User Profile: DamoclesAurelius

DamoclesAurelius

Member Since: November 01, 2012

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [3] May 19, 2015 at 1:57am

    It’s also not necessarily literal, but symbolic of woman’s relationship to man. Eve was taken from Adan’s side, as in she is to be a companion always at his side (not in front nor behind). The rib is also what protects the heart of man.

  • May 16, 2015 at 11:10am

    Georgie, bubby, look up the definition of a “cliched argument” because that’s all your post is. Your points have already been dealt with, extensively, by experts and apologists and even myself in a plethora of locations (try FAIRlds.org for starters). So, the fact that you choose to repeat them means either you are ignorant of these responses to your false accusations, and are merely regurgitating what you’ve read on some anti-Mormon blog, or you have read them and choose to ignore the facts and logic they present counter to said false accusations.

    So which is it Georgie? Are you a liar? Or are you just plain stupid? Those are your only two choices here.

  • [2] May 15, 2015 at 2:15am

    I know I’ll catch a lot of hell for suggesting this from some of the peanut gallery here, but why not do the same thing for the Book of Mormon? It’s written for our day, based in the Americas, and right now we are experiencing a lot of the stories that happened there. The controversy alone might gather a larger audience, and the fact that it hasn’t been done before (expect for that really crappy movie and the kids cartoons) means you’d be brining something new and fresh to the table and not competing with so many other takes on the Bible in the media. Give it a thought.

    Responses (2) +
  • [14] May 13, 2015 at 9:00pm

    Random…not to mention completely false.

  • [20] May 10, 2015 at 5:46pm

    This, of course, is a lie, since when is the last time you heard of “devout” Muslims rampaging against other Muslims, or even atheists or secularists for blaspheming Jesus?

    Where were the angry Muslims during Piss Christ?

  • [1] May 7, 2015 at 11:41pm

    What’s the difference you ask? Before I answer that question let the record show that you asking such a mind-numbingly dumb question belies either monumental idiocy on your part…or deliberate dishonesty. So I’ll ask you zappa: are you an idiot or a liar?

    In any case, the difference is that most Christians who cite the OT are not actually advocating the death penalty for gays so much as they are pointing out how severe a sin homosexuality was considered (the OT also advocates the death penalty for not honoring the Sabbath, but these same Christians don’t cite those verses. Either they are horribly inconsistent, or you are blatantly misrepresenting their intent). The few, if any Christians who do advocate capitol punishment clearly do no understand the Bible, or they are ignoring it’s other teachings as found in the NT.

    Here we have a radical Imam stating that an innocent woman who has nothing to do with Islam should be tried under Shariah law, found guilty, and put to death. That is NOT the same thing you ignoramus.

  • [8] April 21, 2015 at 2:29am

    And that friends, is why God invented the flamethrower.

  • [-2] April 20, 2015 at 5:08pm

    Here’s the correct answer: IT DOESN’T MATTER. Whether you choose to be gay or whether you are born that way is inconsequential to the issue of gay marriage. Advocates of gay marriage think the “born that way” claim will allow them claim to civil rights protections like skin color would for a minority. But how you feel-no matter how much you feel it is your nature- is irrelevant to how you ACT.

    Responses (1) +
  • April 16, 2015 at 10:31pm

    Ok here is the history of the term.

    The term “Neo conservative” originated during FDR’s term when he was pushing for his New Deal. In order to increase its popularity FDR tried to get “new conservatives” who would be for it (but who were still socially conservative). The definition later expanded to refer to anyone who is socially conservative, but likes the same types of fiscal and regulatory policies (I.e big government) as liberals.

    And now you know!

  • [6] April 7, 2015 at 5:48pm

    *phrasing!

    Responses (1) +
  • [8] March 19, 2015 at 5:46pm

    It takes a pretty intellectually dishonest person to accuse someone of ONLY being concerned about the political backlash because that’s the ONLY consequence they listed. That or you’re stupid.

    So which is it commie? You a dummy or a liar?

  • [13] March 19, 2015 at 5:40pm

    I don’t know if the KKK is “liberal” or “conservative” as we use the terms today.

    But I do know that Progressive Liberal icon Woodrow Wilson supported the KKK and even aired the KKK propaganda film “birth of a nation” from the White House lawn. Progressive liberal democrat Robert Byrd was member of the KKK and progressive liberal LBJ was an avid racist who opposed civil rights.

  • [-1] March 12, 2015 at 11:03pm

    If you only defend free speech when you are talking about action by the government, do you really believe in free speech?

  • [1] March 12, 2015 at 11:01pm

    Cavallo is correct: outside the US, the comparison of a person to a monkey does not have the racial undertones it has here in the states, because they do not share our history of racial strife. My wife (who is from South America) learned this lesson the hard way when she made a similar remark about an ex-girlfriend (who happened to be black). Good thing for her, she only said it in front of me so it was easily corrected and has never happened again.

    Hispanics will say you look like in a monkey if they see the resemblance, regardless of your race. It has no racial undertones. Univision is overreacting, probably due to pressure from white, ignorant liberals.

  • [9] March 11, 2015 at 11:56am

    Here is a story of a true disciple of Christ, who supped with prostitutes and publicans, saints and sinners, and called all to repentance with love and meekness. God bless this man for his charity!

  • [12] March 7, 2015 at 2:39pm

    A prominent conservative -who writes for national review which is an establishment republican/Neo-conservative rag- criticizes a tea party favorite for not engaging in the politics of the day.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] February 17, 2015 at 11:24pm

    “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;” 2 Timothy 4:3

    “Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
    From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
    Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
    But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
    Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
    For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
    According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.” 1 Timothy 1:6-11

  • [4] February 14, 2015 at 12:27pm

    All the people in the crowd yelling “allahu ackbar”?

    Just taze them bro!

    Responses (1) +
  • [4] February 5, 2015 at 8:29pm

    Federalist Restoration Party.

    Responses (3) +
  • February 4, 2015 at 7:07am

    Two words. Wesley. Snipes.

    Three words actually: dumbass.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love