Messages

Friends,

by the way, I wish you all the best, Gandalf![]

OK, really too. Since I think arguing itself isn't bad. It's a way to learn to widen your knowladge and respect other people's opinions. It's a way to become smarter and wiser. But like every thing, there is a line that may not be crossed. There are laws and ethics. Keep these things in mind, OK?

Can't we all just get along?

Neg remover5, please do appologise and the other guy too.

I've also read the whole thing. It was magnificent. I just hope someone would make a movie about it. Although that would be quite a challenge[]. It's deep, yeah, and Morgoth is way cooler than Sauron. He's the "bad guy" over there. I promise you, it will become more and more exciting when the book goes on. One guy even asks the dark lord (nice thing to say here, since I don't remember which was it – anyway asks Sauron/Morgoth[]) to a duel.

All the best,

Gwathren

quote:Originally posted by Leyla

I tried allready, it won't let me delete it.

Poor thing...[]

quote:Originally posted by Gandalf

Ok, I was *really* tempted to continue this argument, but i am going to bite the bullet, as i can see that this debate is not going anywhere; we agree to disagree!

But I just wanted to say..... arrghh, no I've stopped myself.

Regards,
Douglas

I agree, since I have nothing else to add. This has been only my selfish opinion, but for me it is based on ethics and the ideas that I value.

PEACE,
May shadows reach the light,
Gwathren

quote:Originally posted by Huwie

You don't like it because it's wrong?  Why?  What's wrong with it?  You seem to be saying that marriage is fundamentally about man and woman to the exclusion of all else.  I just want to know why.  And please, don't cite religious reasons because they're irrelevant when discussing morals and ethics (not to mention irrelevant to anybody who isn't religious).

"Prove me that nature has not expressed itself by designing man and woman as they look like -- different."

So, is it wrong for a white man and a black woman to marry too?  They look different.

"Allowing legal unions between man and man and woman and woman raises their realtionships as high as is the marriage between man and woman."

Yep.  I don't see a problem with that.

"Call it whatever you want, but it simply is not marriage."

It would be marriage in the eyes of the law, if the law was changed to accomodate it.  Again, don't talk to me about religion because if people aren't religious, then marriage has nothing to do with religion.

"If you are convinced that a family that consists of two men or women is just as good as the one between a man and a woman, then that is your opinion."

Yeah I am, and let me tell you why.  I have seen many, many marriages between man and woman fail.  I have seen partnerships (because gay marriages aren't allowed here yet) between man and man or woman and woman succeed, for many years.  There's no distinction as far as I can see between the prospects or anything else for gay couples as opposed to straight couples.

Excuse me, but are you saying that the difference of skin-color is compareable to the difference that separates man from woman. If that is so, then I'm not the only one who is hysterical here.

By the way I'm not a religious person, but i still think that religion is not always dark and idiotic, but is very often quite useful.

Marriages are divorced, because partners are not suitable, not because of their sexual orientation.

Really...there was someone who channeled God, we should give him this question.

The natural point (this is added to love and the happiness that two persons share) is to give birth to kids. Gay parents can't do that the natural way.

And, finally,
for all I care, gays may marry each other if they want, but the term "marriage" can not be used there. If having a partner of the same sex makes gays happy, go ahead. You want to know why marriage is fundamentally between man and woman? It's because otherwise humans would not have two sexes. We would be like dewworms. It is meant to be so. It's pure nature and that's it. If you don't like religion as a reason, then accept nature. And forget about asking "but we can change that" because that is acting against the very thing we are -- humans.

Gwathren

quote:Originally posted by Huwie

Here's the really dangerous part of your argument, Gwathren:

"I'm saying that if we give gays so many rights, they will be taken as a normal thing which I don't like."

...which you don't like.  So, you don't like the idea, huh?  Well fine, you're entitled to your opinion, but so what?  Why the hell should your personal likes/dislikes affect other people's very rights?!

