FUCK...enough with the stupid huge post comments, if it is that big a deal just delete it, don't tell me you are the creater of this site and can't remove content, you edit it the way you see fit...prick!

This seems a little off topic, but the point is: I do not want to and should not have to moderate content.

Jesus saves the day, maybe he will do your job and keep this site from going to shit again.

Eddie, do you know a guy named Rob. Worked/works for disney...a cook of some kind or chef...ring any bells?

You sucked his dick in the parking lot on April 12th.

Religion sucks...it keeps people in line and that's the only reason i'm ok with it. But when it starts getting people killed over nothing...where is your god then?

"he's the one telling them to do it".... so they say.

... and where the hell did dinosaurs come from?

It wasn't such a big deal when it was just the book. I think that is a direct insult to the intelligence of the world. Do some think that those that watch the movie are more easily led than those that read the book? Or is it simply that the movie will lead you down a narrower path; that the book lends itself to more personal sentiment as to the meaning of it all. Haven't read the book, but the little lady wants to see the movie, so I will offer more of my opinion after i have more information.

You need to watch "The Real DaVinci Code". It totally slays Dan "Assclown" Brown and his stupid theories.

I like anything that pisses off the squares.

So are you saying that "If loving god is wrong, I don't wanna be right"

Hard right or left, any extreme tends to claim a bunch of bullshit that no one should believe. It's completely self motivated babble just to swing polls one way or another. People would much rather hear what they want, than the truth. Imagine this pitch:

"Well, I shoot more shit than the other candidate so I got the south and I have never had a daughter that needed an abortion so I'm against that. Got you Christian fuckers too, jobs pretty much done here. I probably deserve to be impeached since I have been waving around the American flag as a weapon, but the people are too stupid, don't care or are just plain powerless. Oh well, see you fuckers in Texas."

So, while I appreciate mild Christianity I think using it as a platform for politics is lunacy. Who said we should separate Church and State? I dunno, but I bet it was Thomas Jefferson since he said a lot of smart shit.

Just for shits and grins...define Christian.

As far as I'm concerned, Bush is a goddamned criminal. Forgive me for being redundant, but he and his entire troupe of squalid swine lied to the nation as a means to get into Iraq and the intellectually inert hailed him as though he was a hero for fighting terrorism. Simply, he lied. This lie has cost thousands of American lives. Bill Clinton lied, too. But about an overweight Jew that was buffing his tip. On the scale of things, I think digging your head into the throat of a Jew is pretty serious stuff if you're a proclaimed Christian... but he didn't endanger national security.
I will follow with this: Do not push your morals on me. I do not need morals as defined from the bible to be a good person. There should ALWAYS be a clear line between church and state. I am staunchly against organized religion anyways. It has its redeeming factors of course... if you're in a good position you can manipulate the lay person.

You'd know better than the rest.

So...I saw the DaVinci Code this evening. I have started reading the book, and in the few hundred pages that I have read, I can run off a significant list of differences, but so is cinema. Honestly, I see no reason for outcry, it was an excellent movie in my opinion, but for all the controversy that it has started, it left me feeling kind of empty. I was waiting for the "FU Catholicism" but it never happened, great drama, good movie, but Passion was more controversial in my opinion.

Well thats a group of lunatics as well.

Well you're a lot more liberal than most Christians. The church would lose a lot credibility if the guy they put all of their "faith" in was simply a mortal and got his dick wet.

Well, I wouldn't want to be in the position in the first place to have to "trust" another man, friends aside. As for men who wouldn't have sex with women, why not just eliminate that and say a celibate person.
Now,
A person seen as powerful is a person who has total control of their body, including it's urges. The Greeks believed this true and you can see this in their artwork. Discobolos for instance features a discus thrower with a small dick. A small penis portrayed showed power because that person would not be weak to sexual urges. It would be similiar to how we perceive someone a pussy when they get a shot and wince in pain. These days it would be abnormal for a person to abstain from sex for reasons other than religious or spiritual. The man who preaches to me not to masturbate or have sex for pleasure should also be the man who doesn't molest alter boys.

