Washington Times columnist calls AIDS ‘the gift of the gays.’
Washington Times columnist calls AIDS ‘the gift of the gays.’
In a op-ed yesterday attempting to cast doubt on man-made global warming, Washington Times columnist and editor emeritus Wesley Pruden opened with a line stating that the AIDS virus is “the gifts of the gays“:
We were all supposed to be dead now, done in by AIDS, the gift of the gays. After that it was SARS, bequeathed to the world by China. Then it was avian flu, which, to be fair to the alarmists, did in fact result in the deaths of millions. The millions were all chickens, true, but chickens have feelings, too. You could ask the folks at PETA.
As Media Matters has documented, Pruden has a history of writing that heterosexuals having AIDS is a “myth,” even though the U.N. reported that, in 2005, 32 percent of all new AIDS infections in the U.S. were contracted by heterosexuals. (HT: Huffington Post)
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Is the garbage Chimpy administration a “gift” from you GOP backing homophobic , racist , sexist morons to the rest of us ?
I’d return it , but there is no redeeming value there…..
June 18th, 2008 at 6:12 pmJesus H. Christ. What a despicable bag of slime.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:13 pmPruden must believe homosexuality is rampant in Africa, where AIDS is practically (if not officially) an epidemic there.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:14 pmMaybe Pruden and all of the staff at that sorry-arse rag, owned by the Moonies should ‘open that little gift-wrapped box’ and find out what it is really all about.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:15 pmWe were all supposed to be dead now, done in by AIDS, the gift of the gays. After that it was SARS, bequeathed to the world by China. Then it was avian flu, which, to be fair to the alarmists, did in fact result in the deaths of millions.
Yeah, I can see Pruden’s point. I mean, if you wet your pants at every bump in the night like today’s neocons do, if every potential threat is almost certain to kill us if we don’t invade another country, then sure, i can see where Pruden would jump to the conclusion that AIDS was supposed to kill us all.
Of course, those of us who can think rationally concluded long ago that the threat of AIDS required that we take steps to protect ourselves, and research to find ways to arrest the disease.
Apparently Pruden thinks that all of us who got tested and adopted safe sexual practices were idiots because — See? There was no threat after all. It was just the “alarmists”.
It’s good to see the WaTimes is an equal-opportunity employer. The thinking-impaired have to feed their families, too.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:17 pmOh Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarylllllllllllllll!
His gaydar must not be working properly…
June 18th, 2008 at 6:18 pmDavid Brock was also a closeted homosexual when he worked for the Washington Times. Looks like the Times hires a lot of these types.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:19 pmIn 1998 Pruden made a speech to the United Daughters of the Confederacy, at the Manassas battlefield. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), he said “Southerners … hold loyalty to two countries in our hearts.” The second country is one “baptized 137 years ago on this very field in the blood of First Manassas, a country no longer at the mercy of the vicissitudes in the tangled affairs of men, a country that lives within us, a country that will endure for as long as men and women know love. … God bless America, God bless the Confederate States of America, and God bless you all.”
Guess no one has informed Pruneface that the Confederacy has been dissolved ……BTW
Isn’t the above completely un-American and borderline sedition ?
June 18th, 2008 at 6:19 pmThanks to Southerners who wanted the “freedom” to own slaves, 620,000 lives were snuffed out during those terrible 5 years…
June 18th, 2008 at 6:22 pmCompletely off topic, but if VaVa shows up again, make sure you direct it here
Virginia Polls RCP
Polling Data
Poll Date Sample McCain (R) Obama (D) Spread
RCP Average 05/12 - 06/16 — 43.8 44.3 Obama +0.5
PPP (D) 06/14 - 06/16 893 LV 45 47 Obama +2.0
June 18th, 2008 at 6:22 pmRasmussen 06/12 - 06/12 500 LV 44 45 Obama +1.0
SurveyUSA 05/16 - 05/18 600 RV 42 49 Obama +7.0
RUCerious Says:
Oh Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarylllllllllllllll!
His gaydar must not be working properly…
Daryll’s time on Earth is up for today. Beelzebub limits the time his children may spend with humans, lest they begin to take on any positive human attributes.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:24 pmIn 1998 Pruden made a speech to the United Daughters of the Confederacy, at the Manassas battlefield. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), he said “Southerners … hold loyalty to two countries in our hearts.” The second country is one “baptized 137 years ago on this very field in the blood of First Manassas, a country no longer at the mercy of the vicissitudes in the tangled affairs of men, a country that lives within us, a country that will endure for as long as men and women know love. … God bless America, God bless the Confederate States of America, and God bless you all.”
