ShadowGov Constitution

[Jefferson]

See what I mean?

 

[Lighthouse]

:sozo:The ShadowGov Constitution is not Christian.

So what, if it isn't? The US Constitution isn't either. I don't see you whining about that.

 

[Lighthouse]

Why would you support something that has nothing to do with Christianity?

:idea: Go find a synagogue.

I cannot believe you are this stupid. Really. This isn't about religion, period.

 

[kmoney]

I cannot believe you are this stupid. Really. This isn't about religion, period.

What is it about?

 

[PKevman]

:sigh:
I could really care less about your opinions. Is there something you wished to debate or is leaving ad-hom negative reps just "your thing"? Does debating just take too much effort on your part?

Actually Wiz, my neg-rep was for your arrogant attitude in the post in which I neg-repped. There was no further dialogue necessary. You made an arrogant statement, I neg-repped you for it. Quit acting like a :baby: about it. You give me neg-reps, and I don't make posts whining about them. In fact, reps whether positive or negative are a part of this website. Hopefully my rep to you will get you to think about your arrogant behavior. If it doesn't, at least I tried.

Lighthouse and Mary Contrary are more than capable of defending themselves and their warped theology.

I have no doubt they are capable of defending their supposedly "Warped theology". I would bet you cannot show why it is warped, and would fall all over yourself trying like you have so many times in the past. My neg-rep of you had nothing to do with defending them.

Why don't you either join the thread and debate the issues, or ignore it altogether?

When you are made administrator of this website, then you can tell me what to participate and NOT partipate in. If I see something I like to respond to, I'll respond to it. It's that simple.

You're just making yourself look like a :chicken: by leaving these lame hit and run negative reps which have no bearing on the thread whatsoever. You don't like me. I get it.

If that makes you feel better, more power to you. I respond to ideas because ideas have consequences. It's nothing personal. But, go ahead and play the martyr some more, "You don't like me" boo-hoo. :baby:

:sozo:The ShadowGov Constitution is not Christian.

You aren't a Christian. You cannot make a determination what is and isn't Christian. You should repent and get saved, then the Holy Spirit will come into your heart and life, and you would be better qualified to determine if something is Christian or not. I have no problem with the ShadowGov Constitution, nor do I think it's an entirely bad idea in many respects. Sure there are things in it I might do differently, but the bottom line is that we live in a free country where free speech is available to all. This is simply one idea that's been proposed. If you don't like it, then that's also your opinion and your right.

Either; debate that, address the OP about where it went, or go away.

The OP has already been addressed. Bob didn't know it wasn't available anymore. There is nothing further to address as it relates to the OP.

Is asking you to put me on *ignore* really too much to ask?

I rarely put someone on ignore, in fact only a few people have ever been on my ignore list. I wonder why you're so afraid of having me read your posts (if your positions are as brilliant as you seem to think they are)?

 

[Granite]

Either the document was removed deliberately or it's a technical glitch. Can anyone comment as to either?

By the way, enough of this nonsense about people taking this proposed constitution too seriously, or more seriously than Enyart intended. It wasn't just a thought experiment and it was never intended to be poo-poohed or dismissed as a flight of fancy. If Enyart didn't want it taken seriously, he wouldn't have made it available on the web. As the man himself said:

"Liberals talk about creativity and using technology, but nothing like ShadowGov has ever been conceived of before -- to build a parallel government, train men and wait for the opportunity. It almost certainly will never take over. But we want to be prepared, just in case."

 

[death2impiety]

Either the document was removed deliberately or it's a technical glitch. Can anyone comment as to either?

By the way, enough of this nonsense about people taking this proposed constitution too seriously, or more seriously than Enyart intended. It wasn't just a thought experiment and it was never intended to be poo-poohed or dismissed as a flight of fancy. If Enyart didn't want it taken seriously, he wouldn't have made it available on the web. As the man himself said:

"Liberals talk about creativity and using technology, but nothing like ShadowGov has ever been conceived of before -- to build a parallel government, train men and wait for the opportunity. It almost certainly will never take over. But we want to be prepared, just in case."

I'm pretty sure Maxime told you that it's a glitch.

While trying to end abortion in Colorado, working on publishing BEL products and producing Focus on the Strategy III, Bob doesn't have much time to give attention to such a minor thing. The BEL sites are being revamped so it could be back in 2 days, weeks, months... however long it takes.

It'll be working again, don't you fret!

But keep asking if you feel like it

 

[Granite]

I'm pretty sure Maxime told you that it's a glitch.

While trying to end abortion in Colorado, working on publishing BEL products and producing Focus on the Strategy III, Bob doesn't have much time to give attention to such a minor thing. The BEL sites are being revamped so it could be back in 2 days, weeks, months... however long it takes.

