something there

@MKnowlesShow @michaeljknowles Melissa Dougherty does a really good deep dive into this subculture. There is some really dark stuff there. youtu.be/-XSO2KwUoeg?si…

.@michaeljknowles: "From what I can see, [the furry fandom] is quite gay. I think it's only 10% of self-identified furries identify as straight." FURRY: "These are actual statistics...that is very, very true, yes."

@JosephineDurian @bonchieredstate I too like to make things up. Good job with cultivating your incredible imagination!

@bonchieredstate Yeah tradition of genocide thievery self entitlement . and then the mythology copy pasted from cultures that came before them. Good job guys

Ah yes. If there’s one thing Israelis lack, it’s thousands of years of heavily-sourced and defined tradition. It’s not like history’s most published book contains any of that.

@baalam_trance @xnoesbueno When did this take alleged abuse take place?

@xnoesbueno Trump was ordered to pay millions of dlls for sexual abuse & defamation they found that Carroll had not proven he raped her within the narrow technical definition of the NY Code. Juries did find that he penetrated her without consent, which is legally defined as "sexual abuse".

You are aware ABC had to pay $15m to Trump because Stephanopoulos said exactly what you just said, correct?

@mac499 @exAtheistRCC That he was the judge of the world, the unique son of God, the son of man who comes on the cloud and is given glory, the one who can forgive sins by virtue of his person, the one who preexisted Abraham? You can accept that he said those things that he said?

@somethinghere87 @exAtheistRCC No; I can go with the secular teachings of most religions founders.. It's the supernatural stuff I can't believe...

Claims are not evidence

@mac499 @exAtheistRCC You can say what you want but I'm talking about the historical evidence of what the actual human who walked the face of the earth, named Yeshua, said. The issue is, you look back at him and chop him up and try to recreate him in your own image.

@somethinghere87 @exAtheistRCC Not at all I believe people can be inspired by the actions and teachings of others.. I just don't believe in faeries or other supernatural things..

@vteclimey @InspiringPhilos @hankrsmith No he doesn't. To show you, just try to map out the logic. And then we'll apply your logic broadly. I'm interested to see Mormons call demon possessed people subhuman.

@InspiringPhilos @hankrsmith And yet he makes a valid point.

Joseph Smith was deceived by a demon? That rhetoric opens the door to seeing Latter-day Saints as something less than human. This is what leads people to drive their trucks into our churches and open fire on men, women, and children.

@mac499 @exAtheistRCC Because that's not all he was saying nor the main point of his message. It's just you trying to co-opt Christ to fit your ideology.

@exAtheistRCC Tell you what, rather than all the supernatural stuff, why not just say.. "2,000 years ago a guy went around saying be nice to people even the ones you don't like and life will be better for all. I think he was right and I try and do the same"

That's not the question. The question is severity and why. If I slipped you an anti-parasite against your will, I might get in trouble. Obviously that would be worse than you freely receiving the anti-parasite. Is that the equivalent? If I gave a person a miscarriage inducing drug have I merely done the equivalent of giving her an anti-parasite against her will?

@somethinghere87 If you don't understand why causing a miscarriage in a human being is illegal compared to a person having an abortion, then you don't understand the difference between sex and rape. Because they're contingent on the same thing.

No, but it's a crime, but of course anti-choicers have constant violent fantasies

@AnAngelADay Is it ONLY assault against her? It might even be temporary, if the person slipped her an abortion pill, maybe only minorly felt for a short time. In that case is it minor assault?

No. It is assault against a pregnant person. FFS they pretend the pregnant person becomes invisible and unimportant.

@AnAngelADay @JackieFrancesca @ChrisWa16704550 @iamAtheistGirl @MakeItWithCal @MikeWingerii Okay, if they wanted to kill the human in the womb. What then?

@somethinghere87 @JackieFrancesca @ChrisWa16704550 @iamAtheistGirl @MakeItWithCal @MikeWingerii No. Not unless they can prove intent. You really don’t understand how laws work do you??? 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️

It’s wild that people still use the line “her own body” like the baby doesn’t exist. Dude, if it was truly “her own body” she wouldn’t be pregnant in the first place.. Abortion is so unthinkably evil that to support it they have to lie to themselves about the baby they kill.

@ConfessorMaximo @WesleyLHuff Dude. You suck at reading comprehension. You went from a text that said "salvation is so plainly stated in SOME part of Scripture" to "every scripture about salvation is clear." No wonder you're EO.

The definitive stance of Reformed Baptists (wes huff) is laid out in Chapter 1, Paragraph 7 of the 1689 Confession:Salvation is clear: Everything a person must know, believe, and observe for salvation is so plainly stated in some part of the Scripture that even the unlearned can grasp it by utilizing ordinary means.

