How do you think the relatives of the lady who Bruce Jenner killed in a car accident recently are feeling about the four letter network honoring it? It is disgusting.
jenner to be honered at the epsys with courage award
- Thread starter coolirish9
- Start date
The award is for athletes that show courage
1. How are those related?
2. That car accident was an accident I have seen nothing to suggest it was malicious
1. How are those related?
2. That car accident was an accident I have seen nothing to suggest it was malicious
Bodizephax
I've posted how many times?
She took her eye off the road when she was looking through her purse for mascara. Maybe not malicious but negligent.
Typical woman driver.
So is shaving your beard on the way to the courthouse but I definitely saw a dude doing that today on the road next to me.
It's fitting that the two holier than thou, know-it-all, d-bags on here are in agreement.
I'd be willing to bet echoweaker and NDSMC1878 are the same person or know each other. "They" always have the same opinion. 78 just mentioned it's okay that some people are different, but man when someone on here has a different view point he/she cries and trashes that other opinion. What a hypocrite.
I'd be willing to bet echoweaker and NDSMC1878 are the same person or know each other. "They" always have the same opinion. 78 just mentioned it's okay that some people are different, but man when someone on here has a different view point he/she cries and trashes that other opinion. What a hypocrite.
I don't think you understand the drivel you just posted.
"Libtards hate freedom of speech"
Amen! While Ewing18 rambles on about how great of a human he thinks he is, all I could think about was how this he-she killed a human being this past winter. Unknowledgeable people should step aside.
The use of the term "libtards" confirms my initial thought that you're a mouth breather with very little to add to society.
You also clearly don't understand the concept of 'freedom of speech' or what the First Amendment actually protects.
"Libtards"? Aren't you clever? Why don''t you try to add something worthwhile to the discussion, rather than recycling juvenile insults, particularly when the person to whom they are directed is clearly your intellectual superior?
This from the person who thinks it is acceptable to use the terms "libtards" to refer to other people. If you are going to talk about other people, you should at least get their screen names right. Man, you are just an absolute zero.
I personally thought that the award should've gone to Lauren Hill. Courage means something different to each one of us but I'm sure we can all agree this girl showed courage while looking death in the face.
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-b...er-lauren-hill-19-dies-pediatric-brain-cancer
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-b...er-lauren-hill-19-dies-pediatric-brain-cancer
the problem with these arguments, as this one has developed: no one knows how to end them!
there are 2 thoughts expressed and both arguments are opposite sides that are convinced of their correctness.
1. expression of a point of view consistant with fundamentalist biblical Christian belief is socially no longer politically correct and will be attacked and ridiculed as biased or bigoted by 'non-believers. You can have religious freedom as long as you adopt a secular perspective as the higher authority. Man>God.
2. the other is what I call the 'salami theory'; a man basically continues to compromise, agree or concede a small slice until - the whole salami is gone! That is the there are groups that are using the step by step progression to get everything they want. 1st get agreement on this; then proceed to move on to the next goal .... There is a desire to "force" social and religious approval for a point of view; in order for some sort of verification and validation that, "it is correct or all right or normal". This group has become the "intolerant group"; enjoying the power of plurality.
The reality of the matter is the two points of view are mutually exclusive and there is no resolution nor future except continued conflict.
Since I am 100% correct; you may reply but your counters will fall on deaf ears. (see the 2nd para.)
there are 2 thoughts expressed and both arguments are opposite sides that are convinced of their correctness.
1. expression of a point of view consistant with fundamentalist biblical Christian belief is socially no longer politically correct and will be attacked and ridiculed as biased or bigoted by 'non-believers. You can have religious freedom as long as you adopt a secular perspective as the higher authority. Man>God.
2. the other is what I call the 'salami theory'; a man basically continues to compromise, agree or concede a small slice until - the whole salami is gone! That is the there are groups that are using the step by step progression to get everything they want. 1st get agreement on this; then proceed to move on to the next goal .... There is a desire to "force" social and religious approval for a point of view; in order for some sort of verification and validation that, "it is correct or all right or normal". This group has become the "intolerant group"; enjoying the power of plurality.
The reality of the matter is the two points of view are mutually exclusive and there is no resolution nor future except continued conflict.
