TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- If you dance your going to hell
Pages (2): « 1 [2]


Posted by {b.s.e.} on Jan-17-2004 04:45:


Posted by DaveSZ on Jan-17-2004 07:33:

Hehe, I'm sure he is.


Posted by TwoPlow on Jan-17-2004 07:38:

Sounds like the people that live in my town.


Posted by Sid on Jan-17-2004 09:13:

quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
I'd rather dance than be a child molester.


QUALITY


Posted by ehehe on Jan-17-2004 10:15:


Posted by TranceMuzik02 on Jan-17-2004 12:58:

This is the kind of thing that makes me hate religion and god so much


Posted by Moongoose on Jan-17-2004 13:33:

quote:
Originally posted by occrider
It DOES lead to buying foreign cars however. Ever since I've started dancing I've had this urge to buy an Audi.


Thats becouse audis are great cars Right after BMW and Mercedes there is Audi Everything american is waaaay down the lsit


Posted by loca on Jan-17-2004 16:37:

i'm going to hell
not anything i didn't know before though...
and dancing leads to pre-marital sex? bahahahaha


Posted by DaveSZ on Jan-17-2004 16:48:

Let me try and find that Falwell article about how he brands Tinky Winkey as a "gay" symbol.




Actually he does look a bit gay.


Posted by DaveSZ on Jan-17-2004 16:54:

Proof Falwell is crazy:

http://www.liberty.edu/chancellor/n...9/politics2.htm


quote:
PARENTS ALERT . . . PARENTS ALERT

Tinky Winky Comes Out of the Closet
The sexual preference of Tinky Winky, the largest of the four Teletubbies characters on the series that airs in America on PBS stations, has been the subject of debate since the series premiered in England in 1997.

The character, whose voice is obviously that of a boy, has been found carrying a red purse in many episodes and has become a favorite character among gay groups worldwide.

Now, further evidence that the creators of the series intend for Tinky Winky to be a gay role model have surfaced. He is purple -- the gay-pride color; and his antenna is shaped like a triangle -- the gay-pride symbol.

Furthering Tinky�s �outing� was a recent Washington Post editorial that cast the character�s photo opposite that of Ellen DeGeneres in an �In/Out� column. This implies that Ellen is �out� as the chief national gay representative, while Tinky Winky is the trendy �in� celebrity.

These subtle depictions are no doubt intentional and parents are warned to be alert to these elements of the series. However, many families are allowing the series to entertain their children. In the January 10 Blockbuster �Hit List� of the top-ten selling videos, two Teletubbies titles appeared on the list. The itsy bitsy Entertainment Company will release interactive Teletubbies dolls in March.

South Park Invasion
The creators of South Park, the juvenile animated series that airs on Comedy Central, have released a set of trading cards depicting episodes from the series that are now being sold in toy, hobby and sports card stores across the nation.

Parents should be aware that the cards feature the same impudent and vile language as the series. God�s name is frequently taken in vain, other four-letter words are continually uttered, female characters are routinely referred to in vile terms and human waste named Mr. Hankey becomes a live, speaking character.

In addition, the character of Kenny is brutally massacred in every broadcast while the remaining characters respond, �Oh my God, they�ve killed Kenny.� Many of those killings are also depicted in the card series. The trading cards are the exact size of traditional sports cards, making it easy for kids to sneak them into the home.

Acclaim Entertainment recently began selling the South Park video game -- which also features extreme violence and obscene language -- for Nintendo 64 with the support of a multi-million dollar marketing campaign.

Disney�s Hollow �Promise� to Parents
On January 8, the Walt Disney Company announced a recall of 3.4 million video copies of its animated film, The Rescuers, after two frames of the film were discovered to exhibit the figure of a nude woman. Disney had earlier refused to recall videos of the films The Little Mermaid and The Lion King after parents complained that other subliminal messages were hidden in scenes from those movies.

Disney said it is recalling the videos to �keep its promise to families that they can trust and rely on the Disney name to provide the finest in family entertainment.� If that promise is true, families across the nation wonder why obviously planned offensives persistently show up in the company�s videos.

�Certainly the image in The Little Mermaid of the clergyman who obtains [sexual stimulation] while performing the wedding ceremony qualifies as an image that does not belong in a children�s video,� said Cathy Brown, director of Why Life? (the youth division of American Life League). �And having the letters S-E-X float across the screen in The Lion King is objectionable as well. Why hasn�t Disney recalled these videos?� she asked.



Posted by Lost Inhibition on Jan-17-2004 18:15:

Re: Proof Falwell is crazy:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveSaenz
http://www.liberty.edu/chancellor/n...9/politics2.htm






lol i fail to see how anyone can consider humor and entertainment to be sinful. even Jesus himself promoted dancing and laughter as ways of praising God. it wasnt until the church became this massive hierarchy that they began to start outlawing dancing in places of worship and started to promote monies for salvation.


Posted by {b.s.e.} on Jan-17-2004 18:23:

You people fiend for hypocrisy. Admit it, you like that there's so much wrong with the world. We'd have some pretty boring threads if there wasn't.


Posted by cviper on Jan-17-2004 18:32:

Re: Proof Falwell is crazy:

quote:
[...]after two frames of the film were discovered to exhibit the figure of a nude woman


They recall all the stuff because of two frames (~0.08 seconds)? Someone must be kidding


Posted by whiskers on Jan-17-2004 18:53:

buying foreign countries is unpatriotic, treacherous, and by doing so you're supporting terrorism!!



OMG we must BAN disney movies LOLOL!1111


hell, i wouldn't want my kid to watch south park, but you gotta admit it - it's farking hilarious ang brilliant!