I should have seen a small penis joke coming from the mind of a person so fixated on dick. It may not fill your large mouth but would your Christian girlfriend.

Nah. No need. Its the wasteland.

Hey, kids fuck around and I'm terribly sorry you didn't have the attention from the other girls that I was able to rouse. At any rate, I don't know why that situation was brought up in light of what the "situation" is.

Do not try to condescend me with that dribble you pour from your fingers. People who weigh themselves on pussy had and gotten are the pathetic:the swine who are so perverse to try to manipulate and then hail themselves upon successful pussy. Do not speak to me as though I have a pathetic sex life when you are the one who can not settle on one piece of ass. When you flip-flop beneath butt like a juggler because nothing can make you happy does not make another person pathetic. When you can’t decide whether your dinner will be tacos or hamburgers, you have no judgment. Bugger off you sot.

Why don't we start a new thread for this. We have almost 50 comments under a post that hardly has a sentence.

There was no inability to speak of in my relationships. As for yours, I would beg to differ. I would not say that your sexual expertise did not keep you in kind favor with the whores you slept with, but rather YOUR inability to keep them emotionally happy. You've been through more girls than Bush in mistakes.

So, back to the Da Vinci Code...

Why is it hard to believe that Jesus may have been a father? It's certainly not unnatural to reproduce - and controlling sexual urges - well that's just ridiculous. The story is not saying he slept around. It's saying he had a meaningful, loving relationship with his wife and had children.

It may be beating a dead horse, but that's all I have to say.

There is quite a difference between being celibate and loving ones wife and having children. Remember, Jesus is supposed to resemble man... But he's a step above. He can walk on water, resurrect himself, give the ultimate sacrifice and doesn't have sex. As for this being my opinion of Jesus, it is not, but rather my opinion of what the Church should want you to think. If there was really a Jesus, which there probably was, I would say he was married and had children. It's easy to understand why the Catholics would be upset seeing how what they've believed in for centuries is now being read more than the bible but is not teaching the same thing as the bible. It is a fictionalized version of the bible. Dan Brown is a good researcher, BUT, when he can't prove something, he speculates. In the beginning of the book it mentions something about there being no false truths in the Da Vinci Code. Take that into account when normal people, perhaps not Catholics, but normal people who are God fearing, but don't feel the need to attend church, who read this book and take those things that Dan Brown as written as fact. When I was on vacation last year there were a group of people who had read Da Vinci Code and were talking about religion and citing and cross referencing Brown. That is the problem. And the book was horseshit.

It is a fiction book, clearly. I didn't think it was too bad at all, but fiction. It's labeled as such.

As for the Bible, I think dumb shits have just started taking it too seriously over the years. If the bible is read from the aspect of a story trying to teach a moral lesson or trying to teach something about the past without science then it makes a lot more sense, the Vatican has all but said so. The book is more artful than factual.

The only bit of Creation that comes to mind really easily is when God makes woman from the rib of Adam. After we crawled from the ocean we probably weren't two sexes yet and evolution (personified as God) split us in twain from the same animal. It could be a reach for that but there are other examples that I don't feel like reading around for.

It may be labeled as such but the fact remains that people think it's true. That's where the problem lies. Regardless, it does mention "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate".

people think the bible is true, too...what of it?

The Da Vinci Code is entertainment, the bible in my opinion is a much truer fraud.

The movie blows dick.... I couldnt finish it.

Yeah. Agreed. Despite that, I felt it farce and exaggerated.

Trey and I have both seen it.

and pam. trav - you forgot pam. again.

remember me?... pamcake...personal pam pizza... p3... p-triple... pamburger....

at least Trey remembered I went. sheesh.

Wow...I'm so sorry. I don't know Pam...ever since you started this job, we have been drifting farther and farther apart...I...I don't know what to do anymore.

*"R. Kelly - I Can't Sleep Baby" plays in the background*