He meant “Bull Run”, didn’t he? Hey, our side (the Union) won, so we should get to choose the historical names.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:24 pmBTW
Anyone wondering why Pruneface is this big a d0uchebag need look no further than his piece of garbage old man ; a racist who pretended to be a “man of God” by masquerading as a chaplain………
If all are truly equal in the eyes of the “Lord” , what is the basis behind racism and opposing integration ?
June 18th, 2008 at 6:29 pmBush has aids. they advise him to do crazy sh!t all the time.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:30 pmIs it any wonder why there still are +/- 23% of the American public which thinks our WH occupant is doing a good job.
Hey, you can’t fix stupid - don’t even try.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:30 pmIt’s amazing how many people think this. I’ve heard it constantly.
I’ve also heard from random idiots that it came from people in Africa having sex with apes. Are there honestly people who think this is true? It’s racist, insulting and stupid.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:46 pmI seem to recall that in the late 1990s, a crisis of monumental proportions loomed as soon as the calendar odometer rolled over to 2000, due to computer programming done years before that didn’t allow for four-digit years.
Great alarms were sounded, and — guess what? January 1, 2000 came along and disaster didn’t strike.
There were plenty of people who claimed that the people who sounded the alarms were crackpots who didn’t know what they were talking about. I prefer to think that there WAS a potential crisis, but because people were alerted to it and worked their asses off to prevent it, the crisis was averted.
AIDS has also been a crisis of monumental proportions. But thinking people have been busily at work, coming up with medications and working on prevention programs and education. As a result, more people take measures to prevent getting it, and people who do get it are able to continue living their lives longer than they could have 20 years ago. However, the fact that we aren’t all dead is not due to the fact that it was never a problem, it’s due to a whole lot of work coming up with solutions.
As it is with global warming. If we act now, we can stave off disaster. But staving off disaster will mean success for our efforts. It will not mean validation for the naysayers.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:56 pmUmmmm, I’m no fan of the guy, but I think he was being sarcastic…
June 18th, 2008 at 6:59 pmWesley Pruden writes the Moony paper Washington Times. Only morons, RePugniScums and hard core Ghould-Aid guzzlin’ Christianistas read that useless, yellow-journalism, RAG!!
June 18th, 2008 at 7:06 pmSounds like the reich-wing GOPig base.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:12 pmDo you need help reading your own copy and paste rant that has nothing to do with the topic at hand?
June 18th, 2008 at 7:14 pmAbstinance pants for all!!!
June 18th, 2008 at 7:16 pmDid you know that one of the little nasty secrets about AIDS currently is that the Hassidic commnunity is beset with the disease.
The wifes are infected by sexually repressed husbands that visit infected hookers on the sly.
It’s very sad. These women deserve better. They will never get it inside their religion. They are GOD/MALE oppressed.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:17 pmSomething you should know a lot about.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:23 pmThe bible says, “The wages of sin is death”.
The Bible is pure phucking fiction!! Get over it!!
June 18th, 2008 at 7:24 pmDaryll Says
June 18th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
But gay males are prone to contracting the virus because of sex through the rectum, which is considered high risk.
_________________________________________________________
OK, I just gotta ask. Since lesbians don’t have sex through the rectum as a general rule, does this make them God’s chosen people? I mean, not only are they less likely to get AIDS than the heterosexual population on average, they are less likely to get ANY kind of STD. This would indicate that they are favored in some way, if you buy the logic that STDs are punishment for sin.
Oh — and sex through the rectum isn’t what’s “high-risk”. Having sex with somebody with AIDS is.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:30 pmI have a gift for you Wesley Pruden…a go fcuk yourself kind of gift.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:39 pmHey Daryll:
June 18th, 2008 at 7:47 pmI don’t mean to bum you out but the whole reason it is sin is because of the risk. Come on man! Jump into the deep end
Wow, these people really are disgusting.
And Daryll, I have some sad news for you. You will not be allowed in the Kingdom of Heaven due to your disgusting beliefs and actions. God does not want you. But, rest assured, there’s a special place in Hell reserved for you. You will like it there. You will be able to spend time with all those criminals you admire so much.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:48 pmOh — and sex through the rectum isn’t what’s “high-risk”. Having sex with somebody with AIDS is.
