also in the bible:

Isiah 5:19 19Who say, "Let Him make speed, let Him hasten His work, that we may see it; And let the purpose of the Holy One of Israel draw near And come to pass, that we may know it!"

20Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

21Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight!…

science has but r reluctant to say. is this.

They have found off of the African coast, Austrailian coast and elsewhere that their seems to of at one time been a collapse of the ocean floor. This is why they keep finding antient cities they believe on the ocean floor close to land.

They have said that it is possible their used to be a lot more land than their is now. that if their was a lot of water under this land in huge cavities and as the Bible says the Fountains of the earth Sprang forth emptying these cavises under the ground that a world wide flood would probally cause these empty caverans to collapse. hence this would cause whole cities to disappear and sink to where they are now. This they have said would explain where all the water of the earth went. right back to where it was, except the land now would be under the water and our oceans much larger. Science does not want to believe in a world wide flood. But they will admit that their was a large collapse of land for some reason in times past. Science is funny how it is wrong constantly and then they say oh well we know more now. Yet the scriptures have to be right all the time or it is of no use. What if Science had to live up to that same standard? would it be useless, a fairly tale?

they say if we look at the world map all of where the water is was becouse of the flooding and one day land will reach across oceans and be all land again and water will have dried up ... ok that was the history channel talking or Cosmo's can't remember ... Noak may have built a ark but I do not believe he had the power to get each animal by twos in that ark... I believe in miracles but that one is a little hard to believe ...

Perhaps, but Mathew doesn't speak of Jeremiah. Says "Jeremy". "Nicnames" weren't aren't used in the scriptures. Nicnames such as my full name is Gregory, but more usually go by Greg. That is not the same as Jeremiah and Jeremy, two different names, two different persons. And besides that no "book" was even mentioned in Mat.

aww,, ya don't know me well at all,,,,

speaking about it (which I actually don't talk about a lot)is not the same as being 'uptight' about it,,,,

unless you are 'uptight' about religion,, but I wouldn't describe you that way,,, a bit biased, for sure,,, but not 'uptight'

Im a gal, yo.

lol. Nothing you can make that can't be made
No one you can save that can't be saved
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be you in time
It's easy

All you need is love

Pennsylvania moved to Europe?

yes

one is sex for sex sake, one is sex for rents sake

but both are consentual sex,,,

and of course, those who engage in sex for sex sake may find a relationship,,,,


and those having sex for money may find the 'rewards' of sex,,,,

most everyone is a breeder by physical design, just not by choice

I don't mind that at all

Im not sure of the scientific term for those who engage in and encourage and support casual sex,, but casual sexer seemed the shorter and most direct way to phrase it,,,

suggestions are welcome

real life is also not just what our work exposes us to

just taking issue with the use of the word 'most',, although 'most' that you worked with may have been,,,,,,

leading you to believe that MOST of all are,,,,

I can say, in my experience, most people who engage often in 'casual' sex with those they have no intimate bond to beyond physical attraction are also damaged on some level,,,

doesn't mean it is true of MOST casual sexers period,,,though.



and if I were to engage in the limited definition of prostitution as those sex slaves, it seems the correct emotion to feel towards them is empathy and compassion, not disgust and inferiority,,

the latter being what confuses me amongst those who claim that casual sex is perfectly fine and healthy,,,,

yes it is offensive, as well as insensitive(considering it's your own son) and ignorant.....but that's just me, I don't think belittling someone else is funny.