What if gay people had all the power, and decided to ban heterosexual marriages simply because they didn't like it?  How would that make you feel?  And by the way, citing religious reasons amounts to exactly the same thing, because even if there is a god like the one the Bible describes, who is to say what he really thinks about it?  Furthermore, why should people who don't believe in that god be affected by his followers?

Deciding the rights of others based on your own personal opinions is dangerous and wrong.  There are no two ways about it.  It's wrong.

This will go on the account of my disability to express myself. I don't like it, because it's wrong. It's wrong because it's not natural. This does not get any simple then that. Prove me that nature has not expressed itself by designing man and woman as they look like -- different. Man and woman are different and they are meant to be so. Allowing legal unions between man and man and woman and woman raises their realtionships as high as is the marriage between man and woman. Call it whatever you want, but
it simply is not marriage.
If you are convinced that a family that consists of two men or women is just as good as the one between a man and a woman, then that is your opinion.

Gwathren

quote:Originally posted by Haematite

Gwathren - I read "Sinuhe" these days - great book...and "Turms" is also very good one[]

Did the idea come from my signature?[]

Ok, Hi Mustardseed

The archangel has not yet answered my questions, so maybe you will. Althgough the coolest would be if you both answered them. OK, here goes:

I'm working on a novel. It's quite a long one. By writing it, I am putting quite much of myself into this work. I don't have a writer's talent, but I'm trying and the idea itself is very good(not only my opinion).

I'd like to know,
1. is there any point of continuing writing my book
and
2. if he sees future, then what could he say about mine?

I am certain that God won't give the answers "yes"/"no", but if you could ask these, I'd still be very grateful.

May shadows reach the light,
Gwathren

quote:
If my attitude about men are similiar to a lesbian, then there is a sexuality aspect that divides us. I am heterosexual but find men a little overbearing sometimes,anger issues most likely. Too many better things to do than struggle with what is nonsense or power plays.Women do it too, I don't play that game either. I find women manipulate, whereas men get angry. I don't like either!

At the risk of sounding lesbian again, I do appreciate men that express, or at least recognize their female side. Not in the boohhoohoo way (though a good cry is good for anyone every once in a while).And not in the emotional wreck sense, but one who is sensitive toward where the other person is coming from. This very thing is something I have to work on myself. I have a tendency to not appreciate the sensitivity of others, mainly because it can, and is often used for manipulation of others. I guess that's part of the male aspect I express/recognize in myself.

Men are good at fixing things mechanical, I like that a lot. That doesn't mean I'm sexually attracted to them.However, it would be a great asset to have in a relationship. I can fix things myself to an extent, but I have other things to think about and do.A lot of times it seems men enjoy fixing things, it's a burden to me. And yes, there is a sense of accomplishment, but I get so tired of life's lessons sometimes.I just want to take the easy way sometimes.

So a kind man, who respects you just as much as you repect him will have no chance with you? Even when he is caring and loving and even tries to be your "soulmate"?

quote:Originally posted by wisp

Antranik,
Thanks for the cat info. I have heard of those things happening with cats. I hadn't thought about an aura as a possible route for encounters. It sure is something to think about.

The uniformity of the lighting of an object is also an important factor, I had forgotten that. I don't work at auras very much. I don't know if it's just me, but it seems to take some amount of energy to do it. It's well worth it though, if one is so inclined and interested. If I had more time and energy I would do it more.

Oh, an interesting aura experience I had last time I did it to myself (looking in a mirror).I saw a lot of falling white flakes flowing downward on me(usually the energy moves upward).These particles even obscured my face (never had the aura get in front of me). The even weirder part to this was that these particles had a burning feel. A very strange thing, and quite different from my other times looking at my own aura. I have had vibrational changes happen while looking at other people's auras. This is something more I want to seek out with future aura readings.

I forgot to mention another appearance of aura, sparkles. These are some interesting things to see too.

