40 million = Total Recall
Why is it that no one seems to be heading up the Total Recall of the Govenator. Why hasn't the District Attorney filled charges against him for crimes against the city and mis-management of funds.
Is the govenator right? Is the proverbial they a bunch of "Girly Men"
How much leeway should he be given because he is a bit famous. Do you excuse him because he is an actor? Is it like being a blonde? Do we look the other way because he is related to our Royal Family, the Kennedy's. Can he pull the wool over our eyes with the bravado? Do we get caught up in the allure of his schmoozy,macho,uber male charm?
When he landed in the Terminator, and the smoke cleared we saw his ass. Now that he is the Govenator and the smoke cleared all I see is an ass.
I want to say thank you to the Citizens of California for sending him a wake up call. But, was it enough? I say no... He feels that he can spend our money with no responsibility. I hope that in the next election, we show him that with great power, comes great responsibility.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Sunday, October 02, 2005
2005 Racism is it dead or alive ?
When I woke up on Friday morning realizing that another month has passed me by, it seemed as if it was going to be like any other day. Now, that I was unemployed, my day would more than likely consist of scouring the online want-ads and only pay 1/2 attention to the monotonous drown of morning television in the background.
My attention was being pulled away from job hunting as the news caster was repeating words I thought went out of fashion in 1957. They were reporting the following
Mr Bennett, who held prominent posts in the administrations of former presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, told a caller to his syndicated radio talk show Wednesday: "If you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossibly ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down," he said.
I was immediately transported in time to the early 60's. Visions of poodle skirts, fresh baked cookies, moms homemade apple pie. Gas was 10 cents a gallon and cigarettes were 5 cents a pack. Schools were segregated and Rosa Parks was still moving to the back of the bus. Huh? What? Wait a minute, I shook my head, at once I was smacked in the face with the reality that it is 2005, and this man had just proved to me that we had still not moved very far up the evolutionary ladder.
How is it in 2005 A Neanderthal is walking around, and even more shocking he has his own radio show, where on a whim, he can proselytize hate speech.
I starting really thinking about his statement, giving it an honest once over, removing the sentence from the shock value. I realized that this man is wrong on so many levels. Lets look at a few.
1. His assumption that blacks commit more crime, that the rest of society, does have slight merit. What he fails to recognize is the root causes for a large majority of blacks committing crimes. Poverty is one of the leading factors. Who is poor? A large portion of the black community is poor, at or just above poverty.
2. Indifference. We often forget that a large portion of America has a whole is in poverty. We were recently reminded of this fact, during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. People were saying that why didn't they leave. If you are so poor you can't afford a car, and everyone around you is just a poor, how do you get out?
3. Drugs I think this factor speaks for itself. Although, it would seem that this is a subject for a whole nother blog. Specifically the conspiracy???
If Mr. Bennett really wanted to reduce crime, he should focus on reducing poverty.
Mr Bennett also fails to realize that Whites have cornered that market on serial killing, and pedophilia.
We have people who are homeless, starving, teen pregnancies, AIDS, etc, and Mr. Bennett finds time to be a racist.
IDIOTS ARE EVERYWHERE
My attention was being pulled away from job hunting as the news caster was repeating words I thought went out of fashion in 1957. They were reporting the following
Mr Bennett, who held prominent posts in the administrations of former presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, told a caller to his syndicated radio talk show Wednesday: "If you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossibly ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down," he said.
I was immediately transported in time to the early 60's. Visions of poodle skirts, fresh baked cookies, moms homemade apple pie. Gas was 10 cents a gallon and cigarettes were 5 cents a pack. Schools were segregated and Rosa Parks was still moving to the back of the bus. Huh? What? Wait a minute, I shook my head, at once I was smacked in the face with the reality that it is 2005, and this man had just proved to me that we had still not moved very far up the evolutionary ladder.
How is it in 2005 A Neanderthal is walking around, and even more shocking he has his own radio show, where on a whim, he can proselytize hate speech.
I starting really thinking about his statement, giving it an honest once over, removing the sentence from the shock value. I realized that this man is wrong on so many levels. Lets look at a few.
1. His assumption that blacks commit more crime, that the rest of society, does have slight merit. What he fails to recognize is the root causes for a large majority of blacks committing crimes. Poverty is one of the leading factors. Who is poor? A large portion of the black community is poor, at or just above poverty.
2. Indifference. We often forget that a large portion of America has a whole is in poverty. We were recently reminded of this fact, during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. People were saying that why didn't they leave. If you are so poor you can't afford a car, and everyone around you is just a poor, how do you get out?
3. Drugs I think this factor speaks for itself. Although, it would seem that this is a subject for a whole nother blog. Specifically the conspiracy???
If Mr. Bennett really wanted to reduce crime, he should focus on reducing poverty.
Mr Bennett also fails to realize that Whites have cornered that market on serial killing, and pedophilia.
We have people who are homeless, starving, teen pregnancies, AIDS, etc, and Mr. Bennett finds time to be a racist.
IDIOTS ARE EVERYWHERE
Monday, September 12, 2005
Katrina a canadian observation
Re-post froma group I belong to
I am sure no disrespect for the victims of Katrina was intended by the person who put the Bush Vacation image together, who and wherever he or she is.
And no disrespect was intended when I posted it.
The image is in my opinion a brilliant, biting commentary on the ENORMOUS, mind-numbing disrespect paid by the White House to those very victims in the past days. As the storm passed and the water flooded in, Bush and Cheney kept on vacationing for days before cluing in that people were demanding their leadership; Condi went on a shopping spree in New York to buy shoes before being browbeaten by a citizen on the street for doing nothing as people suffered, whence she hightailed it back to Washington.
Since then, their priority has been political damage control - saving their own sorry hides and casting desperately for anyone else they can blame - before belatedly pulling together a response that has been a disaster in its own right.
Being that I am a ctizen of Canada, you may say this is none of my business: but when Washington coughs, the world catches cold. The supposed leader of the free world is responsible to all who believe in democracy. We don't hate Americans, but we so wish our friends in America would wake up to the perversion of democracy that is taking place under the banner of "freedom on the march".
New Orleans is a tragedy, and I couldn't agree more that it is not a laughing matter. Rock and Roll Boys posted a tribute with links to where you can help a week ago, with no comment on who is to blame.
The photo in question is a classic example of black humour, a joke intended to expose an absurd response by the established order to a deadly serious situation.
No Vince, no disrespect was intended to you, to your great country, or to the victims of this tragedy with this photo. Nothing like this has happpened to an American city since the Chicago fire of 1871 or the San Francisco earthquake of 1906.
But I imagine that in seeing the image I posted, most citizens of New Orleans would see the image for what it is, and agree wholeheartedly on the sorry state of leadership today that it represents.
Katrina a disaster on so many levels
There is plenty of blame to go around.. But lets just place it where it belongs..
