I have a Michael Irvin Question for the Board

[Mike 1967]

Per ESPN, Mike caught with "Plastic baggies with marijuana residue were found in a Versace sunglasses case along with a marijuana pipe".

As has been recently discussed here on this board, this resulted in a charge of "misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia ".

This incident has raised questions regarding his character and his status as a HOF candidate. People appear to be widely divided on wether he should be included into the HOF.....but are fairly consistent in stating that they are dissapointed in him, if the marijuana was indeed his.

Before I ask the question, let me first say that I am also dissapointed if the marijuana is his. But my primary dissapointment would come from his lying about it being his. And I would also be dissapointed about him breaking the law....but I would have equally dissapointment if he were caught with an open container of beer in his car. (Something many here have probably been guilty of at some time in their past)

Here is my question (And it is primarily aimed at those who are "strongly upset" about the discovery of the drug paraphernalia in Irvin's car.

Would you feel differently if Mike had been pulled over in Denver, since he would not have broken a law in Denver ?

Denver voters adopted the (I-100) Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization Initiative earlier this year. It made Denver the first U.S. city to make marijuana legal
for private adult use.

[Shaun]

Per ESPN, Mike caught with "Plastic baggies with marijuana residue were found in a Versace sunglasses case along with a marijuana pipe".

As has been recently discussed here on this board, this resulted in a charge of "misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia ".

This incident has raised questions regarding his character and his status as a HOF candidate. People appear to be widely divided on wether he should be included into the HOF.....but are fairly consistent in stating that they are dissapointed in him, if the marijuana was indeed his.

Before I ask the question, let me first say that I am also dissapointed if the marijuana is his. But my primary dissapointment would come from his lying about it being his. And I would also be dissapointed about him breaking the law....but I would have equally dissapointment if he were caught with an open container of beer in his car. (Something many here have probably been guilty of at some time in their past)

Here is my question (And it is primarily aimed at those who are "strongly upset" about the discovery of the drug paraphernalia in Irvin's car.

Would you feel differently if Mike had been pulled over in Denver, since he would not have broken a law in Denver ?

Denver voters adopted the (I-100) Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization Initiative earlier this year. It made Denver the first U.S. city to make marijuana legal
for private adult use.

I think federal law still supercedes state or city law.

But what I can't understand why this should affect his Hall of Fame chances. This minor incident does absolutely nothing to change the fact that Irvin took care of business on Sundays.

[theogt]

Denver voters adopted the (I-100) Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization Initiative earlier this year. It made Denver the first U.S. city to make marijuana legal
for private adult use.1. I'm not familiar with the statute but I would assume that this will likely be challenged and found to be inconsistent with federal law.

2. Legality =/= Morality.

[sporadic]

Leave it to those Tree Huggin Denver hippies to legalize weed...

[mr.jameswoods]

No, I wouldn't feel any differently. Irvin has a family he is responsible for. He has worked hard to erase his past and he has a budding future in sports journalism. He would be an excellent person in the booth. A person in his situation should not be using period. He is not some 20 year old kid in college.

No, it shouldn't affect his Hall of Fame candidacy. And if someone failed to vote him in based on those reasons, they should be removed from the voting panel. The rules explicitly state that candidacy is based solely on what was accomplished on the field. If the rules were more broad, I might think otherwise.

[Mike 1967]

No, I wouldn't feel any differently. Irvin has a family he is responsible for. He has worked hard to erase his past and he has a budding future in sports journalism. He would be an excellent person in the booth. A person in his situation should not be using period. He is not some 20 year old kid in college.

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

[Mike 1967]

1. I'm not familiar with the statute but I would assume that this will likely be challenged and found to be inconsistent with federal law.

I do believe that State/Federal law supercedes here.

2. Legality =/= Morality.

Exactly the point I am most interested in discussing.

Do you believe this to be true ?

[iceberg]

the trouble is, it's been "illegal" for so long and has had so many misconceptions about it over the years.

marajuana doesn't lead to harder drugs, the desire to do drugs leads to harder drugs. marajuana just gets rid of the junk in your fridge that's been sitting there as a science experiment for quite some time but may taste ok just the same.

"reefer madness" - if there was ever a load of hammered moose manure, this is it. getting all energetic and crazy after smoking it? hardly. well, unless taking 10 minutes to reach for the remote then not knowing why is just whacky.

and it's been villianized most all of our lives. those who have not already put that aside and tried it will likely have a negative outlook on it and those who use it.

w/alcohol, people go nuts, drive around and kill people, get into arguments, blow out livers (wonder how much of mine is left anymore - it grows back, right???) but w/weed you just sit around and waste time.

maybe too much of it - that IS a valid concern.

now - what if an NFL player went to amsterdam - could they THEN smoke and it be "ok"? i tend to doubt it because i'd think the policy is NO WEED, not NO WEED WHERE ILLEGAL. but since irvin isn't in the NFL, what would his work say?

in jobs where you're not required to be 24x7 i think a drug law is an invasion of privacy. when i go to best buy and see they're drug free, it does my heart wonders to know that the pimple-faced kid who put the cd's out didn't get high last night.

right, WHO CARES? and why would NOT smoking be a pre-req for a job like this? policeman, fireman, doctor on call - sure. if you may have to "go to work" then you'd better be straight and able to. otherwise, what people do with their own lives is their own business.

smoking and driving - would it bug me if someone was high and ran into my truck because of it? well, no more than the **(#*($&*(*(&@(*$ idiots who must talk on their cell phone and cut over 4 lanes because they're about to miss a turn, drive slow because they're busy talking on the phone and doing hand motions with the other hand leaving the rest of us to wonder what they're driving with.

in short, i don't care what michael does or where. but if illegal and he gets caught, then pay the standard fare and move about your life - that's the law and i'm ok with that.

instead people want to be judge and jury and express a standard of life for others i sincerely doubt they'd hold to for themselves.

now if he was pulled over where legal, then we'd probably never know because he'd just be sent on his way.

