DISCUSSION FORUMS
MAIN MENU
Home
Help
Advanced Search
Recent Posts
Site Statistics
Who's Online
Forum Rules
Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
Community
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
Shop
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
Read
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
Connect
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
Graphics
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
Webmasters
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

ChristiansUnite
Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 07:35:19 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Our Lord Jesus Christ loves you.
286776 Posts in 27568 Topics by 3790 Members
Latest Member: Goodwin
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14
31  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / End of the War on Drugs? on: March 16, 2009, 11:16:01 AM
Headlines lately seem to indicate the coming admission that we have lost the War on Drugs - NYS liberalizing the Rockefeller Drug Laws, legalization of Marijuana in California, the imminent collapse of Mexico to drug gangs, etc.
While drug enforcement has kept the price of drugs up and limited their availability to some extent, it has also been a boon to organized crime. There is so much money in it that corruption of police and authorities is rampant and violence is epidemic.
Legalization would undercut the drug gangs by taking away their primary source of income, but it would also make drugs more widely available. My question is, is it worth the trade-off?

My own opinion is that if drugs are legalized, no one should get public benefits like welfare unless they pass random drug tests. No reason we should subsidize the druggies (except rehab should be available for anyone who wants it). Also, I doubt if this will cut into organized crime as hoped as we seem to be entering into a new war - the war on guns - which like prohibition and drug laws, will provide new opportunities for organized crime and gangs.
32  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / Re: Obama on: March 07, 2009, 03:49:49 PM
The question now is, even if he is ineligible, who is going to remove him? The military? They probably wouldn't, as the crisis would bring down the government and the world economy.
33  Theology / Prophecy - Current Events / Re: Stock Market Crash Expected In 2008 To Be Worse Than 1929 on: March 04, 2009, 12:05:36 AM
The older term of "Panic" would seem to be more appropriate to what is happening today. The stock market is panicking and selling off stock at a loss. Companies are panicking and requesting bailouts. The government is panicking and throwing money at the problem, with little apparent result.
34  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / Re: Falling Toward Socialism and Worse on: February 19, 2009, 08:15:29 PM
Money - that IS the American way to take away rights while pretending to uphold them! Money will be the way freedom of religion is taken away, not outright prohibition.

Just make sure the government doesn't know you own guns, and can't prove they are yours if they find them. The best way to keep government out of your life is to make sure they know as little as possible about you, and that other people know even less. Keep your mouth shut.

Actually no anti-gun laws are effective. Guns are 14th century technology - anyone with hand tools and reasonable skills can make one, and anyone with a lathe and milling machine could mass produce them. Ammunition is the weak link.

But actually it won't come to that - organized crime will fill the need as they did in prohibition.

What would be really interesting is if people start applying 21st century technology to personal armaments. No noise, no trace, doesn't look like a gun?
35  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / Re: Homeland Security on: February 12, 2009, 11:56:37 AM
WOW!

What has our so-called government been doing about these terrorist training camps on our own soil? Do we have  government, or are they too busy with corruption and lining their pockets to be interested in the safety of the people.

This is another perfect example of it being foolish to put any trust in men. We don't have many left that are worthy of any trust at all. Let's put it this way - they're OUTNUMBERED! Nothing should surprise us these days. Who knows - maybe our so-called government has a use for these terrorists. Realistically and eventually, we are going to have to protect our families and ourselves.


It is entirely possible our government is lax, but another possibility is that it has been thoroughly infiltrated and is being used as a sting operation to identify and track homegrown terrorists.

If so, one has to hope the authorities are "on the ball" enough to act before these people actually launch an attack.

On the other hand they may want them to launch a successful attack so they can declare a national emergency and suspend the Constitution!
36  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / Obama's first test as COC on: February 06, 2009, 10:44:23 AM
Looks like President Obama is facing his first test as Commander in Chief as Russia effectively checks his planned Afghanistan troop buildup by getting Kyrgystan to close our air base there.

"Kyrgyzstan says its decision to close a US base that serves as a vital supply route for US and Nato operations in Afghanistan is "final"". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7873866.stm
37  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / Re: YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK on: February 06, 2009, 10:36:37 AM
Being more realistic, after reading the text of the bill, it looks like a pork barrel project to spend 360 million or more of taxpayer money reopening closed military bases on the slim chance that people will choose to move there after a disaster such as Katrina.