The affected cities had plenty of time to plan ahead. they should have done the following:
General warning on every local station, advising citizens to evacuate.
Made preperations for shelters, including being high enough not to flood, water and food and electricity.
Making plans for prearranged pick up locations, to bus out those citizens unable to leave on their own.
the local government should be held liable for not making plans in advance
Now, anyone who stayed of their own free choice, to bad..so sad
you should have gotten your ass out when you were warned.
If you were poor and had no means of getting out, it should have been provided..and law suits for lost loved ones should be filed.
The federal government should have also been prepared to have buses ready with food and water, to relocate everyone to a predetermined location(s), making it easier to stay together and to find family members including pets.
President Bush should be held liable for hiring a friend with no qualifications, who did not prepare and lost lives.
the media should be held responsible for the vial act of perpetuating racism.. how can a black boy be called a looter, right next to a white couple and they didnt loot they found the food..... as long as we are fighting amongst ourselves we are not paying attention to what the government is doing.
Please watch big brother, cause he is watching you
The affected cities had plenty of time to plan ahead. they should have done the following:
General warning on every local station, advising citizens to evacuate.
Made preperations for shelters, including being high enough not to flood, water and food and electricity.
Making plans for prearranged pick up locations, to bus out those citizens unable to leave on their own.
the local government should be held liable for not making plans in advance
Now, anyone who stayed of their own free choice, to bad..so sad
you should have gotten your ass out when you were warned.
If you were poor and had no means of getting out, it should have been provided..and law suits for lost loved ones should be filed.
The federal government should have also been prepared to have buses ready with food and water, to relocate everyone to a predetermined location(s), making it easier to stay together and to find family members including pets.
President Bush should be held liable for hiring a friend with no qualifications, who did not prepare and lost lives.
the media should be held responsible for the vial act of perpetuating racism.. how can a black boy be called a looter, right next to a white couple and they didnt loot they found the food..... as long as we are fighting amongst ourselves we are not paying attention to what the government is doing.
Please watch big brother, cause he is watching you
Monday, July 25, 2005
The Mornign Star truth or another lie
i am re-posting this as I found it very interesting
The word "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12 presents a minor problem to mainstream Christianity. It becomes a much larger problem to Bible literalists, and becomes a huge obstacle for the claims of Mormonism.
Lucifer makes his appearance in the fourteenth chapter of the Old Testament book of Isaiah, at the twelfth verse, and nowhere else: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"
The first problem is that Lucifer is a Latin name. So how did it find its way into a Hebrew manuscript, written before there was a Roman language? To find the answer, I consulted a scholar at the library of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati. What Hebrew name, I asked, was Satan given in this chapter of Isaiah, which describes the angel who fell to become the ruler of hell?
The answer was a surprise. In the original Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a fallen angel, but about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel. It contains no mention of Satan, either by name or reference. The Hebrew scholar could only speculate that some early Christian scribes, writing in the Latin tongue used by the Church, had decided for themselves that they wanted the story to be about a fallen angel, a creature not even mentioned in the original Hebrew text, and to whom they gave the name "Lucifer."
Why Lucifer? In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name given to the morning star (the star we now know by another Roman name, Venus). The morning star appears in the heavens just before dawn, heralding the rising sun. The name derives from the Latin term lucem ferre, bringer, or bearer, of light." In the Hebrew text the expression used to describe the Babylonian king before his death is Helal, son of Shahar, which can best be translated as "Day star, son of the Dawn." The name evokes the golden glitter of a proud king's dress and court (much as his personal splendor earned for King Louis XIV of France the appellation, "The Sun King").
The scholars authorized by ... King James I to translate the Bible into current English did not use the original Hebrew texts, but used versions translated ... largely by St. Jerome in the fourth century. Jerome had mistranslated the Hebraic metaphor, "Day star, son of the Dawn," as "Lucifer," and over the centuries a metamorphosis took place. Lucifer the morning star became a disobedient angel, cast out of heaven to rule eternally in hell. Theologians, writers, and poets interwove the myth with the doctrine of the Fall, and in Christian tradition Lucifer is now the same as Satan, the Devil, and --- ironically --- the Prince of Darkness.
So "Lucifer" is nothing more than an ancient Latin name for the morning star, the bringer of light. That can be confusing for Christians who identify Christ himself as the morning star, a term used as a central theme in many Christian sermons. Jesus refers to himself as the morning star in Revelation 22:16: "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
And so there are those who do not read beyond the King James version of the Bible, who say 'Lucifer is Satan: so says the Word of God'...." Henry Neufeld (a Christian who comments on Biblical sticky issues) went on to say,
"this passage is often related to Satan, and a similar thought is expressed in Luke 10:18 by Jesus, that was not its first meaning. It's primary meaning is given in Isaiah 14:4 which says that when Israel is restored they will "take up this taunt against the king of Babylon . . ." Verse 12 is a part of this taunt song. This passage refers first to the fall of that earthly king...
How does the confusion in translating this verse arise? The Hebrew of this passage reads: "heleyl, ben shachar" which can be literally translated "shining one, son of dawn." This phrase means, again literally, the planet Venus when it appears as a morning star. In the Septuagint, a 3rd century BC translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek, it is translated as "heosphoros" which also means Venus as a morning star.
How did the translation "lucifer" arise? This word comes from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Was Jerome in error? Not at all. In Latin at the time, "lucifer" actually meant Venus as a morning star. Isaiah is using this metaphor for a bright light, though not the greatest light to illustrate the apparent power of the Babylonian king which then faded." Therefore, Lucifer wasn't equated with Satan until after Jerome. Jerome wasn't in error. Later Christians (and Mormons) were in equating "Lucifer" with "Satan".
So why is this a problem to Christians? Christians now generally believe that Satan (or the Devil or Lucifer who they equate with Satan) is a being who has always existed (or who was created at or near the "beginning"). Therefore, they also think that the 'prophets' of the Old Testament believed in this creature. The Isaiah scripture is used as proof (and has been used as such for hundreds of years now). As Elaine Pagels explains though, the concept of Satan has evolved over the years and the early Bible writers didn't believe in or teach such a doctrine.
The irony for those who believe that "Lucifer" refers to Satan is that the same title ('morning star' or 'light-bearer') is used to refer to Jesus, in 2 Peter 1:19, where the Greek text has exactly the same term: 'phos-phoros' 'light-bearer.' This is also the term used for Jesus in Revelation 22:16.
