bruce #fundie

bruce #fundie momof9splace.com

Whether you realize it or not, men look at certain portions of the body; and it doesn’t matter whether you think that is good, bad, or otherwise, they are going to do it. And if you wear clothing that attracts attention to that, you are just helping them in their sin. That’s why a dress, unless it’s too tight, is better than pants; because a dress does not draw the attention to that part of the body that people look at and lust after.

52 comments

old comment by FundieVisionInc 2.0

"rolls eyes"

So in less than four sentences you've proven yourself to both misandrist and misogynistic. Impressive bruce, I think you may have a career as Davey-Poo's sidekick unless Jerry beats you out first. (We all know Jerry secret crush of Davey-Poo and/or Jeebus.)

So. Let's see how we can disprove your pathetic assertions today shall we?

1. Physical attraction is not something to be ashmed of, repressed, or viewed with anything other than acknowledgement. It is a natural state and a lack of physical attraction can signal health problems in some people. (Unless you're asexual)

The only thing wrong with physical attraction is when it is used to make either sex uncomfortable or fearful. No means no brucey. Remember that.

2. Women are not responsible for the feelings of men. By making them so, you both place unfair responsibility for the feelings of the male sex on women, and indicate that men are weaker than women since women apparently have so much power over men.

3. Men are fully capable of self control in most cases and specific mental illnesses and behavioral problems aside, the ones who are not are douchebags and the shameful minority of the male sex. Men may feel lust because it 'is' a natural response, but they don't have to act like bufoons.

Also Brucey? Women feel lust too. Women like sex, sometimes more than men, and they want to do nasty and naughty things to decent guys and sometimes girls who respect them.

old comment by Oxymoron's Razor

<That’s why a dress, unless it’s too tight, is better than pants; because a dress does not draw the attention to that part of the body that people look at and lust after.>

Small flaw in that theory, Bruce-not-so-Mighty. What little, if any, lust I feel tends to be aimed above the waist, so a dress (depending on the style) will at best make no difference, at worst, be far more inclined to promote said lust.

@Jerry

Birches? Does your particular sect require you to wear wooden pants, Jerry? Are the splinters they cause the reason why you act like such an intolerant person? It might help you to switch to fabrics for your clothing options... I hear there's this new thing called 'Denim'

old comment by Indicible

@ Jerry

The fact pants were not widely known and even less used during biblical time does not even seem to cross your mind.
For all intents and purposes, Jesus and co were wearing dresses. Naughty crossdressers...

Your book is just that: a book. It's a political document. Now, if and when somebody starts quoting the communist manifesto or Mao's red book as a justification, you can tell them to shove it. The same applies here: shove it. Your book is a load of crock. It is the work of a handful of conmen who figured the best way to control people was to make them believe there was a celestial vindictive Peeping Tom.
I guess it is comforting to believe in a set of rules. Problem is, those rules are outdated and do not reflect the complexity of the world. Get over it. Santa Claus is comforting too, but at some point, you need to outgrow it.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Gay Jerry

"The reason women are to be dressed in modest dresses is because the Bible says so. It tells women to be modest in appearance and it prohibits cross-dressing."

image

Your Queen Jesus hung around with twelve men two of whom were sailors; one of said twelve kissed him. Hardly associated with women, if ever. Never married one. Told others to 'Love your fellow man'.

And as proved above, he wore a dress too.

Since he's not wearing trousers, therefore he is Satan. You said it, I didn't.

remember, Jer: Gay King, thus Gay Bible (the basis of your 'Biblical Christianity: the Queen James Version), therefore Gay God.

'the Bible says so. It tells women to be modest in appearance and it prohibits cross-dressing', you say? Then your 'Lord' is a tranny! Look at that long hair too! He's an abomination, according to your own doctrinal logic.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@90-Pound Weakling Jerry

image

'We Icelandic men are strong, because we do whatever our womenfolk tell us to!'

-Jon-Pall Sigmarsson

Note what he's wearing. I challenge you to go to any pub in Scotland - I suggest those in Glasgow - and shout out 'Men who wear Kilts are Jessies!'

I'll remember to place a flower on your Grave, Jer. If there's anything left of you to bury, that is. >:D

"Jesus did not wear a dress"

How do you know? Were you there?

If your answer is the only one possible, then your J-boy did wear a dress. And he had long hair, the Jessie!

Because if you can't find any empirical secular peer reviewed evidence to the contrary, then thank you for admitting that your J-boy never existed to determine what garb he wore.

Enjoy your paradox, Jer: Either he was a crossdressser, and therefore an abomination, or he didn't exist, and there's your 'Biblical Christianity' completely fucked, then. >:D

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@SpukiKitty

The reason why Jerry the Jessie daren't answer you, is because you have something he hasn't: Balls.

...that, and the simple fact that if he did answer us (and none of that argument-evading 'Christians don't answer questions' BS; remember: 1 Thessalonians 5:21 [QJV]: 'Prove all things (which means exactly that; no 'Interpretation' allowed. It says it that way, it means it that way: using the Scientific Method, prove your 'claims' to our satisfaction), he'd be so argumentally cornered, he'd probably have no alternative but to do a Jonathan Edwards.

...don't forget Jessie... er, I mean Jerry, he's having his Salvation cake and eating it as an Atheist; OSAS, and all that jazz.

'Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.'

-Marcus Aurelius

And that ancient Roman won the bet way before Pascal existed to make his 'Wager': eviscerating him with his verbal gladius way before William of Ockham slit Pascal up a treat with his 'Razor'.

To paraphrase Capt. James T. Kirk in "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier": What does God need with 'Belief'?

'Worship'. 'Glory'. A truly transcenent being requires not such irrelevancies. For such an 'Omnipotent' being is above mere mortal things.

'You proceed from a false assumption. I am a Vulcan: I have no ego to bruise.'

-Spock (Leonard Nimoy), "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan"

image

Those such as Ebon - Luciferans - are right then. [/Anna Diehl]

old comment by FundieVision Inc

"cracks knuckles"

@SpukiKitty

If men have to cover up? Dog needs to be killed and replaced with a deity that understands that ogling is good and proper, and that lust is awesome.

Actually no, we need to replace the fundie version of Dog for the entire fucking Old Testament. Ogling is just a bonus.

@ Jerry-Chan

Jerry-Poo has never answered my points on Satan, The Garden, and the morality of his God.

He's been very evasive on answering my points on his One True Way (tm) (I will get that bitch copyrighted.)

Tell me Jerry-Poo, How can you claim to have "True Biblical Christianity (tm)" When you acknowledge that Protestants are Christians, and many have been true Christians? You see, there are numerous denominations within the Protestant umbrella, and each has their own ideas of what Dog wants, and his handbook says.

By admitting Protestants can be Christians, you acknowledge the veracity of their approaches to The Bible, and this means...you're "One True Way" is simply one among many.

"smiles coldly"

Which means Jerry-Poo your declarations I was never a Christian are simply your opinon, and are bullshit as various Protestant faiths acknowledge that people leave the faith.

I was a Protestant Jerry-Poo, and thus a Christian by your own definition

bruce #fundie momof9splace.com

52 comments

Confused?