Since I am 100% correct; you may reply but your counters will fall on deaf ears. (see the 2nd para.)
(1) Religious freedom, like all freedoms in the First Amendment, is not absolute. I can't hide behind religious freedom, for example, to ignore my responsibility to pay taxes. I can't hide behind religious freedom to sacrifice virgins. I can't hide behind religious freedom to deny someone because of race. The LGBT issues are in a gray area right now. As I've noted in the past, at some point society determines what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable. I have no idea where to draw that line, but line-drawing does occur. I imagine that there are a number of people who pound their fist for religious freedom, but at the same time disagreed with the Supreme Court's recent decision with respect to Abercrombie & Fitch.
(2) It would help those who support religious freedom to be compassionate toward others. I try to work on that daily, with varying degrees of success (but usually failure). It would aid the religious freedom argument if proponents of religion generally seemed to attempt to adhere to their leader's example.
Believing in the bible and persecuting those that don't practice the teachings of the bible aren't necessarily linked.
I’ve had a team working on this over the past few weeks, and what we’ve come up with can be reduced to two fundamental concepts.
One, people are not wearing enough hats.
Two, matter is energy. In the Universe there are many energy fields which we cannot normally perceive. Some energies have a spiritual source which act upon a person’s soul. However, this soul does not exist ab initio as orthodox Christianity teaches; it has to be brought into existence by a process of guided self-observation. However, this is rarely achieved owing to man’s unique ability to be distracted from spiritual matters by everyday trivia.
One, people are not wearing enough hats.
Two, matter is energy. In the Universe there are many energy fields which we cannot normally perceive. Some energies have a spiritual source which act upon a person’s soul. However, this soul does not exist ab initio as orthodox Christianity teaches; it has to be brought into existence by a process of guided self-observation. However, this is rarely achieved owing to man’s unique ability to be distracted from spiritual matters by everyday trivia.
The "lame-stream" media loves this! All part of their desire to normalize depravity and perversion. On the other hand, they have no problem skewering Christians, like the Duggars, for something that the kid did when he was 14, and corrective/proper legal steps were taken.
Question: Who's more brave - a person like BRUCE Jenner who does something like he did, or a person who speaks out against it knowing the PC police are going to shame them because they have a differing opinion?
Question: Who's more brave - a person like BRUCE Jenner who does something like he did, or a person who speaks out against it knowing the PC police are going to shame them because they have a differing opinion?
That's an interesting system of values you have there. It's OK for you to rail at others for being the "PC police," but that doesn't stop you from condemning an entire class of people for "depravity and perversion."
^ you confuse faith morality and legal. Man does not govern God. You have raised the legal several times.
Past discussions long ago convinces me your an imovable rock once you state your position
But your whole premise of faith/legal is misplaced and just so wrong.
Past discussions long ago convinces me your an imovable rock once you state your position
But your whole premise of faith/legal is misplaced and just so wrong.
Show me a fundamentalist preacher that publicly shares his own gender transformation, or the PC Police Chief that condemns him for doing it, and then we can talk about courage.
Personally I'm comfortable in my own beliefs, so I'm not particularly bothered when someone criticizes me for sharing them.
But I can't imagine not being comfortable in my own skin, so its really hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that the once "World's Greatest Athlete" wasn't comfortable in his. I don't know whether its tragic or courageous. I guess I really don't need to.
When the prior poster suggests that proper legal steps were taken, and I respond that, to my knowledge, proper legal steps were not taken, I'm not sure how I confused "morality" with "legality".
I was not using any 1 specific reply as reason for my post; it was a summation of your responses.
You apply legal perspective to spiritual debate. Legal logic is your strength and domain so that is not unexpected.
As far as faith, I admit to being an immovable rock. I do not suffer 'values of convenience' that are convenient to others here. Yes, you sre correct!
To each his own. I don't give a crap if HE wants to be a SHE. Go for it.
Live your life the way you want.
But an award for courage?? That's a bit much.
What's next the CMH for Heroism? Because, after all, he is a hero.
Who did Jenner molest? The Duggars' situation has nothing to do with Christianity and all to do with covering for a crime that harmed other individuals.