So why is Lucifer a far bigger problem to Mormons? Mormons claim that an ancient record (the Book of Mormon) was written beginning in about 600 BC, and the author in 600 BC supposedly copied Isaiah in Isaiah's original words. When Joseph Smith pretended to translate the supposed 'ancient record', he included the Lucifer verse in the Book of Mormon. Obviously he wasn't copying what Isaiah actually wrote. He was copying the King James Version of the Bible. Another book of LDS scripture, the Doctrine & Covenants, furthers this problem in 76:26 when it affirms the false Christian doctrine that "Lucifer" means Satan. This incorrect doctrine also spread into a third set of Mormon scriptures, the Pearl of Great Price, which describes a war in heaven based, in part, on Joseph Smith's incorrect interpretation of the word "Lucifer" which only appears in Isaiah.
The author of The Polytheism Of The Bible And The Mystery Of Lucifer, F.T. DeAngelis, comments on this page as follows
"The actual name, "Lucifer," goes back to the Greeks, before the Romans. Socrates and Plato talk about this "god of light"; surprisingly, not in the context of Eos (god of Dawn), but -- as a morning star -- juxtaposed with the sun (Helios) and Hermes. This information can be found in Plato's Timaeus (38e) and in Edith Hamilton's Mythology."
Again, just a queer observation, bit it raises very puzzleing questions ?
The word "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12 presents a minor problem to mainstream Christianity. It becomes a much larger problem to Bible literalists, and becomes a huge obstacle for the claims of Mormonism.
Lucifer makes his appearance in the fourteenth chapter of the Old Testament book of Isaiah, at the twelfth verse, and nowhere else: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"
The first problem is that Lucifer is a Latin name. So how did it find its way into a Hebrew manuscript, written before there was a Roman language? To find the answer, I consulted a scholar at the library of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati. What Hebrew name, I asked, was Satan given in this chapter of Isaiah, which describes the angel who fell to become the ruler of hell?
The answer was a surprise. In the original Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a fallen angel, but about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel. It contains no mention of Satan, either by name or reference. The Hebrew scholar could only speculate that some early Christian scribes, writing in the Latin tongue used by the Church, had decided for themselves that they wanted the story to be about a fallen angel, a creature not even mentioned in the original Hebrew text, and to whom they gave the name "Lucifer."
Why Lucifer? In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name given to the morning star (the star we now know by another Roman name, Venus). The morning star appears in the heavens just before dawn, heralding the rising sun. The name derives from the Latin term lucem ferre, bringer, or bearer, of light." In the Hebrew text the expression used to describe the Babylonian king before his death is Helal, son of Shahar, which can best be translated as "Day star, son of the Dawn." The name evokes the golden glitter of a proud king's dress and court (much as his personal splendor earned for King Louis XIV of France the appellation, "The Sun King").
The scholars authorized by ... King James I to translate the Bible into current English did not use the original Hebrew texts, but used versions translated ... largely by St. Jerome in the fourth century. Jerome had mistranslated the Hebraic metaphor, "Day star, son of the Dawn," as "Lucifer," and over the centuries a metamorphosis took place. Lucifer the morning star became a disobedient angel, cast out of heaven to rule eternally in hell. Theologians, writers, and poets interwove the myth with the doctrine of the Fall, and in Christian tradition Lucifer is now the same as Satan, the Devil, and --- ironically --- the Prince of Darkness.
So "Lucifer" is nothing more than an ancient Latin name for the morning star, the bringer of light. That can be confusing for Christians who identify Christ himself as the morning star, a term used as a central theme in many Christian sermons. Jesus refers to himself as the morning star in Revelation 22:16: "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
And so there are those who do not read beyond the King James version of the Bible, who say 'Lucifer is Satan: so says the Word of God'...." Henry Neufeld (a Christian who comments on Biblical sticky issues) went on to say,
"this passage is often related to Satan, and a similar thought is expressed in Luke 10:18 by Jesus, that was not its first meaning. It's primary meaning is given in Isaiah 14:4 which says that when Israel is restored they will "take up this taunt against the king of Babylon . . ." Verse 12 is a part of this taunt song. This passage refers first to the fall of that earthly king...
How does the confusion in translating this verse arise? The Hebrew of this passage reads: "heleyl, ben shachar" which can be literally translated "shining one, son of dawn." This phrase means, again literally, the planet Venus when it appears as a morning star. In the Septuagint, a 3rd century BC translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek, it is translated as "heosphoros" which also means Venus as a morning star.
How did the translation "lucifer" arise? This word comes from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Was Jerome in error? Not at all. In Latin at the time, "lucifer" actually meant Venus as a morning star. Isaiah is using this metaphor for a bright light, though not the greatest light to illustrate the apparent power of the Babylonian king which then faded." Therefore, Lucifer wasn't equated with Satan until after Jerome. Jerome wasn't in error. Later Christians (and Mormons) were in equating "Lucifer" with "Satan".
So why is this a problem to Christians? Christians now generally believe that Satan (or the Devil or Lucifer who they equate with Satan) is a being who has always existed (or who was created at or near the "beginning"). Therefore, they also think that the 'prophets' of the Old Testament believed in this creature. The Isaiah scripture is used as proof (and has been used as such for hundreds of years now). As Elaine Pagels explains though, the concept of Satan has evolved over the years and the early Bible writers didn't believe in or teach such a doctrine.
The irony for those who believe that "Lucifer" refers to Satan is that the same title ('morning star' or 'light-bearer') is used to refer to Jesus, in 2 Peter 1:19, where the Greek text has exactly the same term: 'phos-phoros' 'light-bearer.' This is also the term used for Jesus in Revelation 22:16.
So why is Lucifer a far bigger problem to Mormons? Mormons claim that an ancient record (the Book of Mormon) was written beginning in about 600 BC, and the author in 600 BC supposedly copied Isaiah in Isaiah's original words. When Joseph Smith pretended to translate the supposed 'ancient record', he included the Lucifer verse in the Book of Mormon. Obviously he wasn't copying what Isaiah actually wrote. He was copying the King James Version of the Bible. Another book of LDS scripture, the Doctrine & Covenants, furthers this problem in 76:26 when it affirms the false Christian doctrine that "Lucifer" means Satan. This incorrect doctrine also spread into a third set of Mormon scriptures, the Pearl of Great Price, which describes a war in heaven based, in part, on Joseph Smith's incorrect interpretation of the word "Lucifer" which only appears in Isaiah.
The author of The Polytheism Of The Bible And The Mystery Of Lucifer, F.T. DeAngelis, comments on this page as follows
"The actual name, "Lucifer," goes back to the Greeks, before the Romans. Socrates and Plato talk about this "god of light"; surprisingly, not in the context of Eos (god of Dawn), but -- as a morning star -- juxtaposed with the sun (Helios) and Hermes. This information can be found in Plato's Timaeus (38e) and in Edith Hamilton's Mythology."
Again, just a queer observation, bit it raises very puzzleing questions ?
