calfoxwc Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Don't they have anything better to do? http://wcbstv.com/health/cheerios.general.....2.1007986.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Now we know why only one new thread a day is allowed on this board. Cheerios? C'mon Cal, when are you going to grow up? Oh c'mon, you don't think the plan to tax everything in the world merits at least a little attention?? Let's put em in the same category as Pfizer...... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Now we know why only one new thread a day is allowed on this board. Cheerios? C'mon Cal, when are you going to grow up? Dan **************************************** This is my one thread. It's news. The Obama admin/FDA is arguing with General Mills about the claims of Cheerios. Grow up... hmmmm. that means I have to let you and mz the pussy and Al decide what I am allowed to post? Do you have anything non-confrontational to add to the discussion? It's also funny. And while laughter may be considered childish, I think not. Which supports what some of us have said in the past: Liberals have no sense of humor, so they hate it when conservatives do. I call it the "liberal humor envy syndrome". In real life, I am very mature. But I am also funny and analytical. But not too analytical - that could get my earlobe pinched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Cheerios should do like wheeties does, they plave sports heros on the front of the box, cheerios should put Miss California. Carrie Prejean on the front of the box. She is a Hero who has been dis-creditedby liberals who got their panties twisted in a wad. Atleast Donald Trump gets it. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/reliable-...d=news-col-blog Facsism is here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 some bimbo model from california is a hero? holy xxxx, now ive heard it all......that's probably the funniest, most ridiculous shit i'll hear this month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 If you want to think about all the pussies who dont speak about how they feel over an issue, she is heroic. To many people stay silent in fear of being attacked by the liberal media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 This thread is brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aloysius Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 She might not be a hero in the saving lives sense of the word, but you can't deny this woman was extremely brave. She's miss California, representing one of the most liberal states in the country and on live TV when addressed by a gay man said what she believes. She didn't go the politically correct route. She had to of known that giving an answer like that would be extremely controversial and severely hurt her chances of winning. I really don't get this. Is it really an act of courage for her to repeat what her parents and teachers had taught her? If she had taken what you think is the easy path and endorsed gay marriage on national television, wouldn't she have risked social alienation from her relatives and friends? That, I think, is a far greater risk, especially when endorsing gay marriage probably wouldn't have guaranteed her the win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 If she had taken what you think is the easy path and endorsed gay marriage on national television, wouldn't she have risked social alienation from her relatives and friends? That, I think, is a far greater risk, especially when endorsing gay marriage probably wouldn't have guaranteed her the win. Hey sounds like Obammy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 ' BTW how'd this thread get here? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 so its brave to speak your mind when others disagree? i thought that was bigotry....face it.....do you consider a woman that champions abortion to be a hero? perhaps people on the left do.....she's standing up for what she believes...so by that logic, she's a hero. yet, conservatives would call her a murder. hmmm...... calling this chick a hero makes real hero's everywhere look bad..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I have to go to the store and buy some Cheerios. And blueberries. I need a gardening/farming forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We need Tom Tupa Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I appreciate the point one of Sullivan's readers made last week. If she had given the opposite answer, would we have seen the same reaction from the people that disagreed with her? Would her personal life have been investigated and exposed night after night on cable news? Would her every embarrassing decision have been used to discredit her? I only make the point because I think it's worth remembering the next time you want to complain about the self-righteous Right that thinks they are right and you are wrong. The Rovian monsters that attack the people they disagree with. The Left has spent more skewering teenage girls than anybody in Washington lately. High road and all that. We should all be very proud of ourselves. The level of discourse is higher than ever, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aloysius Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Didn't mean to say that she was simply parroting what had been drilled into her. My point was more subtle: in a moment of tension, wouldn't it be more natural to come back to the beliefs and views you grew up with, especially if you haven't rejected them? And even if she had privately rejected them, I think you're way underestimating the degree to which expressing religious views different from family members can be difficult and/or can dissolve familial bonds. And that doesn't even get to friends, where those ties are already far less strong. Doesn't she attend an evangelical college? That'd be awkward... So in that brief moment, I have a hard time seeing how she could consciously choose to be the pro-gay marriage person. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Then again, I also don't understand how someone who still believes in the evangelical Christianity of her parents could model lingerie or even walk across a stage wearing a swimsuit. But that goes in line with how I often see the most fervent Bible thumpers on this board listed as the last poster in the cheerleaders thread. It's all too confusing for this lapsed Pharisee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I suppose that was directed at me, as usual, by Al, the one who won't easily tolerate being disagreed with. Kinda like Heck's image in a political mirror... (say, I like that, I'll think I'll use that again later....) Some of the pics are in poor taste, some are just sexy. Are you saying that pretty girls are not to be looked at, or conservative guys are being hypocrites? Or, that sexual attraction of guys to gals is a violation of how God created us? Never heard Al come up with the outrageous leaps of ASSumptions. He's really, really out of touch. And, he's wearing Heck's "emporor's new clothes" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aloysius Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Wasn't directed at you, Cal, though it's fun to be the object of your two minutes of hate. Also in regards to the cheerleader thread you do have a point, but then again it's not a sin to admire the female body, sure some of those pics aren't very tasteful but this is a locker room of sorts where guys shoot the shit about a variety of topics, one of them being hot chicks. Well, it'd be very difficult to find verses in the Hebrew Bible or New Testament extolling the virtue of admiring the female body. By contrast, there are plenty of verses that militate against it - Numbers 15:39 is one that comes to mind. I understand that the board has a locker room mentality, but I don't get how that changes anything. If you actually believe that God tells you not to look at this stuff, you shouldn't be caving in to your "sinful" needs. Similarly, you shouldn't be proclaiming things in front a TV audience that you think go against God's word. Not to get into the absurd generalities business that's been going on here, but I've found that many of my friends who've lost their faith did so because they took it more seriously than other religious folks. That's why I think it's revealing that soft porn and bible quotes are coming from the same people here. Then again, I also know plenty of people who take it incredibly seriously and have retained their faith...or at least enough of it that they wouldn't mix the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aloysius Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Sure, I've read it. And I'm pretty sure it was understood during canonization to be allegorical, though there's good reason to suspect that the author's intent was something else. I honestly don't understand how anyone can think that looking at soft porn in moderation is part of an authentic religious life. Maybe it's just a matter of coming at it from different religious backgrounds, but that seems to me like a fundamentally unserious thing to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aloysius Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Do you think that's at all comparable to looking at pictures of college girls shot in suggestive poses? I think there's a big difference. Though, to be fair, some religious Jews would consider both problematic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiperBowl Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 now i can have both in the morning cereal and boobies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aloysius Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Just seems like a lot of picking & choosing to me. Which is fine...I guess...but it means you can't judge others when they do the same. And like I was trying to say in the post I deleted in another thread, what you then get is religion completely dependent on subjective judgments and experience. Kind of a dime store existentialism, which makes organized religion irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Back to the OP (if I dare). Cheerios are processed crap. Not unlike Frosted Flakes or Lucky Charms. Wonder why they don't advertise that. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 The problem I have with religion is the cruelty. The "it is God's will" that someone was killed by a psycho, that an earthquake killed 50,000 people. I don't believe that. I find it hard to believe that there is someone floating above us and watching all of us and keeping a score card. I do believe in some sort of creator, a "superior being" if you will. None of us know really what the deal is. But we will all find out one day. No one likes the idea of dying and never returning, an eternal blackness. But that is possible, whether you like it or not. Reincarnation, could be. After all, we all were born into these "bodies" we now occupy, so I guess we could be reborn again, but wouldn't remember anything from this life. Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 In my understanding, the cruelty is not God's cruelty. From the original Hebrew and Greek, it is the angelic conflict raging on the earth. God vs Satan in the struggle to win over mankind/womenkind's hearts and souls. God cannot force evil to stop, or he would take away mankind/womenkinds' free will. In the end, it is to God's Glory that he wins in the end, with his creation freeing choosing him. As such, God allows the battle to play out. That's just a brief synopsis of what I understood from way back decades ago now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Dont blame me if my favorite part of a any beauty pageant is the swim suit modeling. Some love it and some despise it. After all God did give us eyes to see, and men see shapes better than women. It was by God's grand design. Even for those who worship God have eyes to see. It is only a sin if you lust after it. Everyone holds prejudices about one thing or another. some like meat and some are vegetarians. The same applies to politics, some love Constitution Bill of Rights wrecking Free $pending Liberals who want to place laws and regulations on every aspect of life and tax everything that moves. And some want to live life Free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Oats are very good for you. Cheerios are made from oats. Oatmeal is also made from oats. Therefore, mz the pussy, oatmeal is good for you. I know, logic is a right wing conspiracy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Oats are very good for you. Cheerios are made from oats. Oatmeal is also made from oats. Therefore, mz the pussy, oatmeal is good for you. I know, logic is a right wing conspiracy... A simple answer from a simple man. Cheerios, like all breakfast cereals, are a processed food. Yes they contain oats but are not nearly as nutritionally viable as plain old oats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Plants are good for you. Tobacco is a plant. Cigarettes contain tobacco. Cigarettes are good for you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 I have never before died in a car accident. Therefore, I will never die in a car accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.