerate, is intolerance.


Actually this is not true.

There are things that should not be tolerated.

I remember once reading about a country in Europe that had a complete tolerance policy, and this lead to pedophilia being aired on TV, until they realized how backwards the idea of complete tolerance really is. I agree, and it should be that people should be tolerant of each other, and each other's beliefs.

But there are things that society just should not tolerate, and that is not a bad thing. Tolerance is lacking in society, but complete tolerance of everything but intolerance is out-right stupid.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 04:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: TheCretinHop


And let's not get into the vulgar amounts of incest in the bible, that moral guidebook for outrage and bigotry! I only ask because I don't want to keep making assumptions about you or the basis for your feelings.

But this is getting way off topic here so it should be nipped in the bud sooner than later


I've read the Bible, and although I've read the accounts of incest, it was never in any way condoning it.

As far as the first humans, such as Cain taking a wife for himself among his sisters, he was the first human child from his first human parents. Where else was he going to get a wife? At that time the gene pool was almost basically perfect, and there was no problem with marrying a brother or sister, and the only way the human race would continue.

Obviously after several generations of derogation of the human genetic structure, marrying family members had to be forbidden, and God did forbid it in the Mosaic law. And it is still wrong up till today.

And far from being bigoted, as you wrongly and falsely accuse it, it states very plainly:

"At this Peter began to speak, and he said: “Now I truly understand that God is not partial,+ 35 but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him."" - Acts 10:34, 35.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: JackReyes


I've read the Bible, and although I've read the accounts of incest, it was never in any way condoning it.


Then why are there specific rules in the Hebrew text to know which types of incest are OK? If 2 half siblings have the same mother but different fathers they may marry and have children. Abraham, patriarch of the Hebrew people, was married to his half sister Sarah. Abrahams son Isaac married his 1st cousin, Amram married his paternal aunt, Jochabed, mother of Moses and Aaron and on and on...


As far as the first humans, such as Cain taking a wife for himself among his sisters, he was the first human child from his first human parents. Where else was he going to get a wife? At that time the gene pool was almost basically perfect, and there was no problem with marrying a brother or sister, and the only way the human race would continue.


So you take the scriptural accounts literally then? How do you arrive at the gene pool being perfect? If Eve was made from Adam's rib, she was Adam's genetic duplicate, a clone made directly from his genetic material. Thus from the first generation of their offspring, there would be genetic inefficiencies displayed. This entire illogical line of thinking is completely contrary to everything known about how genetics works. To rationalize any of it requires some serious mental gymnastics and none of it is remotely supported by science. I'm going to trust scientific, peer reviewed data over 3500 year old fables of the bronze age


Obviously after several generations of derogation of the human genetic structure, marrying family members had to be forbidden, and God did forbid it in the Mosaic law. And it is still wrong up till today.

How many to you is "several"? Genetic deformities and recessive genes would run amok through the population within 4 generations and would be so prevalent by the 5th generation that nobody would be able to correct them. And at this point, everyone would still be related very closely. How do you reconcile this reality with the biblical literalist view point?


And far from being bigoted, as you wrongly and falsely accuse it, it states very plainly:
"At this Peter began to speak, and he said: “Now I truly understand that God is not partial,+ 35 but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him."" - Acts 10:34, 35.


This is what we call 'quote mining'. You take one single line out of the entire chapter and use it to justify ignorance and bigotry. When someone uses the book to justify their ignorant, bigoted hatred of others, it is contrary to the teachings of Christ. Let's look at Acts Ch 10 from the beginning... Peter is at a house by the sea praying and wants to eat. While his meal is being prepared he receives a vision from god showing a large variety of animals and is instructed to kill and eat. Peter cries out that he can not eat anything unclean and god responds that no animal created by him can be considered unclean. Prior to this, an angel appears to a Roman Centurion names Cornelius because of the generous offerings and gifts given to god in Cornelius name. As a result Cornelius is considered righteous enough to receive messages from gods servants among men and the angel instructs Cornelius to seek out Peter. Right after Peter receives his vision regarding the OK to eat all animals, Cornelius' servants arrive to bring him back to Cornelius' home. When Peter arrives there, Cornelius throws himself at Peter's feet and was told to stand as Peter was just a man. They then went into Cornelius' home where there was a large gathering of people waiting to hear Peter speak. Peter reminded Cornelius that it was against the law for a Jew. Here, let me quote the actual scripture...


28 He said to them: "You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.

29 So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection. May I ask why you sent for me?"

30 Cornelius answered: "Four days ago I was in my house praying at this hour, at three in the afternoon. Suddenly a man in shining clothes stood before me

31 and said, 'Cornelius, God has heard your prayer and remembered your gifts to the poor.

32 Send to Joppa for Simon who is called Peter. He is a guest in the home of Simon the tanner, who lives by the sea.'

33 So I sent for you immediately, and it was good of you to come. Now we are all here in the presence of God to listen to everything the Lord has commanded you to tell us."


Context is everything, especially in this instance. Unless I misunderstood your position and you are agreeing with me that no man should be judged or be called impure or unclean by any other. However, there are many pieces of text in both Hebrew and later scripture associated with Christianity that contradict this passage and are used by adherents of the faith to discriminate against homosexuals in a fashion that seems to go against the ethos of Christ. Do you deny that many Christians use scripture to justify their bigoted stances? And they base it on scripture found within the same book you quote from. There is far more intolerance and bigotry in the "good book" than there is tolerance and love.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Nothin' says luvvin like marryin' yer cousin!



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: waterLaw

Was any option given to opt out and not answer the questions? I have read a bit about such surveys, looking for all sorts of personal details on students, and, usually, their families as well. Gins in the home? Religion? And so forth. Nothing like that was EVER asked when I was in school. Ever. Never came up, at all. No, "who would you vote for, even. These days, they want to much information. I'd say, tell them it's personal and none of their business, that you feel offended that they asked, and bullied. Watch them scramble.

I have to add - based on some of the comments, you can see what sort are all for those little surveys. It's about control, and keeping you from thinking for yourself. In that regard, to seem to be ahead of some of the older posters. Don't let anyone tell you that you aren't allowed to have your own opinions! You saw an issue, and pointed it out. I have seen enough of those little surveys to know they are real, and don't need that proof from you. Good topic, regardless of the dissent. Kudos.
edit on 25-7-2015 by LadyGreenEyes because: addition



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: TheCretinHop

damn dyslexia, got my memebers crossed, sorry!


edit on 25-7-2015 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 12:00 AM
link   
HA.
I'm adopted!



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join