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
SEX AND OBSCENITY IN THE BIBLE
SEX AND OBSCENITY IN THE BIBLE
GENESIS 17:9-14 Circumcision mandated
19:1-8 Rape virgins instead of male angels
19:30-38 Righteous man impregnates his 2 daughters while drunk
24:2-3, 9 Place your hand "under the thigh" (sexual organs) of someone swearing sacred oaths
25:1-6 Keeping mistresses is not adultery
32:25 God grabs Jacob's testicles
34:1-31 Brothers are riled when sister is defiled
35:2 Reuben sleeps with father's concubine
38:1-10 Onan's method of birth control not approved
38:12-30 Tamar plays the harlot to seduce father-in-law
39:1-20 Women tries to rape man
47:29 Joseph ordered to place his hand under father's thigh
EXODUS
20:26 God specifies building of altar to prevent exposure of nakedness
22:19 Death decreed for bestiality
33:17-23 God moons Moses
NUMBERS
31:1-18; 28-47 God commands genocide of Midianites, Moses orders that virgins be kept, other captives slain
5:11-31 God's fidelity test for women only
LEVITICUS
12:1-8 Bible calls childbirth a sin and bearing females a greater sin than bearing males
15:16-18 Sperm and intercourse are unclean 15:19-33 Menstruation unclean; elaborate rules
15:29-30 Women must make sin offering for menstrual periods
18:22 Homosexuality declared an abomination
18:23 More bestiality
19:1,20-22 Man gets forgiven, slave girl gets flogging
20:10 Adulterers shall be put to death
20:13 Death decreed for homosexuals
20:15-16 Death decreed for bestiality (& beast)
26:29 Curse: Eat your sons and daughters
DEUTERONOMY
3:1-7 Kill men, women, & children
21:10-14 God okays captured maidens as trial wives
22:5 Men's clothing not to be worn by women, & vice versa
22:13-21 A bride not a virgin must die
22:23-26 Virgin raped in city given no pity
23:12-14 Defecation: Carry paddle, dig hole, & cover up
25:5-10 Woman has cause to spit in man's face
25:11-12 A woman shall have her hand cut off for touching a penis
22:28-29 Paying father to have sex with daughter
23:1 Man "wounded in the stones" can't enter congregation
23:2 Children born out of wedlock condemned as bastards to 10th generation 23:10-11 Cleanliness called for in nocturnal emissions
24:1 Man can divorce wife through eviction
28:27 Hemorrhoids ("emerods") punishment for sin
28:30 Lord's curse: Another man shall lie with groom's bride first
28:53-57 Curse: Eat your own body & children
JUDGES
3:20-22 Dagger in fat king's gut gets "dirt" out
4:4-22 Hammer & nail murder by woman
8:30 Gideon had many wives, concubines
11:29-40 Jephtha's daughter: human sacrifice
19:1-30 Woman raped and ruined by homosexuals
21:6-25 Amidst carnage virgins captured for wives
RUTH
3:6-9 To "hook" him as husband, Ruth sleeps with Boaz
4:9-10 Boaz buys Ruth
I SAMUEL
5:9-12 Philistines "smitten with emerods" as punishment for stealing ark
6:1-5 To placate God, make golden emerods
15:3 God orders Saul to kill suckling babes
18:23-27 200 foreskins gain David a king's daughter
25:22,34 Any that pisseth against the wall II SAMUEL
3:7 More concubine hanky-panky
11:1-27 Uriah sent to lose his life so David can get his wife
12:7-12 Obscene performance to be viewed by all Israel
5:13 David had many wives, concubines Chapter 13 Amnon rapes his sister 16:20-23 Absalom copulates with father's concubines on rooftop
20:3 David imprisons concubines for above
I KINGS
1:1-4 Virgin as therapy for sick old man unsuccessful
11:1-10 Wise Solomon has wives and concubines galore
14:10 Him that pisseth against the wall
16:11 One that pisseth against a wall
21:21 Him that pisseth against the wall
II KINGS
6:24-33 "So we boiled my son, and did eat him"
9:8 Subject not mentioned in sermons
23:7 Male houses of prostitution destroyed
I CHRONICLES
1:32-33 Abraham's concubines have children
II CHRONICLES 11:21
King Rehoboam had 18 wives & 60 concubines
ESTHER
Chapters 1-2 Sexual contest to decide new queen
SONG OF SOLOMON (the whole thing!)
ISAIAH
3:16 "...and the Lord will discover their secret parts"
9:20 Every man shall eat the flesh of his own arm
14:21-22 Slaughter children for fathers' iniquity
16:11 Biblical boast: "My bowels shall sound like an harp"
36:12 Eating dung and drinking piss
JEREMIAH
16:4 Grievous, obscene deaths
LAMENTATIONS
2:19 Something to lament 4:10 Women boil children for food
EZEKIEL
4:12-15 God says: Eat bread defiled with dung
5:8-10 What's for dinner?
8:2 Lord's loins make guest appearance
16:15 Fornications pour out
16:36-37 Their "filthiness poured out..."
