Forums → WEPR → Marriage equality

God's laws should be obeyed

Which ones?

In the book of Leviticus, he says that
both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned.

It also says you may buy people who come from neighboring countries as slaves for life. Such a moral high ground.

It also says you may buy people who come from neighboring countries as slaves for life. Such a moral high ground.

And that a rapist must marry his victim.

There is no way for me to convince any non-Christian that it's wrong without first getting them to believe that the Bible is true and right and that God's laws should be obeyed, which wouldn't be an easy task.

How do you know you're interpreting your scripture correctly? How do you know that your religion is the right one? How do you know that particular book in the Bible you're referencing was not made up?

"One man shall marry one man". In the book of Leviticus, he says that
both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned.

Explain why we witness homosexual behaviors in over 1500 different species.

God made marriage

People made marriage. The idea of joining two people together in some sort of ceremony has arisen in many different areas across the world independently.

and also uses it as an example for how Christ loves
the Church, and how the Church should love Christ.

Pope is male. Christ is male. Hmm...
Priests are almost always male. Christ is male. Hmm...
Half of any given congregation is male. Christ is male. Hmm...

God created man and woman. There's a reason He didn't create man and
man, or woman and woman. He says "One man shall marry one woman", not
"One man shall marry one man".

- And what's that reason, can you tell me?
- What he does not say is automatically wrong?
- He obviously created gay people too, unless you are going to deny their existence. How do you interpret that?

In the book of Leviticus, he says that
both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned.

He also says that wearing the clothes of the opposite sex should be amended by stoning, and that kids who don't obey their parents shall be brought to the elders and stoned. Now go out, obey your Lord and do your duty. Good luck with that.

So how could anyone claim to be a Christian and still support this?

Personal interpretation.

give it 3 pages or 1 guy going against it. and we are on the same debate =P

tadaaaa xD

God created man and woman. There's a reason He didn't create man and man, or woman and woman.

How do you know that Eve wasn't a sissyboy, or that Adam wasn't a bull dyke?

He says "One man shall marry one woman", not "One man shall marry one man".

That phrase appears nowhere in the bible, in absolutely no translation.

In the book of Leviticus, he says that both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned.

Even god's for legalizing it now.

God made marriage, and also uses it as an example for how Christ loves the Church, and how the Church should love Christ.

And, unfortunately, how the church loves its altar boys.

When someone messes with that design, they are disobeying God.

So you believe in an all-powerful being who can be disobeyed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whoever thou art, that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest, doest the same things.

"One man shall marry one woman"

You realize there's tons of polygamy in there, right?

Oh well. I guess I'm the one going against it.

Here's the deal with me: for people who don't believe in the Bible, and who don't think there is a God, or at least not the Christians God, there is nothing wrong with homosexuals getting married to the same gender.

There is no way for me to convince any non-Christian that it's wrong without first getting them to believe that the Bible is true and right and that God's laws should be obeyed, which wouldn't be an easy task.

But if this debate continues, I may be able get y'all thinking about it.

For anyone who claims to be Christian, but still supports homosexual marriage, I have to tell you, that goes against the Bible. Here's my speech for anyone who claims to be Christian in any way and still supports it:

God created man and woman. There's a reason He didn't create man and
man, or woman and woman. He says "One man shall marry one woman", not
"One man shall marry one man". In the book of Leviticus, he says that
both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned.

God made marriage, and also uses it as an example for how Christ loves
the Church, and how the Church should love Christ. When someone messes
with that design, they are disobeying God.

So how could anyone claim to be a Christian and still support this?
Well, that's what I have to say, even though I'm not sure there are any Christian gay supporters reading this.

Honestly, this argument can't be touched. When you say, "It's wrong because God said it's wrong," there's really nothing anyone can say to change your opinion about this specific topic. Sure, we can debate the validity of the bible, but then we go into a completely different topic.

The problem with Christians who are against homosexuality is that they believe it's wrong simply because God said it was wrong. Why is God against homosexuality? Who knows, but he is, therefore it's wrong.

Then, you have people who try to justify why homosexuality is a sin. These people COMPLETELY ignore reality. They will argue that a child needs to be raised by both a mother and a father. For example, a boy needs to have a male role model. And as much as this makes sense in our heads, it's just not reality. Plenty of boys grow up without a male figure in the house. The problem is when children grow up with only a single parent.

The saddest thing is when you show people evidence that homosexual parents can raise children, and the evidence is just ignored. In a different forum, someone said "I looked through all the sources, and they were all referencing studies..." Well, gee, isn't that the point? "... and all these studies were hand picked and therefore were biased." What a cop out! Sadly, I was banned by a lying moderator, but that's neither here nor there.

