1 >>>"Despite the fact that President Pervez Musharraf recently enacted a law making honor killing a capital offense, it continues at a rate of about 1,000 deaths each year." Rusty, your moral compass needs a severe readjustment. This doesn't compare to the insane priest in Transylvania who crucified a nun. Yes, that was just one incident, but it's so much worse than all these perfectly sane muslim men burning their wives by the thousands. Where is your perspective?

2 Does Iran seem like a complete hell hole or is it just me?

3 There's so many of us, So many of us, So many, there's so many, there's so many Let's have a war So you can go and die! Let's have a war! We could all use the money! Let's have a war! We need the space! Let's have a war! Clean out this place! It already started in the city! Suburbia will be just as easy! Let's have a war! Jack up the Dow Jones! Let's have a war! It can start in New Jersey! Let's have a war! Blame it on the middle-class! Let's have a war! We're like rats in a cage! It already started in the city! Suburbia will be just as easy! Let's have a war! Sell the rights to the networks! Let's have a war! Let our wallets get fat like last time! Let's have a war! Give guns to the queers! Let's have a war! The enemy's within! It already started in the city! Suburbia will be just as easy!

4 Osama: I can top those anti-war lyrics with this little ditty popular during my childhood: Are you believing the morning papers? War is coming back in style There's generals here, advisors there And Russians nibbling everywhere The chessboard's filling up with red We make more profits when we blow off their heads Economy is looking bad Let's start another war when ya get drafted Fan the fires of racist hatred We want total war when ya get drafted Drooling fingers Panic buttons Playing with missiles like they're toys There's easy money, easy jobs Especially when you build the bombs That blow big cities off the map Just guess who profits when we build 'em back up Yeah, what Big Business wants Big Business gets It wants a war when ya get drafted Trilateral Commission goonies laugh and scheme for more when ya get drafted Call the Army! Call the Navy! Stocked with kids from slums when ya get drafted If you can't afford a slick attorney We might make you a spy Forget your demonstrations Kids today sit on their ass when ya get drafted Just a six-pack And you're happy We're prepared For when ya get drafted

5 Ok, so mine was Circle Jerks...what was yours? It sounds like those kind of lyrics would get someone blacklisted for being a Communist!

6 Saw the Circle Kerks. AND the Dead Kennedys ("artists" of the ditty).

7 Er, "Jerks."

8 The Dead Kennedys...now there's an amazing band name. Good band too.

9 As usual, another great round up of links. Especially "New terms set for Gitmo detainees". Har Har.

10 Yeah, the Dead Kennedys are great, but they're missing one member, though from the looks of him, he'll be joining shortly, but not soon enough.

11 I thought that was Black Flag. Hmmm.

12 I prefer Ska myself. And some punk/ska.

13 Just a correction, Let's Have a War was done by Fear, not the Circle Jerks...

14 Yes, Fear it was. Now I listen to Mitch and the Gang.

15 My huge fuck-up. Sorry about that. Everytime I hear that song I have Repo Man flashbacks...

16 Yeah, me too. Except I usually think of The Jerks doing "When the Shit Hits the Fan"........... Ten Kids in a Cadillac Stand in Line For Welfare Checks Let's all leech off the State Gee, the money's.........really great. We just get by however we can...... We all gotta duck When the shit hits the fan..

17 The NICEST band I ever saw/met: The Exploited.

18 In case you're wondering, Carlos was referring to this: 'Possessed' nun crucified after row with priest By Kate Connolly in Berlin (Filed: 20/06/2005) “A Romanian Orthodox priest who faces a murder charge after ordering the crucifixion of a young nun because she was "possessed by the devil" was unrepentant as he conducted a funeral mass for his alleged victim. Father Daniel Corogeanu, 29, said that the nun had been "possessed by the devil" and was "beyond salvation" in life. He claimed that from the religious point of view, the crucifixion of Maricica Irina Cornici, 23, was "entirely justified", but admitted that he faced excommunication as well as prosecution, and was seeking a "good lawyer." The nun was found dead last Wednesday, gagged and chained to a cross, after nuns from her order, the Holy Trinity, called for an ambulance in the remote mountain village of Tanacu in north-eastern Romania.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/06/20/wcruc20.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/06/20/ixworld.html Gosh! This sounds like something that muslims would be accused of doing! Whadup widat?