23:1-40 Sex organs and ejaculate of harlots' lovers compared to asses & horses 29:7-8 God performs bloody castration via a sword
HOSEA
1:2-11 God tells Hosea to take whore to wife
2:1-15 Complications ensue (lewdly described)
NAHUM
3:4-6 Lord: "I will discover thy skirts upon thy face"
MALACHI
2:1-4 An angry god will spread feces on your faces
MATTHEW
5:27-30 A man may lust but it's not considered just
5:31-32 Man can divorce wife for fornication only 19:3-9 Man who divorces and remarries is adulterer
19:12 Castrate yourself for Jesus
22:24 Law of Onan (you have to marry your dead brother's wife)
LUKE
2:21 Eight day old Jesus is circumcised ACTS
5:38 Eunuch baptized
15:24 Circumcision is not commandment
16:3 Paul circumcises adult
I CORINTHIANS 6:18-20 Abstain from sex
7:1-40 To be more holy, refrain from sex wholly
7:18-19 If you're not circumcised, stay that way
GALATIANS
5:1-4 Paul speaks against circumcision
REVELATION
17:1-6 A whore is stripped, eaten and burned
GENESIS 17:9-14 Circumcision mandated
19:1-8 Rape virgins instead of male angels
19:30-38 Righteous man impregnates his 2 daughters while drunk
24:2-3, 9 Place your hand "under the thigh" (sexual organs) of someone swearing sacred oaths
25:1-6 Keeping mistresses is not adultery
32:25 God grabs Jacob's testicles
34:1-31 Brothers are riled when sister is defiled
35:2 Reuben sleeps with father's concubine
38:1-10 Onan's method of birth control not approved
38:12-30 Tamar plays the harlot to seduce father-in-law
39:1-20 Women tries to rape man
47:29 Joseph ordered to place his hand under father's thigh
EXODUS
20:26 God specifies building of altar to prevent exposure of nakedness
22:19 Death decreed for bestiality
33:17-23 God moons Moses
NUMBERS
31:1-18; 28-47 God commands genocide of Midianites, Moses orders that virgins be kept, other captives slain
5:11-31 God's fidelity test for women only
LEVITICUS
12:1-8 Bible calls childbirth a sin and bearing females a greater sin than bearing males
15:16-18 Sperm and intercourse are unclean 15:19-33 Menstruation unclean; elaborate rules
15:29-30 Women must make sin offering for menstrual periods
18:22 Homosexuality declared an abomination
18:23 More bestiality
19:1,20-22 Man gets forgiven, slave girl gets flogging
20:10 Adulterers shall be put to death
20:13 Death decreed for homosexuals
20:15-16 Death decreed for bestiality (& beast)
26:29 Curse: Eat your sons and daughters
DEUTERONOMY
3:1-7 Kill men, women, & children
21:10-14 God okays captured maidens as trial wives
22:5 Men's clothing not to be worn by women, & vice versa
22:13-21 A bride not a virgin must die
22:23-26 Virgin raped in city given no pity
23:12-14 Defecation: Carry paddle, dig hole, & cover up
25:5-10 Woman has cause to spit in man's face
25:11-12 A woman shall have her hand cut off for touching a penis
22:28-29 Paying father to have sex with daughter
23:1 Man "wounded in the stones" can't enter congregation
23:2 Children born out of wedlock condemned as bastards to 10th generation 23:10-11 Cleanliness called for in nocturnal emissions
24:1 Man can divorce wife through eviction
28:27 Hemorrhoids ("emerods") punishment for sin
28:30 Lord's curse: Another man shall lie with groom's bride first
28:53-57 Curse: Eat your own body & children
JUDGES
3:20-22 Dagger in fat king's gut gets "dirt" out
4:4-22 Hammer & nail murder by woman
8:30 Gideon had many wives, concubines
11:29-40 Jephtha's daughter: human sacrifice
19:1-30 Woman raped and ruined by homosexuals
21:6-25 Amidst carnage virgins captured for wives
RUTH
3:6-9 To "hook" him as husband, Ruth sleeps with Boaz
4:9-10 Boaz buys Ruth
I SAMUEL
5:9-12 Philistines "smitten with emerods" as punishment for stealing ark
6:1-5 To placate God, make golden emerods
15:3 God orders Saul to kill suckling babes
18:23-27 200 foreskins gain David a king's daughter
25:22,34 Any that pisseth against the wall II SAMUEL
3:7 More concubine hanky-panky
11:1-27 Uriah sent to lose his life so David can get his wife
12:7-12 Obscene performance to be viewed by all Israel
5:13 David had many wives, concubines Chapter 13 Amnon rapes his sister 16:20-23 Absalom copulates with father's concubines on rooftop
20:3 David imprisons concubines for above
I KINGS
1:1-4 Virgin as therapy for sick old man unsuccessful
11:1-10 Wise Solomon has wives and concubines galore
14:10 Him that pisseth against the wall
16:11 One that pisseth against a wall
21:21 Him that pisseth against the wall
II KINGS
6:24-33 "So we boiled my son, and did eat him"
9:8 Subject not mentioned in sermons
23:7 Male houses of prostitution destroyed
I CHRONICLES
1:32-33 Abraham's concubines have children
II CHRONICLES 11:21
King Rehoboam had 18 wives & 60 concubines
ESTHER
Chapters 1-2 Sexual contest to decide new queen
SONG OF SOLOMON (the whole thing!)
ISAIAH
3:16 "...and the Lord will discover their secret parts"
9:20 Every man shall eat the flesh of his own arm
14:21-22 Slaughter children for fathers' iniquity
16:11 Biblical boast: "My bowels shall sound like an harp"
36:12 Eating dung and drinking piss
JEREMIAH
16:4 Grievous, obscene deaths
LAMENTATIONS
2:19 Something to lament 4:10 Women boil children for food
EZEKIEL
4:12-15 God says: Eat bread defiled with dung
5:8-10 What's for dinner?
8:2 Lord's loins make guest appearance
16:15 Fornications pour out
16:36-37 Their "filthiness poured out..."
23:1-40 Sex organs and ejaculate of harlots' lovers compared to asses & horses 29:7-8 God performs bloody castration via a sword
HOSEA
1:2-11 God tells Hosea to take whore to wife
2:1-15 Complications ensue (lewdly described)
NAHUM
3:4-6 Lord: "I will discover thy skirts upon thy face"
MALACHI
2:1-4 An angry god will spread feces on your faces
MATTHEW
5:27-30 A man may lust but it's not considered just
5:31-32 Man can divorce wife for fornication only 19:3-9 Man who divorces and remarries is adulterer
19:12 Castrate yourself for Jesus
22:24 Law of Onan (you have to marry your dead brother's wife)
LUKE
2:21 Eight day old Jesus is circumcised ACTS
5:38 Eunuch baptized
15:24 Circumcision is not commandment
16:3 Paul circumcises adult
I CORINTHIANS 6:18-20 Abstain from sex
7:1-40 To be more holy, refrain from sex wholly
7:18-19 If you're not circumcised, stay that way
GALATIANS
5:1-4 Paul speaks against circumcision
REVELATION
17:1-6 A whore is stripped, eaten and burned
Saturday, July 16, 2005
hell..... the devils domain
I was recently channel surfing and came across a program called "Hell.. the Devil's Domain" I would encourage everyone to see this program.. as it raises interesting questions.
Is organized religion, just that "organized", much like the teamsters, or the PTA.
It has been reported that the Roman Catholic Church is worth 20 Billion dollars. ( yes.... say it just like Dr EVIL).
What does Jesus need with 20 Billion Dollars?
The Catholic Church spent nine million dollars on the Pope's traveling. How many homeless, hungry or underprivledged could that money have helped
Matthew 21:12-17
And Jesus entered the temple of God and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple and He overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, ‘It is written, "My House shall be called a house of prayer"
Luke 19 45:46
And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought; Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves.
Luke 13 14-16
In the temple he found people selling cattle, sheep, and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. Making a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, both the sheep and the cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. He told those who were selling the doves, ‘Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a marketplace!’
So, if Jesus found it vulgar to sell in the temple, how can TV preachers sell their books and potions. Why do book stores charge for the Bible??
Does the money collected for the bibles, the books etc, go in to the global Jesus bank account?
When Galileo discovered for the first time that it is not the sun that goes around the earth, but the earth that goes around the sun -- he was very old, seventy-five or eighty, almost on his deathbed -- he was dragged to the court of the pope. And the pope said, "Before you die, change that statement, because it goes against The Bible. And anything that goes against The Bible is automatically wrong, because The Bible is the word of God." The pope said, "We cannot allow even a single statement to go against The Bible for the simple reason that if one statement becomes false, God's infallibility disappears. And if God himself is fallible, what about Jesus Christ? And what about the pope? And if God can write one thing wrong, who knows? -- he may have written many things wrong. We cannot afford it."
