Re: Don't forget to send your favorites!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Annika1980, Oct 25, 2009.

  1. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Oct 25, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Annika1980

    Bob Larter Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > On Oct 24, 1:01 pm, "Bowser" <> wrote:
    >
    >> I swear I didn't plan it this way, but the light and leaves got nice over
    >> the last couple of days, so I'll post two "leaf" shots and a cheerleader
    >> shot. Only because Bret has been such a huge disappointment to me.
    >>
    >> ;-)

    >
    > Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
    > http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1/666521757_yRkn3


    Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute girls?

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    Bob Larter, Oct 27, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    On Oct 25, 11:16 am, Alan Browne <>
    wrote:
    >
    > > Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
    > >http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...

    >
    > Nice set of phots.  The god squad is out in force.  Bible belters are
    > truly lost.
    >
    > I saw an article about this school and its scripture issues a week or so
    > ago in the LA Times (I think).


    Yes, and the NY Times also ran an article on it yesterday. The guy
    who wrote it wanted to interview me about it since I have been very
    vocal railing against the Biblical banners. I never called him back
    since I was on vacation, but I was hoping they'd use one of my pics
    like the "God Zombies" photo I submitted to the SI.

    Those Bible-thumpers are pretty nasty here in the buckle of the Bible
    Belt.
    One of them even called me a pedophile because I was at the game
    taking pics and I dared take a photo of her precious daughter, who was
    one of the cheerleaders. Can you imagine such a thing?

    Here's the pic in question, which I call "Mocking Jesus."
    http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/20090352/668395527_kttkG-L.jpg
    Annika1980, Oct 29, 2009
    #3
  4. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Oct 29, 2009
    #4
  5. Annika1980

    Bob Larter Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > On Oct 27, 2:38 am, Bob Larter <> wrote:
    >>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
    >>> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...

    >> Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute

    >
    > These are good wholesome Christian girls,


    Pfft. Odds on that half of them will be pregnant before they graduate HS.

    > not the usual Asian sluts
    > you're used to, Lionel.


    So you're racist as well as being sexist? What a surprise...


    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    Bob Larter, Oct 30, 2009
    #5
  6. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    On Oct 29, 9:16 pm, Bob Larter <> wrote:
    > Annika1980 wrote:
    > > On Oct 27, 2:38 am, Bob Larter <> wrote:
    > >>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
    > >>>http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1....
    > >> Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute

    >
    > > These are good wholesome Christian girls,

    >
    > Pfft. Odds on that half of them will be pregnant before they graduate HS.
    >
    > > not the usual Asian sluts
    > > you're used to, Lionel.

    >
    > So you're racist as well as being sexist? What a surprise...


    Hell no. One of my favorite films is Anal Asians IV.

    But you are correct about the cheerleaders. I have learned that
    besides posting Bible verses on banners one of the other long held
    traditions at that school is cheerleaders getting pregnant. By good
    Christian boys, no doubt.
    Annika1980, Oct 30, 2009
    #6
  7. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Annika1980 wrote:
    >
    >> But you are correct about the cheerleaders. I have learned that
    >> besides posting Bible verses on banners one of the other long held
    >> traditions at that school is cheerleaders getting pregnant. By good
    >> Christian boys, no doubt.

    >
    > I always find it ironic that "Right to Life" anti-abortion Christians also
    > don't want frank sex education in schools and especially not discussion of
    > effective birth control beyond abstinence.
    >
    > Abstinence is 100% effective to be sure, ...


    Oh I dunno.
    Ask Mary...
    (or Joseph)
    Jeff R., Oct 30, 2009
    #7
  8. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Jeff R. wrote:
    >>> Abstinence is 100% effective to be sure, ...

    >>
    >> Oh I dunno.
    >> Ask Mary...
    >> (or Joseph)

    >
    > The greatest cuckold?
    >
    > Anyone who believes that story really needs a does of objectivity. But
    > even the most deeply bathed in the blood Baptist would not suspect God of
    > impregnating their precious little virgin.



    Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one of the
    easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.

    Heck - I talk to the reptiles in my backyard, and they regularly reply in
    very eloquent hisses.

    What was this thread about?

    --
    Jeff R.
    Jeff R., Oct 30, 2009
    #8
  9. Annika1980

    Bob Larter Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > On Oct 29, 9:16 pm, Bob Larter <> wrote:
    >> Annika1980 wrote:
    >>> On Oct 27, 2:38 am, Bob Larter <> wrote:
    >>>>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
    >>>>> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...
    >>>> Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute
    >>> These are good wholesome Christian girls,

    >> Pfft. Odds on that half of them will be pregnant before they graduate HS.
    >>
    >>> not the usual Asian sluts
    >>> you're used to, Lionel.

    >> So you're racist as well as being sexist? What a surprise...

    >
    > Hell no. One of my favorite films is Anal Asians IV.


    Why doesn't it surprise me that the only things you know about Asian
    women comes from pornos?

    > But you are correct about the cheerleaders. I have learned that
    > besides posting Bible verses on banners one of the other long held
    > traditions at that school is cheerleaders getting pregnant. By good
    > Christian boys, no doubt.


    No doubt.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    Bob Larter, Oct 31, 2009
    #9
  10. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Jeff R. wrote:
    >>
    >> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one of
    >> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.

    >
    > Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
    > times. Has it?


    I think so.
    I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
    *ever* had sex.
    Jeff R., Oct 31, 2009
    #10
  11. Annika1980

    Bob Larter Guest

    Jeff R. wrote:
    > "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one of
    >>> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.

    >> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
    >> times. Has it?

    >
    > I think so.
    > I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
    > *ever* had sex.


    *shudder* I know what you mean.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    Bob Larter, Nov 1, 2009
    #11
  12. Annika1980

    mikey4 Guest

    "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
    news:2009110108235680278-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
    > On 2009-11-01 07:13:14 -0800, Alan Browne
    > <> said:
    >
    >> Savageduck wrote:
    >>> On 2009-10-31 15:43:57 -0700, "Jeff R." <> said:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one
    >>>>>> of
    >>>>>> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary
    >>>>>> beliefs.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
    >>>>> times. Has it?
    >>>>
    >>>> I think so.
    >>>> I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
    >>>> *ever* had sex.
    >>>
    >>> Some of them didn't.
    >>>
    >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitro_fertilization
    >>>

    >>
    >> Doesn't obviate sex.

    >
    > It does if you use the cruder definition of sex as actual coitus, as
    > opposed to fertilization and cell division. Especially since the female in
    > this case wouldn't even have to meet the sperm donor, let alone be
    > intimate.
    >
    > I doubt many men would call invitro, without penetration, sex.
    > Let's see you sit back and be gratified by that?
    >
    > --

    No "after" cigarette either.
    mikey4, Nov 1, 2009
    #12
  13. Annika1980

    NameHere Guest

    On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:43:57 +1100, "Jeff R." <> wrote:

    >
    >"Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one of
    >>> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.

    >>
    >> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
    >> times. Has it?

    >
    >I think so.
    >I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
    >*ever* had sex.
    >
    >


    To put the kibosh on this puerile off-topic troll's nonsense.

    One of my own truisms:

    "Ugliness, as well as beauty, lies solely within the eye of the beholder.
    Those that see ugliness in others are only revealing the ugliness within
    themselves." by ~ caMel ~

    Yes, you may quote me in the future. You'll have to. The next time someone
    tells you how ugly you are you'll be able to explain to them why.
    NameHere, Nov 1, 2009
    #13
  14. Annika1980

