Defending the Truth

Ralph Rote:ROTE: mechanical or habitual repetition of something

So, my use of the word ROTE was a combination of wrote, and rote; ROTE being what I see here of your writings.

You are probably the only one here that I had to write this explanation for...

Me thinks thou doest protest to much for a simple presentation of levity, yet there is none forthcoming when the levity is directed by you and presented toward another. We must learn to laugh with others not at them, or indeed we will develop a complex. Chill, its only a joke, as I said we all slip on occasion, is it not amusing? You have to explain nothing, but I certainly know rote is not a common expression of reference to the past tense of having written, as "rote" (in connection with the human language) is commonly used to refer to repetition of speech or actions, not as a declaration of the past particle of write, WRITTEN or its past tense of WROTE in the singular tense. NUFF SAID? You Dont hafta to prove or splain nothing, aint it great? AS PAPPY ALWAYS SEYS, THE SMELLER'S THA FELLER. (R)

That is a complete load of crap. The misogynistic tendencies you have are showing. And I think you need to study history a bit more closely before you make such ignorant comments. You are correct, I am biased against Paul, because I find his witness to be one that has infiltrated the true version of Christianity and used it to forward his own teachings, which vary greatly from Jesus'. And I know that there are prophecies in the O.T. about the messiah, but I also know that the people writing things down after the time of Jesus were also aware of the prophecies and may have deliberately written down versions that were meant to fulfill them. As I said, your quotations do nothing but back up scripture that in my opinion cannot be trusted.

Religion isn't for everybody, but even if it's not for you, why not respect the beliefs of people it DOES suit? Why go out to offend? that's how I always see it.

Let them keep it in their private lives, and not try to enact legislation according to their version of a religion. And I have no respect for those that would use a book that is ancient, to enslave one half of the population and say that they are righteous because the bible says that is how it should be. Religion is for churches, not government.

it is not a problem to respect peoples beliefs. but it is a problem when people start to use their religious belief to drive their behaviour and to drive legislation. when this happens, we start to get a culture where right and wrong become synonymous with christian and unchristian, or islamic and unislamic, or jewish and non jewish. this is not a way to run a free society.

one of the problems with religious beliefs is that they do not tolerate criticism or change. culture changes, law and government have to keep up. when religion is in charge, society cannot move forward.

That's right, dragon. God's word cannot be changed, so when God is in charge, he can do no wrong, neither can his workers, the clergy. And we know where that has gotten us in the past, we don't need to go backward.

There isnt a single voting person in America that doesnt try to push legislation according to there beliefs. Hypocrits.

Not religious beliefs, according to a certain religion above the rest. Not even close Grace.

No one is trying to make a theocracy waiting. That doesnt mean everyone shouldnt be able to vote according to there beliefs, according to there conscience. You are not honestly suggesting that people who vote according to religious beliefs shouldnt have that right? Who are you to suggest such a thing? You can vote based on whatever belief you want, even if you roled dice to decide, and no one should be able to take that right from you in a true democracy. You dont have the right to tell people under what beliefs they must base there vote on. Regardless of what those beliefs may be.