I guess my point is this. If you think homosexuality is a sin because God willed it to be a sin, fair enough. But if you think gay marriage or even homosexuality in general should be banned because of your religion, then you're stepping into the grounds of forcing your religious beliefs on other people, which is not cool. But regardless, those who see homosexuality as a sin don't really have a good reason.

spun it to "colored people causing too much of a burden on the white population that would have to pay for it as a part of taxes", but he might agree with that.

I did. He continuously ignored it

People made marriage. The idea of joining two people together in some sort of ceremony has arisen in many different areas across the world independently.

And marriage's roots aren't for bringing a couple together as one..but as a bargaining means in a trade, a way to keep peace between different tribes, etc

Wow. I guess my comment sparked something. I'll try to respond to everything brought to me, and I'll start at the ones posted most recently after mine. I just want to note that I will be answering using the Bible as a reference, and if there is anyone else out there who agrees with me, speak up.

Okay EmperorPalpatine:

Which ones?

"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." Leviticus 18:22

It also says you may buy people who come from neighboring countries as slaves for life. Such a moral high ground.

Ah, actually it states that they could take(not buy) slaves from conquered countries. And in case you don't think that's any better(I know I wouldn't), let me quickly say that in the way 'slave' is used, it is more like servent. Also, there was a law then saying that they had to be freed after 7 years, thus pretty much removing the meaning of slavery as you are thinking.



Kasic:

And that a rapist must marry his victim.

By no means. It says that a rapist must be stoned to death. You may be mistaking it for another verse that says that when two unmarried people have sex outside of marriage, they must marry.

How do you know you're interpreting your scripture correctly? How do you know that your religion is the right one? How do you know that particular book in the Bible you're referencing was not made up?

How do I know I'm interpreting it correctly? Well, it's rather blunt: "Do not practice homosexuality". Not too much room for misinterpretation.
How do I know my religion is the right one? How do you know your religion is the right one? If you are an Atheist, how do you know that's right? I'm pretty sure we'd have the same answer, but not betting on it.
How do I know it wasn't made up? The Jews have used that particular book as law for several thousand years. Historical tests have shown that the Bible we have now is exaclty the same as when it was written, aside from the fact that most of us don't use the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin translations.

[qutoe]People made marriage. The idea of joining two people together in some sort of ceremony has arisen in many different areas across the world independently.[/quote]

Since I'm using the Bible to prove my points, I'll tell you that every human originated in the same place. The Garden of Eden. Thus, when God created the concept of marriage(by creating one man and one woman, and telling them to "Be fruitful and multiply&quot, it was brought to the different places in the world by different cultures who had come from the same place, and had the concept of marriage handed down through the generations.

Pope is male. Christ is male. Hmm...
Priests are almost always male. Christ is male. Hmm...
Half of any given congregation is male. Christ is male. Hmm...

Ah, I think you're getting the picture, but not exactly as I intended.
I mean that according to the Bible, a woman should love and honor her husband(not always in a sexual way), and a man should love and respect his wife. It doen't say there has to be sexual love. But it says they should be fruitful in the same way that the Church, when following Christ, is fruitful.



HahiHa

- And what's that reason, can you tell me?
- What he does not say is automatically wrong?
- He obviously created gay people too, unless you are going to deny their existence. How do you interpret that?

Reason: God created man. Then he created woman to be his helper and companion. He didn't create another man because Adam was a man, and already had what he needed. Eve was a woman and as you know, there are definate differences between men and women, not just physical. You probably already know that.

Second: He did say it was wrong. When there was only one man and one woman, there wasn't really any possible way for there to be homosexuality. In the verse mentioned above, God clearly states that it is wrong.

Third: When sin entered the world, life got harder.
As you can see by looking around different people have different struggles. One person may struggle with gossip, another with alchohol, another with stealing.
Did God make those people? Yes. Just like He made you. You have your own struggle too, and I have no idea what it is. But you know.
But back to the point: God made them. God made kleptomaniacs. They have an almost overwhelming desire to steal. Is that their fault? Well, you can argue yes or no, because they were "born with it". You "God created homosexuals", thus, they were born with it. If that's true, and you say it's okay with them doing that, then why isn't it okay with kleptomaniacs stealing whatever they want? They were born with it, and that's just the way they are.
Because sin entered the world, everyone has their own struggle. I mentioned this before. Homosexuals struggle with homosexuality. Does that make it right? Only if you can admit that kleptomaniacs can steal whatever they want.

