Thread: SCOTUS decides on Prop 8 :D

Originally Posted by HeavyG

Wrong... There are plenty of tax write offs that you can take advantage of if you are filing a joint return vs a single return.

For example, I am unmarred and filed individually. Because my income was over $75k last year, I was unable to write off interest paid towards student loans. If I filed a joint return, our combined income limit would have been $150k, which would have been over our combined income, allowing us both to claim our interest paid towards student loans.

There are many other benefits from being married, such as higher income ranges for USDA home loan approvals (I was over the limit for the no down payment program but could have been within the limit if I was approved), IRA contribution benefits, and as someone stated before, medical benefits which can really make a difference, especially when your "significant other" is unemployed and would not be eligible for benefits otherwise.

I cant speak to IRA's but i can speak to medical which the benefit is actually 0. We cant sit around and pretend that there isnt free health care already. People take advantage of it every day. Anyone can file for a joint loan. Taxes are a good topic because there is wiggle room to go either direction. However a good accountant can write damn near anything off so i cant say i completely agree with you on it but i can concede on it.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

I would beg to differ. Jeremiah 22:13-17

Uh, I don't think this means what you think it means. However, if you could please explain what nomenclature you see in these verses that make you think the Bible is expressly calling the act of owning slaves sin.

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Uh, I don't think this means what you think it means. However, if you could please explain what nomenclature you see in these verses that make you think the Bible is expressly calling the act of owning slaves sin.

I think it means exactly what i think it means. Thats the problem with living your life thru a book that is chock full of ways to interpret everything.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

Well it's pretty plain in its meaning. The biggest problem non-believers and some so-called Christians have is taking scripture out of context and with no understanding of who wrote it or why. When you think it's all made up in the first place as you do DG, then that's an easy mistake to make.

Your right it is pretty plain in its meaning which is you pay people a wage for work done. Whether i think its made up or not is irrelevant. If i had said i go to church we would be discussing the different interpretations not whether or not i made a mistake interpreting it.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

I think it means exactly what i think it means. Thats the problem with living your life thru a book that is chock full of ways to interpret everything.

I'll address your comment in two parts since you are making two different points. The Bible is open for interpretation. But when you open it, you begin with a healthy dose of incredulity before you ever actually read what it has to say. Whether or not that has been that way your whole life is up to you. The thing is, you are more than welcome to make those assumptions. But there is a reason we study this book over and over and over and over. Because like any good book or movie, there are always things to be picked up that you may have missed the first 20 times.

Now, if you're telling me that you've read the Bible countless times, in every version there is, with a worldview which accepted it as 100% true, then we can certainly have a debate about what you think a particular verse means. Why? Because we're both accepting certain core, foundational beliefs in which to have that conversation. But since I highly doubt the above is true, then to sit here for another 20 pages explaining something that I don't think you want to fully see from my point of view in the first place kinda feels like a waste of time to me. But since we're on the topic of 'rules'...

I'm sure if I asked you to give me the complete abridged version of the rules for football, basketball, or baseball you would happily quote them as if they were a part of you. You may even cite a critical need for them in order to enjoy the game. You would argue that you can't have multiple sources of rules, instead you'd want a unified compilation of rules in a single format so that everyone knows, and can abide by those rules for the harmony of everyone.

Does TPG not have specific rules for this very forum? Are they not found in a single post at the top of this forum? And yet, even when those rule are written down, people still find a way to interpret them don't they? We had that very incident earlier in this thread. Yet when people look at the Bible, they make all these assumptions about interpretation. They don't read everything, they select bits and pieces. You can't agree to only a certain portion of the Baseball handbook can you? No, you have to agree to the whole thing. Only then does it make sense. It is only then where consistency is reached. Imagine a player hitting a baseball, then running to third base, only to turn around and run home for a score. How asinine would that be? Would anyone listen what that guy thought about baseball? Or was he simply choosing to interpret his version of baseball and forcing everyone else to agree with him.

The same thing is happening here.

You're taking a handful of versus from the Bible, from a book in the old testament, which spoke of a way of life Jesus himself came to abolish, and using it to suggest that listening to said book is chocked full of ways to interpret things (many of which you may feel is wrong).

Saying, "you're wrong", is too easy. I would rather say, you don't have the full meaning behind it. Even if you have read the Bible through and through, I would be like someone telling me they've read through the whole tax code once or twice, or ten times. They still would have no idea what they were talking about.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

Still no explanation regarding how owning a slave is a sin. You do realize that most slaves back then sold themselves into slavery right? Meaning their family was paid a ton of money for them to become a slave for a certain time. Criminals would of course kidnap people, put them into slavery, etc. and other things would happen like a conquered people would be forced into slavery... Which do you think this passage referred to?

Ultimately this passage is more about leadership than anything. But taken out of context I guess you can decide what you want.

We still haven't been able to translate the oldest bible we've found correct?

Originally Posted by Ranger10

I'll address your comment in two parts since you are making two different points. The Bible is open for interpretation. But when you open it, you begin with a healthy dose of incredulity before you ever actually read what it has to say. Whether or not that has been that way your whole life is up to you. The thing is, you are more than welcome to make those assumptions. But there is a reason we study this book over and over and over and over. Because like any good book or movie, there are always things to be picked up that you may have missed the first 20 times.

Now, if you're telling me that you've read the Bible countless times, in every version there is, with a worldview which accepted it as 100% true, then we can certainly have a debate about what you think a particular verse means. Why? Because we're both accepting certain core, foundational beliefs in which to have that conversation. But since I highly doubt the above is true, then to sit here for another 20 pages explaining something that I don't think you want to fully see from my point of view in the first place kinda feels like a waste of time to me. But since we're on the topic of 'rules'...

I'm sure if I asked you to give me the complete abridged version of the rules for football, basketball, or baseball you would happily quote them as if they were a part of you. You may even cite a critical need for them in order to enjoy the game. You would argue that you can't have multiple sources of rules, instead you'd want a unified compilation of rules in a single format so that everyone knows, and can abide by those rules for the harmony of everyone.

Does TPG not have specific rules for this very forum? Are they not found in a single post at the top of this forum? And yet, even when those rule are written down, people still find a way to interpret them don't they? We had that very incident earlier in this thread. Yet when people look at the Bible, they make all these assumptions about interpretation. They don't read everything, they select bits and pieces. You can't agree to only a certain portion of the Baseball handbook can you? No, you have to agree to the whole thing. Only then does it make sense. It is only then where consistency is reached. Imagine a player hitting a baseball, then running to third base, only to turn around and run home for a score. How asinine would that be? Would anyone listen what that guy thought about baseball? Or was he simply choosing to interpret his version of baseball and forcing everyone else to agree with him.

The same thing is happening here.

You're taking a handful of versus from the Bible, from a book in the old testament, which spoke of a way of life Jesus himself came to abolish, and using it to suggest that listening to said book is chocked full of ways to interpret things (many of which you may feel is wrong).

Saying, "you're wrong", is too easy. I would rather say, you don't have the full meaning behind it. Even if you have read the Bible through and through, I would be like someone telling me they've read through the whole tax code once or twice, or ten times. They still would have no idea what they were talking about.

So i dont have the full meaning because i haven't read it over and over and over yet you say its read over and over because people continue to pick up on things. So i say it sounds like no one knows the full meaning of the book. I also have to say why would your interpretation be any more correct then mine?