[superpunk]

Does anyone have a real estate guide for Denver?:ohboy:

[iceberg]

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

like i said - some will view the past villianization of weed as a current guideline - and that's fine. but if it should ever become "legal" to where you can buy it when you buy alcohol, then that would fade in time and it would just be "the way it is" like alcohol is today.

[Mike 1967]

like i said - some will view the past villianization of weed as a current guideline - and that's fine. but if it should ever become "legal" to where you can buy it when you buy alcohol, then that would fade in time and it would just be "the way it is" like alcohol is today.

I had no issue with what you said.

But I am interested to know what James is basing his position on.

I have discussed enough with you to assume that you are one that holds to no absolute morality. Is my assumption incorrect ?

[iceberg]

my morality may or may not fit someone elses. i'm fine with that but many times "they" are not. my morality is my own and in the end, i'll have to pay whatever price there is to pay for "being me".

weed is not an issue of morals to me in the same breathe as say, sleeping with another mans wife, stealing, killing, intentionally harming someone else...all those are moral issues to me i'd NEVER do or want to do. in fact, if you use the 10 commandments as a guide, does it even address drugs?

i guess back to being anal, how do you define someones morality?

[theogt]

I do believe that State/Federal law supercedes here.I'm 99.9% positive a court would overturn the law, especially considering the recent Raich decision.
Exactly the point I am most interested in discussing.

Do you believe this to be true ?Yes, I believe that morality and legality are not the same. I am disappointed with Mike IF he lied to us about who owned the pipe. It's not illegal for him to go on TV and claim it wasn't his, but it is of course immoral. Should morality play a role in HOF decisions? I think it should to a limited extent (i.e., rape charges), but I believe minor charges such as this should not.

[mr.jameswoods]

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

My personal values! And I understand that my personal values might be irrelevant but you wanted an honest answer and I'm giving you one. Irvin has a history of abusing drugs so for him to show signs that he is using is wrong in my opinion particularly since he has a family and high profile job. I'm studying to be a physician. Medicine has changed in which physicians are asked to do more than merely prescribe medication. We are asked to look after the welfare of our patients. So I see Mike as a former addict who is trying to turn his life around. Someone like that should not be using whether it's legal or not. Fast food is legalized but if I find out a patient with a family history of colon cancer is chompin down on the burgers 3 times a week, you better be sure he is going to get earful from me.

Yes, I think morality should play a role in HOF decisions but if the current standard asks that morality not play a role then it's my job to uphold the integrity of the voting process and abide by it's laws which asks that one only take a player's performance into account.

[Kilyin]

Yeah, I was more angry about the stupidity of the whole situation (I'm not a millionaire, but if I owe the Court some money, you better believe I'll find a way to pay it) and the fact I think Mike is lying. Coupled with his past, the whole situation just screams "I'm a "

[Mike 1967]

my morality may or may not fit someone elses. i'm fine with that but many times "they" are not. my morality is my own and in the end, i'll have to pay whatever price there is to pay for "being me".

weed is not an issue of morals to me in the same breathe as say, sleeping with another mans wife, stealing, killing, intentionally harming someone else...all those are moral issues to me i'd NEVER do or want to do. in fact, if you use the 10 commandments as a guide, does it even address drugs?

i guess back to being anal, how do you define someones morality?

I believe in absolute morals. But that should be evident since I am a proclaimed Christian. Absolute Morals require an absolute standard. An absolute standard requires something in the universe beyond time + chance....specifically God.

But we live in a Humanist society today. So I am always curious how anyone, who does not claim to believe in a personal infinite God, can hold anyone to a "moral standard".

[aikemirv]

But if it is legalized...then what do you base your position on ?

That it is impairs your judgement and kills brain cells. Anything that impairs judgement, taken on your own volition is wrong. It does not effect just you, it will effect others too.

As a Christian, your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost - Michael on that basis should not be doing something that "messes up that Temple" as he proclaims to be a Christian.

The Bible does not speak of drug use as far as I know but does speak of alcohol and how it effects your judgement and taken in that manner is wrong, so I would carry that over into any drug use taken recreationally rather than for medicinal purposes.

[Mike 1967]

That it is impairs your judgement and kills brain cells. Anything that impairs judgement, taken on your own volition is wrong. It does not effect just you, it will effect others too.

As a Christian, your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost - Michael on that basis should not be doing something that "messes up that Temple" as he proclaims to be a Christian.

The Bible does not speak of drug use as far as I know but does speak of alcohol and how it effects your jus=dgement and taken in that manner is wrong, so I would carry that over into any drug use taken recreationally rather than for medicinal purposes.

drank Wine.

Paul, in 1st Timothy, tells Timothy to drink wine....for medicinal reasons.

[iceberg]

I believe in absolute morals. But that should be evident since I am a proclaimed Christian. Absolute Morals require an absolute standard. An absolute standard requires something in the universe beyond time + chance....specifically God.

But we live in a Humanist society today. So I am always curious how anyone, who does not claim to believe in a personal infinite God, can hold anyone to a "moral standard".

heh, by now you know that i don't believe in absolutes simply because that implies a black/white RIGHT/WRONG w/no situational analysis allowed. neither of us in the grand scheme of things has verifiable proof that our "morals" are exactly what is required and/or needed.

i have my morals and they are absolute to me. but i'd not ask anyone else to live by them because they are not me.

[superpunk]

drank Wine.

Paul, in 1st Timothy, tells Timothy to drink wine....for medicinal reasons.

