Dogs names not allowed anymore?
Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett
-
- Posts: 1342
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:02 am
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
you better wake up and smell the coffee,Greg if you think that's the reason our country is in trouble. Lazy people, greed and drugs would be a start.
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
I hate to say it but 5000 is some what right i am a Christian and I do not agree with gays nor go along with being born that way it's a choice but we as Christian should be good to every one and treat every person with respect if you can't win them over with love you sure ant going to with hate. As to the flag and race thing we are all men and women of equal rights free to see things in our own way if you want me to take my flag down because it offended you then pull your pants up it offends me.
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
I don't hate to say it because Mo. Beagler 5000 is correct. Many Christians say they do not go along with gays or being born that way, it's a choice. That is ones right to believe but in dong so Christians also must believe that many do not agree with their interpretation of being Christian or being born that way, it's a choice! For me, I can honestly say I don't know either as I personally have never succumbed to anything that I have not actually seen or felt in my heart and soul. I don't feel I have the authority to tell anyone what they should believe nor do I want anyone else infringing upon my free will and right to determine my own beliefs and life style. I know who I am in my heart and soul and do not need ANYONE else guiding my life as I have the moral fiber built right into me in my belief of what is right or wrong. I believe we ALL have it and it is within ALL of us without said help. My grandfather who was a very religious man, by the way once told me that "prayers are but merely words unless the lips also have legs!" I often ponder those words when I see all that is gong on in this world under the disguise of religion and people pray for the fix. I know that there are laws that we ALL must abide by not because of a religion but in spite of it. Marriage is also encompassed in written law(s), not merely belief and those that must be followed by EVERYONE are those written laws because beliefs have no legal authority. In fact the SUPREME law of the land the U.S. Constitution mandates a separation of personal beliefs and the State. TRUTH is that is why this country was founded as our forefathers wanted to escape European religious persecution so they could believe or NPOT believe freely and without any persecution. Here is some of my research on the issue as well as supporting case law or the history of the issue. PLEASE notice the date in which the U.S. SUPREME COURT has ruled on the case of marriage which blows holes in the dissenting justices maintain that the court has no right to do so. The case law itself proves them WRONG and ruling on individual or political belief rather than law!
There are several reasons that Americans marry. The desire to have children is one; having a family is a high priority among many Americans BUT not the sole reason for ALL. People also desire love, companionship, commitment, continuity, and permanence. There are some reasons for marriage that are ephemeral. These reasons include social legitimacy, social pressure, the desire for a high social status, economic security, rebellion or revenge, or validation of an unplanned pregnancy.
There are also three differing models of marriage. The Judaic-Christian model BELIEVES that the institution of marriage is a creation of God and that the couple is joined together by God. The first purpose and function of marriage in this model is to have companionship, to love each other, and to help one another with the daily struggles of everyday life. The SECOND purpose is to have children and be an outlet for sexual expression.
Marriage laws are established by individual states. There are two methods of receiving state recognition of a marriage: common law marriage and obtaining a marriage license. Common-law marriage is no longer permitted in most states. Though federal law does not regulate state marriage law, it does provide for rights and responsibilities of married couples that differ from those of unmarried couples. Reports published by the General Accounting Office in 1997 and 2004 identified over 1000 such laws.
The United States Supreme Court has in at least 14 cases since 1888 ruled that marriage is a fundamental right. These cases are:
1. Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888) Marriage is "the most important relation in life" and "the foundation of the family and society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress."
2. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) The right "to marry, establish a home and bring up children" is a central part of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.
3. Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535 (1942) Marriage is "one of the basic civil rights of man" and "fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race."
4. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) "We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights—older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions."
5. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men."
6. Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1971) "[M]arriage involves interests of basic importance to our society" and is "a fundamental human relationship."
7. Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632 (1974) "This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."
8. Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977) "[W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation."
9. Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678 (1977) "t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education."
10. Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374 (1978) "[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals."
11. Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987) "[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right" and an "expression[ ] of emotional support and public commitment."
12. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) "These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life."
13. M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996) "Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as 'of basic importance in our society,' rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State's unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect."
14. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) "[O]ur laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and education. ... Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do."
