Jump to content

T-Shirt

Members
  • Content count

    834
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

384 Excellent

3 Followers

About T-Shirt

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Everett, WA

Recent Profile Visitors

1,636 profile views
  1. This is no longer the case. The handbook states:
  2. T-Shirt

    John 5:18 - LDS Non LDS

    Why do you believe the King James Bible is the word of God? How do you know it is true?
  3. Of these, "many" bad and questionable things that he did, I would be interested in seeing your top ten list so we might discuss it in a dispassionate manner. And, since you are big on evidence, let's see the evidence you have for your top ten list.
  4. T-Shirt

    Moroni's Promise

    Good to see you are still proof texting. Ironic that the meaning you attach to this verse is quite different from the meaning conveyed by the chapter in which it is found. Joseph didn't pray in a field and he didn't see an angel. He knows by the Holy Ghost. I think, even, you believe in the Holy Ghost What is truly circular is believing that the KJV of the Bible is the whole and complete word of God, simply because you think the book, itself, tells you so. The prerequisite is having faith in Christ and real intent. It says nothing about believing Moroni or the Book of Mormon before the test. Of course, Moroni doesn't mention anything about a feeling in the heart. Let me ask you a question. When the Holy Ghost teaches you something, how do you know?
  5. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    How is a place equal to a person?
  6. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    That is a very good and succinct definition of what the gay lobby has been doing for a decade. "Marriage" refers to an institution that has been well defined for 6,000 years. There is nothing, "Orwellian" about it. I don't see your point. That doesn't work. In your example you have decided to ban something that already exists, With gay marriage you are adding to something that already exists. Using your example of shoes, a better example would be that everyone has access to shoes. Someone, who does not like shoes, wants to strap kittens on his feet and demand they be called shoes. When he is told that those are not shoes, he ignores that fact and claims he is being denied his right to wear shoes and calls anyone who disagrees with him, a bigot. He will never acknowledge the fact that he always had the same access to shoes as everyone else. If marriage was traditionally defined, for 6,000 years, as being only between members of the same sex, I would not want to be married. If there was some benefit to having my family's relationship recognized by law, I would seek to either, pass a new law giving legal status to my relationship, or I would seek to have the word, "marriage" redefined to include couples of the opposite sex. If I did not see any benefit in this, I would not care. I would just continue doing what I was doing. Can you provide examples of ways that marriage was evolving three hundred years ago, or anytime, for that matter, that involves the gender of those involved?
  7. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    All of those still adhere to the traditional definition of marriage regarding the gender of the participants.
  8. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    "Temple" refers to where the marriage is being held, it is not a sub-set of, "marriage". "Gay", refers to who is being married.
  9. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    If there needs to be a subset of the word, that means that something needs to be added to the definition that wasn't there before. If the word, "marriage" always included the right for a person to marry anyone they want, why the need for the new sub-set?
  10. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    I don't know what you mean, Why is it Orwellian? If the long-held traditional definition of marriage was that only people of the same gender can marry, humanity would have died out centuries ago. If you say there was no attempt to change the definition of a word or establish new rights, why do you keep saying, "Gay" marriage instead of just "marriage"?
  11. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    You want to make this about feelings rather than facts. When you can't make an honest or rational argument, you result to insults. Well done.
  12. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    You are making judgments on things for which you have no way of knowing anything.
  13. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    The argument was never about civil rights, it was about changing the definition of a word. The proponents of gay marriage couldn't win that battle so they took a different approach, bullying people into agreeing with them. Gays have always had the same Civil Rights as anyone else. Even in regards to marriage.
  14. T-Shirt

    Recent Survey (via Jana Reiss)

    You have a great big, giant tree blocking your view of the forest.
×