|
|
It's an expression of who you are, and who you are is okay!
Wheresoever wearing swimsuits is okay, going naked shall also be okay as well.
|
|
|
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote
> You're lying, because you already admitted that you would not do such a
> thing in the case of a specific sect of Christians.
Technically, Quakers aren't 'Christians'. They quake before the Lord- mo
|
|
|
(37) His disciples said, "When will you become revealed to us and when
shall we see you?"
Jesus said, "When you disrobe without being ashamed and take up your
garments and place them under your feet like little children and tread
on them, then will yo
|
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message news:<h359e0pjlrmb591a5vvcro9tvrp36mu9ks@4ax.com>...
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:31:13 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
> >Then why wouldn't you evaluate the testimony itself, rather than what
|
|
|
the law should be written to say:
If the other person is under 18, you should be within 3 years of age of them!
|
|
|
Dean O. wrote:
> Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 01:21:58 -0500, Dean O. <deano@nospam.com>
>>
>>> Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I wouldn't be surprised if there was a little more to the story
>>>> t
|
|
|
Chas wrote:
> "Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote
>
>>You're lying, because you already admitted that you would not do such a
>>thing in the case of a specific sect of Christians.
>
>
> Technically, Quakers aren't 'Christians'.
|
|
|
"Dissident" <qqqq@7600.net> wrote in message
news:40E3A63E.8040904@7600.net...
> BOB wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 09:17:58 -0600, "=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Republicans as a group tend to be more perverted.
> >
> >
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:31:13 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>As a member of the jury, I have to decide whether he's telling the truth or not.
>Then why wouldn't you evaluate the testimony itself, rather than what
>you think the
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:32:52 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>>But honesty has never been your strong point.
>>It's always been my strong point, much to your embarrassment.
>Liar.
quote the little black bird.
duke
*****
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 05:31:19 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Nope, my job on a jury is to judge.
>Unless Earl is sitting down his ass must be real sore. That's what you land
>on when you stick both feet in your mouth at
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 00:25:17 GMT, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote:
>>> They are your xer bretheren.
>>Are they xer's?
> Yep. The Society of Friends/Quakers are a sect of xers.
I'd trust them.
>>>> Their reputation might cover
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:32:30 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
>What words of wisdom did Christ have to offer on the topic of
>judging...?
What words of wisdom did God have to offer on the topic of admonishment?
What words of wisd
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:18:29 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> Nope, my job on a jury is to judge.
>No, your job on the jury is to determine the facts. It's up to the judge
>to do the judging. That's why they call him/her the judge, d
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 05:35:34 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> As a member of the jury, I have to decide whether he's telling the truth
>or not.
> Clearly you've never been on a jury and never learned anything about the
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:31:13 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>As a member of the jury, I have to decide whether he's telling the truth or not.
>Then why wouldn't you evaluate the testimony itself, rather than what
>you think the
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 14:46:23 GMT, Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote:
>In article <k8h6e0tqqst5aq3pr8co6k248ltcu0t2rp@4ax.com>, duke says...
>>
>>On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:27:52 GMT, Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Don't call
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:26:45 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:57:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:27:52 GMT, Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Don't call
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:35:48 -0700, "Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote:
>> Yet it's my job as a member of the jury to decide if the witness is telling the truth. If
>> he swears instead on his lunch french fries, well.............I'll
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 01:08:31 GMT, Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Yet it's my job as a member of the jury to decide if the witness is
>> telling the truth. If he swears instead on his lunch french fries,
>> well.............I'll take that
|
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 01:41:52 +0100, "Steve O" <stoboyle@hotmail.com> wrote:
>But surely, duke, does it matter whther you believe the witness or not?
>Iif God is ever present and omnipotent, he sees to it that the guilty are
>punished and justice preva
|
|
|
On 30 Jun 2004 22:46:58 -0700, ptravel@ruyitang.com (PTRAVEL) wrote:
What's the matter, little atheist?
>I'm not an atheist. It must be galling to be wrong so often and so
>consistently.
>> Beginning to suspect that your position may just jump
>
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 05:39:52 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Earl, when you provide evidence that your name is not Earl, I will call you
>what ever your real name is. The evidence points to you being named Earl.
When are
|
|
|
duke wrote:
> On 30 Jun 2004 22:46:58 -0700, ptravel@ruyitang.com (PTRAVEL) wrote:
> What's the matter, little atheist?
>
>
>>I'm not an atheist. It must be galling to be wrong so often and so
>>consistently.