    J. Clarke Guest

    Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2009-11-01 11:00:20 -0800, Alan Browne
    > <> said:
    >
    >> Savageduck wrote:
    >>> On 2009-11-01 07:13:14 -0800, Alan Browne
    >>> <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> Savageduck wrote:
    >>>>> On 2009-10-31 15:43:57 -0700, "Jeff R." <> said:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Alan Browne" <> wrote in
    >>>>>> message news:...
    >>>>>>> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-|
    >>>>>>>> ) one of the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the
    >>>>>>>> necessary beliefs.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred
    >>>>>>> numerous times. Has it?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I think so.
    >>>>>> I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in
    >>>>>> tow have *ever* had sex.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Some of them didn't.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitro_fertilization
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Doesn't obviate sex.
    >>>
    >>> It does if you use the cruder definition of sex as actual coitus, as
    >>> opposed to fertilization and cell division. Especially since the
    >>> female in this case wouldn't even have to meet the sperm donor, let
    >>> alone be intimate.
    >>>
    >>> I doubt many men would call invitro, without penetration, sex.
    >>> Let's see you sit back and be gratified by that?

    >>
    >> You misunderstand what I said. Because a woman has an in-vitro
    >> fert., that does not mean she's a virgin. In fact it's extremely
    >> unlikely that a virgin would be approved for IVF.
    >>
    >> Further, your reply cur around the definition of parthenogenesis
    >> which is essentially "self reproduction". IVF is definitely not
    >> parthenogenesis.

    >
    > OK! OK! I did think we were talking "human" mothers in this humorous
    > sidetrack, not those life forms for which parthenogenesis is a valid
    > form of reproduction.
    >
    > The bottom line is "virgin" birth as proposed in the New Testament
    > remains fiction, and for humans is a myth.


    Yep. Note that the Bible is silent on the question of how it was determined
    that Mary was a virgin. All that we have is that Matthew and Luke said so.
    We don't know if she told them or whether God told them or whether they
    personally put a chastity belt on her or if they had it from a team of
    whatever passed for OB/GYNs in the middle east of the time or whether Joseph
    complained to them incessantly about how she never put out and got pregnant
    anyway or what.
    J. Clarke, Nov 1, 2009
    #14
  15. On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 16:02:34 -0500, "J. Clarke" <>
    wrote:

    >Savageduck wrote:
    >> On 2009-11-01 11:00:20 -0800, Alan Browne
    >> <> said:
    >>
    >>> Savageduck wrote:
    >>>> On 2009-11-01 07:13:14 -0800, Alan Browne
    >>>> <> said:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Savageduck wrote:
    >>>>>> On 2009-10-31 15:43:57 -0700, "Jeff R." <> said:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Alan Browne" <> wrote in
    >>>>>>> message news:...
    >>>>>>>> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-|
    >>>>>>>>> ) one of the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the
    >>>>>>>>> necessary beliefs.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred
    >>>>>>>> numerous times. Has it?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I think so.
    >>>>>>> I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in
    >>>>>>> tow have *ever* had sex.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Some of them didn't.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitro_fertilization
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Doesn't obviate sex.
    >>>>
    >>>> It does if you use the cruder definition of sex as actual coitus, as
    >>>> opposed to fertilization and cell division. Especially since the
    >>>> female in this case wouldn't even have to meet the sperm donor, let
    >>>> alone be intimate.
    >>>>
    >>>> I doubt many men would call invitro, without penetration, sex.
    >>>> Let's see you sit back and be gratified by that?
    >>>
    >>> You misunderstand what I said. Because a woman has an in-vitro
    >>> fert., that does not mean she's a virgin. In fact it's extremely
    >>> unlikely that a virgin would be approved for IVF.
    >>>
    >>> Further, your reply cur around the definition of parthenogenesis
    >>> which is essentially "self reproduction". IVF is definitely not
    >>> parthenogenesis.

    >>
    >> OK! OK! I did think we were talking "human" mothers in this humorous
    >> sidetrack, not those life forms for which parthenogenesis is a valid
    >> form of reproduction.
    >>
    >> The bottom line is "virgin" birth as proposed in the New Testament
    >> remains fiction, and for humans is a myth.