She’s absolutely right, Daryll. Or did you not understand that about AIDS? Did you know that you can contract AIDS through a blood transfusion, too, with absolutely no sex involved whatsoever? Did you know that? What else don’t you know about the disease?
June 18th, 2008 at 7:50 pmLike murdering other humans in the name of war?
June 18th, 2008 at 7:58 pmSex through the rectum? But still you are not allowed to say ” anole eyes” or “A nail is sis”
June 18th, 2008 at 8:04 pmdbadass Says
June 18th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Sex through the rectum? But still you are not allowed to say ” anole eyes” or “A nail is sis”
________________________________________
Apparently, “rectum” is OK. So just substitute “rectum” for the offending word. Examples: rectumyze, rectumysis, rectumyst.
And if you happen to be applying those terms to political pundits, there may be some humor associated with it.
June 18th, 2008 at 8:29 pmJesus found himself a spouse of the opposite gender?
True, but, as Paula Poundstone has observed, after they take the taxes out, it’s more just a tired feeling, really.
June 18th, 2008 at 8:45 pmPerhaps I.V. drug users who share needles should send Pruden a Thank You card for not mentioning their practices as a contributing factor?
June 18th, 2008 at 9:07 pmHow well does Pruden know Larry Craig and Jeff Gannon?
June 18th, 2008 at 9:08 pmHey Daryll –
According to Jesus in Matthew 7:1-2 (NIV) —
1″Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”
What does this Bible verse mean to you?
June 18th, 2008 at 9:15 pmConspiracy theorists will agree.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:23 pmthe U.N. reported that, in 2005, 32 percent of all new AIDS infections in the U.S. were contracted by heterosexuals.
So?
These are just facts, right?
/sarc off
June 18th, 2008 at 9:27 pmMethinks my fish’s sex life is spicier and kinkier than Darryll’s…
June 18th, 2008 at 9:33 pmInteresting you should bring that up, curmudgeon — earlier today, Daryll was quoting that very same verse.. Yet in the very same thread, he was judging others.
Now, what you have to understand about Daryll is that he’s not really a biblethumper. He’s really a blog performance artist acting the character of a biblethumper.
He’s really quite good, about the best fake troll we’ve got here. Is great about staying in character, inventive in his routine… but every once in a while, like all great artists, he overreaches. Falls prey to unintended irony.
At least — I think this is unintended.
If Daryll actually meant to play hy[ocrisy, I’ll be disappointed in him. He’s better than that. Hypocrisy is so easy to play.
C’mon, Daryll! You can do better!
June 18th, 2008 at 9:36 pmDaryll Says:
There is a consequence for sin. The bible says, “The wages of sin is death”.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
_____
Actually, the wages of life is death. Non-sinners die, too, you know.
June 18th, 2008 at 10:15 pmDoesn’t pointing out that that 30% of new infections in the US are among heterosexuals still mean that 70% are among homosexuals? I don’t really see how that’s going to change the mind of someone who is already convinced it’s a “gay disease.”
And then assuming that a large number of that 30% might be people involved in prostitution (either providing it or using it) or IV drug users—which of course has nothing to do with sex at all—I don’t really think someone who thinks that AIDS is a punishment for “sin” is going to be forced to question their notions about the disease that much.
According to this article in The Independent, http://tinyurl.com/6fwtxz , now the World Health Organization says that among heterosexuals, the disease mainly effects conservative Republican politicians (OK, well they actually said the disease mainly effects drug users and people who have sex with prostitutes—but that pretty much describes the modern GOP, right?).
June 18th, 2008 at 10:20 pmThis is another prime example of why the Washington Times is in no way “independent” of Sun Myung Moon’s effort to manipulate our political system towards his right wing, authoritarian, homophobic, fascist ideology. It has done an excellent job for Moon. As for people making up rationalizations for this fact by deceptively claiming the paper is “independent” of Moon, let me point out two things.
One, there have been examples of editors with principles quitting the paper over moonie influence saying that the so called “independence” is a sham.
If you have not watched this panel discussion with three very conservative former editors of Moon’s media, you likely do not know how Moon uses his media. This is a much watch – informative and even humorous at times: http://video.google.com/ videoplay?docid=9008719207533458404&hl=en
One former member attested that he personally saw long time Moon follower, Josette Shiner the managing editor of the paper for many years, taking orders directly from Moon on what he wanted done with the paper. There are also examples of Moon bragging about using the paper to “influence America” and to gather intelligence for his organization.