I believe he was speaking of excesses of wine, and "drunken bouts", which are spoken against. Not just an occasional cocktail, LOL.

[mr.jameswoods]

That it is impairs your judgement and kills brain cells. Anything that impairs judgement, taken on your own volition is wrong. It does not effect just you, it will effect others too.

As a Christian, your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost - Michael on that basis should not be doing something that "messes up that Temple" as he proclaims to be a Christian.

The Bible does not speak of drug use as far as I know but does speak of alcohol and how it effects your judgement and taken in that manner is wrong, so I would carry that over into any drug use taken recreationally rather than for medicinal purposes.

What's interesting to note is that a lot of other religions say the same thing too. Not trying to start a religious debate. I just find it fascinating that the worlds major religions share many of the same messages.

[aikemirv]

drank Wine.

Paul, in 1st Timothy, tells Timothy to drink wine....for medicinal reasons.

If you look in the Bible their is a marked difference between the Wine that drank and the wine as stated in Proverbs:

Proverbs 23:31 - Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

[Mike 1967]

heh, by now you know that i don't believe in absolutes simply because that implies a black/white RIGHT/WRONG w/no situational analysis allowed. neither of us in the grand scheme of things has verifiable proof that our "morals" are exactly what is required and/or needed.

i have my morals and they are absolute to me. but i'd not ask anyone else to live by them because they are not me.

Then, obviously, you will never have an opinion of someone's character based on "moral" issue's.

If pedophilia were ever legalized...then you would be ok with it in respect to allowing others to do it.

In short...there is nothing that you would fight for.....on moral grounds.

[Mike 1967]

I believe he was speaking of excesses of wine, and "drunken bouts", which are spoken against. Not just an occasional cocktail, LOL.

I don't have an argument with that.

Which would point us back to the original question. Pot residue is not "excessive".

[aikemirv]

What's interesting to note is that a lot of other religions say the same thing too. Not trying to start a religious debate. I just find it fascinating that the worlds major religions share many of the same messages.

Well, If you believe as I do that The God of the Bible created the universe and thus the first religion that the fact that other religions follow the same theory is not odd.

[TruBlueCowboy]

It's a harmless drug but it is illegal. People - especially a father and "role model" -should be more responsible. Driving with arrest warrants because he never paid his speeding tickets, sticking a pipe below the seat when he knew if he was pulled over he would be searched, and then giving us this bologne story about brother, friend or whoever in rehab frustrating. Just be a man Mike, and admit you still don't care. If you weren't full of it, you'd take a drug test pronto. You can use all the drugs you want, just don't expect to get in the HOF soon, make fans proud of you, and keep your job at ESPN. There are consequences for everything. Weed may be harmless but it is illegal. I don't think it's too hard to expect a Cowboys legend to stay away from a drug that isn't even addictive. It's not a drug problem, it's not legalization politics, it's the attitude of someone who doesn't think he can get caught, and doesn't care if he does, but instead tries to use Christianity, friends in need, and whateer other excuses he's offered before, and never takes the responsibility or blame himself. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

[mr.jameswoods]

If you look in the Bible their is a marked difference between the Wine that drank and the wine as stated in Proverbs:

Proverbs 23:31 - Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

The wine back then was 3-4 times as strong as wine today. The fermentation process wasn't as carefully controlled and so a person could easily get drunk on a couple of glasses of wine.

[aikemirv]

I don't have an argument with that.

Which would point us back to the original question. Pot residue is not "excessive".

No, not excessive but it would alter your judgement, would it not?

[Yakuza Rich]

I've heard it was a crack pipe and I've heard it was a marijuana pipe.

My only concern is that Irvin is an addict and it's typically not wise for addicts to take any type of drugs. Alcoholics are told the same thing, in fact they tell them not to drink NA beer.

If it was marijuana, other than being concerned about his health, I have no problem with it. Regardless of whether it happened in Dallas, Denver or Amsterdam.

As a former marijuana user, it's far better than any type of tobacco and while I like my alcohol, it's much much better for you than alcohol.

I don't use anymore for being afraid of getting caught and I'm not sure how my work would handle it, even if it's pretty much a harmless drug.

But in Irvin's case, I'm just afraid that it may be a gateway drug given his situation. However, I do think football players and athletes that are in very physical sports (especially pro wrestlers) should take up smoking marijuana as it's a far safer alternative than pain killers.


Rich.........

[mr.jameswoods]

Well, If you believe as I do that The God of the Bible created the universe and thus the first religion that the fact that other religions follow the same theory is not odd.

Technically, Christianity is not the world's oldest practiced religion. You do know that right? Both Hinduism and Buddhism have been practiced for far longer. I do believe in the God of the Bible. I believe he created the Universe. But I also believe many of the world's major religions worship that same god in different forms.

[Mike 1967]

If you look in the Bible their is a marked difference between the Wine that drank and the wine as stated in Proverbs:

Proverbs 23:31 - Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

I guess it all depends on the definition of Excess

1Ti 3:8 Likewise5615 must the deacons1249 be grave,4586 not3361 doubletongued,1351 not3361 given4337 to much4183 wine,3631 not3361 greedy of filthy lucre;146

1Ti 5:23 Drink no longer water,5202, 3371 but235 use5530 a little3641 wine3631 for thy stomach's sake1223, 4675, 4751 and2532 thine4675 often4437 infirmities.769

[aikemirv]

Technically, Christianity is not the world's oldest practiced religion. You do know that right?

If the God of the Bible, who created everything, namely the first Man and Woman, Adam and Eve, and they worshipped that God, then how could it not be?

[superpunk]

I don't have an argument with that.

Which would point us back to the original question. Pot residue is not "excessive".

But what led to that "residue"? Probably a more sizeable portion of pot. And even a little bit, can impair you.