    >
    >Yep. Note that the Bible is silent on the question of how it was determined
    >that Mary was a virgin. All that we have is that Matthew and Luke said so.
    >We don't know if she told them or whether God told them or whether they
    >personally put a chastity belt on her or if they had it from a team of
    >whatever passed for OB/GYNs in the middle east of the time or whether Joseph
    >complained to them incessantly about how she never put out and got pregnant
    >anyway or what.
    >


    Their virgin mary was just a name they carved over the name of Isis on her
    statues when people demanded that there must be a female counterpart to
    their invent-as-you-go christian beliefs. The virgin birth was stolen from
    a more ancient Pagan Roman legend. The "easter resurrection" is a
    bastardization of the holiday of Eostre, a Pagan Goddess of spring, to
    celebrate the yearly resurrection of life in a northern climate, a holiday
    that began over 3500 years ago under various names and cultures.

    No mother + no birth + no resurrection = no christ.
    The OT-Troll's Omega, Nov 1, 2009
    #15
  16. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    "NameHere" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:43:57 +1100, "Jeff R." <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one
    >>>> of
    >>>> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.
    >>>
    >>> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
    >>> times. Has it?

    >>
    >>I think so.
    >>I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
    >>*ever* had sex.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > To put the kibosh on this puerile off-topic troll's nonsense.
    >
    > One of my own truisms:
    >
    > "Ugliness, as well as beauty, lies solely within the eye of the beholder.
    > Those that see ugliness in others are only revealing the ugliness within
    > themselves." by ~ caMel ~
    >
    > Yes, you may quote me in the future. You'll have to. The next time someone
    > tells you how ugly you are you'll be able to explain to them why.



    Here's one my favourites, by way of reply:

    " ...The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
    by ~ Shakespeare, Ham A.III Sc.II ~



    Act III Scene II
    Jeff R., Nov 1, 2009
    #16
  17. Annika1980

    Wilba Guest

    J. Clarke wrote:
    >
    > Note that the Bible is silent on the question of how it was determined
    > that Mary was a virgin. All that we have is that Matthew and Luke said
    > so.
    > We don't know if she told them or whether God told them or whether they
    > personally put a chastity belt on her or if they had it from a team of
    > whatever passed for OB/GYNs in the middle east of the time or whether
    > Joseph
    > complained to them incessantly about how she never put out and got
    > pregnant
    > anyway or what.


    It's a translation error. The Aramaic word used to describe her has mutated
    through several steps into "virgin", but a good direct translation would be
    "lass" - simply a young woman.
    Wilba, Nov 1, 2009
    #17
  18. Annika1980

    NameHere Guest

    On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:42:11 +1100, "Jeff R." <> wrote:

    >
    >"NameHere" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:43:57 +1100, "Jeff R." <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>"Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    >>>news:...
    >>>> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one
    >>>>> of
    >>>>> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.
    >>>>
    >>>> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
    >>>> times. Has it?
    >>>
    >>>I think so.
    >>>I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
    >>>*ever* had sex.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> To put the kibosh on this puerile off-topic troll's nonsense.
    >>
    >> One of my own truisms:
    >>
    >> "Ugliness, as well as beauty, lies solely within the eye of the beholder.
    >> Those that see ugliness in others are only revealing the ugliness within
    >> themselves." by ~ caMel ~
    >>
    >> Yes, you may quote me in the future. You'll have to. The next time someone
    >> tells you how ugly you are you'll be able to explain to them why.

    >
    >
    >Here's one my favourites, by way of reply:
    >
    >" ...The lady doth protest too much, methinks."


    Yes, I figured you'd read it wrong, as all trolls read everything wrong.

