Perhaps an escrow holding Bitcoin (or if the ever get it working, multi-key scripts to share control of Bitcoin) can be used as collateral in future contracts, too?
I really think we need some "open source" accounting geeks to start drafting the other, likely just as important, component of Bitcoin: Bitcoin specific GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Practices). I'm no accountant myself (had many classes, but hate the subject), but I thing certain things should be standardised, such as keeping some of the company's internal transactions on the public block chain, with matching addresses on financial statements. Things like this will go far to help people independently verify a business and improve trust over all.

NSFW: http://www.google.com/search?gcx=c&q=sex&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=685

NSFW: http://www.google.com/search?gcx=c&q=fucking&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=685

NSFW: http://www.google.com/search?gcx=c&q=hentai&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=685

Have I made my point?

Good morning!   Glad to see you are willing to continue this discussion.


You have a good point. Though, when dealing with distraught or damaged people, one should at least try to understand them and learn how to help them without just outright pissing them off (granted in some cases that requires an entire degree in psychiatry to accomplish)


You are correct, it was the King James version, though it's rather strange of you to assume that I don't know that there are "multiple translations of the bible" when I even mentioned that I have read multiple bibles in multiple languages, and attempted to explain that particular passage using the original language. I think you may be getting a bit too defensive. Anyway, Just as you claim that modern scholars may have a better understanding or interpretation, I can claim that modern scholars are a lot more likely to be influenced by modern culture and try to apply or fit their translations into it for the common people to understand. More importantly, your claim completely sidestepped the fact that I was using the actual original language words, like "arsenokoitai," to explain what the meaning is. I'm depending on the original wording, and the definitions of those words, not the multitude of translations, each trying to fit the words into it's specific time and culture. Fact is, the word for "homosexuality" doesn't even exist in the original bible. Why is that, if it was such a great sin?


Here I was concerned that you were the one who had this problem. Rather, that you can't grasp the difference between platonic love, romantic love, and just sex. As mentioned, my 2+ year relationship was without sex, yet was condemned just the same.


Russian/Ukrainian, the culture I come from, is one of those. We greet with a kiss (I don't any more). We, however, do not cry, and kiss, and kiss, and kiss, when we part from someone we care about. Not unless it was someone we love very much. You are also making an assumption that their relationship did not cross into sexual practices. In this passage:

“You son of a perverse, rebellious woman! Do I not know that you have chosen [David] the son of Jesse to your own shame and to the shame of your mother’s nakedness? For as long as the son of Jesse lives upon the earth, neither you nor your kingdom shall be established.” (1 Samuel 20:30)

Saul, Jonathan's father, is basically saying what too many parents have been saying to their gay kids, "You're a perv! How could you choose him for your love! It's a shame!" and all that.
First, ask yourself, if this was just platonic love, then why was Saul so angry at Jonathan for "choosing" David? Why did he say that it was shameful? Why is he blaming his mother? On the "nakedness" part, uncovering the nakedness of a family member was a euphemism for incest in the holiness codes of the Old Testament, and Saul would not have used this phrase lightly. For example, Leviticus 18:6-18 begins, “You shall not approach anyone near of kin to uncover nakedness” and goes on to list every possible incestuous relationship (except that of father and daughter), stating before each one, “You shall not uncover the nakedness of . . .” Why use that phrase if there was nothing sexual between them?

No, he was not a homosexual. Neither am I. Though I do believe he was at least bisexual (like me), and a somewhat gay acting one, too, based on his actions towards Jonathan and the other passages I mentioned. It's true that the armor part is a symbol of transfer of power. So, please explain, why would Jonathan, upon meeting David, give up his most prized possessions to him in a show of giving up himself to David's power? My guess, love/crush at first sight. What is yours?



Not sure what this bowing is about, as I didn't bring it up. Explain?


I can't want approval of someone I don't believe exists. What are you doing to get approval of Pinkie Pie pony, and if nothing, why don't you want Pinkie Pie's approval?


Kettle <-> Pot. Homosexuality was not illegal, and love between men, and even marriage between male monks, wasn't that uncommon until some time in the 1400's (I think, though I may be off by a few centuries). Marriage itself was simply a property transfer contract until the liberalization of the last 2 or 3 hundred years or so. So, perhaps the bible has always spoken out against homosexuality, and gays are just trying to make it fit the current (new) culture, or perhaps the bible never said anything against homosexuality because it was never considered as anything weird, and Christians are just "taking a little bit out of the Old Testament (about 5 to 7 "mentions?") to try to make it fit into their own (still somewhat-new) culture?