Still a bad idea - much cheaper to let them arrange their own lodgings with relatives or friends, or let churches and private organizations help them with temporary resettlement. Although the intended purpose of these centers might be benign, once established they can easily be used for other purposes such as interring Americans of the wrong political or religious persuasion. Sad
38  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / Re: YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK on: February 05, 2009, 11:37:38 AM
Can I get the contract for the ovens?

Bill creates detention camps in U.S. for 'emergencies'
Sweeping, undefined purpose raises worries about military police state

Rep. Alcee L. Hastings, D-Fla., has introduced to the House of Representatives a new bill, H.R. 645, calling for the secretary of homeland security to establish no fewer than six national emergency centers for corralling civilians on military installations.



39  Fellowship / You name it!! / Re: How do I deal with not agreeing 100% with my Pastors? on: January 27, 2009, 10:17:05 AM
I agree - the Bible clearly teaches homosexuality is wrong. That doesn't make it a worse sin than adultery or fornication or any other sin, but it is a sin. Your pastors seem to be trying to please man rather than God and are interpreting Scripture in the light of popular culture rather than judging popular culture by Scripture.

No one is going to agree with their pastor 100%, but if the disagreement involves clear violation of Scriptural teaching, not just honest differences of opinion in areas that are not clearly spelled out, then you need to take a stand.

2Ti 2:24  And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
2Ti 2:25  In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
2Ti 2:26  And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
40  Fellowship / You name it!! / Ethics and genetic manipulation on: January 27, 2009, 10:08:05 AM
Here is an example of the difficult ethical problems we are going to face in the near future as genetics advances:

From: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KA28Ak01.html

"The genetic blood disorder Mediterranean anemia, more commonly known as thalassemia, is a hot topic in the Turkish press. The most recent story to hit the headlines has focused on three-year-old twins Muhammed and Beyza, who had their genes altered at birth to be perfect bone marrow donors for older siblings suffering from the potentially fatal condition."
41  Entertainment / Politics and Political Issues / Re: Falling Toward Socialism and Worse on: January 25, 2009, 08:45:09 PM


There was a time when hungry people and people with other life-sustaining needs were taken care of by churches and the generosity of big-hearted people who wanted to help. This is called FREEDOM. The government didn't STEAL your money by force and give it to someone you don't know - for a reason you don't know.

While I agree with your basic argument in this thread, the above is simply not true. Governments have been involved in taking care of those who couldn't care for themselves since the Puritans settled in Massachusetts. I remember reading a complaint from someone in Connecticut in colonial days that a person "was taking too long to die and burdening the taxpayers"! Welfare was the responsibility of local, not Federal governments, but it was still a government function.

Churches should meet the need, but have never been very effective at doing it.

There was a time when the individual person chose what charities they wanted to support financially, and that's part of FREEDOM. You got to look at all of the circumstances and decide YES or NO on helping - based on your own opinions, not those of government. This pertained to every NECESSITY OF LIFE, and nobody dreamed of trying to make you buy someone a house, a car, a television, and other NON-NECESSITIES OF LIFE. It was just a MATTER OF COMMON SENSE. A BASIS RULE OF THUMB involved EATING:  you worked if you wanted to EAT. You didn't STEAL someone else's food or ask the government to do the STEALING FOR YOU because that wouldn't be FREEDOM. Things did start out gradually and most didn't object too harshly because people were starving to death. We've made a lot of SO-CALLED PROGRESS since then, and now they want to force us to pay for ABORTIONS in our country and others. Under the theory of COMMON SENSE AND FREEDOM, one would have to think that things like this COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE FORCED! WATCH and see what they're about to do.

I agree here. Some on welfare live better than those who work to pay for it. Welfare should only pay for the basic necessities of life, and then only for those who are really unable to work. Those who can work should be made to either get a job or do public service in return for benefits.

Average Christians, regardless of wealth, still help more people than anyone else - AND that's over and beyond the money that the government STEALS from them. Being big-hearted and wanting to help someone is also a MATTER OF FREEDOM. Please keep in mind this is the opposite of being FORCED - COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY - FREEDOM! In a free country, you get what you earn, and you keep what you earn to spend however you wish, and that certainly includes helping others you want to help.


Maybe. While there is no forced giving in the Bible, (God loves a cheerful giver) the principle is that it is God's money, not yours, and that you should be using it as God directs. The attitude should be that God has blessed you with it, not that "I earned it by my own skills and effort  and it is mine to do with as I like".  Too many Christians seem to forget this.

It is ironic that those who condemned welfare for individuals over the last decades - right wing businessmen and financiers, are now lined up at the public trough for corporate welfare! And while there is a lot in the Bible about helping the poor, there is absolutely nothing about giving to bail out poorly run businesses.