[Mike 1967]

No, not excessive but it would alter your judgement, would it not?

Yes...even a small amount of wine would have a "relaxing" effect

[Mike 1967]

But what led to that "residue"? Probably a more sizeable portion of pot. And even a little bit, can impair you.

Are you assuming that he smoked it while driving ?

Would you feel the same way if there was an open beer can in his car ?

[mr.jameswoods]

If the God of the Bible, who created everything, namely the first Man and Woman, Adam and Eve, and they worshipped that God, then how could it not be?

Religion is a technical term. Faith or belief is something else. You could argue that Christianity in terms of faith or belief is the oldest or first so yes, you could say that. I don't believe in creationism so I don't believe in Adam and Eve. I believe God created the universe through evolutionary processes.

[mr.jameswoods]

Since we are on the topic of religion. Do you guys believe that Mormons are Christians?

[Hoov]

the trouble is, it's been "illegal" for so long and has had so many misconceptions about it over the years.

marajuana doesn't lead to harder drugs, the desire to do drugs leads to harder drugs. marajuana just gets rid of the junk in your fridge that's been sitting there as a science experiment for quite some time but may taste ok just the same.

"reefer madness" - if there was ever a load of hammered moose manure, this is it. getting all energetic and crazy after smoking it? hardly. well, unless taking 10 minutes to reach for the remote then not knowing why is just whacky.

and it's been villianized most all of our lives. those who have not already put that aside and tried it will likely have a negative outlook on it and those who use it.

w/alcohol, people go nuts, drive around and kill people, get into arguments, blow out livers (wonder how much of mine is left anymore - it grows back, right???) but w/weed you just sit around and waste time.

maybe too much of it - that IS a valid concern.

now - what if an NFL player went to amsterdam - could they THEN smoke and it be "ok"? i tend to doubt it because i'd think the policy is NO WEED, not NO WEED WHERE ILLEGAL. but since irvin isn't in the NFL, what would his work say?

in jobs where you're not required to be 24x7 i think a drug law is an invasion of privacy. when i go to best buy and see they're drug free, it does my heart wonders to know that the pimple-faced kid who put the cd's out didn't get high last night.

right, WHO CARES? and why would NOT smoking be a pre-req for a job like this? policeman, fireman, doctor on call - sure. if you may have to "go to work" then you'd better be straight and able to. otherwise, what people do with their own lives is their own business.

smoking and driving - would it bug me if someone was high and ran into my truck because of it? well, no more than the **(#*($&*(*(&@(*$ idiots who must talk on their cell phone and cut over 4 lanes because they're about to miss a turn, drive slow because they're busy talking on the phone and doing hand motions with the other hand leaving the rest of us to wonder what they're driving with.

in short, i don't care what michael does or where. but if illegal and he gets caught, then pay the standard fare and move about your life - that's the law and i'm ok with that.

instead people want to be judge and jury and express a standard of life for others i sincerely doubt they'd hold to for themselves.

now if he was pulled over where legal, then we'd probably never know because he'd just be sent on his way.

That was a great post, cant think of anything i would add to it.

Oh yeah, the liver does regenerate itself unless it gets to a certain point, i cant remember but i think if more than 80% is destroyed you could have problems with regeneration. Usually it doesnt get to this point unless your a hard drinker and drinking every single day, cause you never give it a chance to regenerate.

[aikemirv]

Since we are on the topic of religion. Do you guys believe that Mormons are Christians?

A true Mormon does not believe that is God, so therefore he is not perfect and thus his atoning sacrifice would be of no use. While I guess one could be, I can't imagine how.

[superpunk]

Are you assuming that he smoked it while driving ?

Would you feel the same way if there was an open beer can in his car ?

Honestly, I want to believe Michael. I consider him rehabilitated, and I believe you "forgive and forget", not bringing up prior transgressions when reviewing new situations. I don't think he was smoking while drinking, I think if that was the case, the policeman would have recognized the aroma, and that would have been mentioned somewhere.

I was just speaking from a moral standpoint, and if there was paraphernalia with pot "residue" on it, then there was more than likely a decent amount of pot on or in that paraphernalia. If your conscience prohibits you from defiling your body, or impairing your judgement (which can lead to worse things), then you can't be "OK" with Irvin having anything with any sort of a trace of pot on it.

In either case (beer can or paraphernalia), I would and do think Irvin acted in poor judgement. He knows his history, he knows what people will assume if he's caught with either object. He shouldn't have been so foolish.

[Mike 1967]

Technically, Christianity is not the world's oldest practiced religion. You do know that right? Both Hinduism and Buddhism have been practiced for far longer. I do believe in the God of the Bible. I believe he created the Universe. But I also believe many of the world's major religions worship that same god in different forms.

Buddhism is derived from Hinduism.

Hinduism is not proven to be older than the Torah (Old Testament)

Hinduism does not hold to a personal infinite God....so absolute morals should be a non-issue.

[mr.jameswoods]

A true Mormon does not believe that is God, so therefore he is not perfect and thus his atoning sacrifice would be of no use. While I guess one could be, I can't imagine how.

They don't believe is God? I thought they believe that? I could be wrong. I was just curious. I thought the only real difference between Christianity and Mormonism is that Mormons believe appeared in the United States in the early 19th century. I know some Christians don't believe in Joseph Smith's vision and saw him and the movement he started as a cult. I didn't know if the majority of Christians felt the same way?

[Richmond Cowboy]

Oh no here we go, another morality/politics/religion thread.

[iceberg]

looks like inet issue and my answer didn't come through mike -

pedofile - you got me. if someone is a known child molseter, shoot them now. they deserve NO second chance at screwing up someone elses lives.

so yes, i do have my limits and it's more along the lines of when your own actions DO harm others INTENTIONALLY. accidents happen whether under the influence or on the phone. if you lost someone you love in a car wreck, would it matter if the other person were high vs. on the phone?

