­

I heard it was a blast.

I know this was symbolic of the covenant, but what was the point?

Why cut off the foreskin?

"For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." - Matthew 5:20

Right before this verse, Jesus talks about how those who follow his commandments get rewards, but those who do not would not get rewards, but then it says, "in the kingdom of heaven," implying that you can even preach against the laws and still go to Heaven.

"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." - Matthew 5:19

Someone explain these to me plz.

I don't get it.

Why does 20 seem to contradict 19, and all the other stuff Jesus said in John?

Satan is in the Bible too, not just God.

I guess even atheists understand that it is immoral to insult your own father.

Let's see...

Patriot Act: Section 215:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation

or a designee of the Director (whose rank shall be no lower than

Assistant Special Agent in Charge) may make an application for

an order requiring the production of any tangible things (including

books, records, papers, documents, and other items) for an investiga-

tion to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intel-

ligence activities

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So.... The FBI may seize anything for an investigation against "terrorism?"

Hold on a second...

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." - 4th Amendment

Read that. Isn't that clear as day? You need a warrant for seizing property. You can't just take it.

There goes the 4th.

National Defense Authorization Act: Section 1021:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the

President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to

the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40;

50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces

of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in sub-

section (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section

is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided

the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,

or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported

al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged

in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,

including any person who has committed a belligerent act or

has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy

forces.

(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a

person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may

include the following:

(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until

the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for

Use of Military Force.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hold ON a second! Let's look at that again...

"the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to ... detain ... any person who has committed a belligerent act ... Detention under the law of war without trial"

So, they can basically throw ANYONE in prison who has committed a "belligerent act"? Let's take a look at something...

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury" - Sixth Amendment

I mean, it's not rocket science people. You can't imprison people without a trial.

When I take old McDonald's burgers out of the fridge, the cheese always is stuck to the wrapping paper and I can't get it all out, and I tend to accidentally eat some left-over paper that I couldn't get out of the cheese.

Is this unhealthy?

I've been wondering this for a few weeks now so could someone tell me?

Okay, I understand preferences. I completely understand that you may prefer Sony, or even Microsoft, over Nintendo. But what is it that leads people to hate Nintendo?

I don't see how any gamer could HATE Nintendo, it doesn't make any sense to me. Nintendo really launched the home console business. With crappy games like ET, it was dying, but Nintendo practically resurrected it. Not only that, but they have been around the longest, since 1889. They always makes their consoles free, always provide great customer support, and even give back physical items to their fans (and pretty high quality stuff, too, completely free). They even made gaming how it is today. Notice the Start/Select button on your controllers? Originally, this was sometimes seen on arcade machines. Selected switched between selections in the menu, and Start started the game with that selection. Nintendo adapted this since their NES was meant to be like a home arcade system. They even started that.

I just don't see how any true gamer can hate on Nintendo. Not only are they historically deserving of respect, but they still currently provide great customer support and give back to their users. Not only that, but their systems are great. Sure, the Wii may have inferior graphics, but the mass amount of creativity and work that goes into every single 1st party title is just astounding.

I post this because I had a couple people stop being my friends because I liked Nintendo.

I don't literally mean they all text "omg" or something, I mean every culture.

Americans say "oh my god"

Spanish peeps say "dios mio"

Portuguese dudes say "deus meu"

Serbian "o boze"

Russian "boze moi"

Spanish "dios mio"

Arabic "ya-llah"

German "mein gott"

French "mon dieu"

Turkish "allahim"

Croatian "boze moj"

You see my point? I just find this weird. Why does every culture feel the need to mention an omniscient being as an exclamation?

Like, 90% of the people I see on the internet are perverts, assholes, bigots, or just plain retards. But in real like, like 90% of the people I meet are smarter and kinder.

What is it about the internet that makes people turn stupid? Or does it just attract stupid people?