There are several reasons that Americans marry. The desire to have children is one; having a family is a high priority among many Americans BUT not the sole reason for ALL. People also desire love, companionship, commitment, continuity, and permanence. There are some reasons for marriage that are ephemeral. These reasons include social legitimacy, social pressure, the desire for a high social status, economic security, rebellion or revenge, or validation of an unplanned pregnancy.
There are also three differing models of marriage. The Judaic-Christian model BELIEVES that the institution of marriage is a creation of God and that the couple is joined together by God. The first purpose and function of marriage in this model is to have companionship, to love each other, and to help one another with the daily struggles of everyday life. The SECOND purpose is to have children and be an outlet for sexual expression.
Marriage laws are established by individual states. There are two methods of receiving state recognition of a marriage: common law marriage and obtaining a marriage license. Common-law marriage is no longer permitted in most states. Though federal law does not regulate state marriage law, it does provide for rights and responsibilities of married couples that differ from those of unmarried couples. Reports published by the General Accounting Office in 1997 and 2004 identified over 1000 such laws.
The United States Supreme Court has in at least 14 cases since 1888 ruled that marriage is a fundamental right. These cases are:
1. Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888) Marriage is "the most important relation in life" and "the foundation of the family and society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress."
2. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) The right "to marry, establish a home and bring up children" is a central part of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.
3. Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535 (1942) Marriage is "one of the basic civil rights of man" and "fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race."
4. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) "We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights—older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions."
5. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men."
6. Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1971) "[M]arriage involves interests of basic importance to our society" and is "a fundamental human relationship."
7. Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632 (1974) "This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."
8. Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977) "[W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation."
9. Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678 (1977) "t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education."
10. Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374 (1978) "[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals."
11. Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987) "[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right" and an "expression[ ] of emotional support and public commitment."
12. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) "These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life."
13. M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996) "Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as 'of basic importance in our society,' rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State's unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect."
14. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) "[O]ur laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and education. ... Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do."
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I dont hate anyone that's gay,I just don't agree with it. This country has changed a lot over the past 40-50 years,seems people have gotten lazier,greedier,and drugs have gotten much worse,kids are way more disrespectful,and the overall morals of people have been lowered. I remember saying the pledge of allegiance and a little prayer first thing every morning at school,I remember telling people Merry Christmas now a days it's Happy Holidays in order to be politically correct. In my opinion the further this country has gotten away from God the worse things have gotten. Some people aren't gonna agree with me,and that's ok,but this is what I believe. God Bless America, Happy 4th of July.
SHAKE DOWN BEAGLES
-
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:54 pm
- Location: Annville, Kentucky
- Contact:
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
Ron, if they would read the Bible & believe it's word, they wouldn't be lazy, greedy & on drugs. Everytime I've drifted away from God & His Word, I've found myself doing things that were far from God's will.
I'm not perfect, no one is, my only hope is believing in Jesus Christ as my sacrifice. Jesus dwelled among the sinners because he loved them & wanted to save them from Hell. Christians don't hate anyone; they chastise out of love & it is the sin they despise, not the sinner.
I'm not perfect, no one is, my only hope is believing in Jesus Christ as my sacrifice. Jesus dwelled among the sinners because he loved them & wanted to save them from Hell. Christians don't hate anyone; they chastise out of love & it is the sin they despise, not the sinner.
Wells Woods Kennel
Greg Wells
R.I.P.
FC Brent's Prime Time
FC Wells' Silver Spring
FCGD Wells Woods Valentine
Strange Daze Axle
Talkabout Cleo
Greg Wells
R.I.P.
FC Brent's Prime Time
FC Wells' Silver Spring
FCGD Wells Woods Valentine
Strange Daze Axle
Talkabout Cleo
-
- Posts: 1342
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:02 am
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
The bible has nothing to do with it. It is called will power. I don't need to rely on a book somebody wrote that I don't even know, I'm a big boy and I can make my own decisions. If you need to rely on a book to make your decisions for you than I can respect that. But don't tell someone what they should believe in.
-
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:54 pm
- Location: Annville, Kentucky
- Contact:
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
God is real & Christ is the only way to eternal life. I wouldn't say it if I didn't believe it. I've seen too much proof in my own life to deny it. If you choose not to believe, that's your own decision. I know you are a good man & know right from wrong, but good works alone won't get you to heaven; it takes faith in Jesus Christ. I know to most people that aren't Christians, this sounds ridiculous, but it's not. I hope you will give him a chance someday.