19 >>>"A Romanian Orthodox priest who faces a murder charge after ordering the crucifixion of a young nun because she was "possessed by the devil" Evangelicals scare me.

20 I've got a couple of ex-wives I'd like to burn. They sure burned me!

21 "Doo ba dee doo wop say what yeah..."

22 Punk music is alright, but skanking is fucking stupid.

23 Yeah, and it's not the good gay either.

24 Re: Crucified nun. Religion is a funny thing. It exists only in the minds of its adherents, and each person experiences it differently, depending on many things, such as their personality, local traditions and customs, education level, etc.. Some people are not very stable, or sane, or capable of rational thought, some people always run on an even keel, and the majority are in between. It seems we only notice the best and worst of people whatever situation they're in, but with religion, everything is put in a special context. An atheist who sacrifices for others is considered no better in general than the average person, but an atheist who murders people and eats their hearts is considered typical of the breed. A religious person who sacrifices for others is a saint, whereas a fanatic who nails a schizophrenic woman to a cross is generally ignored at best or considered an eccentric at worst. What is it about religion that breeds such hypicirsy in people? If this had been an atheist who nailed a crazy woman up, it would be all over the news, but since a priest did it, it will get mentioned on a few websites and let die in obscurity. The crimes we are willing to overlook for the sake of superstition. It staggers the mind.

25 "The crimes we are willing to overlook for the sake of superstition." IM: I think that media is all-too eager to attack religion. I just read today how Pope Benedict's views limit the rights of parents (i.e., he defends the Church's anti-abortion position on abortion).

26 All I wanted was a Pepsi

27 And she wouldn't give it to me - just a Pepsi...

28 Well, YBP: The Pope wants abstinence promoted in Africa, and won't endorse the use of condoms. You can't blame me for thinking this guy is divorced from reality because of this. When will religions in general learn that nature ALWAYS finds a way. Nature cannot be stopped. The sooner religions get over their antiquated sexual power issues, the sooner we will live in a healthier world that isn't so repressed or twisted. It astounds me to think that anyone can think they can tell people to ignore the strongest motivation one has in life besides surviving: to screw often and make more of yourself! Abstinence education is a complete joke. You can't tell a nation dying of AIDS to stop fucking. You have to throw as many condoms at them as you can and hope a cure or vaccine is engineered ASAP.

29 Osama: The Church's position is that there is a hereafter, and that illicit sex and condome use are against natural law, making their use wrong, which is bad for people spiritually. The Church can't tell people to sin in order to save their lives. it does not get at the root of the matter. People can control their inclinations. Lots of people do it. Having self-discipline is not a joke.

30 YBP, I know of all these reasons, but it still doesn't translate to reality for me. Not being sexual is completely unnatural for any form of life unless you are an amoeba. So why is it a sin? Does the church not want people to feel good? Express themselves? Is it a male power thing? I think the self-discipline lies in using a condom to prevent overpopulation, disease and abortion. I think the church is morally irresponsible and backwards for promoting something which results in perversion, repression, disease, rape, overpopulation and starvation. Call me harsh, but I think they need to catch up with the times and change.

31 Osama: "Is it a male power thing?" Stop reading those NARAL brochures. Being sexual doesn't mean copulating with whomever or whatever one desires. There are rules to simply rules to sex--it's the abuse of it that leads to the issues you list, like diease, rape, etc. Do you honestly believe that if every one had a condom rapes would be a thing of the past? Are these acts committed by practicing Catholics? I would say the opposite. Hey, there are liberal Catholics who feel the way you do, but they're just bad Catholics. The Church cannot say something is now good which it has deemed bad so that people will thing it's cool and progressive or "with the times." But the Church is not a democracy. It's a hierarchy, like the army--you live by the rules or go elsewhere.

