Sunday, April 29, 2012

The Bible Forbids...

Some Sunday thoughts...According to this article in the Huffington Post a few things the old testament in the bible forbids.."Tattoos- Leviticus 19:28 states: Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.

Getting Remarried- Mark 10:11-12 states: Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

Working On Sunday- Exodus 31:14-15 states: "Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death

Women Speaking In Church- Corinthians 14:34-35 states: Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Eating Shrimp, Lobster..- Leviticus 10-11 states: And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

Losing Your Virginity- Deuteronomy 22:20-21 states: ... Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die:"


Personally speaking I've questioned whether "The Christian Bible" should include both the old testament with the new. Christianity began with Christ, who claimed to make all things anew.

The old testaments speak of a God that is demanding, vengeful, requires sacrifice, speaks of punishment by death and wars. The new testaments speak of an all forgiving God. One that is in total opposition to the other. How can you have one that is so diametrically opposed to the other and speak of the same God?

Therefore how does it make sense for Christianity to include both when one predates the other and is in total opposition?

The God of the new testament is all forgiving and loving of his children

Let's hope all that old testament nonsense is just that. As for me, I'd rather choose to believe in the latter.

What say you?


Thursday, April 19, 2012

Allentown Pools- I Have A Plan

"The cost to close Fountain, turn Irving into a spray park and redo Cedar, Mack and Jordan was estimated at $10 million to $11.3 million, with those projects being done over the next seven years." MY PLAN: If the city is determined to choke up 10 or 11 million dollars, why not just buy qualifying city residents season passes to Dorney Park? The passes are good at both parks and currently cost individuals just over $100. I'm certain the city could negotiate a lower price in bulk. Even at $100 apiece 15,714 passes could be handed out each and every year for the next seven years.
(the intended time stated for completion of the project)
There a number of advantages:(1) The city eliminates their pool vandalism & legal liabilities. (2) Who wouldn't rather go to Dorney for it's rides & water park? (3) Why wait seven years to enjoy what can be had right now. (4) The city doesn't have to pay to maintain or for guards & security. (5) In seven years would we'd have to start all over again.I'm not all that hot about spending this kind of money in the first place, but if we're going to do it, might as well make it some place people really want to go. The city's already too heavily invested in the entertainment business. Leave it up to the professionals who do it better.
Anyone else see how few actually use the city's pools?
There's no way the city can compete. Today's population just doesn't sit around pools anymore. They haven't for some time. There'd certainly be less bored people hanging around the streets or the city pools on a hot summer day getting into trouble. People need to be kept occupied (entertained) or they get into trouble. That's a fact. You want to attract new people to Allentown? Want to help lesser fortunate inner city kids? Want to reduce vandalism and nuisance police calls? Want to provide the people a first class recreational area?
Offer them season passes to Dorney or at least a huge supplemental discount off season passes. If people object to the $11+ million intended to be spent on city pools, the city should ask themselves, how many folks do you think would still object if the city were to offer season passes to Dorney instead? I'd prefer we didn't spend this kind of money in the first place. But, if the city's so determined as to spend $11+ million, at least spend it on something a far larger number of people could get behind and will actually use. Don't even talk to me about funding not being available for this. We've all seen the magic happen when government planners get something in their heads time and again. Sports complexes, airports, casinos, entertainment venues, public TV construction, trails, private offices, hotels, restaurants and all kinds of other private business developments, etc. etc. etc. If not on this, then let us do none of those either. Those projects benefited a few well connected. At least this plan would actually be spent doing something for the people who benefited little or nothing from those.Except for the privileges of spending money on tickets or services to use them, the average person has received little or nothing in return.
Which Would You Rather? The Pool OR...