Don't get discouraged, Gwathren, it could be the energy factor I mentioned at the beginning of this post. Don't be in any hurry about it. Just do it when you feel like it, keep the fun in it. []

It might be a cool idea to make a subject about the magical powers of the cats. All that talk that they have 9 lives etc. Interesting...
But well, my question was more about does the object(the cat but also for example, the human or whatever else living thing) notice that they're aura is being watched?
OK, let's lessen the question to only about human being.[]

quote:Originally posted by wisp

What Gawathren is saying is very simple.The accepted concept of marriage is set.To allow a different set of standards will cause the purpose and function of the traditional marriage concept or idea to be muddled or weakened.

Another name other than marriage can and may be given to gay couples.Why is there such a demand for the name "marriage"? Legal purposes, of course.

There's a lot of names,words,and phrases out there for coupling or partnerships. Is this a challenge or attempt to destroy? It sure is beginning to appear that way! I hadn't realized it until reading this thread.

Political correctness shortcuts at the expense of the majority is a cheap trick! Why can't gay couples do it like everyone else in the political and legal arenas, or are they exempt from having to take the same routes everyone else has to (no pun intended)? It's an easy path to attach oneself to the concept of marriage. In this situation I highly suspect inheritance rights and other such things. It sounds like money gain,and legal and political maneuvering is behind all this. If so, it's bound to fail (universal law and all).

Special interest groups are getting better and better at what they do. Short term effects may look innocent enough, but the long term effects will leave a mark.

Gwathren, correct me if I didn't represent your point correctly, I've only read a few of these posts.

Thank you wisp,

Exactly, you got me right. Especially the sentance:
Short term effects may look innocent enough, but the long term effects will leave a mark.
By that I meant evolution. It's a problem like the low birth-rate in european countries. We don't notice it, but it will have an effect. The difference there is that the birth-rate may make a difference in years, but we  have no idea what will come out of this gay-marriage stuff after thousands and millions of years.

Sure, maybe nothing, but it might become a much bigger problem than we imagine right now.

As I've said I really have nothing against gays and lesbies, but marriage is something they really should not have. However, I am quite sure that they will have what they want. It's jsut a matter of time. And that's exactly what I don't like. We live in a free society. But after the flourishing free greece and rome came another period – medieval age. We know that history is custom to repeating itself. Something like that striking the hole world would not be beautiful and yes it's unimaginable and hysterical, so Gandalf, don't comment on that. By the way I don't think that peolple will start to ride on horses and fight with swords.

I think I've again thought a little off the topic, but that's me[] I won't say anything about making my "last post regardig a topic" again either.

Hoping that I have made clear my opinion about gays and lesbies,
May shadows reach the light,
Gwathren

quote:Originally posted by Gandalf
I would still like to see a good argument to back up your hysterical claim that gay relationships and gay marriage in particular will cause 'gayness' to threaten humanity. You havent shown any so far, apart from some wild kneejerk apocalyptic rants of biblical proportions.

Thank you for that, Gandalf,

You got me wrong. I don't try to say that straight people will be convinced to become gay. I'm saying that if we give gays so many rights, they will be taken as a normal thing which I don't like. Marriages are a way too big thing to let them have. Men should play their role and women theirs. You have not understood what I'm trying to say when I'm talking about EVOLUTION. This might be because english is not my native language and I'm still learning it, but maybe because you don't want to see what I'm getting at.

This is my last comment at this topic. I'm saying that the cause of human's downfall might be human itself. And the reason of that is forgetting what we really are(and not only being lesbies and gays).

I would actually add, that this very thing – homosexuality might eventually cause the end of human rule on Earth
I haven't seen this from a glass-ball. It's just a theory.
I have nothing against gays and lesbies, but I personally don't imagine sitting by the side of my wife at a party around the table with 5 more happy couples and one couple is formed by two men..
It's just not right.
That was my opinion. Accept it as I have accepted yours and don't think that you know what future will bring to the human race.
Mine was just a theory. It's a bit ridiculous, but I don't think that 2004 years ago anyone imagined what human can do now.

Now, with best regards let us stop this arguing. Maybe I can find a way to express myself better and I'll pm you.

