Home country: USA
Current location: Chapel Hill, NC
Member since: Sat May 7, 2005, 11:13 PM
Number of posts: 14,979
Home country: USA
Current location: Chapel Hill, NC
Member since: Sat May 7, 2005, 11:13 PM
Number of posts: 14,979
- 2015 (3)
- January (3)
- 2014 (40)
- 2013 (42)
- 2012 (29)
- Older Archives
Fundies and right wingers go NUTS when you mention it and say, oh, no, it's the test for an adulterous wife. Yeah, but the point is that IF the wife has been unfaithful and is subjected to the priest's ritual then the 'test' causes an abortion. Guess what? Then the husband isn't responsible for raising a child conceived in adultery. Pretty nice little test, huh? Fundies go NUTS, absolutely NUTS when you show them this passage.
New International Version (NIV)
The Test for an Unfaithful Wife
11 Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.
16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”
23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
29 “‘This, then, is the law of jealousy when a woman goes astray and makes herself impure while married to her husband, 30 or when feelings of jealousy come over a man because he suspects his wife. The priest is to have her stand before the Lord and is to apply this entire law to her. 31 The husband will be innocent of any wrongdoing, but the woman will bear the consequences of her sin.’”
Posted by mnhtnbb | Fri Oct 26, 2012, 04:52 AM (0 replies)
Many of us in NC are getting pretty pissed off with the pollsters and pundits. The Obama ground game here is FABULOUS!
The Dems have registered over 100,000 MORE NEW voters--bringing the advantage up to 806,942 MORE DEMS than Repubs registered in the state of North Carolina as of today.
AND the DEMS are ADDING advantage on a daily basis by virtue of the right to register AND vote same day
at early voting locations across the state.
Take a look at yesterday:
Voter Registration as of 10/23/2012 Democratic: 2,843,490 Republican: 2,037,725 Libertarian: 18,513
Unaffiliated: 1,695,271 Total: 6,594,999
(I posted these numbers in this thread yesterday: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=168818
Now look at today:
Voter Registration as of 10/24/2012 Democratic: 2,845,559 Republican: 2,038,617 Libertarian: 18,564
Unaffiliated: 1,696,215 Total: 6,598,955
Here are the differences between the numbers between yesterday 10/23/2012 and today 10/24/2012:
Democratic: + 2069 Republican: + 892 Libertarian: 51 Unaffiliated: 944 Total: +3956
Broken out as a % of new registrations: Democratic 52.3% Republican 22.5% Libertarian: 1.3% Unaffiliated: 23.9%
Having been watching these registration numbers changing over time during this election cycle, I have to believe that new Democrats are not registering as Democrats so they can vote for Romney! This election is ALL about GOTV, and the Obama team in NC is doing heroic work to make this happen.
So, please, keep your hopes up...everybody is working very hard...and I believe we're going to turn NC BLUE AGAIN!!
Posted by mnhtnbb | Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:41 AM (166 replies)
This has to get picked up by MSM...people have to know how this guy operates.
Mitt Romney’s opposition to the auto bailout has haunted him on the campaign trail, especially in Rust Belt states like Ohio. There, in September, the Obama campaign launched television ads blasting Romney’s November 2008 New York Times op-ed, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.” But Romney has done a good job of concealing, until now, the fact that he and his wife, Ann, personally gained at least $15.3 million from the bailout—and a few of Romney’s most important Wall Street donors made more than $4 billion. Their gains, and the Romneys’, were astronomical—more than 3,000 percent on their investment.
It all starts with Delphi Automotive, a former General Motors subsidiary whose auto parts remain essential to GM’s production lines. No bailout of GM—or Chrysler, for that matter—could have been successful without saving Delphi. So, in addition to making massive loans to automakers in 2009, the federal government sent, directly or indirectly, more than $12.9 billion to Delphi—and to the hedge funds that had gained control over it.
Altogether, in direct and indirect payouts, the government padded these investors’ profits handsomely. The Treasury allowed GM to give Delphi at least $2.8 billion of funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to keep Delphi in business. GM also forgave $2.5 billion in debt owed to it by Delphi, and $2 billion due from Singer and company upon Delphi’s exit from Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The money GM forgave was effectively owed to the Treasury, which had by then become the majority owner of GM as a result of the bailout. Then there was the big one: the government’s Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation took over paying all of Delphi’s retiree pensions. The cost to the taxpayer: $5.6 billion. The bottom line: the hedge funds’ paydays were made possible by a generous donation of $12.9 billion from US taxpayers.
Romney has slammed the bailout as a payoff to the auto workers union. But that certainly wasn’t true for the bailout of Delphi. Once the hedge funders, including Singer—a deep-pocketed right-wing donor and activist who serves as chair of the conservative, anti-union Manhattan Institute—took control of the firm, they rid Delphi of every single one of its 25,200 unionized workers.