It'll be working again, don't you fret!

But keep asking if you feel like it

I don't recall exactly; I believe she said she was unsure. (Why don't you ask her?)

Fret? Goodness no. The sooner it's viewable, the better.:chuckle:

Let it never be said I didn't want a simple answer to a simple question. Hope everybody has a good weekend.

 

[Lucky]

Dang. If someone removed the document just to annoy Granite, mad props! :darwinsm:

 

[Maximeee]

Dang. If someone removed the document just to annoy Granite, mad props! :darwinsm:

Err... yeah... It wasn't me.. :noid:

 

[WizardofOz]

I would bet you cannot show why it is warped, and would fall all over yourself trying like you have so many times in the past.

Sure, whatever you say.

You cannot make a determination what is and isn't Christian.

Sure, whatever you say.

I'm telling you it's not Christian. As a pastor, you should know it's not. Not one single member of this site has shown how it is. Would you like to take a stab at it?

I have no problem with the ShadowGov Constitution, nor do I think it's an entirely bad idea in many respects. Sure there are things in it I might do differently

So, is Bob' version Christian or would your version be?

Let me know if you'd like to debate it sometime. I'd love to fall over myself some more.:thumb:


:wave2:

 

[Jefferson]

I'm telling you it's not Christian.

It is according to First Timothy 1:9,10 - "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine"

 

[WizardofOz]

It is according to First Timothy 1:9,10 - "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine"

I stand by my assertion that most of you fall under the verse almost right before that one.

1 Timothy 1:7
desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm.

You understand neither what you say nor the things which you affirm.

Are you Torah observant Jefferson?

 

[Lighthouse]

I stand by my assertion that most of you fall under the verse almost right before that one.

1 Timothy 1:7
desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm.

You understand neither what you say nor the things which you affirm.

Are you Torah observant Jefferson?

You are so incredibly ignorant.

 

[WizardofOz]

You are so incredibly ignorant.

You disprove your ignorance by the constant stream of ad hominem attacks you sling.

Is that the best you can muster in? Sadly, I think I already know the answer.

 

[Lucky]

Wizard, you do realize this post of yours is nothing but a long-winded ad hominem attack?

I stand by my assertion that most of you fall under the verse almost right before that one.

1 Timothy 1:7
desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm.

You understand neither what you say nor the things which you affirm.

Are you Torah observant Jefferson?

I just want to make sure you realize you do the same as Lighthouse, though maybe not as often. Don't mind me. I'll go back to lurking.

 

[PKevman]

Wizard, you do realize this post of yours is nothing but a long-winded ad hominem attack?

I just want to make sure you realize you do the same as Lighthouse, though maybe not as often. Don't mind me. I'll go back to lurking.

You mean Wiz is a hypocrite? Who would have guessed that??? :rotfl:

:thumb:

 

[PKevman]

You disprove your ignorance by the constant stream of ad hominem attacks you sling.

Somehow I get the impression that you meant to say he PROVES his ignorance. Unless you think ad homs disprove ignorance...... :rotfl:

:mock: WizardofOz

 

[WizardofOz]

Wizard, you do realize this post of yours is nothing but a long-winded ad hominem attack?

I disagree. It addressed the topic, it addressed the verses he used in an attempt to label shadowgov "Christian", and it asked a question which would further the discussion, while making a valid point.

But let's not split hairs. If anyone would care to address the topic, rather than deflect from it by making childish insults, that would be great.

You mean Wiz is a hypocrite? Who would have guessed that???

Nice to see you in this thread again, way to contribute to the discussion! Yet another ad-hominem attack from the ad-hom master. Or maybe it's ad-hom pastor? It's really all I hear you preaching.:idunno:

Somehow I get the impression that you meant to say he PROVES his ignorance.

Nope, I meant exactly what I said. I guess sarcasm is not in your arsenal.

Unless you think ad homs disprove ignorance......

They sure haven't helped your case.

You're getting rather desperate to attack me; aren't you?

The shadowgov constitution is not Christian. Does anyone care to address that? At least Jefferson gave it a shot.:up:

 

[abbo]

Love

Love

Agreed! :thumb:
I'm not getting how supporting this Shadowgov view on government is unpatriotic. I love my country and I really do think it's the best around. I also think it could be a whole lot better and that there's no excuse for it not being so. One of the things I love the most is that it's so clearly designed to be improved upon! It's precisely because I love my country that I want it to grow and be even better!
Not only that but I'd love the good ole US of A to be the one to implement the best possible system of governance and set the example for the rest of the world. If this stuff works the way we're all so confident it would, then I absolutely love the idea of my country being the example.

your supposed to love the WHOLE world