But Moon does not have to come in and tell them what to write. His operative’s do the hiring and firing of the top management of the paper and they have simply hired people like Pruden to run the paper. Moon is not just a right wing extremist but a rampant homophobe. He doesn’t have to tell someone like Pruden what to write. The paper is on auto pilot.
The paper also gives Moon huge face around the world. Astonishingly, many people who have or currently work for the paper still do not see how they empower Moon’s “messianic” mission.
Some on the “independent” WT:
http://cellwhitman.blogspot.com/ 2004/ 10/ independent-washington-times.html
June 19th, 2008 at 12:41 amwow, like any right-wing troll, he manages to scapegoat those whom the right-wing hates…
June 19th, 2008 at 2:45 amcurmudgeon Says:
Hey Daryll –
According to Jesus in Matthew 7:1-2 (NIV) —
1?Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”
What does this Bible verse mean to you?
oh come on, haven’t you gotten the memo? The Gospels are tainted with liberal bias and not to be trusted…;-)
June 19th, 2008 at 2:48 am.
Dear Darryll,
You keep insisting that AIDS is some sort of punishment for “sin”… if it’s a homosexual that has it. Should that be the same reasoning for heterosexuals, too? Because of their “sin” they too, should be punished…?
Now, let me extrapolate your theory for you with one simple…
Q U E S T I O N:
What children did Jesus say to punish?
.
June 19th, 2008 at 3:22 amDaryll IGNORES the words of Jesus when he refuses to condemn people for getting divorce for any reason other than sexual infidelity!
Daryll only “picks & chooses” specific verses of the Bible that support his prejudice! Daryll is to Christianity as the GOP is to the “Constitution”: only certain portions are important, the rest can be thrown away.
June 19th, 2008 at 6:34 ammisshusseinmolly Says:
Daryll Says
June 18th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
But gay males are prone to contracting the virus because of sex through the rectum, which is considered high risk.
_________________________________________________________
OK, I just gotta ask. Since lesbians don’t have sex through the rectum as a general rule, does this make them God’s chosen people? I mean, not only are they less likely to get AIDS than the heterosexual population on average, they are less likely to get ANY kind of STD. This would indicate that they are favored in some way, if you buy the logic that STDs are punishment for sin.
Oh — and sex through the rectum isn’t what’s “high-risk”. Having sex with somebody with AIDS is.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Wasn’t AIDS called GRIDS - gay related - when it was first discovered?
if you buy the logic that STDs are punishment for sin.
Well, the best advice in this area is one man one woman forever. This is a short description of a monogamous - faithful - heterosexual relationship, like in a natural marriage.
This arrangement avoids both the sin and the disease(s).
June 19th, 2008 at 9:45 amcurmudgeon Says:
Hey Daryll –
According to Jesus in Matthew 7:1-2 (NIV) —
1?Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”
What does this Bible verse mean to you?
Something tells bit that it doesn’t mean anything to you but a convenient club with which to swat at Daryll.
If the one you quote does mean anything to you perhaps the one bit quotes will mean something?
http://bibleresources.bible.com/ passagesearchresults2.php?passage1=Matthew+22&book_id=47&version1=31&tp=28&c=22
What does this one mean to you?
bit believes that this scripture means that you can’t do the second command without doing the first one.
Further, Jesus says that these two commands are necessary in order to follow the Law and the teachings of the prophets.
The Law to which he refers would be the Law with the extensive prohibitions against deviant sexual practices - including homosexuality.
June 19th, 2008 at 9:58 am#52 - Bitbit said:
“The Law to which he refers would be the Law with the extensive prohibitions against deviant sexual practices - including homosexuality.”
June 19th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Ironically enough, it ALSO includes the laws against eaing unclean animals, how to sacrifice to God, when women are “unclean” and to burn anything they touch during that time of the month, and when one should kill your children for disobeying you.
Funny how you seem to gloss over those particular laws, but I’m not too surprised. Pick & choose, pick & choose.
June 19th, 2008 at 11:19 amDemocrat Soldier Says:
#52 - Bitbit said:
“The Law to which he refers would be the Law with the extensive prohibitions against deviant sexual practices - including homosexuality.”
