Strange how having a baby seems to limit your time to post not mention being so Kn!*%$ed that you cant think straight. So here is thought from a friend

Dr. Laura Schlessinger is an American radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It’s funny, as well as
informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the
homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to
curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? – Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted fan ……..

Hat tip to Dave Wiles

Wild Seven the movieThe Wackness movie full

Over the Easter weekend we went with my 12 year old son and 9 year daughter out for lunch. It was great place with a large conservatory and plenty of tables outside. Being a sunny day we decided to eat outside. The children and I went in to get a menu and my son took one out to Lori, the sliding door he tried shut on the way bounced back and was left half open. After looking at the specials board an older very posh lady completely started on me complaining my children had no manners, and left the door open (bear in mind she was sitting in a conservatory and it was 20 degrees outside) I explained my son was not rude had very good manners and if she had asked him to shut the door he would have done so. I was told “don’t even bother, do you not know how to bring up children!” I started to reply arguing that my children had good manners, but she cut me off saying “don’t bother, go away you silly man” I stood there partly in shock, and said I was going no where. So stood there for a while whilst she grumbled and moaned at me some more.

Standing in line to get the food a older couple came up to me and said, ” your children were not impolite in the slightest and it is grumpy old people like that – that give us a bad name” Several other older people in the conservatory tried to protest to her that she had been unreasonable. A few even came outside to eat as the that atmosphere she exuded was so negative.

On leaving I wished I had taken a photo of her as I thought we could start a website titled “Is this the grumpiest person in Britain”El cártel full

Hows this for cuteness!

Indiana Lily Passmore arrived 21st February 5.30 am weighing in at 6lbs, Two weeks early. Mum and baby came home yesterday but Indiana does not like her moses basket and only seems to sleep on daddys shoulder or mummys arms.Slipstream psp

American Outlaws movie download

People Tell Me That I’m Not Pragmatic.

I have a tendency to be a bit stubborn sometimes and not do what people want because I believe that it would be wrong for me to do that particular thing. They usually think that it would be right for me to do that particular thing and tell me that I need to be pragmatic and do it anyway.

So I’d come to think that I wasn’t pragmatic and that perhaps I was dogmatic.

Then I heard someone comment that pragmatism was just another name for hypocrisy! Which I took to mean that a pragmatist often did stuff that he didn’t believe he should.

Well…

Pragmatic – solving problems in a realistic way which suits the present conditions rather than obeying fixed theories, ideas or rules

Whereas dogmatic is about having a dogma or a set of rules.

I tend to think that what we do reflects what we really believe, so if I stick to a particular path then that is a result of what I believe. That belief isn’t necessarily a rules based belief – it isn’t necessarily being dogmatic or following a dogma. Belief can be anarchic and not rules based, it can come from a faith that is alive within you. It also doesn’t mean that I’m not pragmatic.

A pragmatist is really someone who recognises that rules aren’t good enough to determine what you should do (I would say that God is a pragmatist because he has given us the option to know in our hearts what to do, moment by moment, rather than relying on an Old Testament style set of rules).

So a pragmatist can still be someone who does what he believes, they don’t have to be a hypocrite.

So I reckon that, despite feeling strongly about specific things in my life and whether they are right or wrong, I’m actually a pragmatist because my belief doesn’t come from a fixed set of rules, but is a more anarchic belief that comes from faith which is something bigger than can be expressed in a set of rules.

So now I know how to answer people who accuse me of not being a pragmatist!Black Irish video

The snow finally arrived this week in Somerset, unfortunatly it came in the form of paperwork and marking! Whilst it is tempting to try to make snowballs, not sure it would go down too well with the students. Might have thawed through by Monday.Blood and Chocolate hd

After some thought and reading I’d like to post a follow up to this last post on money and debt.

Debt money, which is basically based on an assurance from one person to another that the debt will be paid (you may wish to re-read the above mentioned post) can suffer from a confidence problem.

When you accept a promise from someone you are trusting that it will be kept in the expected manner. However, over history many governments (the largest promiser of IOUs) just attempt to print their way out of trouble, creating more and more ‘IOUs’ (credit notes/cash that doesn’t have intrinsic value) thus making the existing money more and more worthless.

So the promise of efficient money by using promises to repay (debt money) is tempered by the risk that the promise will be undermined.

On the other hand using valuable assets as money is far less risky – what is the risk that an asset that is considered to have worthwhile value will plummet to a tiny fraction of it’s current worth? However, it can happen, asset values do vary. So what kind of asset would you want to bank with – something which is useful perhaps, something which is rare?

Ultimately, it is a speculative choice either way – debt money (promises) or asset money (valuable commodities).

With regards to yesterdays post “Having All in Common” I’m tempted to imagine that money isn’t something that would exist in the full on coming (and here) Kingdom of God. After all isn’t money something that gives us ownership of something, something we use to trade something we own for something someone else owns?

So, does God prefer asset money to debt money? I don’t know! He says don’t owe others stuff, but then he says that we should continue to return the debt of love…

Ah well, maybe the above discussion is irrelevant? Maybe I’ll have to give it some more thought…