What on earth is Paul talking about when, in 1 Tim. 2:15, he says: “Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.” Let’s tackle a tricky passage together! Paul’s statement about women being “saved through childbirth” is walked through in a few different ways, and the ambiguity stems from whether he refers to a specific childbirth or childbearing in general. Some of the first in-depth analysis comes in the 4th century. Gregory of Nyssa understood the text literally, interpreting it as referring to the salvation of mothers who bear spiritually regenerated children. Whereas Theodore of Mopsuestia, extended this to all women saved through childbearing. Ambrosiaster qualified this by specifying that salvation applies only when children are “reborn in Christ.” Augustine, however, departed from this literal reading, arguing that Paul’s teaching should be understood “figuratively and mystically.” Contemporary scholarship divides into two primary camps: 1) identifying “the woman” as Eve and “the childbirth” as the birth of the Messiah, reading “τῆς τεκνογονίας” as a reference to a specific childbirth rather than childbearing in general. The verses prior do say: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (2:13-14). Under this messianic reading, even transgression of God’s ordained male/female roles can be redeemed through Christ’s birth, an event contrasted with Adam’s sin, where one brought death and the other brought life. 2) focuses on literal childbearing. Tom Schreiner argues that “saved through childbirth” refers to women being preserved physically when they give birth, since childbirth was a major concern for women in the first century, whereas spiritual salvation doesn’t appear to address the specific concerns of 1–2 Timothy (see Schreiner’s “Paul and Gender”). Under this view, childbirth becomes a metaphor for dangers in a fallen world, and the promise of protection functions similarly to other biblical assurances that don’t guarantee literal preservation. A third option interprets childbearing as representative of women’s acceptance of their proper role in family and church, signaling their rejection of false teaching and return to traditional domestic values (this is argued in Douglas Mangum and E. Tod Twist’s Logos Research commentary). The passage’s meaning ultimately depends on which interpretive framework best accounts for Paul’s theological purpose in 1 Timothy. What are your thoughts?

@monty13182 @nick_matau Yes, those are evil (which was the point in the stories). Now, let's agree Muhammad is a stupid, disgusting pedophile.

@nick_matau Meanwhile 🤣🤣🤣

Your name is literally named after the guy that looked for and found a child bride.

@SuzanneBos43679 @uranoutofluck Are pro-choice people actually able to dialogue or is their entire ideology founded on slogans and intentionally misunderstanding things?

@somethinghere87 @uranoutofluck Clearly there really isn't "Anything there"! 👆👆👆👆

@ConfessorMaximo @WesleyLHuff Where did Wes Huff say that?

@WesleyLHuff I thought all verses under sola scriptura pertaining to salvation were perspicuous?

@AnAngelADay @JackieFrancesca @ChrisWa16704550 @iamAtheistGirl @MakeItWithCal @MikeWingerii So killing the child she wants is not murder? Right?

@somethinghere87 @JackieFrancesca @ChrisWa16704550 @iamAtheistGirl @MakeItWithCal @MikeWingerii You are no longer making any sense. Twisting yourself into a pretzel to ignore a pregnant person is a whole person. Assault against them is assault. Bad try though.

@uranoutofluck Either you are unable to read or you are arguing with imaginary people. Which is it?

@somethinghere87 Do you believe you're imaginary? Do we need to call someone?

@obsessafilma @uranoutofluck Alright. Quote where I said what I was accused of saying.

@somethinghere87 @uranoutofluck Since I can also see your atrocious "arguments", I can confirm you're not imaginary. Unfortunately.

@AnAngelADay @JackieFrancesca @ChrisWa16704550 @iamAtheistGirl @MakeItWithCal @MikeWingerii Slow down. Please try not to think in slogans. Is the extent of the crime (killing the baby she wants) just assault with no lasting harm? After all, the person ostensibly merely alleviated her of a parasite given some pro-choice arguments.

@somethinghere87 @JackieFrancesca @ChrisWa16704550 @iamAtheistGirl @MakeItWithCal @MikeWingerii It? Lol. Yes. Ending someone else’s pregnancy who is not a doctor for the specific goal of abortion is assault on the actual person who is born and gestating a fetus. FFS why don’t pregnant people matter to you? Why isn’t their life sacred??

@uranoutofluck Are you okay? Is the imaginary person you're debating to being nice to you?

@somethinghere87 So you don't understand the difference between rape and sex.

@uranoutofluck Not what I said.

@somethinghere87 You're asking if murdering a pregnant woman was legalized I'd be okay with it. You're defective.