The "organized religions" don't seem to be interested in saving humanity.
Their basic interest is how to covert more and more people in to their religion.
How many people have died in the name of god? What about the Holy Wars? How can both sides of a war be right? Both sides believe that GOD is on their side, and if they win.. well god loves them and has blessed them, but if they fail then god forsaked them.
Relgion is creating agitation in every country for homosexuality to be made a severe crime. And everybody in the world knows that Pope Paul the Sixth was a homosexual. Before he became the pope, he was the cardinal in Milan -- and that was the talk of the town. The whole of Milan was surprised that he was always seen with his boyfriend -- a young, beautiful man. Knowing this perfectly well...still he became the pope. And the moment he became pope, his boyfriend was called to the Vatican, and the boyfriend became the secretary. Ordinarily, the secretary becomes the girlfriend; here, it was just a little different...but the same story.
And it has never been denied by the Vatican; they could not deny it -- it was so factual. But if you say it, that means you are against the pope.
Okay ... well sorta setting the stage for the show i saw. That the devil as we know him today... has never existed.
If we use the bible as a reference:
Isaiah XIV
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Revelation XII
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
If we take this literally... The bible mentions only one place Lucifer was cast down to, "earth". Where is hell then? Now if he was cast to earth, and he is the ruler of hell, does that make earth hell.? Would that then change the meaning of Hell to more of a work furlow program.? Is it then like Driving school? A place where you can work of your sin, in order to make it back to the divine.
How many times can Satan change his duties?
In biblical literature Satan appears in later Old Testament writings as an angelic "son of God" within the heavenly court, as God's prosecuting attorney (Job 1-2; Zechariah 3:1-2; 1 Chronicles 21:1). In inter-testamental and New Testament literature Satan appears as the head of evil -- rebellious, defiant and in opposition to God. Lucifer's fall from heaven (Isaiah 14:14) is usually employed to explain this change in Satan's status. One Mennonite writer uses this text together with Ezekiel 28:12-16, 2 Peter 2:4, and Jude 6 to explain how Satan became the Devil (Hostetter, 15-20). Revelation 12:9 identifies Satan as the devil and "ancient serpent" (Genesis 3:1-5). It speaks also of war in heaven, the archangel Michael's victory over the dragon, and Satan's fall from heaven. The gospel news is that Christ destroys the works of the devil (1 John 3:8; Hebrews 2:14-15). Proclaiming the gospel dethrones Satan (Luke 10:18); Christ's death and resurrection disarms the powers (Colossians 2:15). Through new birth and freedom not to sin, God through Christ keeps the believer from Satan, while the world is under Satan's power (1 John 5:18-19). By wearing the full armor of God, the believer victoriously battles against the invisible evil forces which attack, deceive, and seduce believers personally and through structures (Ephesians 6:10-18).
When did the angel become evil. When did we start to see the Devil, and a devourer of flesh, and father of all lies. Lucifer had been created perfect, but through his own choice, allowed sin to enter into his thinking process. Through his suability he persuaded a third of God's holy angels to join him in his rebellion. He was overcome and cast down to the earth. Did the act of having been cast out change his essence? Did coming to earth cause him to be the "devil" we know today?
When did the change begin... Interesting question.. When we look at history, we find the Devil portrayed in a number of ways. At one time, it was thought that the Devil lived in a icy, frozen place, and he was depicted in literature and popular culture of the time as blue. The idea being that, if GOD was light, the devil was darkness and darkness is cold, so to not be in GODS light meant you were dark cold and frozen. He was also portrayed as the eater of flesh, that if you went to hell he ate you. It wasn't until Dante's Inferno that popular culture and literature, that the Devil was depicted as Red horns, a tail and lived in fire..
Does this seem odd to anyone else. That Religion followed suit, and depicted him based not on the bible, but a secular book. How can we believe anything organized religion tells us, if they have lied all this time. The bible says that Jesus had skin of bronze and hair of wool, why then is he depicted as a white man with straight hair. Jesus has been morphed to fit the patriarcle idea of white man
Remember, the time period, white man was superior, everyone else was lower in station or a slave.
I believe the devil is in everyone, in all the little white lies we tell, to cheating the cashier, stealing office supplies, driving in the carpool lane when you are the only one in the car,smog, not recycling, attitudes, etc
Good and Evil resides in us.. it's the choices we make that shape our universe, not Pat Robertson or Billy Graham, or how much money you send them.
If you need an example of this, just look at the Catholic Church scandal. The Catholic church is supposed to be the pillar of good, yet they made a choice to be evil, in not removing the priests that were molesting kids. all they did was to move them around and cover it up. Why.. because it was about money.
Money is the root of all evil... so why do churches want it.
anyway, watch the show and draw your own conclusions, as i offer this as just a queer observation.
Organized religion needs to pay tax
Is organized religion, just that "organized", much like the teamsters, or the PTA.
It has been reported that the Roman Catholic Church is worth 20 Billion dollars. ( yes.... say it just like Dr EVIL).
What does Jesus need with 20 Billion Dollars?
The Catholic Church spent nine million dollars on the Pope's traveling. How many homeless, hungry or underprivledged could that money have helped
Matthew 21:12-17
And Jesus entered the temple of God and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple and He overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, ‘It is written, "My House shall be called a house of prayer"
Luke 19 45:46
And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought; Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves.
Luke 13 14-16
In the temple he found people selling cattle, sheep, and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. Making a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, both the sheep and the cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. He told those who were selling the doves, ‘Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a marketplace!’
So, if Jesus found it vulgar to sell in the temple, how can TV preachers sell their books and potions. Why do book stores charge for the Bible??
Does the money collected for the bibles, the books etc, go in to the global Jesus bank account?
When Galileo discovered for the first time that it is not the sun that goes around the earth, but the earth that goes around the sun -- he was very old, seventy-five or eighty, almost on his deathbed -- he was dragged to the court of the pope. And the pope said, "Before you die, change that statement, because it goes against The Bible. And anything that goes against The Bible is automatically wrong, because The Bible is the word of God." The pope said, "We cannot allow even a single statement to go against The Bible for the simple reason that if one statement becomes false, God's infallibility disappears. And if God himself is fallible, what about Jesus Christ? And what about the pope? And if God can write one thing wrong, who knows? -- he may have written many things wrong. We cannot afford it."
The "organized religions" don't seem to be interested in saving humanity.
Their basic interest is how to covert more and more people in to their religion.
How many people have died in the name of god? What about the Holy Wars? How can both sides of a war be right? Both sides believe that GOD is on their side, and if they win.. well god loves them and has blessed them, but if they fail then god forsaked them.
