fun. | Call Me Maybe (cover)
OH GOD FUN. STOP MAKING EVERYTHING BETTER………..
(via desyncglitch)
I’m having a meet up this summer for my online friends so I decided to make a cool poster to go along with it for shits and giggles.
Brilliant.
Reblogging because I still can’t believe something that I made has been reblogged by Wil FREAKING Wheaton. >////<
(via wilwheaton)
JC Penney’s new ad for Father’s Day
The text reads:
“First Pals: What makes Dad so cool? He’s the swim coach, tent maker, best friend, bike fixer and hug giver—all rolled into one. Or two.” The text at the bottom reads: “Real-life dads, Todd Koch and Cooper Smith with their children Claire and Mason.”
(via size10plz)
Leviticus 20:13:
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
Nice try, Colbert.
Leviticus was written approximately 1400 years before Jesus’ birth.
Nice try, artemispotter.
Old Testament =/= New Testament. Seriously. Also, Leviticus also commands you to learn the Torah, which, if you’re getting Old and New confused, you clearly haven’t.
Not to mention the other ridiculous laws in Leviticus (and Deuteronomy, as well), including the following:
- No mixing of different types of fabric
- No having sex with a woman on her period
- Curse your mother or father? You must be killed
- Disabled people cannot worship God
- Stubborn children should be stoned.
So…. still want to argue how valid the OT is?
Also, in the Bible!=Jesus said it, anyway. Even in the NT, there are a lot of people who aren’t Jesus giving their opinions.
Truth.
Only if the words are in red (in many translations) does it mean that Jesus said it.
FWIW, the apostle Paul and I would not have been friends. Mortal enemies is more like it.
Hey, guys, remember that one time when Jesus declared Levitican law irrelevant?
The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.
-Hebrews 7:18-19.
Having been Jewish for, you know, ever, I am endlessly amused at the Christian Right’s reliance on Leviticus. Even I, who didn’t understand the theological difference between Catholics and Protestants until I took a course on Christianity in college, knew that Jesus was totes anti-Leviticus.
Seriously, people…
^^^^^^^
Ugh thank you. Fellow Christian here. I’ve literally NEVER understood this logic. “hey guys let’s pick one arbitrary part of leviticus to harp on and ignore the fact that 99% of the new testament explicitly tells us the old covenants/laws no longer hold true”
I love it when self-professed “Christians” don’t know the ABSOLUTELY MOST SIMPLE basics of the difference between the Old and New Testament. If you are against gay marriage because of Leviticus, you should also keep kosher and be against tattoos. Otherwise you’re just another FLAMING HYPOCRITE.
-Jess
This is an enormous chain and I’m sorry, but I need to say this:
The laws in the Old Testament were set forth by god as the rules the Hebrews needed to follow in order to be righteous, to atone for the sin of Adam and Eve and to be able to get into Heaven. That is also why they were required to make sacrifices, because it was part of the appeasement for Original Sin.
According to Christian theology, when Jesus came from Heaven, it was for the express purpose of sacrificing himself on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven. His sacrifice was supposed to be the ultimate act that would free us from the former laws and regulations and allow us to enter Heaven by acting in his image. That is why he said “it is finished” when he died on the cross. That is why Christians don’t have to circumcise their sons (god’s covenant with Jacob), that is why they don’t have to perform animal sacrifice, or grow out their forelocks, or follow any of the other laws of Leviticus.
When you quote Leviticus as god’s law and say they are rules we must follow because they are what god or Jesus wants us to do, what you are really saying, as a Christian, is that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was invalid. He died in vain because you believe we are still beholden to the old laws. That is what you, a self-professed good Christian, are saying to your god and his son, that their plan for your salvation wasn’t good enough for you.
So maybe actually read the thing before you start quoting it, because the implications of your actions go a lot deeper than you think.
/An atheist who understands Christian theology better than Bible-thumpers do.
Blessed be this post.