But Gandalf,
I never say something hysterical,
I have my view of things and you have yours,
Don't say I'm wrong

That's all,
May shadows reach the light,
Gwathren

quote:Originally posted by Gandalf

Gwathren_

What paint have you been sniffing?

What I say here wasnt intended as an argument against your earlier statement, it was just a comment about homosexuality in the ancient world in general.

As for your earlier comments, I would still like to see your evidence for how homosexuality may 'threaten the future of humanity'.

I say again, that the percentage of gay/bisexual population in ANY given society: Classical, Masai tribesman, modern western, whatever, (never mind whether they have straight relationships also) has always been, is and always will be *tiny* compared to the vast majority of the heterosexual population.
If you can show me any human society past or present in the entire history of humanity that shows otherwise, then I'd like to see your evidence; otherwise, please refrain from making hysterical comments about how gays may 'threaten humanity' and 'form a part of the end times'. Such extremism only fuels more prejudice.

Douglas

I don't sniff paint, Douglas
(whatever that means)

I don't say that tomorrow gays will make Earth explode. It's just that NEVER had they had the right to get married to each other. I KNOW that you talked about ancient times, so did I. I'll repeat: yes of course gays and lesbies have existed for a long time, but THEY HAVE NEVER HAD THE RIGHT TO MARRY.

That was my point. I would like them not to have that right either. They might be the end of the world -- if they become a normal thing, then more and more people may become not heterosexual. They have existed what? 8000 years? The end of the world might be I don't know like umm... after millions of years? I'm talking about evolution here, Douglas. I am not an idiot, so don't take me as one. These are processes that take a long time. Have you observed the changes that take place during millions of years? Has any "tiny minority" of a species ever tried to be not heterosexual, for example do you imagine gay-dinosaurs?

That's weird isn't it? But remember, human is only an animal with brains.

Gwathren

OK, I didn't believe at first that you have this contact for real, but now that you have answered all these questions...the thing is that I myself have two questions.

Like yourself, I'm working on a novel. It's quite a long one. By writing it, I am putting quite much of myself into this work. I don't have a writer's talent, but I'm trying and the idea itself is veryu good(not only my opinion).

I know this seems worthy of the response: "grow up"(either by you or your buddy michael, although he might say it in a more delicate way), but..

I'd like to know,
1. is there any point of continuing my book
and
2. if he see future, then what could he say about mine?

Very, very grateful, if you could ask these two questions[]

I guess since he is an archangel he should know who is asking..

...poor men...
OH GOD!
..poor future me..
[B)]
[xx(]

quote:Originally posted by dkj400

Could you explain Tartarus some more? It sounds interesting.

Yes, Hephaestus?

By the way Hephaestus was god of "metallurgy-of-ancient greece", but I guess you can say he's the god of fire.

Isn't tartarus "the hell" by the belief of ancient greek religion?

quote:Originally posted by Nagual
Oops, I'm not really a woman... [|)]

No-no, if you feel like one, then please do not hesitate to answer the question[][]

quote:Originally posted by pyro4571

just out of curiosity, where is estonia?

I knew it was just a matter of time that someone asks that question. Estonia is one of the countries who is joining the EU this year. You know Finland? It's in north-eastern europe. Estonia is a little south from there.

quote:Originally posted by Gandalf

Gwathren_
Yes, I too accept that homosexuality in the classical period cannot be directly compared to homosexuality in today's world. I was just pointing out that homosexuality played a role in Classical Greek society.

We have to remember that the Classical era is too wide an area to apply one definition in any case.
For example, with regards to Greece: In Athens it was acceptable for an adult man to engage in sexual relations with a boy (ages 12-18 approx); this was viewed as a vital part of a youth's education.
However, sex between two adult men was viewed as perverse!!!

In Sparta however, sex between two adult men was accepted.
However, with all these case, we are talking about the customs of the upper classes, and it is likely the case that these customs were not generally shared by the common people.