If you believe that any thinking can lead down a "dangerous path," that's your very first and most important problem. If your faith is strong, why would you fear taking your thoughts down dangerous passes or fear asking dangerous questions?

Just fyi, "yiffing" is a (rather weird) slang term that litteraly means "to have sex." It's only as specific as that. So, sure, "to have sex" is a perverted fantasy, but not really a unique one :/

Didn't realize it was that easy to scam a scammer, though I've seen funnier stories about that:
The Powerbook Prank

+1

Oh, I'm also curious as to the forum's opinion on the whole David was a flaming homo piece, since pretty much no one knows about it, and with everyone's view of "bible says gay = BAD" it's fun to watch the reactions.

Another downside is the CRAZY HIGHWAY ROBBERY STYLE FEES!

Dunno, but my dad has that exact bottle.... .........

The part with the giant penis. Now go cry in the shower. (Kidding! Love ya! ^.^)
I mentioned I was a "count," not a "countess." Yes, I'm married in DC for real, so that's why I call him "hubby." But, understandable why you'd be confused.

Ok, let me rephrase that. I am not trying, or, more precisely, expecting her to change her mind about this. But I do love the challenge and seeing the reactions (OMG, I think *I* might be the troll O.O)

That is from someone whom EVERYONE tells doesn't know the meaning of the word "tact," what is in your heart, and how others perceive you, do not match up. If you do not care enough that your words and actions portray more spitefulness and piety than care, and will very likely be seen as hurtful to others (and we all know god doesn't want us to hurt others), that's your prerogative.



And way to start off with some bearing of false witness.
Here's the actual quote:
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." Corinthians 6:9-10
It does not say "sexually immoral" (though I'll grant you, I'm more effeminate than most), and it doesn't say "men who have sex with men." This will obviously fall on deaf ears, but "effeminate" in the original language, translated into modern vernacular, means "whiny pussies too wimpy to stand up for themselves, or fight in the army and defend their country."
As for the "abusers of themselves with mankind," the original term "arsenokoitai" has, sadly, lost its exact meaning to history. The best approximation we have of the word, based on its other uses in the bible, is male prostitutes, or boys who give themselves up to sugar daddies (look that one up if you have to). They are condemned for taking their bodies and minds, and giving them up to others to use and abuse. Also, you're a girl. Where does any of this condemn lesbians?


Here's a pro-gay one back to you.
"...Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself." - Samuel 18:1
"And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt." - Samuel 18:3-4 (Smexy Jonathan striptease!?)
"After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with his face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together - but David wept the most." - Samuel 20:41 (The couple crying over their parents forcing hem to break up)
"I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women." - Samuel 1:26
"And David was forsaken by God, and went to hell for being a homo" - Nah, I made this one up.

Tell me how David is not a total homo here? Fact is, if it was't for the whole "BURN THE GAYS" of the last 1000 years or so, the story of David and Jonathan would likely have rivaled Romeo and Juliet as a romantic gay tragedy.

If still not convinced, here's the flaming gay part:
"And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod." - 2 Sauel 6:14 (an ephod is basically an apron, covering only the front)
"And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart." - 2 Samuel 6:16
"Then David returned to bless his household. And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king of Israel today, who uncovered himself today in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly uncovereth himself!
And David said unto Michal, It was before the LORD, which chose me before thy father, and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the LORD, over Israel: therefore will I play before the LORD.   
I will yet be more vile than thus, and will be base in mine own sight: and of the maidservants which thou hast spoken of, of them shall I be had in honour.
Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death." - 2 Samuel 6:20 - 6:23

tl;dr summary: David was dancing and prancing in celebration, wearing nothing but an apron, flashing his butt at everyone (ephod = assless chaps of BC era?). His wife, seeing him dancing all almost-naked, was pissed and hated him for it (do remember that David originally loved Jonathan, and Michal, likely knowing this, no doubt always resented him for it). So, David told her off, and told her he'll never have sex with her, and didn't.

People believe far worse than she does. As for winning, that's not my goal here. In these cases, the journey and learning that comes along with it is far more fun (yes, I find this discussion entertaining)

Fixed a bit, since the people ending up holding bitcoins at the end are typically the scammers

I admin, I find trolls amusing and entertaining. Though that, plus my apparent lack of shame, may make me not so fun for trolls to troll



You do realize that for you to succeed would mean for me to throw away most of my friends, confuse and upset my family, turn away my 11 year relationship with a person I love, married (legally in DC), and made a home with, and throw away the emotionally comfortable place I have finally settled into after many years or grief and conflict? Whom do you love in your life that you would lose if you, while remaining Christian, changed your opinion on one aspect of that religion?