Of the twenty-nine Delphi plants operating in the United States when the hedge funders began buying up control, only four remain, with not a single union production worker. Romney’s “job creators” did create jobs—in China, where Delphi now produces the parts used by GM and other major automakers here and abroad. Delphi is now incorporated overseas, leaving the company with 5,000 employees in the United States (versus almost 100,000 abroad).
Posted by mnhtnbb | Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:31 AM (4 replies)
It started with being able to attend the rally in Chapel Hill with Michelle:
Nothing could have been better--unless perhaps POTUS himself had walked out on the stage--
but that wasn't going to happen.
Then the debate. Oh, my. I had the good fortune to miss the first presidential debate--having
made a conscious decision that I would not risk the good feeling from seeing Kathleen Turner
channel Molly Ivins in "Red Hot Patriot: The Kick-Ass Wit of Molly Ivins" in DC--in order
to catch the end of that debate. Boy, did that ever turn out to be the right choice.
And to go from hearing Michelle--she's an incredible speaker in her own right--to seeing the
President kick some ass last night? Well, I woke up feeling a lot more optimistic this morning.
And, I kicked in another donation to the campaign.
If you can contribute--even $5.00-- do it. Let's finally kick Romney to the curb!
Posted by mnhtnbb | Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:42 AM (0 replies)
Posted by mnhtnbb | Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:31 AM (0 replies)
I had a ticket to attend a grassroots campaign event featuring Michelle!!! today at UNC-Chapel Hill.
It was held at Carmichael Arena on campus--holds 8000--and it was packed! I stood in line starting
at 9:20 a.m. for doors to open at 11:00 a.m. We went through airport type security--and I was wanded.
LOTS of Secret Service in evidence.
Here are photos!
Outside on a beautiful fall day looking at Carmichael
Several photos of waiting for the event--we had a band
NC Early Vote--starts Thursday, Oct. 18th
Can you imagine being a student and getting to introduce Michelle?!?
OK--this is what you want--photos of Michelle! (And yes, several people yelled out, "we love you, Michelle"
Yeah, that's Secret Service to the right and behind her--they were all over the arena!
Our marching orders? Barack Obama won NC in 2008 by an average of 5 votes per precinct. Yes.
Your VOTE COUNTS! We were all challenged to go out and work for those 5 extra votes!
And finally, the motorcycle escort waiting for her outside the arena
The First Lady gave a terrific speech. She talked about Barack Obama--the man--the President--
his record--how elections are about moving forward--and she had us all fired up and ready to go!
Posted by mnhtnbb | Tue Oct 16, 2012, 05:01 PM (18 replies)
Gingrich: ‘You Cannot Debate Somebody Who Is Dishonest’
It's interesting that Gingrich describes his reaction in the same way, with some of the same body language
that President Obama displayed. Turning away and not looking at someone whose behavior is shameful
may be an instinctive response--according to some scientists who study behavior.
"Romney's performance was one that's probably unprecedented in its dishonesty," senior adviser David Plouffe told reporters.
The president opted against "serial fact-checking with Governor Romney, which can be a never-ending, exhausting pursuit," Axelrod said. "Obviously, going forward, we're going to have to look at this, and we're going to have make some adjustments."
Posted by mnhtnbb | Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:34 AM (0 replies)
and decided to take on the haters.
I posted this thread originally about responding to a woman I know who started
a thread on another website because she was truly struggling with the choice
of where to cast her vote: Obama or Romney. Although she lives in Utah and
knows her vote is meaningless, it was important to her:
Well, you can imagine some of the snark that ensued. These are right wing haters.
They don't discuss issues...they hurl insults.
I debated with myself whether to ignore the snark...and I did for a few days. But the more
I thought about it the more angry I got. So, in response to this comment from a very respected
member of that site,
Am I the only one thinking that republicansforobama.org may be the only website with less members than mothersforsusansmithandandreayates.com?
I posted this:
LOL. Actually, if you compare the numbers of the respective fb pages:
Republicans for Obama: 23,294.
Democrats for Romney: 1,453.
Looks like Republicans choose the other guy as opposed to Dems--at least on fb--at the rate of 16:1. Not too shabby.
Couldn't find anybody to support a website for mothers who murder their children. What a snotty response. Too afraid to argue issues?
However, perhaps you would find this article of interest.
The abstract indicates "Maternal filicide, or child murder by mothers, occurs more frequently in the United States than in other developed nations."
Oh, boy, another wonderful indicator of the US leading the world. Hmm...wonder if it could possibly have anything to do with the availability
of health care?!? Oh, well, good for a joke, who cares? Right?
At least you can support an animal abusing, bullying, lying, money loving guy with so much class that he will shamelessly lie--repeatedly--to the face of the President of the United States. What a guy!