>
>
>>>Beginning to suspect th
|
|
|
duke wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:35:48 -0700, "Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Yet it's my job as a member of the jury to decide if the witness is telling the truth. If
>>>he swears instead on his lunch french fries,
|
|
|
duke wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:31:13 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>As a member of the jury, I have to decide whether he's telling the truth or not.
>
>
>>Then why wouldn't you evaluate the testimony itself, r
|
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:v059e0h0g09mufm71nr7qat63abh36intv@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:26:45 GMT, raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com>
wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:57:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wro
|
|
|
In article <k8h6e0tqqst5aq3pr8co6k248ltcu0t2rp@4ax.com>, duke says...
>
>On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:27:52 GMT, Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote:
>
>>>Don't call one as your witness.
>>Please prove that all atheists are liars and be sure to provi
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:49:55 -0400, Ivan Gowch
<ivangowch@SPAMTHEENOTyahoo.com> ejaculated:
>
> The U.S. system of "justice" is a tragic joke,
> and everyone knows it.
So, did you plead guilty?
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundanc
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:27:52 +0000 in episode
<YZAEc.7104$H4.329@www.newsranger.com> we saw our hero Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com>:
> In article <om44e0dpnr46rco63f1pi5q6n310bnut8q@4ax.com>, duke says...
>>
>>On 29 Jun 2004 02:18:05 GMT, Alun
|
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:31:13 +0000 in episode
<haj6e0herejvoo7ei2sgigb3c6f1m4tlum@4ax.com> we saw our hero raven1
<quoththeraven@nevermore.com>:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:53:50 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:28:
|
|
|
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 05:35:34 +0000 in episode
<GoNEc.6925$564.1962@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com> we saw our hero "Mike
Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>:
>
> "duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:h0h6e0tlu38pav5nhh56trrrcd2jsna8cf
|
|
|
duke wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 05:07:10 GMT, Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>That's tantamount to saying that all of us atheists are liars. I guess
>>>>that's what you beleive, then.
>
>
>
>>>Don't call one as your wit
|
|
|
BOB wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 09:17:58 -0600, "=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Republicans as a group tend to be more perverted.
>
>
> Clinton was a Republican?
He said perverted, not sexually active and with a good
sexual
|
|
|
excop42198@aol.com (Excop42198) wrote in message news:<20040630170112.05845.00000587@mb-m27.aol.com>...
> >He has not
> >been charged in the incident last week that began with him allegedly evading
> >officers
>
> What the @$#* is "alleged" about t
|
|
|
Bob wrote:
>>As the men if they've ever had their fly unzipped in public without knowing
>>it until someone else pointed it out.
>>
>>Ask the women if their boobs ever flopped out of their tops or if
>>they ever experienced a "wardrobe malfunction" l
|
|
|
excop42198@aol.com (Excop42198) wrote in message news:<20040630170112.05845.00000587@mb-m27.aol.com>...
> >He has not
> >been charged in the incident last week that began with him allegedly evading
> >officers
>
> What the @$#* is "alleged" about t
|
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:6eh6e01m19hk5jmrv26825jfjpaj5qlev3@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 03:32:02 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >> No, can't say as I stated such a thing. Or even thought
|
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:h0h6e0tlu38pav5nhh56trrrcd2jsna8cf@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:28:52 GMT, Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com>
wrote:
>
> >>Remains to be seen. Their reputation might cover the issue. But
|
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:8rg6e01o78jomvfkb90pijmnsv0ont8od7@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 03:17:44 GMT, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com>
wrote:
>
> >>>>Refusing to swear on a bible is a good reason to question t
|
|
|
Ivan wrote:
>The U.S. system of "justice" is a tragic joke,
>and everyone knows it.
The rest of the BS snipped....if anybody wants to read it, see the original
post.....
Ivan,
You are truly clueless......don't you know those "rules" of yours hav
|
|
|
|
|
|
duke wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 05:07:10 GMT, Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>> That's tantamount to saying that all of us atheists are liars. I
>>>> guess that's what you beleive, then.
>
>>> Don't call one as your witness.
>
>>
|
|
|
> If your witness refuses to swear on a bible, but swears on the
> hamburger he ate for lunch, well....................we'll see.
I once had to attend a magistrates home late at night to apply for a search
warrant.
Normally, you would swear on the b
|
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in
news:g5h6e016aas18l3g06r04eu5p62ovb0vn7@4ax.com:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 05:07:10 GMT, Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>>That's tantamount to saying that all of us atheists are liars. I
>>>>guess
|
|
|
In alt.atheism on Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:50:33 -0500, duke
<duckgumbo32@cox.net> let us all know that:
>On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 03:17:44 GMT, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>Refusing to swear on a bible is a good reason to question the
|
|