Wells Woods Kennel
Greg Wells
R.I.P.
FC Brent's Prime Time
FC Wells' Silver Spring
FCGD Wells Woods Valentine
Strange Daze Axle
Talkabout Cleo
Greg Wells
R.I.P.
FC Brent's Prime Time
FC Wells' Silver Spring
FCGD Wells Woods Valentine
Strange Daze Axle
Talkabout Cleo
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
If people are actually born gay, which I personally don't believe, but I have been wrong before. Anyways if you can be born gay, that would be a major fault, as you would not want to reproduce, and if we were all gay, then man kind would end. I would think that it would be some sort of mental illness. Do gay people think they are normal as in regards to picking a partner of the same sex.
-
- Posts: 1272
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:32 pm
- Location: Warrrensburg, Mo
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
fatboy wrote:If people are actually born gay, which I personally don't believe, but I have been wrong before. Anyways if you can be born gay, that would be a major fault, as you would not want to reproduce, and if we were all gay, then man kind would end. I would think that it would be some sort of mental illness. Do gay people think they are normal as in regards to picking a partner of the same sex.
WOW, I don't even know where to begin.... Ugh. No homosexuality isn't a mental disorder no matter how much you want it to be. That is why the APA took it out of the mental disorder category decades ago.. So welcome back to the 50's intelligence fat boy.
Homosexuality runs RAMPANT in the animal kingdom and animals have even been known to try and mate with other species.. Humans are nothing more than animals because WE ARE GREAT APES
Interesting fact: Bonobos are our closest living relative to us and they are the gayest species other than humans that we know of. It is an evolutionary byproduct of living in large comlex social groups. And it also helps from a "wanting to live" standpoint if the guy you are having sex with can protect you from other members in your group or from outside threats. Also, we observe bonobos being "gay" as you call it, in order to reproduce with the female once he gets closer enough to the male.
All the behaviors humans poses are literally the same as animals, the only different behavior we have is the ability to use more complex tools and reason though advanced language. Other than that, we act like animals including being gay sometimes because millions of years ago it is how they survived a dangerous world.
God isn't real, Beer is good and people are crazy, there I fixed it.
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
Man people are so fired up by this ! You guys do know that just because its legal doesn't mean you have to marry a man ! Hahaha you can continue to disappoint women !
Home of
FTCH Branko's Cornflower (sold)
FTCH Branko's Jimmy D
FTCH Branko's Bronson (rip)
FTCH Martin's LP 2Spot
IFC Branko's Dubonnet
FTCH Branko's Cornflower (sold)
FTCH Branko's Jimmy D
FTCH Branko's Bronson (rip)
FTCH Martin's LP 2Spot
IFC Branko's Dubonnet
-
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:31 am
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
In the end we all die, I would say then we all will learn the truth. believe what you want do what you choose. Einstein one of the smartest men ever believed in a creator, I am not even close to that kind of intelligence. but I can see the sun come up and the moon for light in what would be total darkness, the currents of the oceans which give the earth its weather patterns. this is intelligence design from the creator. good luck with whatever time you may have left on this earth for you are going to die and meet this creator and then you deal with wisdom that far exceeds your small way of thinking.
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
Their are lots of creation stories ,why are you so sure you picked thr right version. Over the centuries many crimes to humanity have been made in the name or religion. I have only one prayer. God ,save us from your followers.randy hicks wrote:In the end we all die, I would say then we all will learn the truth. believe what you want do what you choose. Einstein one of the smartest men ever believed in a creator, I am not even close to that kind of intelligence. but I can see the sun come up and the moon for light in what would be total darkness, the currents of the oceans which give the earth its weather patterns. this is intelligence design from the creator. good luck with whatever time you may have left on this earth for you are going to die and meet this creator and then you deal with wisdom that far exceeds your small way of thinking.