[mr.jameswoods]

Hinduism does not hold to a personal infinite God....so absolute morals should be a non-issue.

Actually, it does. The many gods they worship is a manifestation of one god. So it often mischaracterized as being a polytheistic faith when in reality they believe in a singular higher being.

[Mike 1967]

Honestly, I want to believe Michael. I consider him rehabilitated, and I believe you "forgive and forget", not bringing up prior transgressions when reviewing new situations. I don't think he was smoking while drinking, I think if that was the case, the policeman would have recognized the aroma, and that would have been mentioned somewhere.

I was just speaking from a moral standpoint, and if there was paraphernalia with pot "residue" on it, then there was more than likely a decent amount of pot on or in that paraphernalia. If your conscience prohibits you from defiling your body, or impairing your judgement (which can lead to worse things), then you can't be "OK" with Irvin having anything with any sort of a trace of pot on it.

In either case (beer can or paraphernalia), I would and do think Irvin acted in poor judgement. He knows his history, he knows what people will assume if he's caught with either object. He shouldn't have been so foolish.

I don't have a conscious issue with drinking a little wine. And the wine is obviously having an impact on my "judgement". My "judgement" is also altered when I take actifed for allergies.

But, as Pauls says, I will give up the wine in instances where is causes a weaker brother to stumble

In respect to the residue indicating a "larger dosage". The same could be said of 1 beer can....since they are usually sold in 6-pack or 12-pack containers.

[mr.jameswoods]

Oh no here we go, another morality/politics/religion thread.

Hang on, this one might actually be informative, non-antagonistic and fun to read. Thus far, it has been for me. I haven't been offended by anything written.

[Mike 1967]

Religion is a technical term. Faith or belief is something else. You could argue that Christianity in terms of faith or belief is the oldest or first so yes, you could say that. I don't believe in creationism so I don't believe in Adam and Eve. I believe God created the universe through evolutionary processes.

Do you believe that God is a personal being...or inanimate energy ?

[Richmond Cowboy]

Hang on, this one might actually be informative, non-antagonistic and fun to read. Thus far, it has been for me. I haven't been offended by anything written.

Just give it some time my friend. The fire is still brimming, the right ingredients for a conflagration are yet to sniff the thread. It's only a matter of time...

[Mike 1967]

Since we are on the topic of religion. Do you guys believe that Mormons are Christians?

Depends on what is meant by the term "Christian".

By my definition, they would not be.

I am what you would label a fundamentalist. I hold to the authority of the scriptures as canonized. I will change my position if I am shown to be wrong through the scriptures.

[Mike 1967]

They don't believe is God? I thought they believe that? I could be wrong. I was just curious. I thought the only real difference between Christianity and Mormonism is that Mormons believe appeared in the United States in the early 19th century. I know some Christians don't believe in Joseph Smith's vision and saw him and the movement he started as a cult. I didn't know if the majority of Christians felt the same way?

they definitely don't believe that is God.

But...we better get back to the original question or I am going to get in trouble :D

[Hoov]

Just give it some time my friend. The fire is still brimming, the right ingredients for a conflagration are yet to sniff the thread. It's only a matter of time...

I thought i smelt something, LOL....Hoov is here to add some fuel to the fire, lets get this baby burning, woohooo !!!!!


j/k guys, I'll lay low on this one. Though i was tempted to address the post about christianity being the oldest religion.

[Mike 1967]

I'm bowing out before I get into trouble :D

[superpunk]

I don't have a conscious issue with drinking a little wine. And the wine is obviously having an impact on my "judgement". My "judgement" is also altered when I take actifed for allergies.

But, as Pauls says, I will give up the wine in instances where is causes a weaker brother to stumble

In respect to the residue indicating a "larger dosage". The same could be said of 1 beer can....since they are usually sold in 6-pack or 12-pack containers.

I'm confused as to what we are discussing. If the materials in Michael's car are proven to be his, I would be disappointed in him, no matter where he was caught. He claims to be rehabilitated, and this would prove otherwise. Disappointment. In my eyes, though, he is innocent, until proven otherwise.

1 beer can will (in almost all cases) not affect your judgement. I don't believe that two would even be enough to get you legally drunk. Even a little pot will. A little alcohol will also, not "defile the body" like any sort of smoking will. Just seeing 1 can, would not be a problem. The only way to buy beer in my state (PA) is by the case. Does this mean I'm going to go home and down 24 cold ones? Of course not. It's up to me to know my limit. There is no "limit" with pot, or other narcotics. Can't wuite be regarded the same, IMO.

[WV Cowboy]

Mormons are not Christian.
They don't believe is God.
They believe they can become a god, with enough good works.
Mormonism is a cult. Beware.

Christianity did not begin with Adam & Eve, it began after ascended into heaven.
His followers were called Christians.

And whoever said God created the universe through evolution did not find that in the Bible.
You have been deceived.

Of course all of this is my perspective, and all are free to disagree.

[superpunk]

Mormons are not Christian.
They don't believe is God.
They believe they can become a god, with enough good works.
Mormonism is a cult. Beware.

Christianity did not begin with Adam & Eve, it began after ascended into heaven.
His followers were called Christians.

And whoever said God created the universe through evolution did not find that in the Bible.
You have been deceived.

Of course all of this is my perspective, and all are free to disagree.

Whoa!!! Easy tiger, LOL. Layin it all on the line, huh?

[Hoov]

I'm confused as to what we are discussing. If the materials in Michael's car are proven to be his, I would be disappointed in him, no matter where he was caught. He claims to be rehabilitated, and this would prove otherwise. Disappointment. In my eyes, though, he is innocent, until proven otherwise.