32 TBP wrote: "IM: I think that media is all-too eager to attack religion." Not religion so much as Christianity. They seem to be really good at completely ignoring the savagery of Islam, while loudly decrying every little thing that Christians do. I say this as an atheist, which means I say it as an objective observer. "I just read today how Pope Benedict's views limit the rights of parents (i.e., he defends the Church's anti-abortion position on abortion)." I don't think that killing unborn babies for the sake of convenience is within anyone's rights, and in fact, I feel that it is quite barbaric. Besides, a society that kills its children can't survive. Is it really a coincidence that Western civilization's decline gained such momentum when abortion became acceptable and widespread? I generally agree with some of the Church's positions, but based on pure pragmatism rather than dogma or doctrine. See, I think the core of the left is actually anti-civilization and anti-progress, based purely on the outcomes of their plans and policies. Everything they are for is bad for humanity in the long run, though it may look good in the short term. I know there are plenty of people on the left, such as environmentalists and human rights advocates, who are truly sincere and well-intentioned, but who only see a fragment of the big picture, like judging a jigsaw puzzle by looking at only one or two pieces, and who almost always arrive at the wrong conclusions.

33 Sorry, I put TBP instead of YBP last post.

34 IM: "TBP" That's okay, I knew whom you meant! "See, I think the core of the left is actually anti-civilization and anti-progress, based purely on the outcomes of their plans and policies." Amen. I appreciate your wisdom here comments here concerning abortion. Remember when I said you saw political/philosophical differences where I saw them as being spiritual ones? Well, damn BOTH causes, eh?!

35 Pigamus Maximus, If you want to stop killing kids, tell McChimpy to stop BOMBING them in their homes!

36 YBP: "Stop reading those NARAL brochures. Being sexual doesn't mean copulating with whomever or whatever one desires." Why not? Is that not sexual? "There are rules to simply rules to sex--it's the abuse of it that leads to the issues you list, like disease, rape, etc." Not having sex with condoms is a huge way to abuse being sexual, as far as diseases are concerned. "Do you honestly believe that if every one had a condom rapes would be a thing of the past? Are these acts committed by practicing Catholics? I would say the opposite." Well, with so many priests raping and molesting young boys...I can't agree with you. It pokes (no pun intended) a hole right through the church's abstinence crap. I'm not talking about rapists who have power issues, I'm talking about rape as a result of abstinence. Pretty much every Catholic I know has severe negative sexual issues, depending on how much it was a part of their childhood...everything from shame, guilt, compulsive cleaning habits after sex, problems being intimate with people they love or even girls who grow up thinking it's ok to take it up the ass because that isn't losing their virginity. Nah, that parkinglot blow-job isn't sex... My point is that the repression of human sexuality has almost no positive effect on humanity. It creates more problems than it supposedly solves. "Hey, there are liberal Catholics who feel the way you do, but they're just bad Catholics. The Church cannot say something is now good which it has deemed bad so that people will thing it's cool and progressive or "with the times." But the Church is not a democracy. It's a hierarchy, like the army--you live by the rules or go elsewhere." So what your saying is that they are too narrow-minded and stubborn to adapt with the world, or even unwilling to be wrong about something? There's nothing cool about millions of people dying of AIDS in Africa because they think condoms are bad, or priests who can't hack the unnatural effects of pent up sexual energy taking it out on alter boys.