And to the person who made this comment:
Figured out why libs don't care about fiscal responsibility. According to Krugman, just print more $. As some pundit I was listening to last night explained it, he was a life long liberal Dem until he learned about basic economics He now is right leaning Rep
I posted this:
Oh, boy, go with the guy who learned 'basic' economics vs the Nobel Prize Winner (2008) in Economics. What a great idea!
Posted by mnhtnbb | Mon Oct 8, 2012, 04:51 PM (2 replies)
On another site where right wingers abound (it's a weight loss program) one of the
people I know fairly well put up a thread about the Presidential Debate because
she's truly ambivalent about her choice for POTUS. She recognizes, as a resident
of Utah, that her vote for POTUS doesn't really count, but it's important to her.
She's an out lesbian with a Mormon family. She says she's a Democrat...but
she worked for a defense contractor for many years and got a very close up
look at 'government waste'. Hmm...
Sensing her ambivalence, I put up a post regarding issues, looking at it from
the perspective of Republicans for Obama. I used the info from this thread
and later referred to http://www.republicansforobama.org/
Major snark ensued from other people on the website!!! Not a surprise!
So, then I decided this a.m. to challenge her assertion
that "Romney is a good man". I disputed it based on:
he's an animal abuser;
he's a bully;
he's a liar;
he's all about the money without regard to how he gets it or who gets hurt in the process.
I provided links for everything. In fact, here's my
post from this a.m.:
Wow. Initially, I decided to stay away from this, but after trying to focus my comments on issues rather than personality while addressing M's clear ambivalence, and seeing the snark that erupted from doing so, I'm going to question the assumption that Romney is a good man.
What is good? What unbalances the scale from all the good things that a person does to the not-so-good things that the same person does?
M states that she believes Romney is a good man. I don't come to the same conclusion. Why? Here's my list:
--He is an animal abuser. And for those who like to play snarky, check out
--He is a bully. I do not write off his 'pranks'-- that included holding down a gay man and cutting his hair--as meaningless. It says something about his character. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...ney-bully.html
--He is a liar. There are so many documented instances of this that I won't list any links. Just google his name and liar. Many will say all politicians lie. They definitely all make promises--some of which turn out to be very difficult to keep. Did they intend to keep them? Did they change their mind along the way? Sure, there's nuance to whether a promise not kept is a lie. Again, take the whole history of the person and look to see whether the lies form a pattern across all areas of life.
--Money is everything to the man. It's all about money, no matter how he gets it or who is hurt by his actions. This is the story of Bain Capital. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...pital-20120829
I was a reluctant supporter of Obama in 2008. I'm such a flaming lefty that Obama was much too far to the right of center for my liking. I grew up with Republican parents--Reagan Republicans--and my brother is a staunch Republican. I understand Eisenhower Republicans: remember he was the one who warned of the military-industrial complex. For all the discussion on this thread about cutting the budget, you have to ask, where are you going to make those cuts? There hasn't been ONE word in this thread about touching the defense budget--which is among the categories where significant cuts can be made to discretionary spending. It has to be on the table--because if the US wants to go to war it has to pay for it. Whining about insufficient tax breaks for the richest among us--who DON'T send their kids off to be maimed and die for us--while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer is going to push this country to the brink of civil unrest. Countries that have huge gaps in inequality tend to not do well.
And that is where the US is headed unless/until the people of this country wake up and insist that their elected representatives start working together. The Republicans made it their primary goal to obstruct during President Obama's first term--they even said it out loud!--and that behavior has to stop. https://bangordailynews.com/2012/05/...ling-congress/
President Obama has shown a willingness to negotiate with anyone--on anything--who would come to the table. It's time to get over our differences and work towards common goals.
OMG. After that, the right wingers went bonkers!
But, here comes the punch line. I just checked the thread and one of other lefties posted this:
What stuck out most for me was the Big Bird statement. For me it summarized what I don't like about the Republican challenger. He doesn't get what's important to the average US person. Funding for Big Bird by the gov't is miniscule and the stats are there to show the positive effect of Sesame Street on early and later education. But he would keep tax breaks (aka corporation welfare) to oil companies.
But what made me laugh is the goal comparison of first time candidate Obama vs first time Romney. It shows how far we have come.
Obama 2008: I will get Bin Laden
Romney 2012: I will get Big Bird
That is just too funny!!!
Posted by mnhtnbb | Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:10 PM (20 replies)
I am amazed to see the high prices along the entire west coast.
Has there been pipeline disruption?
I was in DC on Wednesday to see Kathleen Turner in "Red Hot Patriot: The Kick-Ass Wit of Molly Ivins".
It was superb. Driving home to Chapel Hill, I filled up with $3.80/gal for premium--which was about $.32
LESS per gallon than I had paid earlier in the week in anticipation of the drive from NC to DC.
Am I missing something regarding oil distribution that's been in the news?
Posted by mnhtnbb | Sat Oct 6, 2012, 04:27 PM (41 replies)