Messages Dated March 1998
101 - 120 of 9,228
Re: WHAT ABOUT THIS?
Sean Connery is one of those men who definitely improves with aging (not
that he was all that bad when he was young!) OLXWin 1.00a ...Mary used a turkey baster.
Abortion is Love!
As I live in pain daily, I would sure like to know just how he figures
that works. And I am certain that I'm not the only one in this echo
that feels that way.
Unless, of course, he's gotten his personally wiring twisted up and
can't get it up unless somebody's waling away on his ass with a riding
crop OLXWin 1.00a ..Domestic violence: good old Traditional Family Values.
snappy
<sweetsmile> What I'm worried about is just what sort of stuff JJ is
likely to take a liking to OLXWin 1.00a A bigot will not reason, a fool cannot, a slave dare not.
Re: Presumptiousness of A
N
Now, Judith, be fair--I live at the other end of TX. <innocent look> OLXWin 1.00a ..I think. Therefore I am DANGEROUS..
Chemistry
Well, he was willing for his ego to take a mango'ing. OLXWin 1.00a ..Rush Limbaugh-Every republican homosexual's dream date!
Re: Princess Natasha
Puts me in mind of the time that my sister tried to make puff pastry OLXWin 1.00a ...you can call it dishonest and I don't care.-DT
Re: WHAT ABOUT THIS?
I find my self in complete agreement with you. Fabio is stomach
turning. OLXWin 1.00a ...Piss everone off! Nuke the Gay Baby Whales for Jesus!
Judith's Banned Book List
short
Smurfs seem to be a whole different story <blandly innocent look>. OLXWin 1.00a ...Support Drawing Down in the public schools.
Re: Presumptiousness of A
N
'The Princess Bride' OLXWin 1.00a ...The Popemobile: proof prayer doesn't work.
Re: IRC
I heard the same rumor, but had already mostly discontinued using it.
About the only time I turn it on anymore is when several people here in
town are arranging a get together. <G> OLXWin 1.00a ..Sure, when...OINK FLAP FLAP FLAP...I'll be damned!
kick butt and take names
And
More likely the Snippy Horseman OLXWin 1.00a ...Oh, no! The creationists are mutating!
I feel sick
From: Tricia Hague-Blackford Conference: 36 Christian
To: Duncan Reid Message: 296 Reply To: 294
Subj: Gays Date: 01-28-98 Time: 21:38 Gidday there Duncan!
27 Jan 98 at 19:35, Duncan Reid writes to Tricia Hague-Blackford:
Well firstly, you have set yourself up to believe that they are needing
your
help, that they are not well, not normal, not nice even.
Have you ever just tried to be friends with them, without trying to convert
them to your Faith?
In a second
If Staal thought he could get away with it here, he would try it.
BRAIN FORMATION
Keep talking like that in an international forum, and it'll soon
be impossible, bigmouth!
The Inquisition 2/5
CURTIS JOHNSON spoke thusly about: The Inquisition 2/5
Your post ahead of this goes unanswered.
I am serious about the use of foul language,
Curtis. I will not respond to such posts.
I think a lot of authors have some doubt as
to who exactly put the pen to papyrus in their
writing. Was it Paul? I think the evidence
is still strong that it may be. Was it one
of his personal followers who act as scribe?
I think
Break out a keg
It is no cause for celebration when a fundy hurts
her/him self. It _is_ a cause for celebration when the fundy
is prevented from hurting other people.
It would appear from this string of messages that you
got up on the wrong side of your PMS this morning. I am
sorry about your friend's health, physical and mental, and I
applaud the feelings your staunch defense of her here
reveal, but I cannot see that it is anywhere written that
Chemistry
Does not the OT say something about the man,
being rejected? I will let you search the
OT for the traditional places where a messiah
was fortold.
And Abraham writing the Gettysburg Address is also
"an obvious crock." But the example above of what
you see as an inconsistency in the accounts of the
crucifixion/resurrection is actually authenticating,
because it indicates that there was no collusion
among the authors to say the same thing. Before
this thread is over, I
String Cheese for Jesus!
There's one fucking hell of an understatement. He made my spelling
look professional. Or as evil as Staal.
Re: Chemistry is not a m
I don't think he uses the word "random" but I
would have to re-read it to see. So what?
The absence of a discussion of the origin of
the universe need not include randomness,
unless he is discussing the formation of
all the chemical elements in the first
moments of the big bang, or in the remnants
of a supernova. If he did not go into the
details of randomness in this creation, then
it does not prove that randomness
Point of Order
You use relish with your sodomy? How does that work?