June 19th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Ironically enough, it ALSO includes the laws against eaing unclean animals, how to sacrifice to God, when women are “unclean” and to burn anything they touch during that time of the month, and when one should kill your children for disobeying you.
Funny how you seem to gloss over those particular laws, but I’m not too surprised. Pick & choose, pick & choose.
June 19th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Obviously DS wants to gloss over the fact that Christ himself said that the Creator’s intended sexual expression was to be between a man an a woman in a marriage. This is statement very emphatically in Mathew 19. Further, DS appears to want to gloss over the fact that Christ himself said that a mans attitude was as important as his action as far as sexual sin is concerned. Christ says in Matthew 5 that one can look at a woman to lust after her and commit adultery in his heart and that is sin. This is a standard of sexual purity that is in the stratosphere.
How could the Savior who warned about sexual purity regard homosexuality as anything but sin?
bit doesn’t gloss over these laws but bit also knows that the Apostle Paul made it clear that one didn’t have to be a Jew to be a Christian. The Apostle Peter was a harder sale, but he came to understand that a Christian was not required to be a Jew first.
Further, nothing DS said in his post changes anything the Bible says about homosexuality. If DS is correct that bit “glosses” over certain scripture, then bit is simply wrong. Nonetheless, bit doesn’t perceive that DS is trying to correct him.
bit being wrong doesn’t change anything that scripture says about homosexuality.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:33 pmWasn’t AIDS identified in the early ’80’s?
How did AIDS enter the population?
June 19th, 2008 at 12:34 pm#54 - bitblt Says:
If DS is correct that bit “glosses” over certain scripture, then bit is simply wrong.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
I agree, you ARE wrong in holding up one verse of the Bible over other verses. You are simply allowing your prejudice to you ignoring the many verses in the Bible that are not “convenient” to your pre-concieved ideas.
Yes, the Bible says that man sleeping with man is wrong. The Bible also says “Kill your children if they curse you.” Bitbit seems to ingore this verse in the Bible.
The Bible also says “one man, multiple women” are marriage. Bitbit seems to ingore this verse in the Bible.
Why do you hold up certain portions of the Bible as sacrosanct, but completely ignore other verses that are inconvenient to your prejudices, including the many contradictions and falsehoods that are in the Bible?
The reason is obvious: you are USING the Bible to support your prejudice.
I will continue to pray for you, Bitbit. You seriously need the help.
June 19th, 2008 at 2:22 pm#55 - bitblt Says:
———————————————————
“Wasn’t AIDS identified in the early ’80’s?
How did AIDS enter the population?”
June 19th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Yes, AIDS was identified in the early 80’s. It was passed by people who had multiple partners with no regard to safety.
Where did AIDS originally start? Why are the vast majority of AIDS cases wordwide among heterosexuals?
June 19th, 2008 at 2:25 pmDemocrat Soldier Says:
.
.
.
The Bible also says “one man, multiple women” are marriage. Bitbit seems to ingore this verse in the Bible.
.
.
.
Why do you hold up certain portions of the Bible as sacrosanct, but completely ignore other verses that are inconvenient to your prejudices, including the many contradictions and falsehoods that are in the Bible?
.
.
.
I will continue to pray for you, Bitbit. You seriously need the help.
June 19th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
The Bible also says “one man, multiple women” are marriage. Bitbit seems to ingore this verse in the Bible.
b doesn’t believe there is a verse in the Bible that says “one man, multiple marriages.” However, if there is b would certainly appreciated knowing where it is.
Christ certainly doesn’t say this when he quotes Genesis 2 in Matthew 19 to show that the Creator intended that a man and a woman would be “one flesh.”
The Bible does record that there were men in the Old Testament who took more than one wife, but the Bible never says it was a good or a desirable practice or a thing that a man should do. The Bible simply records that it happened, and what commentary the Bible provides on the practice is usually negative. For instance, the Old Testament says that Solomon’s many wives turned his heart from God.
Interestingly the Bible records the name of the first man to take two wives. His name was Lamech and he descended from Cain. This is recorded in Genesis 4.
Why do you hold up certain portions of the Bible as sacrosanct, but completely ignore other verses that are inconvenient to your prejudices, including the many contradictions and falsehoods that are in the Bible?
This suggests to b that DS doesn’t really believe the Bible anyway so what’s the point her?
Since it’s not clear to b exactly what it is DS believes, or to whom DS would be praying, please don’t pray for b.