    Etymology of that truism: I came up with that saying when someone was
    telling me how unattractive they thought someone was. I, on the other hand,
    found the person they were calling "ugly" to be very attractive. I started
    to question the discrepancies between our viewpoints. How could two
    different people perceive a third so differently. No different than how one
    person that might find a spider's appearance and coloring patterns a
    marvelous and beautiful thing, others being disgusted at the sight, now
    revealing the ugliness of that person's fears and insecurities, whether
    learned or innate. The above quotable about ugliness is the answer. That
    saying holds true no matter what way that you try to warp it to justify
    your own inadequacies.
    NameHere, Nov 2, 2009
    #18
  19. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    "NameHere" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:42:11 +1100, "Jeff R." <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"NameHere" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:43:57 +1100, "Jeff R." <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>"Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    >>>>news:...
    >>>>> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one
    >>>>>> of
    >>>>>> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary
    >>>>>> beliefs.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
    >>>>> times. Has it?
    >>>>
    >>>>I think so.
    >>>>I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
    >>>>*ever* had sex.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> To put the kibosh on this puerile off-topic troll's nonsense.
    >>>
    >>> One of my own truisms:
    >>>
    >>> "Ugliness, as well as beauty, lies solely within the eye of the
    >>> beholder.
    >>> Those that see ugliness in others are only revealing the ugliness within
    >>> themselves." by ~ caMel ~
    >>>
    >>> Yes, you may quote me in the future. You'll have to. The next time
    >>> someone
    >>> tells you how ugly you are you'll be able to explain to them why.

    >>
    >>
    >>Here's one my favourites, by way of reply:
    >>
    >>" ...The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

    >
    > Yes, I figured you'd read it wrong, as all trolls read everything wrong.
    >
    > Etymology of that truism: I came up with that saying when someone was
    > telling me how unattractive they thought someone was. I, on the other
    > hand,
    > found the person they were calling "ugly" to be very attractive. I started
    > to question the discrepancies between our viewpoints. How could two
    > different people perceive a third so differently. No different than how
    > one
    > person that might find a spider's appearance and coloring patterns a
    > marvelous and beautiful thing, others being disgusted at the sight, now
    > revealing the ugliness of that person's fears and insecurities, whether
    > learned or innate. The above quotable about ugliness is the answer. That
    > saying holds true no matter what way that you try to warp it to justify
    > your own inadequacies.
    >


    Kindly point out where I mentioned "ugliness".

    (I'll save you some time)
    I didn't.

    That was your own guilty conscience chiming in.

    My reference was to the subject's *behaviour*, but you read it as
    "appearance".

    " ...The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
    Jeff R., Nov 2, 2009
    #19
  20. Annika1980

    J. Clarke Guest

    Wilba wrote:
    > J. Clarke wrote:
    >>
    >> Note that the Bible is silent on the question of how it was
    >> determined that Mary was a virgin. All that we have is that Matthew
    >> and Luke said so.
    >> We don't know if she told them or whether God told them or whether
    >> they personally put a chastity belt on her or if they had it from a
    >> team of whatever passed for OB/GYNs in the middle east of the time
    >> or whether Joseph
    >> complained to them incessantly about how she never put out and got
    >> pregnant
    >> anyway or what.

    >
    > It's a translation error. The Aramaic word used to describe her has
    > mutated through several steps into "virgin", but a good direct
    > translation would be "lass" - simply a young woman.


    Interesting that a major article of Catholic dogma could stem from a
    translation error. If that is the case then somebody screwed the pooch
    royally.
    J. Clarke, Nov 2, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tim Conway

    Re: [SI] Don't forget to send your favorites!

    Tim Conway, Oct 22, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    318
    Robert Coe
    Oct 25, 2009
  2. tony cooper

    Re: [SI] Don't forget to send your favorites!

    tony cooper, Oct 22, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    301
    Robert Coe
    Oct 25, 2009
  3. Robert Coe

    Re: [SI] Don't forget to send your favorites!

    Robert Coe, Oct 23, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    524
    Catch Up
    Oct 27, 2009
  4. Bowser
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    321
    Robert Coe
    Jan 18, 2010
  5. Peter

    Re: [SI] Don't forget to send in your wallpaper!

    Peter, Jun 12, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    68
    Views:
    1,116
Loading...

Share This Page