(Source: drunkonstevphen, via size10plz)
Here is the thing, okay? Coming into a feminist conversation with, “Have you considered that sometimes women acquire free drinks at bars?” is like walking into graduate school during Philosophy finals and saying, “Have you considered that the color blue that I see may not be the color blue that you see?”
Imagine you are the guy who just walked into that Philosophy class and laid that shit down. Imagine the class full of students who have worked very hard and committed themselves and sacrificed to be here, students who have spent several years of their lives learning about this subject. Imagine now their feelings when you go to the head of the classroom with a smirk on your face and demand the professor give you an A for effort. Imagine now that they think you are a douchebag asshole, because they do, and because you are. You are a douchebag asshole because you are obviously so self-centered, arrogant, and completely ignorant of the world around you, that you thought you could walk into a high-level course with no background and no work and say something profoundly simplistic and totally unrelated and also everybody should congratulate you for having done this thing, so brave, so provocative.
[….]
You are not asking us a real question. You are simply illustrating, for all to see, your own ignorance. You are saying, “I have not considered the implications of the question I have just asked. I have not taken the time nor effort nor commitment to sit down and ask myself this question. Instead, I have come into your philosophy classroom/office/feminist blog and shat out my question with a smirk, because I believe that my two seconds of thought are worth more than your long-term analysis, because I believe I am worth more.”
Fugivitus: A few things to consider when you find a feminist blog (via absolutely-spiffing)
In my experience, the men who are most likely to come into feminist groups to criticise them are self proclaimed ‘intellectuals’ who turn up to demonstrate to people just how oh-so-clever they are, to masturbate over their ‘logical’ arguments, to incite ‘new and stimulating’ debate about subjects that have been done to death, to willfully ignore how they are erasing experiences and silencing people, just so that they can have a few moments of ‘thrilling’ discussion in their otherwise dull, highly privileged lives. And when this brief adrenalin rush is over? They can go home, safe in the knowledge that they have shown all these silly hysterical women exactly what’s what, safe in their privilege which means that they do not have to give this encounter more than a passing thought. Believing that they have made a difference. And this makes me sick.
So, this is actually a pretty good example to use. Perhaps these men will read it and we can get it through their pseudo-intellectual heads that this is not ok. This is harmful behaviour and contributes absolutely nothing of worth to anything at all. Feminism has enough flaws as it is. Feminism is, by and large, racist, transphobic, ableist, homophobic, and classist. We do not have time to pander to these individuals too. If men really want to help? Commit to being a good ally and give us the opportunity to solve these problems without this almost constant hindrance.
Omg this is perfect.
(via angrybanette)
So much about this, so true. People think they’re throwing you some curve ball when it’s really like they’re still in the early pre-cambrian bacterial stages of earth’s global evolution yet they’re convinced they’re multicellular organisms. And you’re like “no dude, it’s really clear that you’re not.”
Anyhow, just to add my own to the first example, it’s so complicated indeed and it’s come up twice for me in the past week. I went on a date last night and I was so, so relieved that they did not hassle me at all about buying my own drink. It was in contrast to two nights before, when I was trying to pay for my drink and another guy at the table really wanted to pay for it to me. So many things go through your head- my friends are always all like, “You might as well accept it if they’re offering,” and if I don’t accept the offer in most cases the guys are not like “cool, you must be upholding your internal, personal feminist values,” they’re often offended and feeling like I made a big deal out of nothing and feel it is a slight (and these guys aren’t assholes, to be clear, they’re just accustomed to what this action normally signals). And I myself feel like I’m being unnecessarily argumentative over what is basically just a generous offer, yet I feel really conflicted about accepting a drink from someone if I’m not actually interested in them (but they are in me), and just about the whole… situation. Anyhow. Yeah, it’s complicated, and there is often no win/win solution.
(via feministdisney)(via feministdisney)
“Gay Day at Disney is a day when we and our own families (including our children) have the chance to relax and enjoy a simple trip to a Disney theme park without having to sneak around trying to be invisible in order to avoid being stared at, scowled at, or treated badly by people who hate us.
…