But, by telling me and everyone else on this forum that you are praying for me, you are basically coming off as trying to show everyone how pious you are. And through your public display of care, you are hoping that everyone can see how good of a christian you are, and this trying to "glorify yourself."


I'm sorry if I have given you the wrong impression. I was in pain, yes, but that pain was caused not by my "perversion," but by my own attempts as trying to repress that "perversion" for the sake of god and others. More-so, the pain was caused by watching others trying to live lives true to themselves, and having their families and friends hurt them because they believed that those people themselves were perversions. It was the fear of god itself that was hurting me. A fear that I have long since gotten over, and no longer feel any pain about. My life has no pain (none related to these matters, anyway). I have a supporting family, friends, and a husband I have been happily monogamous with for over 11 years now (while most of my straight friends have broken up or divorced long before us).

Also, do you not realize that you are calling the innocent, non-sexual love and crushes felt by children "perversion?" As I said, I, and the others I knew, were very young at the time. Sex was the furthest thing from our minds. It was simply a crush, a love, an adoration, an infatuation. Something one felt for someone else, not by choice, but just because. Nothing more. And that, you, and others called sick, disgusting, ad perversion. Though I guess you being 17, you don't care, since you're still kind of a child yourself.

Do you know who Thor is? Do you know that there are many books written about him, and are many beliefs throughout history? Can you look to Thor in the same way you look to God? Can you understand that how you fee about Thor, not being able to force yourself to believe in him, is how I am able to "look to your God?" Or is the skill of empathy (putting yourself in other's shoes) not something you are good at?

Actually, this is getting a bit boring and melancholy, so lets liven it up a bit:
If the sin you are talking about is homosexuality, then, I hate to break it to you, but the bible, the original translation, says practically nothing bad about it, and actually has some good words about it (King David and Jonathan are implied to have a relationship, for instance, and David is portrayed as a stereotypical FLAMING prancing queen!). Before you go claiming that as an atheist I don't know anything about the bible or god's meaning, do keep in mind that I've first read the bible when I was about 5 (I liked the stories), and many times since then, and in more than one language no less.

Isn't baseless hype the epitome of Bitcoin, and what makes it so much fun?

I'm mining, and buying more instead of selling. So you're likely correct.

It's likely, though her statements seem genuine, and, worse, not original in the least (i.e. I've come across people saying those things before, and honestly believing them)

How is you announcing publicly that you are praying for me, someone you don't really know, understand, or even know what kind of sins I may be involved in, supposed to be NOT you being a hypocrite, praying in the corner of [forums] that you may be seen? Are you not able to understand that you letting me know you care for me would make no difference to me, since 1) I don't know you, and 2) I don't think there is anything wrong about me for you to care about? Switch roles for a moment. Do you consider it as me being concerned about and caring about you if I tell you that I think your parents and church have psychologically abused you, say that I hope you will be able to overcome the religious harm done to you, and say that I am praying for you because I genuinely care? If not, why do you suppose that I will take your actions to mean that you "care" about me, instead of them being just misguided pity with a touch of hubris and self-righteousness? And if you do understand that I likely will not "understand" your care, then why announce it to everyone, instead of hope and pray for my salvation  privately, unless you were doing it for selfish and self-righteous reasons?
(sorry for the big words and bit of mind chess, but, as I said, human intentions are VERY easy to expand on, and twist into selfish reasons afterwards. Also, I would prefer to use shorter, simpler statements, but I feel I need more specific words to express myself, and in a way, this is a sign of my severe lack of writing skills, so please bear with me. I am also making a genera assumption that my language skills may be harder to follow for someone like you, and if I'm making an ass out of you and me, sorry.)

Here here! Those costumes freak me the f*ck out. Their facial expressions are always stuck in that weird grin thing, and their eyes never move. I imagine it'd be like screwing a corpse or something *shudder*. Plus they're often mangy, sweaty, and stinky, since they're so hot to wear. I prefer being able to see their faces and reactions, though I somewhat disagree with just liking them naked. I prefer them dressed in something nice at first, and being able to "unwrap my present." Builds tension and excitement