37 Osama: "Well, with so many priests raping and molesting young boys...I can't agree with you. It pokes (no pun intended) a hole right through the church's abstinence crap. I'm not talking about rapists who have power issues, I'm talking about rape as a result of abstinence." Osama, I said that these acts were not commited by PRACTICING Catholics. Don't look to deviants to state that the ideal isn't good. That's like condemning the code of the military because of the actions of a small percentage of hooligans. 1%-2% of total priests were involved in abuse--plus lots of clergy from other religions that where celibacy IS NOT INVOLVED (protestant, Eastern rites, Jewish, etc.) So celibacy cannot be the cause. "Pretty much every Catholic I know has severe negative sexual issues, depending on how much it was a part of their childhood...everything from shame, guilt, compulsive cleaning habits after sex, problems being intimate with people they love or even girls who grow up thinking it's ok to take it up the ass because that isn't losing their virginity. Nah, that parkinglot blow-job isn't sex..." You must know a lot of bad Catholics. Again, I'm talking about PRACTICING Catholics. I know TONS who are not neurotic perverts who don't make excuses for their failings. "My point is that the repression of human sexuality has almost no positive effect on humanity." Licentious sexual practice helped lead to the downfall of a couple of famous civilzations. And there should be no "repression" of our desires? If we have desires we should act upon them or else we'll be "neurotic"? That sounds like molesting kids, if that's o=a desire, should be fine. And what about stealing, or murder, too? You use the word 'repression" Others call it self-control, and it's a good thing, or else anarchy would reign. Or diseases, and people dying from AIDS. You wouldn't mind if others hit on/slept with a girlfriend or wife beacause it feels "natural"? "So what your saying is that they are too narrow-minded and stubborn to adapt with the world, or even unwilling to be wrong about something? There's nothing cool about millions of people dying of AIDS in Africa because they think condoms are bad..." Sticking to what one has taught as right is not being narrow-minded. Your argument sounds a little like the old "guns kill people" line that completely ignores the human choice aspect. And don't pretend that all those people in Africa are dying because they're good Catholics and won't wear condoms. If they were good Catholics, they wouldn't be having promiscuous sex! I thoought you were logical than this, friend--is this the SAME Osama???

38 YBP, yeah...hate to disappoint you...it's the same Osama. I don't think anyone has imitated me on here. Make sure you know I have a lot of respect for your views, so I'm not trying to insult you personally: "Osama, I said that these acts were not committed by PRACTICING Catholics. Don't look to deviants to state that the ideal isn't good. That's like condemning the code of the military because of the actions of a small percentage of hooligans. 1%-2% of total priests were involved in abuse--plus lots of clergy from other religions that where celibacy IS NOT INVOLVED (protestant, Eastern rites, Jewish, etc.) So celibacy cannot be the cause." I don't condemn troops based on a few idiots. I also don't condemn clergy in religions that don't force the leaders to be celibate. I also don't think all Catholic priests are fondling kids, but I do know that it's more rampant in Catholicism than most. I wonder why? I can't agree with not letting them marry, or be gay. The latter being I'd rather them be in a relationship with a guy than molesting a boy. "You must know a lot of bad Catholics. Again, I'm talking about PRACTICING Catholics. I know TONS who are not neurotic perverts who don't make excuses for their failings." "Bad", hehee...I think they use the word "Reformed"! But there's that guilt and shame again. Why so much guilt and shame? Can it really be that I only know the "bad" ones? "Licentious sexual practice helped lead to the downfall of a couple of famous civilizations." It didn't cause it, but was abused in decadence...if you're referring to the Romans. "And there should be no "repression" of our desires? If we have desires we should act upon them or else we'll be "neurotic"? That sounds like molesting kids, if that's o=a desire, should be fine. And what about stealing, or murder, too? You use the word 'repression" Others call it self-control, and it's a good thing, or else anarchy would reign. Or diseases, and people dying from AIDS. You wouldn't mind if others hit on/slept with a girlfriend or wife because it feels "natural"?" I'm talking about healthy desires with respect to relationship unions, not murder, molestation, abuse or someone trying to boff my girl. I'm talking about 2 consenting adults having sex. Why must that be such a sin? Why must they be married and not use condoms? "Sticking to what one has taught as right is not being narrow-minded." Yes, but if it's wrong...then what? Why not question what you are taught since we know how many errors humans have made with "fact" throughout all of our history? "Your argument sounds a little like the old "guns kill people" line that completely ignores the human choice aspect." Nah, people kill people. But guns make it easier! "And don't pretend that all those people in Africa are dying because they're good Catholics and won't wear condoms. If they were good Catholics, they wouldn't be having promiscuous sex!" Who's to say they are knocking up everyone... I think the problem is lack of education and condoms plus almost no health care. By not helping Africans in the only way that will actually work, you condemn them to a living hell. "I thought you were logical than this, friend--is this the SAME Osama???" Yeah, yeah...please don't be offended. We both have humanity's best interests in mind, but just think differently about it. I am very open minded about many things, but I have a very strong view about the church's role of manipulating sexuality in religion.