Last edited by APFII on Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
I don't know anything about intelligent design but when I got old enough to understand that there was nothing in life free and it was ALL relative, I realized there was no Santa Clause, Tooth fairy or the Easter bunny. I haven't had any imaginary friends either BUT have learned right from wrong through life. YES, I have sinned in abundance including playing with the drugs, alcohol and running with wild women. Not once in my life have I had to ask what was wrong or right as I already knew but I was in my youth and eager to learn through experimentation (experience). I eventually learned that we are ALL personally responsible for the choices we make, the repercussions associated with them and that time seems to led us in the direction of love of life and humanity which is Godliness, in it's plain and simple form. I am not concerned with eternal life as I believe that it is endless not because of God but despite the BELIEF in one, as cosmic energy is forever. The notion that Einstein believed in a creator is absolutely the opposite of my readings of him because Einstein was totally a believer of SCIENCE and NEVER believed in the bible or in the biblical God.
Christian apologist Dr Hugh Ross claims that, despite not believing in the biblical God, ‘Einstein held unswervingly, against enormous peer pressure, to belief in a Creator. However, in the normal meaning of these terms, Einstein believed no such thing. Thus, Christians who inappropriately invoke Einstein in their preaching, writing or witnessing do so to the detriment of their cause.
Albert Einstein was not a Christian. He had no concept of the God of the Bible or trust in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour. His views on religion and ‘God’ were evolutionary and pantheistic.
He wrote, ‘I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts.”
‘The desire for guidance, love, and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception of God. … The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events. … A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him … .
‘During the youthful period of mankind’s spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man’s own image. … The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. … In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God.”
If NOT being able to rationalize a biblical God was what one of the smartest men EVER thought, then I'm sticking with the smart guy that we all know had legs and walked this earth rather than the imaginary friend that I have to hear from lips to "just trust me on this one!" I won't judge anyone for their belief but I believe that all of us will eventually be ashes to ashes, dust to dust, cosmic energy to the skies or bust! If that is what Christians are claiming as eternal life then I'm pickin up what they are puttin down.
Christian apologist Dr Hugh Ross claims that, despite not believing in the biblical God, ‘Einstein held unswervingly, against enormous peer pressure, to belief in a Creator. However, in the normal meaning of these terms, Einstein believed no such thing. Thus, Christians who inappropriately invoke Einstein in their preaching, writing or witnessing do so to the detriment of their cause.
Albert Einstein was not a Christian. He had no concept of the God of the Bible or trust in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour. His views on religion and ‘God’ were evolutionary and pantheistic.
He wrote, ‘I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts.”
‘The desire for guidance, love, and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception of God. … The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events. … A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him … .
‘During the youthful period of mankind’s spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man’s own image. … The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. … In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God.”
If NOT being able to rationalize a biblical God was what one of the smartest men EVER thought, then I'm sticking with the smart guy that we all know had legs and walked this earth rather than the imaginary friend that I have to hear from lips to "just trust me on this one!" I won't judge anyone for their belief but I believe that all of us will eventually be ashes to ashes, dust to dust, cosmic energy to the skies or bust! If that is what Christians are claiming as eternal life then I'm pickin up what they are puttin down.
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
my advice is to go to youtube and watch John Hagee | Can America Survive Until 2017
-
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:54 pm
- Location: Annville, Kentucky
- Contact:
Re: Dogs names not allowed anymore?
I am not really concerned about what Einstein thought about life & death. He didn't die on a cross, defeat death, hell & the grave by resurrecting & send a comforter, the holy sprit, for those who trust in him. This is a spiritual thing that man cannot understand on rational terms. I don't claim to know everything about God & creation, but God, through the Holy Bible gave me enough information to save my soul by believing in Christ as his Son that died on the cross for our sins. Don't look at me or anyone else as an example of Christianity because even Christians sin & do things that aren't right & everyone that claims to be a Christian may not be. Look at Christ as the example of Christianity & seek out your own salvation; don't let hypocrites distract you from finding out if there is really something to true Christianity.
Wells Woods Kennel
Greg Wells
R.I.P.
FC Brent's Prime Time
FC Wells' Silver Spring
FCGD Wells Woods Valentine
Strange Daze Axle
Talkabout Cleo
Greg Wells
R.I.P.
FC Brent's Prime Time
FC Wells' Silver Spring
FCGD Wells Woods Valentine
Strange Daze Axle
Talkabout Cleo