He also says that wearing the clothes of the opposite sex should be amended by stoning, and that kids who don't obey their parents shall be brought to the elders and stoned. Now go out, obey your Lord and do your duty. Good luck with that.

Wearing the clothes of the opposite sex is denying your own gender. Again it may be a personal struggle.
Regarding the disobedience towards parents, the verses I know of about being put to death for disobeying your parents include:
âWhoever strikes his father or his mother shall be put to death." Exodus 21:15
âIf a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, âThis our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.â Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear. " Deuteronomy 21:18-21.

The first is pretty obvious, the second is more interesting.
First you have to know a few things:
A) the son it is referring to is likely over 18
B) in that time sons would grow up and live on add-ons of their parents houses, and the grandfather would be the head of the household, and if it was a really big houshold, almost the head of a small town, thus the judge

Now, it says that "though they discipline him, he will not listen", which means that the parents had already tried to stop him. And mulitple times he doesn't stop. Also, this isn't a little thing such as poking his sister, or getting into a small argument, or even hitting someone. This is the blatent disobedience of a young adult(18-25) towards the patriarch. And the sin probably isn't a small thing. It says "a glutton and a drunkard", and not just someone who enjoys his food, but closer to someone who will sin during their drunkenness.
Does it make more sense now that they would stone him?

Personal interpretation.

Well, if any Christain gay supporter will tell their interpretation, I'm all ears.



wontgetmycatnip

How do you know that Eve wasn't a sissyboy, or that Adam wasn't a bull dyke?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that, so I can't really answer.

That phrase appears nowhere in the bible, in absolutely no translation.

Ah, there it is. I apoligize for paraphrasing.
"But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. " 1 Corinthians 7:2

If you want you can interpret that differently, but I'm not sure how.

Even god's for legalizing it now.

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion after I said "In the book of Leviticus, he says that both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned", so I can't answer that one either because I don't understand where you got that.

And, unfortunately, how the church loves its altar boys.

If you are referring to incidents where certain sins are commited against them, I can't help you there. I will admit that a very large amount of people who are put in a position of power in a church(such as pastor or bishop) abuse that position and commit sins. It seems like you're saying that God is wrong because a human sinned.

So you believe in an all-powerful being who can be disobeyed.

Yes I do. But that does not diminish His power. The reason He allows humans to disobey Him on Earth is to give us a choice.
If there was no way to disobey God, we would be no better than robots. People have to actively choose to follow God, but also have the choice not to follow God.


Well, sorry that I've only managed to answer four people, but my fingers are getting numb. I'll try to get back to the rest of you shortly.

You may be mistaking it for another verse that says that when two unmarried people have sex outside of marriage, they must marry.

It depends on the translation.

If you are an Atheist, how do you know that's right

All evidence available points to there being no supernatural deities of any sort. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, if proof can be provided.

The Jews have used that particular book as law for several thousand years. Historical tests have shown that the Bible we have now is exaclty the same as when it was written, aside from the fact that most of us don't use the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin translations.

That doesn't mean it's the word of God. Nor does it make the information inside of it any more moral or correct.

I'll tell you that every human originated in the same place. The Garden of Eden. Thus, when God created the concept of marriage(by creating one man and one woman, and telling them to "Be fruitful and multiply&quot, it was brought to the different places in the world by different cultures who had come from the same place, and had the concept of marriage handed down through the generations.

I'll gloss over a lot of the details and leave it at this:

1) It is biologically impossible for two people to produce the entire population we see today.
2) The MASSIVE inbreeding and incest between Adam and Eve's descendants would have left them with horrible birth defects in a dozen generations and all humans would have died off.
3) Adam and Eve's descendants would have had to reproduce with each other. Incest is immoral too, right?

Since I'm using the Bible to prove my points

Here's the thing.

You don't get to use the bible to prove your points. The bible is not proof of your points. The bible is where you are getting your points from. Using the bible to 'rove' your points is called circular reasoning, wherein you cite the source as a reference to its own validity.

I'm right because I'm right because I'm right because I'm right, ad infinitum.

God clearly states that it is wrong.

Why? For what possible reason could it be wrong? Because it wasn't intended? That's a ridiculous reason to call something a sin.

Homosexuals struggle with homosexuality. Does that make it right? Only if you can admit that kleptomaniacs can steal whatever they want.

This is a red herring. Homosexuality is a consensual act between two adults of the same gender. Neither party is harmed. Thievery is when one person takes another's lawful property. There is nothing to compare between them.