39 Osama: "I can't agree with not letting them marry, or be gay" The Church doesn't say someone can't be "gay," it condemns homosexual behavior as evil--just as it does illicit heterosexual behavior. And it doesn't force people to be celibate--it's a calling. it is promoted as an ideal. If priests can't deal with it, they should leave. They are "married" to the Church, as the Bride of Christ. they are supposed to be 100% dedicated to Her, on call for emmergencies, etc. Who would be a more dedicated emergency doctor--an unmarried man or one whose heart's loyalties are with his family? "I'm talking about healthy desires with respect to relationship unions, not murder, molestation, abuse or someone trying to boff my girl. I'm talking about 2 consenting adults having sex. Why must that be such a sin? Why must they be married and not use condoms?" The problem is, there are poeple who would argue that to draw the line at consenting adults is wrong. Without traditional morality, men could argue for sex with children, or goats. Without traditional moralty, it is indeed a slippery slope. My reasons for sex within marriage I've explained. Humans are told that adultery will lead to spiritual death. Condom use, I've sated, is condemmed as being against natural law. If sex is so "natural," doesn't it seem unnatural to stop its natural consequences in some cases (i.e., pregnancy)? If how would children be cared for if everyone were knocking up everyone else? well, look in some inner cities. Condoms promote promiscuity--tjhey do not hinder it. Putting religion aside for a minute--if people ONLY had sex within traditional marriage, what do you think would happen to disease statistics aftr a few years? People point to the Church's teaching and say they are the problem. The problem is that people do not live according to those teachings. "Pretty much every Catholic I know has severe negative sexual issues, depending on how much it was a part of their childhood...everything from shame, guilt, compulsive cleaning habits after sex, problems being intimate with people..." This is a caricature. The Church promotes sex as a beautiful thing, but sex has rules. No one who has sex within marriage suffers from shame or guilt. It's those who cheat on spouses or who lurk off to adult book stores that have these problems. "Yes, but if it's wrong...then what? Why not question what you are taught since we know how many errors humans have made with "fact" throughout all of our history?" I've stated that it is NOT wrong. It's not an option for the Church to say black is white, or wrong is right. As a Catholic, I trust the Church on this. It is a seamless garmnet of truth. Those who try to make a Utopia ("Condoms will solve the whole problem") here on earth will never succeeed. people have to change within, and the Church holds the answer to this. Not Kinsey or Planned Parenthood.

40 What I see in “Organized” religions (nationwide or world wide) is that they are are about controlling the masses. Once again I will semi quote my Government teacher who stated “If you think of any organization (he said government, it works out to be the same) as a business, then you can see that they will want to grow larger.” How do churches grow larger? By having more followers. Also on average, the more children a couple has, the less money they have. The more uneducated the people are, the easier it is to control them. This boils down to don’t use condoms. Tell me, what kind of sin is there for two married individuals to use condoms. It is not like they are fornicating. Or is it a sin for not reproducing. (I think I talked about where this leads once before, ; ) ) Once again, in my “OPINION”, abortion is no ones business but the woman, her doctor and their God. It is not as IM would have us believe the practices of killing children. It is the practice of preventing “POTENTIAL” children. The embryos have never been a “LIVING, BREATHING being.” And unlike the Chinese, who actually did kill it’s (female) children, they did last longer then I believe all the European countries. As for sex leading to the down fall of civilizations, I know of two towns according to the bible but not Civilizations. Which ones?