Relgion is creating agitation in every country for homosexuality to be made a severe crime. And everybody in the world knows that Pope Paul the Sixth was a homosexual. Before he became the pope, he was the cardinal in Milan -- and that was the talk of the town. The whole of Milan was surprised that he was always seen with his boyfriend -- a young, beautiful man. Knowing this perfectly well...still he became the pope. And the moment he became pope, his boyfriend was called to the Vatican, and the boyfriend became the secretary. Ordinarily, the secretary becomes the girlfriend; here, it was just a little different...but the same story.
And it has never been denied by the Vatican; they could not deny it -- it was so factual. But if you say it, that means you are against the pope.
Okay ... well sorta setting the stage for the show i saw. That the devil as we know him today... has never existed.
If we use the bible as a reference:
Isaiah XIV
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Revelation XII
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
If we take this literally... The bible mentions only one place Lucifer was cast down to, "earth". Where is hell then? Now if he was cast to earth, and he is the ruler of hell, does that make earth hell.? Would that then change the meaning of Hell to more of a work furlow program.? Is it then like Driving school? A place where you can work of your sin, in order to make it back to the divine.
How many times can Satan change his duties?
In biblical literature Satan appears in later Old Testament writings as an angelic "son of God" within the heavenly court, as God's prosecuting attorney (Job 1-2; Zechariah 3:1-2; 1 Chronicles 21:1). In inter-testamental and New Testament literature Satan appears as the head of evil -- rebellious, defiant and in opposition to God. Lucifer's fall from heaven (Isaiah 14:14) is usually employed to explain this change in Satan's status. One Mennonite writer uses this text together with Ezekiel 28:12-16, 2 Peter 2:4, and Jude 6 to explain how Satan became the Devil (Hostetter, 15-20). Revelation 12:9 identifies Satan as the devil and "ancient serpent" (Genesis 3:1-5). It speaks also of war in heaven, the archangel Michael's victory over the dragon, and Satan's fall from heaven. The gospel news is that Christ destroys the works of the devil (1 John 3:8; Hebrews 2:14-15). Proclaiming the gospel dethrones Satan (Luke 10:18); Christ's death and resurrection disarms the powers (Colossians 2:15). Through new birth and freedom not to sin, God through Christ keeps the believer from Satan, while the world is under Satan's power (1 John 5:18-19). By wearing the full armor of God, the believer victoriously battles against the invisible evil forces which attack, deceive, and seduce believers personally and through structures (Ephesians 6:10-18).
When did the angel become evil. When did we start to see the Devil, and a devourer of flesh, and father of all lies. Lucifer had been created perfect, but through his own choice, allowed sin to enter into his thinking process. Through his suability he persuaded a third of God's holy angels to join him in his rebellion. He was overcome and cast down to the earth. Did the act of having been cast out change his essence? Did coming to earth cause him to be the "devil" we know today?
When did the change begin... Interesting question.. When we look at history, we find the Devil portrayed in a number of ways. At one time, it was thought that the Devil lived in a icy, frozen place, and he was depicted in literature and popular culture of the time as blue. The idea being that, if GOD was light, the devil was darkness and darkness is cold, so to not be in GODS light meant you were dark cold and frozen. He was also portrayed as the eater of flesh, that if you went to hell he ate you. It wasn't until Dante's Inferno that popular culture and literature, that the Devil was depicted as Red horns, a tail and lived in fire..
Does this seem odd to anyone else. That Religion followed suit, and depicted him based not on the bible, but a secular book. How can we believe anything organized religion tells us, if they have lied all this time. The bible says that Jesus had skin of bronze and hair of wool, why then is he depicted as a white man with straight hair. Jesus has been morphed to fit the patriarcle idea of white man
Remember, the time period, white man was superior, everyone else was lower in station or a slave.
I believe the devil is in everyone, in all the little white lies we tell, to cheating the cashier, stealing office supplies, driving in the carpool lane when you are the only one in the car,smog, not recycling, attitudes, etc
Good and Evil resides in us.. it's the choices we make that shape our universe, not Pat Robertson or Billy Graham, or how much money you send them.
If you need an example of this, just look at the Catholic Church scandal. The Catholic church is supposed to be the pillar of good, yet they made a choice to be evil, in not removing the priests that were molesting kids. all they did was to move them around and cover it up. Why.. because it was about money.
Money is the root of all evil... so why do churches want it.
anyway, watch the show and draw your own conclusions, as i offer this as just a queer observation.
Organized religion needs to pay tax
Sunday, June 12, 2005
How it used to be.........
As you encounter your day ... how often do you complain about how things are? What do you take for granted in your daily existence?
Here is a look back at....... "how it used to be"
Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May, and still smelled pretty good by June. However, they were starting to smell, so brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odor. Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting married. Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water. The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children. Last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it. Hence the saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the bath water."
Houses had thatched roofs-thick straw-piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm, so all the cats and other small animals (mice, bugs) lived in the roof. When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip off the roof. Hence the saying "It's raining cats and dogs." There was nothing to stop things from falling into the house. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could mess up your nice clean bed. Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top, afforded some protection. That's how canopy beds came into existence.
The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt. Hence the saying "dirt poor." The wealthy had slate floors that would get slippery in the winter when wet , so they spread thresh (straw) on the floor to help keep their footing. As the winter wore on, they kept adding more thresh until when you opened the door it would all start slipping outside. A piece of wood was placed in the entranceway. Hence the saying a "thresh hold."
(Getting quite an education, aren't you?)
In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire. Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while. Hence the rhyme, "Peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old." Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man could "bring home the bacon." They would cut off a little to share with guests and would all sit around and "chew the fat."
Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with high acid content caused some of the lead to leak onto the food, causing lead poisoning death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous.
Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or "upper crust."
Lead cups were used to drink ale or whisky. The combination would sometimes knock the imbibers out for a couple of days. Someone walking along the road would take them for dead and prepare them for burial. They were laid out on the kitchen table for a couple of days and the family would gather around and eat and drink and wait and see if they would wake up. Hence the custom of holding a "wake."
England is old and small and the local folks started running out of places to bury people. So they would dig up coffins and would take the bones to a "bone-house" and reuse the grave. When reopening these coffins, 1 out of 25 coffins were found to have scratch marks on the inside and they realized they had been burying people alive. So they would tie a string on the wrist of the corpse, lead it through the coffin and up through the ground and tie it to a bell. Someone would have to sit out in the graveyard all night (the "graveyard shift") to listen for the bell; thus, someone could be "saved by the bell" or was considered a "dead ringer."
Look around you now..... are there still so many things to complain about?... What part of the bread do you get?
Here is a look back at....... "how it used to be"
Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May, and still smelled pretty good by June. However, they were starting to smell, so brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odor. Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting married. Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water. The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children. Last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it. Hence the saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the bath water."