Quote from: pastor roger
The "NEW DEAL" initiated by President F. D. Roosevelt did indeed send this nation into a downward spiral into socialism and did nothing to help the economy. In fact it extended the depression by many years. We see the same thing happening today again. I am convinced that those coming out with these programs have an agenda to repeat the failures (or should I say success depending on how one looks at it) of the Roosevelt era. A failure economically and a success in taking peoples freedoms away.

The New Deal was actually an attempt to preserve capitalism, not institute socialism. It did succeed at that. Communism was gaining ground even in the US as the Depression dragged on. By giving people hope, Roosevelt held off the possibility of revolt either through the polls or violent revolution while buying time for the economy to recover. His programs may not have actually helped the economy to recover, but they probably didn't hurt it much either.

The same situation doesn't hold today, in spite of media hype. We have nowhere near 25% unemployment, no armies of homeless riding the rails, no social unrest as yet. People can get unemployment, welfare, job training - all of which were results of the "New Deal" and help provide social stability through tough times.  I really don't see a need to throw billions at financial services, especially when it isn't closely regulated to make sure it doesn't go into people's pockets.
42  Entertainment / Music / Re: What are Your Music Parimeters? on: January 05, 2009, 01:15:04 PM
I personally like older Country (new country is really just rock and roll), Celtic, Hymns, Southern Gospel, and Folk. I never did like music with a heavy beat. I listen to both secular and Christian music, usually on my way to work and back.

 I don't have music on continually as most folks do these days. In fact, I once deliberately avoided any music at all for quite a period of time, then listened. It was amazing how much more I enjoyed it! I think we are over-saturated with it today, so that it just becomes background noise. We can't seem to exist without constant noise these days.

I enjoy some contemporary Christian songs, but generally I find it to be "dumbed down" music, with a few words and chords repeated over and over and little real message. Hymns weren't always doctrinally sound, but they usually did have a real message and most of them were about God, not about "me and my relationship with God".

I've never been a big fan of particular performers. In fact, I believe Christian performers should take a backseat to the music and the message, and few do. When a "Christian" artist has their name plastered all over everything and is obviously "putting on a performance", I would rather listen to an amateur who is singing to glorify the Lord. Also, too many "Christian artists" are watering down the message to appeal to the secular world. Without a message they aren't going to reach the secular people, so the only reason to do so is that that is where the money is!

There always seem to be divisions in the church over music. As someone else pointed out, there isn't "good or bad" music, though there are good and bad lyrics. Mostly it is a matter of personal taste. A wise church uses a variety of music. Mine includes both hymns and contemporary, though they seem to avoid Southern Gospel. I manage to get a little Celtic in now and then. People seem to dislike hearing or learning anything new, or singing anything remotely difficult.

Interestingly, in the early days of America, there was little music and much preaching in churches. Instruments weren't allowed - one of my early relatives shocked his community by playing his instrument (a cello, I think) in church in Connecticut! Preaching usually went on for several hours in the morning, and again in the afternoon.

My biggest complaint about the music in my own church is the unwillingness of the musicians to "put a cork in it". Our most recent service lasted from 10:30 to 1 PM, mostly because the worship group made like the energizer bunny. Kids were going nuts and many people just walked out before the service ended.
43  Entertainment / Computer Hardware and Software / Re: Increase in Knowledge/New Technologies on: December 23, 2008, 12:58:01 PM
Consumers give thumbs up to fingerprints        

Consumers have given the thumbs up to the use of fingerprint scanning as a preferred way of using biometric identification to verify their identities with banks, government agencies and other organisations.

Analysis of data collated by Unisys Corp alongside the latest instalment of its bi-annual Security Index concludes that people felt reassured by fingerprint scanning more than any other biometric.


But have they given a thought to the fact that although popular belief is that there are no two fingerprints or snowflakes alike, this was never scientifically provable and in the last few years has actually been disproven by science? Even DNA only gives a high degree of probability, not absolute proof of identity.
44  Entertainment / Computer Hardware and Software / Re: Facebook 'invasion on: December 14, 2008, 09:51:39 PM
Will almost certainly be blocked, though some may slip through.
45  Entertainment / Books / Re: What is everyone reading? on: December 04, 2008, 11:59:01 PM
Reading "Rees Howells, Intercessor" by Norman Grubb for the second time. Great book.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14



More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | ChristiansUnite.com Site Map | Statement of Beliefs



Copyright © 1999-2019 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media