41 That should be "they are all about, not they are are"

42 YBP: "The Church doesn't say someone can't be "gay," it condemns homosexual behavior as evil--" What's so evil about it? I know some gay couples that are monogamists that have been together 10-15 years. They put married straight couples to shame... Why is a gay union such an insult or threat to the church? "Who would be a more dedicated emergency doctor--an unmarried man or one whose heart's loyalties are with his family?" I think the one with loyalties to his family would be better able to relate and help others in the same situation/setting. I honestly don't think letting priests be sexual would effect their capability to lead or be a good influence on the world. "Without traditional morality, men could argue for sex with children, or goats. Without traditional morality, it is indeed a slippery slope." Well, I highly doubt many people suffer from conflicts where they are trying to figure out why they want to screw a goat! Really...I mean, I had no religious upbringing and have had no problems being in monogamy, have never cheated, etc. My parents gave me moral guidance, not the church. "If sex is so "natural," doesn't it seem unnatural to stop its natural consequences in some cases (i.e., pregnancy)? If how would children be cared for if everyone were knocking up everyone else? well, look in some inner cities. Condoms promote promiscuity--they do not hinder it. Putting religion aside for a minute--if people ONLY had sex within traditional marriage, what do you think would happen to disease statistics after a few years? People point to the Church's teaching and say they are the problem. The problem is that people do not live according to those teachings." Interesting way of putting it. I still think without condoms, people would still be screwing and we'd just have more pregnancies and disease. Many devices of modern man might seem unnatural, but in modern times have positive effects. I can't say a condom ever ruined someone's life, where the consequences of not using one has. "This is a caricature. The Church promotes sex as a beautiful thing, but sex has rules. No one who has sex within marriage suffers from shame or guilt. It's those who cheat on spouses or who lurk off to adult book stores that have these problems." Not really...you don't need to be a deviant to feel shame. Please tell me the rules you speak of, because I can't respond unless I know. "I've stated that it is NOT wrong. It's not an option for the Church to say black is white, or wrong is right. As a Catholic, I trust the Church on this. It is a seamless garmnet of truth." I know you are very dedicated, YBP...but what about me? How do I relate to how you think on this having not felt connected to any religion? I don't believe was is taught as the "truth" and it's a brick wall between us both. "Those who try to make a Utopia ("Condoms will solve the whole problem") here on earth will never succeed. people have to change within, and the Church holds the answer to this. Not Kinsey or Planned Parenthood." I never said condoms would save the world! Hehehe... I am guilty of having Utopian fantasies, as Carlos quite easily pointed out a few posts back. In reality, I can only hope for the best and do good. By the way, so you dislike Kinsey or Planned Parenthood? Your turn...

43 Osama: The "rules" regarding sex are those oulayed in the the OT/NT: sex outside of marriage is wrong, as couples seek pleasure without a pledge of commitment. Sex beteeen those of the same gender is clearly stated to be wrong as well. I see it as, since God made us, He has the right and authority to call the shots through His instituted Body here on earth. Gays are not a threat to the Church, as the Church will last forever, infinetly longer than the last coupling between two men or two women. It reaches out to all people but doesn't condone behaviors that are hurtful to people's souls and thus their salvation. Regarding Kinsey, his agenda was to to legitimize deviant behavious with his studies. Planned Parenthood, of course, pushes condom and is outright hostile to the the Bride of Christ through their literature and other groups they support and/or endorse. Regarding the dedication demanded of certain professions (and the priesthood), come on. Up until the last century, people clearly saw that individuasls without split loyalties were more likely to "be there" for those they serve. In the 1800's, most teachers were spinsters ot bachelors. Christ was celibate, and he is supposed to tbe the role model for priests. Some of the early apostles were married, but left that vocation at Christ's urging for a higher vocation, the priesthood. The Church sees this as the ideal. I don't think priests who liked little boys would have been normal had they had a wife at home. Why wouldn't thay have sought women? There were other issues at hand. Most of the priests involved were in their 60's or 70's. They were ordained in the free and easy 1960's, when the Church was more lax in their screening of candidates for priesthood. You say we have a wall between us, because you can't relate, and are not connected to any religion. One isn't always born into these things (like a church). I wasn't. I had no religious upbringing at all others than SOME societal guidelines. I've tried your way, but I knew something was missing. We are told that God is good, and will always reach out to those who truly seek Him. But we have to do that first. And we have to want to. God doesn't force allegiance to His ways.