Why is homosexuality worthy of death? On what grounds does God determine that it's such a heinous deed?

It seems like you're saying that God is wrong because a human sinned.

Harking back to Adam and Eve, it is God's fault sin entered the world. He left two people, completely ignorant of right and wrong, within reach of the ridiculously unnecessary tree and then let Satan into the garden to convince them to eat it. This is the same as an adult knowingly leaving a two year old next to a loaded gun and having a sadistic psychopath sibling stay to teach them how to hold it to their head and pull the trigger.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that, so I can't really answer.

Can you prove that Adam was neither a transman nor a "b*tch"? Can you prove that eve was neither a transwoman nor a bull dyke?

"But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. " 1 Corinthians 7:2

Line relates to extramarital lust. Homosexuality is mentioned no-where in that line.

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion after I said "In the book of Leviticus, he says that both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned", so I can't answer that one either because I don't understand where you got that.

If you are referring to incidents where certain sins are commited against them, I can't help you there. I will admit that a very large amount of people who are put in a position of power in a church(such as pastor or bishop) abuse that position and commit sins. It seems like you're saying that God is wrong because a human sinned.

You haven't proved that he's in the right to begin with.

But that does not diminish His power. The reason He allows humans to disobey Him on Earth is to give us a choice.If there was no way to disobey God, we would be no better than robots. People have to actively choose to follow God, but also have the choice not to follow God.

He's all powerful, and yet creates a world which he knows ahead of time will be imperfect, being omniscient. He knows, being all knowing, the consequences of his every action. He knows how all of human history will unfold, and he knows how and what could be different. And yet some how, when he creates a being that he knows will disobey him, and he knows what he could have done different to make that being not disobey him, he punishes that very being for disobeying him, an act which he foretold and which only happened because he caused it to happen

Don't you see you pointless your god is? If your god created everything, and is thus the cause of everything, then he is ultimately responsible for everything, including the people disobeying him.

"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." Leviticus 18:22

Which laws in Leviticus do you choose to follow? Ever eat pork? Shave? Wear clothing with blended fibers? Eat lobster/shrimp/crab? Do any work on the Sabbath?

Ah, actually it states that they could take(not buy) slaves from conquered countries.

Actually, it states the following:
Lev 25:44-46
NIV: 44 ââYour male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

KJV: 44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. 45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. 46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

By no means. It says that a rapist must be stoned to death.

Please find where it says that.

Lev 22:28-29
28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

It depends on the translation.

The related quote he's thinking of is somewhere in Exodus, but that's about the consented act.

Homosexuals struggle with homosexuality. Does that make it right? Only if you can admit that kleptomaniacs can steal whatever they want.

The difference is homosexuals aren't causing inequity to others, while kleptos are.

A) the son it is referring to is likely over 18

If that's really what it means, why doesn't it just say "Men who strike their parents"?

Does it make more sense now that they would stone him?

No, learn to restrict the booze and teach moderation. Simple as that.

Ah, there it is. I apoligize for paraphrasing.
"But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. " 1 Corinthians 7:2

Your original quote was that God specifically said it as His law. This quote isn't claimed to be from Him.

Incest is immoral too, right?

Lev 18 talks about that.

Homosexuals struggle with homosexuality. Does that make it right? Only if you can admit that kleptomaniacs can steal whatever they want.

There are differences. For one, homosexuality doesn't harm anyone, while stealing does. That reason is already enough to not put those two on the same shelf.
Besides, being kleptomaniac means you do not steal by personal choice, but you steal compulsively, so it is not the same as a regular robber either.

Wearing the clothes of the opposite sex is denying your own gender.

You realize women wearing trousers are in that category, right? I don't see christians running around stoning half of the human population.

This is the blatent disobedience of a young adult(18-25) towards the patriarch. And the sin probably isn't a small thing. It says "a glutton and a drunkard", and not just someone who enjoys his food, but closer to someone who will sin during their drunkenness.

Nowhere does it say in which way the disobedience occurs. Being a glutton and a drunkard is not the same as disobedience and here sounds like some random addon to the parents' rant.
Also, do you really think that youth should be punished if it does not do exactly what the parents say? It is a strong mark of individuality, and may not always be in the positive sense, but it's stupid to just go stone everyone that does not behave like a brave little boy.

In both examples with the clothing and the youth, you could say that is because it applies to the time when such things where different. Fair enough. But then why don't you say the same for homosexuality? Just beware not to pick out only parts of the bible when you're using it to argue something.