1 beer can will (in almost all cases) not affect your judgement. I don't believe that two would even be enough to get you legally drunk. Even a little pot will. A little alcohol will also, not "defile the body" like any sort of smoking will. Just seeing 1 can, would not be a problem. The only way to buy beer in my state (PA) is by the case. Does this mean I'm going to go home and down 24 cold ones? Of course not. It's up to me to know my limit. There is no "limit" with pot, or other narcotics. Can't wuite be regarded the same, IMO.

2 drinks in 1 hour at my body wt puts me close to .08, the legal limit here in PA and i would go to jail for likely 6-8 months since i have a prior DUI.

[aikemirv]

Mormons are not Christian.
They don't believe is God.
They believe they can become a god, with enough good works.
Mormonism is a cult. Beware.

Christianity did not begin with Adam & Eve, it began after ascended into heaven.
His followers were called Christians.

And whoever said God created the universe through evolution did not find that in the Bible.
You have been deceived.

Of course all of this is my perspective, and all are free to disagree.

Genesis 3:15 - And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Whereas Christianity did not officially begin as you said the plan was in place and the sacrificial system in the Old testament was a symbol of what was going to do.

[Mike 1967]

I'm confused as to what we are discussing. If the materials in Michael's car are proven to be his, I would be disappointed in him, no matter where he was caught. He claims to be rehabilitated, and this would prove otherwise. Disappointment. In my eyes, though, he is innocent, until proven otherwise.

1 beer can will (in almost all cases) not affect your judgement. I don't believe that two would even be enough to get you legally drunk. Even a little pot will. A little alcohol will also, not "defile the body" like any sort of smoking will. Just seeing 1 can, would not be a problem. The only way to buy beer in my state (PA) is by the case. Does this mean I'm going to go home and down 24 cold ones? Of course not. It's up to me to know my limit. There is no "limit" with pot, or other narcotics. Can't wuite be regarded the same, IMO.

First, since you are a Christian...the question did not really apply to you. As a Christian, you obviously have a basis for absolute morality as dictated by an infinite personal God.

I would disagree with you on your stance regarding the effects of "pot" vs. "beer" AND also disagree with your assesment of "defiling" the body. I think you have taken it to a legalistic extreme....

But...I am not interested in debating a brother on the this type of issue.

[WV Cowboy]

Whoa!!! Easy tiger, LOL. Layin it all on the line, huh?
LOL, yea, I was just responding to several things I had seen throughout the thread. :lmao2:

[Mike 1967]

Genesis 3:15 - And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Whereas Christianity did not officially begin as you said the plan was in place and the sacrificial system in the Old testament was a symbol of what was going to do.

Correct.

The Old Testament Jews had the same promise as the New Testament Christians. The "picture" was simply "much clearer" following the birth, life, death and assension of .

[WV Cowboy]

Genesis 3:15 - And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Whereas Christianity did not officially begin as you said the plan was in place and the sacrificial system in the Old testament was a symbol of what was going to do.
You speak of the battle between Satan and Mankind, and yes, was there from the beginning.

I could be wrong but I think the term Christianity started after the resurrection.

[Mike 1967]

You speak of the battle between Satan and Mankind, and yes, was there from the beginning.

I could be wrong but I think the term Christianity started after the resurrection.

I believe that you are correct when you state that the "term" Christian started after the resurrection.

[superpunk]

2 drinks in 1 hour at my body wt puts me close to .08, the legal limit here in PA and i would go to jail for likely 6-8 months since i have a prior DUI.

Drinking and driving.....:beer1::nono2:

[aikemirv]

You speak of the battle between Satan and Mankind, and yes, was there from the beginning.

I could be wrong but I think the term Christianity started after the resurrection.

The term did , yes, no doubt about it - The Bible Says they were first called Christians at Antioch.

As far as the first religion goes, though, I called it that because of lack of a better term.

[WV Cowboy]

I believe that you are correct when you state that the "term" Christian started after the resurrection.
I'm really racking my brain cells here, but I think they were called that by non-believers.

I think they called themselves, "Followers of I Am"

Not sure about that.

[Mike 1967]

I'm really racking my brain cells here, but I think they were called that by non-believers.

I think they called themselves, "Followers of I Am"

Not sure about that.

I am not sure either. :)

[superpunk]

I would disagree with you on your stance regarding the effects of "pot" vs. "beer" AND also disagree with your assesment of "defiling" the body. I think you have taken it to a legalistic extreme....

It's legal to get tattoos, and to smoke tobacco, but I wouldn't do those things. I don't understand how I have a "stance" exactly, on effects of pot vs beer. You can have one or two beers, and be fine, but one joint....not so much, LOL.

[aikemirv]

Acts 11:26 - And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

[Mike 1967]

Acts 11:26 - And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

Some supporting data from the original Greek

The original greek word used in that passage was khris-tee-an-os'

Definition - a Christian, that is, follower of : - Christian.

[WV Cowboy]

I am not sure either. :)
Good one !

The Bible is such an incredily amazing book, just packed full of many "treasures" to be discovered through study, ... I wish I knew more.

[superpunk]

The term did , yes, no doubt about it - The Bible Says they were first called Christians at Antioch.

As far as the first religion goes, though, I called it that because of lack of a better term.

Christianity began when the holy spirit was poured out at Pentecost in 33 c.e. (tongues of fire), but it was much different from what we have come to know as "Christianity" today, LOL.

You could say that the first "faithful worshipper of God" was Abel, since he died faithful, unlike his parents or brother. Aside from that, until the time of , the only people following God was the nation of Israel, and any proselytes that associated with them.

[Faerluna]

You can have one or two beers, and be fine, but one joint....not so much, LOL.

