By: Sue Alexander
Re: Lest we forget... (1 of 5)

>>> Jim Germiquet to Brian Kolacy 2-29-96 <<<
 
 MH> KD>> Then why are there still Jews?

Are you kidding. JESUS IS A JEW !
And have you not heard of the group "Jews for Jesus"?
Being a Christian does not mean you can't be a Jew.
And it is also said that in the end times when Jesus returns again,
then the Jewish nation will recognize him and accept him as the
Messiah.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Fredric Rice 2-29-96 <<<

 FR> ... Married life presupposes the power of the
 FR> husband over the wife and children, and subjection
 FR> and obediance of the wife to the husband. - Pope
 FR> Pius XI, _Casti Connubii_

Sounds great to me :-) . As long as it is voluntary. But then the husband
must love and cherish the wife. Someone always has to hold the balance of
power or nothing would ever get done if both sides refused to give in.
The responsibility is on the husband then to be sure that he does the RIGHT
THING or HE pays the consequences.

And to this day while man has lost his rights ...ie say in abortions
He still must PAY the consequences <child support> if the woman has 
the child.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Fredric Rice 2-29-96 <<<

 FR> "Now therefore kill every male among the little
 FR> ones, and kill every woman who hath known man by
 FR> lying with him. But all the women children, that have
 FR> not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for
 FR> yourselves."

Actually this sounds quite HUMANE. Think about it. No point having all
those orphaned children and widows around after their hubbys have died
in the war.

And of course you wouldn't want to be taking another mans woman for your
new bride. SO take only the virgins. And at the same time, you continue
the race through the virgins.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Martin Goldberg 3-6-96 <<<

And what happens when your long awaited Messiah ends up being the return
of Jesus Christ ? They are "Christian Jews" not "Orthodox Jews".
We know the HISTORY of the Jewish people. They have a very long history
of turning their back on their own true god and worshipping false gods.
This denial of Jesus is just one more example in my humble opinion.
Can the Jewish People as a nation be trusted when it comes to whether
or not at this particular time they are following god ?
Tell you what. Get that temple in Jerusalem built and let's see what
happens. At least until then I will consider the Jewish nation in just
one more of their rebellions against their true god.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Andrew Masten 3-2-96 <<<

Anything god does, he does becomes people demand it of him. That is
why he had to send Jesus. because the jews had this thing about
sacrificing something to god for forgiveness. So people couldn't
accept gods forgiveness unless they sacrificed something for it.

Its a ritual people like to take part in. STarted back in the garden
of eden when adam ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Then he started making up these rules about how to make up for it when
he did one of those "evil" things.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Martin Goldberg 3-4-96 <<<

What is wrong with being simple minded ? I like the idea? The
simpler the better. WHy try to make things complicated if they
don't have to be.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Rena Mcgee 3-8-96 <<<

 RM> You can't really *love* someone who has to be obey you in all
 RM> things. And if someone is subordinate to you, then its obvious 
 RM> you're superior, right? So if you're superior, and the
 RM> subordinate disobeys you, you have to discipline the subordinate,
 RM> right? After all, the subordinate has to *obey* you, because
 RM> you're *superior* to the subordinate, correct?

Not really. You have to remember that the wife doesn't HAVE to be
subordinate, she CHOOSES to in a good marriage. A man should not have
to force a woman to give him the title of "head" of the family.
She should trust him enough to allow him to have the final say in
matters they have discussed together and have not been able to agree
upon. On his part, he must be fair and consider what is best for all
in the family, not what is best for him.

It is NOT a question of being superior, it is merely a question of
responsibility. It is not a question of being subordinate, it is a
question of being trusting.

It is not a question of "obedience" like a dog, It is a question of
willingness. If the woman is "unwilling" then that is her choice. But
what does that do to the relationship ? That means she doesn't trust
her husband to make the right choice, and what is love without trust
and what is a marriage without love?

>>> Jim Germiquet to Masochistic Maiden 3-11-96 <<<

And many times, it isn't so much the person doing the abuse that needs
treatment, as the person who is allowing their rights to be abused. I mean
if a person doesn't let the abuser know they are crossing that line, it
adds to the problem. And what about the abused person who is either
consciously or unconsciously baiting the abuser and WANTS to be abused.
As a foster parent, we were educated about abused children who try to
get their foster parent to spank them or abuse them because the see it
as an expression of love and caring.

And there was some talk about how Nicole Simpson said she like to get
O.J. worked up because it excited her to see him angry. The excitement,
"living on the edge". With that kind of psychological manipulation happening
is it any wonder that some people become "abusive". I myself had personal
experience with a female who wanted me to help her get together with an
exboyfriend because she wanted to dump him for spite.