Posted by {b.s.e.} on Jan-17-2004 19:34:

The new one was on last night.. Cartman hides Butters in a bomb shelter so he can go to Kyle's birthday party.


Posted by DC76 on Jan-18-2004 05:35:

I am a man of faith... and I also think that that pic is obviously doctored. For one thing, nowhere in the Bible does it say anything against dancing or music. (Which has already been said before.)

Jesus is probably laughing... at the fact that some of his so-called "believers" are going against things that were written in the Bible... I don't know the exact verses, but I know that there are things being done that go against Scripture.

Zum Beispiel:
- forcing their beliefs on others (or at least trying)
- smack-talking people that don't fit the desirable description of a "good person" in their eyes as being "sinners". As if they've never sinned A story there, once I remarked how surprised I was to be sitting with a certain group of friends, given how much talking about sex they do/did, where I'm a virgin... of course, one completed my sentence:

DC: I'm surprised I sit with a bunch of...
EB: SINNERS? (I was actually thinking "hornballs" at the moment )
DC: (snicker) NO. It would be hypocritical of me to not associate with you for that reason.

- using the Word as a weapon (and that happens way too much, as much as I'm embarrassed to say it

As has been said, religion isn't the problem - if it was, I wouldn't be here, would I? - but extremists the likes of Falwell, a fair few other ACR members, Osama bin Laden, and so forth, give their religions a crap name. True Christianity isn't about following rules. It is about loving God and people, and living by faith.


Posted by arctic on Jan-18-2004 07:02:

Re: Re: Proof Falwell is crazy:

quote:
Originally posted by Lost Inhibition
even Jesus himself promoted dancing and laughter as ways of praising God.


Actually, as far as I know, there's no tangible evidence that Jesus even existed.


Posted by ojste on Jan-18-2004 11:43:


Posted by Verona^My on Jan-19-2004 04:59:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveSaenz
Religion isn't the problem; extremists are the problem.


extremists aren't even the problem, people who abuse power are the problem.

Religion is just a tool that the elite use, or abuse. It can be wielded to intimidate others, (you're going to hell) or to inspire others with a sense of purpose. Guess which side I respect more.

Intimidation is an immoral tactic of domination, it breeds contempt, which is why there are plenty of atheists in this world. Inspiration on the other hand, achieves quite the opposite, which is why on the other hand, we have plenty of believers in the world.


Posted by Pheobius on Jan-19-2004 16:32:

quote:
Originally Posted by artic
Actually, as far as I know, there's no tangible evidence that Jesus even existed.


theres more evidence of Jesus as divinity than that the Greeks and Persians went to war in the 5th century BC, try telling a classacist that the Greco Persian war never happened and they'll tell you where to shove it


Posted by Pheobius on Jan-19-2004 16:32:

quote:
Originally Posted by artic
Actually, as far as I know, there's no tangible evidence that Jesus even existed.


theres more eveidence of Jesus as divinity than that the Greeks and Persians went to war in the 5th century BC, try telling a classacist that the Greco Persian war never happened and they'll tell you where to shove it


Posted by arctic on Jan-19-2004 22:28:

quote:
Originally posted by Pheobius
theres more eveidence of Jesus as divinity than that the Greeks and Persians went to war in the 5th century BC, try telling a classacist that the Greco Persian war never happened and they'll tell you where to shove it


There are quite a few books out there (written by credible: ie: non religious right) authors which do a pretty damn good job of showing that at bare minimum, there's really no evidence that the guy existed.

It's at least debatable, but even if one assumes that he did exist, there's no evidence that he was the 'son of god'.


Posted by Verona^My on Jan-20-2004 12:36:

quote:
Originally posted by Treo
!? ..madness..


oh yeah, I'm down


Posted by Dj Dizzy on Jan-20-2004 22:19:

Re: Proof Falwell is crazy:

quote:
Originally posted by DaveSaenz
[url]
Disney said it is recalling the videos to �keep its promise to families that they can trust and rely on the Disney name to provide the finest in family entertainment.� If that promise is true, families across the nation wonder why obviously planned offensives persistently show up in the company�s videos.

�Certainly the image in The Little Mermaid of the clergyman who obtains [sexual stimulation] while performing the wedding ceremony qualifies as an image that does not belong in a children�s video,� said Cathy Brown, director of Why Life? (the youth division of American Life League). �And having the letters S-E-X float across the screen in The Lion King is objectionable as well. Why hasn�t Disney recalled these videos?� she asked.



does anyone remember the balcony scene from Aladdin where he says "all good teenagers take off your clothes"?? i remember when i heard it was thought no way in hell, but put on the captions and all it said was something like "[murmers]" or some shit

and does anyone remember the golden dildo on the original cover for The Little Mermaid before they rereleased it? funny shit



Posted by Lost Inhibition on Jan-21-2004 03:17:

quote:
Originally posted by arctic
There are quite a few books out there (written by credible: ie: non religious right) authors which do a pretty damn good job of showing that at bare minimum, there's really no evidence that the guy existed.

It's at least debatable, but even if one assumes that he did exist, there's no evidence that he was the 'son of god'.


whether or not he was or is the son of God is totally up to the person and what they chose to believe. I chose to believe that he is, and no skeptic can tell me otherwise without somehow interfering with my freewill
as for whether or not he existed, im pretty sure theyre are pieces of evidence such as tablets and artifacts around the area (Israel) that can prove his actual existence. however, since i lack that information, or that information isnt exactly avaliable at the moment due to laws limiting what areas can be searched, im gonna have to go with that its all up to personal faith


Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.