I think that statement is true relevant to the frequency with which a person uses. It's probably true for someone that's never smoked a joint, or only smoked once or twice. The same for drinking and a person that never drinks getting hammered with one beer.

For regular smokers, depending on the quality of the pot you're smoking, one "serving" (I don't think most pot smokers would consider a whole joint as a serving, like one bottle of beer) of said joint could do about as much as one beer for a regular drinker.

[Mike 1967]

It's legal to get tattoos, and to smoke tobacco, but I wouldn't do those things. I don't understand how I have a "stance" exactly, on effects of pot vs beer. You can have one or two beers, and be fine, but one joint....not so much, LOL.

I will agree that it is best to stay away from both if possible.

I used to smoke quite a bit in a previous agnostic life....among other things.

My personal experience was that a few "hits" did not have a major impact after you got beyond the first couple of times.

The first time I smoked it did have a major impact on my mind. But I can also say the same thing for the first beer I ever drank. My first beer threw me for a larger loop than my first "toke".

But now I just have an occasional glass of wine.

[Mike 1967]

Christianity began when the holy spirit was poured out at Pentecost in 33 c.e. (tongues of fire), but it was much different from what we have come to know as "Christianity" today, LOL.

You could say that the first "faithful worshipper of God" was Abel, since he died faithful, unlike his parents or brother. Aside from that, until the time of , the only people following God was the nation of Israel, and any proselytes that associated with them.

What about Noah :)

[aikemirv]

What about Noah :)

Speaking of Noah, Got drunk and was an embarressment - not for drinking, but getting drunk.

[superpunk]

I think that statement is true relevant to the frequency with which a person uses.

True in all things. An alcoholic may need 10 beers before any impairment occurs, but they have had to build up to that point. It doesn't happen overnight. In order for a pot smoker to get to the point you described, he would need to continually push his limits, which would continually impair him. In any case, if there was a bag, with traces of marijuana, it can be assumed more than one joint was made. Again, I prefer to give Michael the benefit of the doubt.

[superpunk]

Speaking of Noah, Got drunk and was an embarressment - not for drinking, but getting drunk.

Excellent point. Noah's folly there, resulted in one of his sons' being punished, for 'laying bare his fathers nakedness'. More than just Noah was affected there.

[Mike 1967]

Speaking of Noah, Got drunk and was an embarressment - not for drinking, but getting drunk.

Excellent point !

[WV Cowboy]

Genesis 1:11
Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants ...

Genesis 1:12
The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds ...

Genesis 1:29
Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth ...

Looks like God wants me to get high !!

J/K :lmao2:

[superpunk]

What about Noah :)

Well, Noah, Enoch, Abram, there were various servants of God before the nation of Israel, but you're right, I misspoke. :o:

[Mike 1967]

Excellent point. Noah's folly there, resulted in one of his sons' being punished, for 'laying bare his fathers nakedness'. More than just Noah was affected there.

yep...that effected generations.

That particular son was cursed....and the curse impacted generations if I remember correctly.

[Mike 1967]

I just want to give Kudo's to the mods for allowing this thread to continue !!!!

[Hoov]

Drinking and driving.....:beer1::nono2:

yes, but after a w/e in jail, a 2 year suspension, over 5,000 of fines and court costs and having to operate my car for a year with a breathalizer ignition interlock and pay another 1,000 for that interlock plus pay highway robbery for auto insurance i think ive paid my dues on that one.

Also, i did have a designated driver that night but the arse left in the middle of rolling stones concert after i had been drinking. I actually stopped drinking and waited over 2 hours before attempting to drive, cause i didnt want to leave my car in the stadium parking lot overnight, i decided i felt ok to drive home. cop profiled me cause i was driving an old lincoln towncar that looked like a pimpmobile after 2 am and rode up on my arse, i changed lanes to let the car pass and he pulled me over for changing lanes without a turn signal, then i failed the breathalizer by only .02 over the legal limit, thats about 1/3 of a beer.

Of course the officer testimony in court was complete BS and when i challenged it the judge got pissed and said i was calling the officer a liar, to which i said "i sure am" and he ended the trial right there. Looking back when the judge yelled at me for trying to explain what happened and told me i was only allowed to answer attorney question yes/no i should have just turned and gave him the finger, i wonder how much that fine would have been.

[superpunk]

yep...that effected generations.

That particular son was cursed....and the curse impacted generations if I remember correctly.

yes, Canaan. Which resulted in him being a "slave to his brother Shem" (Gen 9:26) and eventually ending up in that state - i.e. the nation of Israel conquering the land of Canaan.

[superpunk]

Hoov,

Ouch, tough break. Don't know how much the fine would have been, but you probably would've felt fantastic. Of course, there is that whole "contempt of court" thing.

[WV Cowboy]

yes, but after a w/e in jail, a 2 year suspension, over 5,000 of fines and court costs and having to operate my car for a year with a breathalizer ignition interlock and pay another 1,000 for that interlock plus pay highway robbery for auto insurance i think ive paid my dues on that one.


You should have just killed the cop, couldn't have been much worse.

Just kidding, I know exactly what you went through, I went through it with my son about 9 yrs ago. He was 19 & plenty stupid back then.

[Mike 1967]

yes, Canaan. Which resulted in him being a "slave to his brother Shem" (Gen 9:26) and eventually ending up in that state - i.e. the nation of Israel conquering the land of Canaan.

Very cool !

It is rare to find Christians that know the Old Testemant....much less the Bible at all.

[Hoov]

Hoov,

Ouch, tough break. Don't know how much the fine would have been, but you probably would've felt fantastic. Of course, there is that whole "contempt of court" thing.

yeah, i would have felt great....but it definitely would have been contempt of court and probably at least another 1,000.

At any rate, no more drinking and driving for me. Thats one thing i like about living where i am now, i can walk in 5 minutes to main street and there are about 50 bars and restaurants in halfmile strip.