In Rome, contrary to popular belief, homosexuality was actually frowned upon, although, again in the upper classes it did tend to go on in private; however it was seen as contrary to traditional Roman values and a feature of 'Greekness'.

For example, archaeological evidence from a region where Antony was laying siege to one of Octavian's (later Augustus) strongholds, catapult shot has been recovered which has graffiti inscribed upon it with insults which refer to Octavian as a gay f***!!! Clearly, to be accused of such leanings was not exactly a compliment!

Regards,
Douglas

...but all these men were MARRIED to women.

That's the very thing I was trying to say.
[]

quote:Originally posted by Gandalf
Of course christians like yourself are perfectly free to express your beliefs on this matter, as are jews or muslims, and if you feel that marriages are holy ceremonies sanctioned by god and only applying to straight couples then it is fine for you to apply this to members of your own religious community.

Gandalf (by the way you are my favourite character in "the lord of the rings"),

I am not a christian[]
I simply think that marriage is more than a social thing. You don't have to get married to have a relationship. But I leave you be, I'm afraid our beliefs here are too different.

Peace to you,

Gwathren

Edit: By the way I read your profile, that you know about antique, do you agree that the position of gays and lesbies in the antique is not comparable to their situation at this time?

quote:Originally posted by Mystic Cloud

quote:hysterix wrote:

Leyla, my bodily age of 18 means nothing. I'm more spirtually advanced than you and thats all that truly counts to me. You say I come on here, masquerading, and fraudulently trying to pass myself off as a spiritual person?

By saying that you are more spiritually advanced than someone, really just neglets your own spirituality and you step out into your ego-self which isn't spiritual at all. [}:)] I would think that someone truly spiritual would not say a thing like that [] But no one is perfect, and I must confess I've done it myself too many times in the past. But lately it has been going to a better direction.

I think that Socrates had it right when he said his famous words about knowing something[]

The white robes are cool, but their point is excrement. They should not insult cool white robes by wearing them. They should wear something that looks as excrement as their ideas are.

quote:Originally posted by Mystic Cloud

You should first start out with living plants. The faster they grow the easier it is to see their aura.

Well if you get a human to stand still 15 minutes infront of a white wall, then why not.

I also noticed that you see the aura easier if there is direct sunlight coming to the target.

Ok, but how can I be sure that the aura is really an aura. For example with the books the "auras" were so...chemichal. But the sort of chemichal that you see every once in a while when you have suddenly blinked your eyes or something. Then everyone sees auras sometimes, they don't simply admit it to themselves. Or are these only mirages?

quote:Originally posted by Mystic Cloud
Actually I'll give you some background detail on the OBE process.
Many think that when you get out of your body, you leave your body 'empty' like a seashell, but this is not however true at all. You are still as much present in your real body even when you are outside. You see your OBE is only a COPY of your real body. You get 2 separate memories, one for your OBE body and one for your Physical body. So you could be OBEing and doing whatever you like in the astral while your Physical body is eating lunch after a 'failed' exit attempt.

The benefits of being OBE when psychic attack occurs (based on my intuition not real experience) is that you are in DIRECT connect with everything, so that means you can summon up a real big blue flaming holy avenger sword and bless it with gods name and kick the living *S**T* out of those harrassing you.

You shouldn't be afraid of them, because that is what they want. They can only inflict terror and some 'pain' but no direct real damage. The real damage only occurs if they get hold of you under a longer period of time, and this can still be reversed to 100%.

I like to see them as 'sparring' partners. Something which you can train yourself with.

So my suggestion is: Give in to the fear and see what happens, if something negative starts happening become a Spiritual warrior and slice and dice 'em back to where they came from, otherwise just observe what happens and maybe you will get a gift (OBEing) for example.

Can "holy avengar" be also used against criminals who harrass you at night in a dark street?[]

By the way I'd also add the worst horror movie and that would be "wrong turn". Nothing new there, just the old stuff, that human-mutants fight with innocent tourists and blah-blah-blah...