Houses had thatched roofs-thick straw-piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm, so all the cats and other small animals (mice, bugs) lived in the roof. When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip off the roof. Hence the saying "It's raining cats and dogs." There was nothing to stop things from falling into the house. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could mess up your nice clean bed. Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top, afforded some protection. That's how canopy beds came into existence.
The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt. Hence the saying "dirt poor." The wealthy had slate floors that would get slippery in the winter when wet , so they spread thresh (straw) on the floor to help keep their footing. As the winter wore on, they kept adding more thresh until when you opened the door it would all start slipping outside. A piece of wood was placed in the entranceway. Hence the saying a "thresh hold."
(Getting quite an education, aren't you?)
In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire. Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while. Hence the rhyme, "Peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old." Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man could "bring home the bacon." They would cut off a little to share with guests and would all sit around and "chew the fat."
Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with high acid content caused some of the lead to leak onto the food, causing lead poisoning death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous.
Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or "upper crust."
Lead cups were used to drink ale or whisky. The combination would sometimes knock the imbibers out for a couple of days. Someone walking along the road would take them for dead and prepare them for burial. They were laid out on the kitchen table for a couple of days and the family would gather around and eat and drink and wait and see if they would wake up. Hence the custom of holding a "wake."
England is old and small and the local folks started running out of places to bury people. So they would dig up coffins and would take the bones to a "bone-house" and reuse the grave. When reopening these coffins, 1 out of 25 coffins were found to have scratch marks on the inside and they realized they had been burying people alive. So they would tie a string on the wrist of the corpse, lead it through the coffin and up through the ground and tie it to a bell. Someone would have to sit out in the graveyard all night (the "graveyard shift") to listen for the bell; thus, someone could be "saved by the bell" or was considered a "dead ringer."
Look around you now..... are there still so many things to complain about?... What part of the bread do you get?
Thursday, June 09, 2005
Taken for granted
What do you take for granted? I was recently reminded that this is national GLBT month, and that several PRIDE activites will be commencing soon. Being reminded started me thinking about pride, and what pride means to me. Celebrating... is there anything to celebrate...
Is a pride parade the best way to celebrate, during yet another George W.Bush term. Was Dykes on Bikes, and THE GOLDS GYM GUYS, or a cornacopia of drag queens the best way to celebrate pride. Can wearing a "PRIDE FROCK" or singing I will Survive, make me feel prideful?
I don't really feel like celebrating .... I mean my job may be coming to an end, way above my head in debt with the IRS... being OVERWEIGHT. trying to make a 9 year relationship work, even though he is a flight attendant and almost never here.... Oh did i mention another birthday on June 21st . What exacly is there to celebrate, this doesn't sound anything like the Queer lifestyle I read about in the brochure before signing up.
I now realize that I have taken my PRIDE for granted. I had forgotten about all the sacrafice and hard work the people before me had to endure. I live in a free ( ok semi-free) country. I have been in a same sex relationship for 9 years, and noone is trying to knock down the door and arrest me. I am out at home, at work.. ok everywhere.. you can see my gay ass coming a mile away.. but I am out ... I am not discriminated against at work or in housing, and although i hear FAG hollered out of a passing car window every once in awhile, it's a good thing. I snaps me back to reality, awakens me from my "straightalized" existence. It also reminds me that as far as we have come, baby we got a ways to go.
I do have alot of things to celebrate, a husband, 2 dogs, a small group of real friends, and a job with BENEFITS... Participating in pride, even in the smallest way, well ensure that these things can't be taken away. To qoute "ACT UP" SILENCE = DEATH...... but i will go one further --- VISABILITY = ATTENTION.
It is now more that ever, that we need to march, to celebrate, even to get all FROCKED UP, and to fill your lungs with free air, and sing at the top of your voice I WILL SURVIVE , because if we slack even for a moment, the proverbial "THEY" are waiting to take away what you already have, and make sure you don't survive.
So the next time you see dykes on bikes, trannies, pan asain gay youth on the news, and you cringe, and ask yourself why is that the only section of our community they show on tv. STOP yourself miss thing... look around you....... look at your gay life, your gay lover, your gay house/apartment.. it is those pepole on the news that has afforded your gay ass, a gay life, a gay lover, a gay house........If you think that your community isnt being represented, then why are you sitting on your couch watching the parade on the news.. get out there and represent...
PS.. if this year will be your first parade....... it probaly isnt a good thing to do DRAG the first time ...
PSS I am trying this blog thing on a dare.. but its kinda theraputic???
Is a pride parade the best way to celebrate, during yet another George W.Bush term. Was Dykes on Bikes, and THE GOLDS GYM GUYS, or a cornacopia of drag queens the best way to celebrate pride. Can wearing a "PRIDE FROCK" or singing I will Survive, make me feel prideful?
I don't really feel like celebrating .... I mean my job may be coming to an end, way above my head in debt with the IRS... being OVERWEIGHT. trying to make a 9 year relationship work, even though he is a flight attendant and almost never here.... Oh did i mention another birthday on June 21st . What exacly is there to celebrate, this doesn't sound anything like the Queer lifestyle I read about in the brochure before signing up.
I now realize that I have taken my PRIDE for granted. I had forgotten about all the sacrafice and hard work the people before me had to endure. I live in a free ( ok semi-free) country. I have been in a same sex relationship for 9 years, and noone is trying to knock down the door and arrest me. I am out at home, at work.. ok everywhere.. you can see my gay ass coming a mile away.. but I am out ... I am not discriminated against at work or in housing, and although i hear FAG hollered out of a passing car window every once in awhile, it's a good thing. I snaps me back to reality, awakens me from my "straightalized" existence. It also reminds me that as far as we have come, baby we got a ways to go.
I do have alot of things to celebrate, a husband, 2 dogs, a small group of real friends, and a job with BENEFITS... Participating in pride, even in the smallest way, well ensure that these things can't be taken away. To qoute "ACT UP" SILENCE = DEATH...... but i will go one further --- VISABILITY = ATTENTION.
It is now more that ever, that we need to march, to celebrate, even to get all FROCKED UP, and to fill your lungs with free air, and sing at the top of your voice I WILL SURVIVE , because if we slack even for a moment, the proverbial "THEY" are waiting to take away what you already have, and make sure you don't survive.
So the next time you see dykes on bikes, trannies, pan asain gay youth on the news, and you cringe, and ask yourself why is that the only section of our community they show on tv. STOP yourself miss thing... look around you....... look at your gay life, your gay lover, your gay house/apartment.. it is those pepole on the news that has afforded your gay ass, a gay life, a gay lover, a gay house........If you think that your community isnt being represented, then why are you sitting on your couch watching the parade on the news.. get out there and represent...
PS.. if this year will be your first parade....... it probaly isnt a good thing to do DRAG the first time ...
PSS I am trying this blog thing on a dare.. but its kinda theraputic???
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)