That breathalizer is a big time pain though, ive had my car not start at 6am cause of drinking the night before and had to run and catch a bus to get to work.

[Mike 1967]

yeah, i would have felt great....but it definitely would have been contempt of court and probably at least another 1,000.

At any rate, no more drinking and driving for me. Thats one thing i like about living where i am now, i can walk in 5 minutes to main street and there are about 50 bars and restaurants in halfmile strip.

That breathalizer is a big time pain though, ive had my car not start at 6am cause of drinking the night before and had to run and catch a bus to get to work.

I like ya hoov

But....I cannot feel any pity for your current situation.

There have been to many innocent deaths caused by drunk drivers

[superpunk]

Very cool !

It is rare to find Christians that know the Old Testemant....much less the Bible at all.

Isn't that what our beliefs and morals are SUPPOSED to be based on? LOL. I know what you're talking about though. Very few people actually open the bible up, and examine what it has to say for themselves. Many would rather just listen to what they're told, rather than investigate themselves. I'd rather be like the "noble minded Beroeans" who "received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so." (Acts 17:11)

[Mike 1967]

Isn't that what our beliefs and morals are SUPPOSED to be based on? LOL. I know what you're talking about though. Very few people actually open the bible up, and examine what it has to say for themselves. Many would rather just listen to what they're told, rather than investigate themselves. I'd rather be like the "noble minded Beroeans" who "received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so." (Acts 17:11)

Yes, that is definitely what a "Christians" morals and beliefs should be based on.

As well as the law written on our hearts (concience) that Paul refers to in Romans 1.

[superpunk]

That's what separates us from the animals, no doubt.

[Mike 1967]

Isn't that what our beliefs and morals are SUPPOSED to be based on? LOL. I know what you're talking about though. Very few people actually open the bible up, and examine what it has to say for themselves. Many would rather just listen to what they're told, rather than investigate themselves. I'd rather be like the "noble minded Beroeans" who "received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so." (Acts 17:11)

The original constitution and Law in this Country revolved around the concept that LAW should be over the KING. The basis for this concept came from the Bible.

But todays society has a new religion. Humanism. Humanism is the belief that there is not God. That everything is a result of time + chance. So basically all "truth" centers off of Man.

The original concept of Separation of Church and State was to gaurd against a State Church......as was the case in England and other Norther Europe countries at that time. The founders wanted a separation because they wanted to safeguard freedom of religion. But the founders understood that you could not have a standard of LAW over man without a GOD over man.

Today, the concept of Seperation of Church and State has been misconstrued to remove anything that is Christian from government insitutions. And ironically, it has been replaced by the State Religion of Humanism...otherwise known as Evolution.

In Humanism..there are no absolutes...only time + chance. So in essence there is no absolute basis for law or morality or ethics. What you are left with is the King over the Law.

A prime example is the ruling on Abortion. A majority of people agreed that abortion was wrong....but a select few (the Supreme Court) dictated that abortion was legal.

[Mike 1967]

That's what separates us from the animals, no doubt.

Yes...you are created in the Image of God. Which is why you are more valuable than the entire universe.

[WV Cowboy]

Yes, that is definitely what a "Christians" morals and beliefs should be based on.

As well as the law written on our hearts (concience) that Paul refers to in Romans 1.
But we do have to be careful about following our conscience, because it is a realative thing.

Each person could have a different level of conscience, or none at all.

I know what you mean though.

[jem88]

the trouble is, it's been "illegal" for so long and has had so many misconceptions about it over the years.

marajuana doesn't lead to harder drugs, the desire to do drugs leads to harder drugs. marajuana just gets rid of the junk in your fridge that's been sitting there as a science experiment for quite some time but may taste ok just the same.

"reefer madness" - if there was ever a load of hammered moose manure, this is it. getting all energetic and crazy after smoking it? hardly. well, unless taking 10 minutes to reach for the remote then not knowing why is just whacky.

and it's been villianized most all of our lives. those who have not already put that aside and tried it will likely have a negative outlook on it and those who use it.

w/alcohol, people go nuts, drive around and kill people, get into arguments, blow out livers (wonder how much of mine is left anymore - it grows back, right???) but w/weed you just sit around and waste time.

maybe too much of it - that IS a valid concern.

now - what if an NFL player went to amsterdam - could they THEN smoke and it be "ok"? i tend to doubt it because i'd think the policy is NO WEED, not NO WEED WHERE ILLEGAL. but since irvin isn't in the NFL, what would his work say?

in jobs where you're not required to be 24x7 i think a drug law is an invasion of privacy. when i go to best buy and see they're drug free, it does my heart wonders to know that the pimple-faced kid who put the cd's out didn't get high last night.

right, WHO CARES? and why would NOT smoking be a pre-req for a job like this? policeman, fireman, doctor on call - sure. if you may have to "go to work" then you'd better be straight and able to. otherwise, what people do with their own lives is their own business.

smoking and driving - would it bug me if someone was high and ran into my truck because of it? well, no more than the **(#*($&*(*(&@(*$ idiots who must talk on their cell phone and cut over 4 lanes because they're about to miss a turn, drive slow because they're busy talking on the phone and doing hand motions with the other hand leaving the rest of us to wonder what they're driving with.

in short, i don't care what michael does or where. but if illegal and he gets caught, then pay the standard fare and move about your life - that's the law and i'm ok with that.

instead people want to be judge and jury and express a standard of life for others i sincerely doubt they'd hold to for themselves.

now if he was pulled over where legal, then we'd probably never know because he'd just be sent on his way. I'm obviously a bit late arriving to this thread but I have to say that this is probably the best post I've read in my time here at this board (apart from the numerous enlightening posts written by jem88 of course!)