>>> Jim Germiquet to "Norbert Sykes" 3-12-96 <<<
(re:killing the boys and non-virgins after a battle)

I was talking about fighting back as a nationa and not as individuals.
As has already been noted, there is no evidence that these "virgins"
were raped or used as anything more than servants. And from my reading
of the bible many servants were treated quite well. The prodigal son
for example went home thinking "even my fathers servants are better
off than I am".

And these virgins on becoming women may have voluntarily become sexually
active with their captors due to their own sexual needs and urges.
And also the desire to have children.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Michael Hardy 3-12-96 <<<

 MH> So instead he goes to great lengths to make salvation possible,
 MH> freely available to anyone who wants it.

And what is salvation ? It is avoidance of the pain caused by making
wrong decisions. Much like a person who takes the advice of not
playing with matches avoids the hell of being burned over 90% of their
body, like those who have ignored the warning and have been burned.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Chad Osten 3-12-96 <<<

 CO> I don't know if it was you or not, but somebody mentioned about how
 CO> people need to submit to christ...that isn't exactly free choice..how
 CO> would a christian reconcile their need with being a human and being
 CO> a christian in this scenario?

Of course it is a free choice, if you submit yourself willingly.
A good example would be that of a wife who trusts her husband enough
to give him the final say in family affairs. She believes that whatever
decision he makes will be in the best interests of all concerned.

Many women no longer feel that way. They feel it is belittling to trust
their husbands enough to willingly submit to his decision.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Preston Simpson 3-13-96 <<<

 PS> Think about it. If you awoke one morning to the sound of gunfire and
 PS> discovered that your neighbor had invaded his neighbor's house, killed
 PS> everyone there except for that family's little girl, and taken her as
 PS> a slave, wouldn't *you* feel disposed to do something about it, before
 PS> he came after you?

I'd become his friend as soon as possible :-). A STRONG friend as opposed
to a snivelling cowardly friend. He would see the benefit of forming an
alliance with me and be wary of attacking me or betraying me for his
own safety.

>>> Jim Germiquet to David Worrell 3-13-96 <<<

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! Like you have any idea of what a "quantum
fluctuation is" How many have you personally encountered ?
Seen any universes created by that method lately ? I thought not.
Fancy words for "non existent magician waved non existent wand and
POOF a universe" And you thing god is a fairy tale?
 
>>> Jim Germiquet to "Norbert Sykes" 3-13-96 <<<

Then we would be saying why can't the wife be subordinate to the
husband. But I would say basically it makes more sense for the
physically stronger person to bear the responsibility , especially
in the past where it was necessary for purposes of protection and
lower factor of intimidation. The man has nearly always been
considered the provider and the protector, making him less likely to
make decisions out of fear or intimidation.
 
But as I said I don't consider it being "subordinate" as much as trusting
the man to do that which he is suited for by nature. The woman is physically
the one who must bear the children.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Martin Goldberg 3-18-96 <<<

 MG> Obesity is real.
 MG> You have yet to show that hell is real.

Easy, Obesity is real, Obesity is hell ...therefore Hell is real !

NEXT !   :-)

>>> Jim Germiquet to Martin Goldberg 3-18-96 <<<

 MG> The Big Bang came from a highly compressed ball of matter that
 MG> contained all the matter in the universe.  When a critical mass was
 MG> achieved by gravitational compression, the mass expanded.
 MG> It's that simple.  Where is your evidence for god?

Well thank you very much, you have just given the evidence for my God.
My God is that highly compressed ball of < matter??? whats that? > matter
that expanded. TADA !

That is my "god the creator". As for "god the spirit". That is simply
the non physical concept of the TRUTH of the non physical uniting power
of LOVE ,the non physical sustaining power of HOPE and the assurance of the
reality of life or non physical power of FAITH.

These three remain. Faith , Hope , and Love. And the greatest of these is
Love.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Martin Goldberg 3-18-96 <<<

Well obviously Jesus and God are real because there are MILLIONS of
people who believe in them and act upon those beliefs.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Martin Goldberg 3-23-96 <<<

I have always concidered science to just be those who discover what
gods creation is and how he put it together .

Leave the why and the wherefore, to religion <spiritual not political>.
Maybe even philosophy.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Judith Bandsma 3-23-96 <<<

 JG> Exactly and at the time these "canals" were discovered, I was told
 JG> about them. Later the opinion was that these "canals" were the result
 JG> of the instrument being used to study the planet.

 JB> I absolutely refuse to believe that you are over 100 years old.