"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." Leviticus 18:22

I have to reiterate what Nemo asked. Why does God find this detestable and an offense to himself?

By no means. It says that a rapist must be stoned to death. You may be mistaking it for another verse that says that when two unmarried people have sex outside of marriage, they must marry.

You may want to read through the Bible cover to cover for your self instead of just getting your information from whoever you're listening to on this.

Historical tests have shown that the Bible we have now is exaclty the same as when it was written,

No it's not. For example the earliest versions of the Gospel of Mark that we have stop at Jesus dying on the cross with no mention of his resurrection. There are plenty more examples like this as well.

Since I'm using the Bible to prove my points,

The Bible is the claim you need to prove.

I'll tell you that every human originated in the same place. The Garden of Eden. Thus, when God created the concept of marriage(by creating one man and one woman, and telling them to "Be fruitful and multiply&quot,

So who did Cain marry?

Second: He did say it was wrong. When there was only one man and one woman, there wasn't really any possible way for there to be homosexuality.

genetically the human race starting from just two people wouldn't be possible. By this evidence alone we can dismiss this event as false.

Just like He made you.

God didn't make me. I was a product of of an egg and sperm coming together forming a zygote which continued to develop into the present sate that I'm in now. It's all a genetic process that we have a pretty firm understanding of. Not once do we need to include a deity for this process to occur.

If that's true, and you say it's okay with them doing that, then why isn't it okay with kleptomaniacs stealing whatever they want?

One is doing harm to others without consent while the other is not doing harm to another and has consent.

Wearing the clothes of the opposite sex is denying your own gender.

It was actually quite common to do in the past. for instance my grandfather when he was little wore his sisters hand-me-down dress. There is even a picture of this. If you like I will try to find it and post it.

Does it make more sense now that they would stone him?

No it doesn't. I see o reason why the age would make a difference.

"a glutton and a drunkard", and not just someone who enjoys his food,

Interestingly the word for glutton here "zalal" would likely be better translated "to mean be worthless". Now drunkard could be an accurate word to use given this refers to "a drink, liquor".

If you want you can interpret that differently, but I'm not sure how.

It also says a marriage fits these parameters as well.
Betty Bowers Explains Traditional Marriage to Everyone Else

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion after I said "In the book of Leviticus, he says that both people practicing homosexuality would be immediately stoned"

God: Stone your son to death.
God: Stone homosexuals to death.
God: Thou shall not kill.
No contradictions!

Yes I do. But that does not diminish His power. The reason He allows humans to disobey Him on Earth is to give us a choice.

People have to actively choose to follow God, but also have the choice not to follow God.

I have to be given reason to believe this God exists in the first place. Then after that I would have to determine if this God is even worth following. If his God does exist and is just as the Bible describes, this God is nothing more than a monster with power and not worthy of anyone's devotion.

Again I'll say that I will try to answer everything, but I don't know if I can answer the people who asked near the beginning, due to the amount responding back now.


First I want to say: The purpose of this debate is not defending the existance of God, nor the validity of the Bible. I may take part in a debate regarding those, but for now this is regarding homosexuality. I mentioned in my first post that I could only convince you of homosexuality being if you believed the Bible. So, I am not using circular reasoning to defend the Bible, because I am not defending the Bible now.
Recall my mentioning "for people who don't believe in the Bible, and who don't think there is a God, or at least not the Christians God, there is nothing wrong with homosexuals getting married to the same gender."
Got it?

Okay, let's continue then.

Kasic:

It depends on the translation.

Okay, I'm bolding this so it's noticed, because several people metioned it, and I want you to read the whole verse

"But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her. If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days." Deuteronomy 22:25-29

So, by reading that you can realize that in the first part it is speaking of rape, when a man rapes a woman in a place where there is no one to come help her. The second part refers to when it happens in a place where there is the chance of help, if she calls out. But notice the specific wording in the middle "If they are found out". That is very two-sided. [iThey[/i]. not him. They. I believe I can let it rest there, especailly since this is going into rape, when the topic is homosexuality.

All evidence available points to there being no supernatural deities of any sort. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, if proof can be provided.

All evidence available. That's pretty broad. But, I have to point out, you may want to say "The evidence as interpreted by me points to there being no supernatural deities." Because there isn't too much evidence that there is no deity. I will admit, the evidence that there is a deity is often misinterpreted, and appears faulty, but in the same way that the evidence is small regarding that there isn't a deity.


I'm sorry I couldn't answer more, but I have to go. I think you can understand how hard it is for one person(me) to debate several, especially considering the sheer number of posts I still have to respond to here.