June 19th, 2008 at 4:51 pmI really don’t give a damn what the bible says.
June 19th, 2008 at 5:57 pmbitblt Says:
——————————————————————————–
Wasn’t AIDS identified in the early ’80’s?
How did AIDS enter the population?
–
June 19th, 2008 at 5:59 pmCome on. I don’t wish to treat you without respect but viruses have been mutating and jumping species for millenia. This is just stupid
bitblt Says:
b doesn’t believe there is a verse in the Bible that says “one man, multiple marriages.” However, if there is b would certainly appreciated knowing where it is.
ROTFL!! Ironic how *ssh*les like you that CLAIM to be XTians tend to KNOW THE LEAST about YOUR RELIGION! You’re as IGNORANT about XTianity as you are EVERY OTHER TOPIC, you DUMB, DUMB LITTLE TARD!!! ROTFL!!
In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.
In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.
In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.
In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon’s son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.
In Deuteronomy 21:15 “If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons….”
bitblt Says:
Christ certainly doesn’t say this when he quotes Genesis 2 in Matthew 19 to show that the Creator intended that a man and a woman would be “one flesh.”
ROTFL!!! HYSTERICAL!! You are SO IGNORANT! The ORIGINAL CREATION myth had LILITH co-created with Adam, but because she wouldn’t be SUBMISSIVE and a SLAVE to Adam, Yahweh (the Son of Ashera the SUPREME MOTHER GODDESS) created Eve out of Adam’s Rib… Wow you XTians sure are IGNORANT of YOUR OWN MYTHS!!!
There are a lot more verses from the Old Testament that allow polygamy, but I think that the above are sufficient enough to prove my point.
bitblt Says:
The Bible does record that there were men in the Old Testament who took more than one wife, but the Bible never says it was a good or a desirable practice or a thing that a man should do. The Bible simply records that it happened, and what commentary the Bible provides on the practice is usually negative. For instance, the Old Testament says that Solomon’s many wives turned his heart from God.
ROTFL!! That’s HYSTERICAL, because THE TEXTS I JUST POSTED SAY THE OPPOSITE!!
bitblt Says:
Interestingly the Bible records the name of the first man to take two wives. His name was Lamech and he descended from Cain. This is recorded in Genesis 4.
RECORDS? as in HISTORICAL? You mean the same way it RECORDS a FLAT EARTH and an 8000 old Planet with BILLION YEAR OLD ROCKS, and 10000 Year old LIVING TREES? ROTFL, you’re a F**kING MORON!!!
June 20th, 2008 at 1:55 ambitblt Says:
Wasn’t AIDS identified in the early ’80’s?
How did AIDS enter the population?
From monkeys bighting humans who were killing and eating them thanks to GOOD XTians f**king up their continent with HeyZeus fearing colonial @ssh@le behavior… It’s a disease, only FOOLS believe DISEASE is PUNISHMENT. Especially MENTAL ILLNESS sufferers LIKE YOURSELF - you IGNORANT HATEFUL TARD!
June 20th, 2008 at 1:57 am#58 - bitblt Says:
b doesn’t believe there is a verse in the Bible that says “one man, multiple marriages.” However, if there is b would certainly appreciated knowing where it is.
June 19th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
“Thy silver and thy gold is mine; thy wives also and thy children, even the goodliest, are mine.” 1 Kings 20:3
“But Abijah waxed mighty, and married fourteen wives, and begat twenty and two sons, and sixteen daughters.” 2 Chronicles 13:21
“And Ashur the father of Tekoa had two wives, Helah and Naarah.” 1 Chronicles 4:5
“And David took him more concubines and wives” 2 Samuel 5:13, 1 Chronicles 14:3
“And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.” 2 Samuel 12:7-8
“And Gideon had threescore and ten sons of his body begotten: for he had many wives.” Judges 8:30
There are many more, but this will get you started.
Bitbit needs to read the entire Bible, and not just the verses that agree with bitbit’s preconcieved notions about what the Bible says.
Bitbit seems to be confused over what the Bible truly says. If you refuse to understand what’s in the Bible, you will make a very poor teacher of the Bible. I would suggest that you continue your education prior to attempting to educate others. When your glass is less than half full, it would be unwise for you to pour any out for others.
Again, I will continue to pray that you educate yourself about the Bible and the many things that are in the Bible. You truly need the help.
June 20th, 2008 at 7:47 am