Eesh, again you pick on some irrelevent technical point and completely
ignore the concept within the message . just like the sadducees and
pharisees of the new testament that Jesus criticised.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Kevin D. Mckenzie 3-26-96 <<<

Of course. The bible says in the beginning was only god. What did god
create the universe out of ? I believe the universe is god, and the
big bang, was the birth of man. The sperm and egg of life uniting.
Sure it took 4.3 billion years of pregnancy before man was finally
born, but it was all part of the process and it really isnt much time
in comparison to eternity, is it ?
 
>>> Jim Germiquet to Lynda Bustilloz 3-29-96 <<<

 LB> Does that spirit of Truth and Love embody the concept that it's a
 LB> darned shame that women have gotten so uppity that you see no recourse
 LB> but to either backhand them, or start gunning women down at random?

I have presented such scenarios in terms of sick people who do not know
any other way of coping with this changing world. Men have to learn how
to deal with the mental abuses of women, in another way. In general men
AND women must learn respect for one another. The scars that a woman has
learned to leave upon men, are not physical, they are mental and so there
are no polaroid snapshots that can be presented in a trial. And of course
society still laughs at a man who allows a woman to abuse him. Women also
must bear the curse of their own aggressiveness, and sadly their children
must also bear the curse of a woman who has chased her husband out of the
home and marriage through constant verbal abuse, free from the previous
threat of physical defence once used by men. Some men on the other hand who
have not learned another way other than the physical will continue to go
mad from this verbal spousal abuse of women and in their madness strike
out at those who have scarred their minds, perhaps irrepairably.
No one is justifying this action of men. Just pointing out the possibilities
for it.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Lynda Bustilloz 3-29-96 <<<

 LB> Like claiming that it was a mistake to let women get so uppity you
 LB> have to backhand them?

I have never backhanded any woman in my life. I said that was what some men
used to control women. In fact I was always taught that you should never hit
a lady. But then of course that was in the days when women were ladies not
like today when many women are just men without penises. They have no
respect for their own femaleness and wish they were men.

 LB> Do you think he got much done, having all those women around who
 LB> needed a good rap across the mouth? Or did he just "cull the herd" when

You must be really desperate, to keep HARPING on the same thing. But then
you are a female. Is that sexism ? or just pointing  out a trait common
to the disrespectful females of the human species.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Fredric Rice 4-2-96 <<<

Of course you can do anything you want. Of course our society has set
up some laws that might discourage you from doing so. But god would
not stop you. But god might forewarn me if I am listening, and allow
me to escape your evil intent. He might even use conditions that would
cause me to run away at just the right time that as you are pursuing
me, a power line that is ready to snap will come down and electrocute
you for your treachery. Of course had you not pursued me it would not
have happened that you would die.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Elliot Finesse 4-10-96 <<<

Of course I get my info straight from God. The bible just verifies what
God tells me. You can get your info straight from God as well. In fact,
that is the only way you can really interpret the bible properly.

(later...)
SO far here are two points you have missed that I have tried to make.

1) The perception of truth is unique to the individual, as opposed
   to the actual truth of god.
2) Our perception of the truth is limited by our ability to seperate
   ourselves from what we WANT to believe, or our agenda.
3) The interpretation of the bible relies on our ability to perceive this
   actual truth of god as opposed to our perception of the truth which is
   tinted by our agenda.

(even later...)
I don't say words aren't to be trusted, I say words must be interpretted
and the interpretations might not be accurate, depending on our ability
or willingness to interpret them properly. But words are superfluous,
in relationship to the truth. As Jesus said the truth is within each of
us. We use words with each other to try and justify our denial of the
actual truth. You and I both have access to the actual reality of the
truth. If we argue or disagree, it is because we have agendas in which
we must twist the truth to prove what we want to believe is true.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Sue Armstrong 4-12-96 <<<

 Femaleness is the femininity of women 1) physically as child barers
 and nurturers 2) Socially as  child nurturers and homemakers 3) Mentally
 as a different being than the male of the species, with different
 perceptions and outlooks and qualities which are wll recognized
 by psychologists and other professionals. This has nothing to do with
 not having a say in what goes on. It has nothing to do with being
 inferior to men. This is what has been perceived and so women no longer
 respect the role that their gender best suits them for , in favor of
 taking on what they see as the more glamorous and superior role of
 the male.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Katherine Wintersnight 4-15-96 <<<

 KW> Perhaps he needs glasses?  I would think that if *I* could tell the
 KW> difference between harming another (murder) and piggishness
 KW> (gluttony), an omnipotent god would be able to.

It is not a question of not being able to "tell" the difference. It is a
question of the ratio of how "big" the sin is.
When compared to the perfect sinlessness of god, murder and gluttony are
not much different in grandeur. The comparison would be like having a
huge circle that represents sinlessness, and murder being a pinprick
in it and gluttony being a very slightly smaller pinprick. In relation
to the circle less than a .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
per cent difference.