44 YBP, you stated, "Christ was celibate", but how do we really know. All we have is a bunch of stories handed down word of mouth to word of mouth until it was eventually written down. Being an educated man as you are, I am certain that you have heard of the Devinci Code, right. The case they make in "The breaking of the Devinci Code" all sound very logical. It actually sounds more plausible then a celibate Jesus(the man not the Christ). (If you have not seen the movie, let me know and I will go into what they say.)Also have you ever heard of Jesus Pentera, who some say is the result of a Roman soldier Ben Pentera's rape of Mary. That is why Jesus does not have a last name due to the fact that he was illegitimate. Now I am not saying either of these are true, but I am saying they do sound more plausible then a virgin birth. I guess what I am trying to say with all of my rambling is we only really have one main book, the Bible, to really tell us about Jesus. But looking at the Bible, I see things wrong with it. I see stories in it that belongs to other religions that were prior to Christianity. I see, (my own opinion), a book that starts off as a familyÂ’s genealogy, that is why there is only Eve and no other women. The forgot the womenÂ’s name. I believe, that a lot of the doÂ’s and donÂ’t of the bible were old men in a patriarchal position who did or did not like what was happening so they made a law about it. Hate pork, eating pork is sinful. Hate working on Sunday, Sunday is now a no work day, so on. Where is the facts about Jesus. We donÂ’t even really know when he was born. I know it was not December 25, that is just when we celebrate it. So how can we know who Jesus really is, of if the Bible is truly correct. As I have stated in other posts, I know there is a God, due to the fact of to many logical and orderly occurrences in the universe to have been random chance. Beyond that, I am still looking and hopefully learning more each day.

45 Butch: Scholars place Christ's birth two years before the year zero. There was actually an atrolonomical phenomema that year that was the guiding star for the three wisemen. There's debate about the year--very complicated reading, and many scholars indeed place the birth in December. We know Jesus was not married because there is no mention of an immediate family other than his two parents, Joseph and Mary, who was ever-virgin. The spouses of some of the early apostles are mentioned--hence, there is no reason why a supposed wife of Jesus would not have been married. Also, on the cross, He gives his mother over to the care of an apostle, Joseph having died before. Had he had his own family, Mary would have been in this person's care. The Da-Vinci Code is truly evil propaganda meant to slander and scandalize. It's already been debunked by many scholars, protestant and Catholic. I just hope the author repents of his crime in writing that trash so he doesn't have to suffer for it in the next world. Have a good weekend, my friend.

46 YBP...I wasn't saying that priests who molest boys should have wives. It's pretty obvious they'd probably be better off with other consenting men! They probably picked boys because they are easier to manipulate into being quiet. I also know that priests molesting boys is no new phenomenon, so you can't blame the 60's! I read what you write about religion and so little of it weighs of fact for me...the faith you have is something I might never understand since I have guidelines for what I believe. If there is factual proof of evolution, or how long it took for our planet to form, or even the virginal birth of Christ? Come on...who would be walking around with half the DNA needed to live? From my point of view it is like many other religions that are based on stories handed down over many many generations to explain the unexplainable, often full of exaggeration. I can't put my faith in stories, especially when they are so full of holes and misinformation. I'm not dumping on religion as a whole though...there are many positive effects that religion can have on people, but many negatives as well. I'm quite comfortable not knowing the secrets of the universe and I really doubt that our minds are capable of really understanding them anyway...not that it doesn't hurt to try. I also don't worry about my fate as I accept it for whatever it is. I make the best of my life and have good values...even if I'm wrong about any theology, I doubt a "God" would have me burn in hell for not believing any of them when they all conflict so much and science seems to be more believable.

47 Osama: Half the DNA? God is not bound to science, as science is what men have created to explain the world in which we live. It doesn't nor can it not explain everything. Check out "Orthodoxy," by G. K. Chesterton. Or Lewis (even though he's a Prot) "The Case for Christianity." If the Church was trying to come up with some beliefs to bamboozle the populace, would they have chosen virgin birth? Why hasn't there been an explanation in the last 300 years, when we supposedly began to rely more on reqason than faith, to brush it aside as a "story created by superstitious Jews," or a symbolic interpretation to explain how special Christ was? It's so bizarre, it's real, my friend. Proof for evolution? Check out "Creationism Rediscovered." Osama, we can go on for ever, here. I've done my obligation to explain what I believe. We can't both be right. But one day we'll BOTH know the truth.