Obviously the numbers are not meant literally, but just to give you an
idea of the context of what I am saying.

A sin is a sin is a sin, and it is man who puts this idea of one sin
being bigger than another sin, and even then it is based on mans
perception of the sin. What you may consider to be a big sin, another
person might consider to be quite appropriate behavoir.

>>> Jim Germiquet to David Worrell 4-3-96 <<<

 DW> What happens if your wife-to-be dies soon after your marriage, and you
 DW> eventually marry another woman? Which one will you "continue united is
 DW> a spiritual union" with?

This question is answered by Jesus. he says that in "heaven" it is not
like that. There is no male or female. Perhaps we will all be united
in a spiritual union.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Preston Simpson 4-18-96 <<<

 PS> Bully for you. Your definition of God seems to be a very vague and
 PS> nebulous one.

Oh yeah? ANd I suppose you have a better one ? Of COURSE you are going to
be able to ridicule a God that is defined as a piece of wood, or anything
that can be totally comprehended by such a sensually limited human being.
We are so very limited by our 5 senses, we cant even hear what dogs can
hear. We cant sense the things a bat can. All our efforts are concentrated
on developing devices that are capable of recognizing things that we cannot
"sense" and translating those into a form we can identify with our 5 senses.
X-RAYS and Radioactivity were unknown before we developed instruments
capable of detecting them. Same with "black holes". The POINT is so very
much could exist all around us that we are simply incapable of "sensing".
We are limited, and as such can hardly be expected to be able to completely
define what "God" is.

My defintion is a "partial" definition. I have several that include
God the creator, God the spirit, God the controller.
 
>>> Jim Germiquet to Becke Jones (now Boyer) 4-18-96:

 BJ> gender roles for women in the first place. Men can be just as capable
 BJ> of these acts (nurturer, homemaker, etc.). Just because women are
 BJ> escaping the restraints that men have put on them in the past doesn't
 BJ> make them any less a woman... 

Give me a break. A man does not have a WOMB or BREASTS necessary to
bare and feed children. And you as a woman MUST know the value of
breast feeding in the bonding of a child to its mother and how important
it is for babies to bond, if the are to thrive and be healthy.
Men just as capable ? Hardly.

And now just because we have infant formula and all its additives and
cows milk with all its allergic reactions and intolerences, women think
it is fine to deny a child the BEST food processed specifically for it
within its mothers body, and allow their poor infant to suffer all the
problems related to substitute milk or soya products.

Just because we have day care centres, it is fine to deprive the child
of the bonding to his real mother. The nurturing of his natural mother
you SHOULD care more about it than any day care worker possibly could,
but obviously doesn't care enough to provide that nurturing because she
wants to be a businessman.. oops businessperson.

Men have put these restraints on women ? Hardly, it was love for their
children that once put these restraints on women. A love that seems to
have dissapated. And when these chidren grow up what love will they pass
on to their children, probably even less than their businessmother gave
them.

Any less a woman ? depends on your definition of "woman", if you mean
physically, other than breast implants probably not. But in terms of
womanhood and a mothers natural love for her family, and a womans pride
of being a mother and nurturere and homemaker for her family, yes these
are much less women and getting to be more and more like men in a mans
body, I wonder if this could be a cause of the rise in lesbienism ?

And of course with women castrating men with the same knife of women
lib fanatacism, it is no surprise their is an increase in the number
of gay men.

Have a nice day sir.

>>> Jim Germiquet to Sue Alexander 4-19-96 <<<

 SA> woman's responsibility to her children if she is in an abusive
 SA> relationship?  What is the woman's responsibility if she has a very

 Certainly such men <and abusive women> should not be allowed to do so.
 Such people should first receive counselling and legal action should be
 taken. What ever happened to "For better or worse, richer or poorer in
 sickness and in health ?" I certainly do not expect a woman to allow
 herself to be abused, and at the very first sign of abuse action should
 be taken to end the abuse, but not necessarily the relationship. It is
 so easy now for a woman to just walk out and take everything with her,
 that I really believe it is becoming a ploy of women, to hook rich men
 with the intention of walking out after a couple years with a couple of
 kids and a house and a guaranteed child support income.

 You tell me in this situation, who is being abused. WHo is being taken
 for a ride and not only being raped materially, but emotionally as well
 when he has given everything to this woman including his trust and heart
 and she just stomps on it and walks out !

>>> Jim Germiquet to Sue Armstrong 4-26-96 <<<

 SA> Yes, these things hurt people.  Not gods.  Therefore, they are not
 SA> sins. 

Oh I see what we have here. A person who does not believe that stealing
adultery and murder would be perfectly GOOD things to do , as long as we
"legalize" them. I think this says much about your own character ! And you
talk about how terrible war is ? ROFL !