Rogue Nine Posted June 14, 2002 Share Posted June 14, 2002 I've never seen it. What's the gore level on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 *giggles* Not too bad... They only perform field surgery, and have to reach INTO a guy's leg, on camera... And the rest of the movie's pretty bloody too... And as far as the combat itself, it's the best in a modern war movie ever. The only technical error in the whole film is that the HMMVEE's had different tread style then the ones in the actual raid back in 1993. It's sad that I noticed that... Then again, I saw it 8 times in theaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNNER Posted June 18, 2002 Author Share Posted June 18, 2002 Yo again peeps. Lets see. Not layed off yet but I am only 4 from the bottom now. Yikes. I just got me a vasectomy last monday so I am no longer a stallion but a gelding. Nope, just joking, I am THE Stallion. It didn't hurt a bit and I was done in 10 minutes. my new PC is all togther and I got it running and the OS loaded on Saturday. If any of you do benchmarking go herehttp://www.madonion.com and load the 3dmark2001 and try iy out. I got a score of 7977.. It have overclocked my chip from 1.6 to 2.1 and will try 2.2 this week. My GF2 Ti200 was clocked to 245/470. Map is ........................... um, I suck:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Aw, dude....a vasectomy? *shudder* Welcome back, GUNNARDOG. Stay awhile, will you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNNER Posted June 18, 2002 Author Share Posted June 18, 2002 Yep, the snip snip. hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 The Gunner's shootin' blanks, eh? (Aw c'mon! Ya knew someone was going to say it,.. it might as well be me!) I'm jealous of those scores. Even with the GF4 4600 Ti overclocked to hell and back this old bucket (P3 933) can't pull those kind of numbers. Damn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 I still enjoy my TNT2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNNER Posted June 18, 2002 Author Share Posted June 18, 2002 My 933 with a GF2 GTS did about 3000. With my chip set to 1.6 and my card at 175/400 it did 7100. As soon as I turned my chip to 2.1 I got 7600+. Then I started turning up the video card speeds. I wish I had a Ti500 or GF4 now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying Beastie Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Originally posted by GUNNER Map is ........................... um, I suck GET BACK TO WORK! j/k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 This ain't a union, bub! Get in there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNNER Posted June 18, 2002 Author Share Posted June 18, 2002 What, no union benifits? Damn, slave labor I tell ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Blackhawk Down destroyes Full metal Jacket as war movies goes. I love that movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyan Farlander Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Wow, GUNNER, I ... wouldn't have expected that from you. I assume this was to avoid having any more children. But do you really think mutilating yourself was the answer? As a Christian man, shouldn't you leave such things in the hands of God, and not try to take them into your own hands? And why would you wish to frustrate God's purpose in creating the marital act as a perfect union of the unitive and procreative purposes? Did not we learn from Onan what an unholy thing that is? At any rate, it is really not my business, but you did post it on a public message board, and so I felt it would be prudent to put these questions to you, not as an attack or accusation, my friend, but in the spirit of charity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNNER Posted June 18, 2002 Author Share Posted June 18, 2002 Keyan, I was hardly mutilated. Do you think we should have unprotected sex for the rest of our lives and let GOD be the one to decide if we should get pregnant? Having a Vasectomy and wearing a condom do the samething except I no longer have to buy condoms thus saving lots of money. I am certanly open for a discussion on this if you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyan Farlander Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Originally posted by GUNNER Keyan, I was hardly mutilated. Do you think we should have unprotected sex for the rest of our lives and let GOD be the one to decide if we should get pregnant? I do. After all, that is faith! That is putting your trust in God and knowing that he will never place a burden on you that he does not equip you deal with. It is knowing that he will not put you in a situation you cannot deal with when you are cooperating with his great command to "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth." And it is respecting his will and the order of creation - the Natural Law. God does nothing without a purpose. It is no accident that he created sex as he did. It is perhaps his greatest gift to man. It has two purposes - the unitive and the procreative. The unitive - bringing a man and his wife closer together, strengthing their bond, and helping one another get to heaven. The procreative - bringing forth new life. God willed that these two aspects be as one in the marital act. They cannot be seperated, for they were intended to be as one. For 2000 years, Christians have understood and tought that any use of a human being's sexual faculties that does not cooperate with this is gravely wrong, be it in the form of sterilization, devices that prevent conception, or masturbation. Only in the 20th Century have some Christian's changed their attitudes on this teaching. And not for what could be considered valid reasons, for the most part - indeed, most that fell away from this teaching did not have any sort of religious motives for doing so. That is not to say, mind you, that there are not good reasons for not wanting to have a child at some particular point. And there are ways to go about that. "Natural Family Planning," for example is by far the best method, in my opinion, for doing this. But however you do it, the idea behind it is that if you are unwilling to accept the consequence of conception, you should not have sex when that is a possibility. In doing this, you can cooperate with the Natural Law set in place by God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwing Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Keyan you're slightly off base in my opinion. I wouldn't make it a point to discuss this but GUNNER said he's open to discussion, so here's my one cent: [Gen 38:9.2] But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother's wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. I don't see how that relates to vasectomies. Unless GUNNER is in a cultural situation where he has to get his dead brother's wife pregnant to continue his line, (which I'm fairly sure he's not) and he got a vasectomy to get around getting her pregnant and fufilling his cultural obligation (which I'm sure were not his motives, although I could be wrong ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNNER Posted June 18, 2002 Author Share Posted June 18, 2002 Sorry, I had to do some work. I am after all at work so go figure. But it is now time to head home but I will be back tomorrow to try and come up with some sort of defense to Keyans reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyan Farlander Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 It relates because God killed Onan for spilling his semen on the ground. Onan seperated the procreative purpose of sex from the unitive purpose, and was struck down for it. There are other possible interpretations of the passage, but this is the one that the early Church Fathers had, and that Christians have had until very recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyan Farlander Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Yes, it is kind of strange having a discussion about this, but it could be a very good discussion if everybody stays mature about it...and as we've stated in another thread recently, this forum is in serious need of some good discussion. And GUNNER, again please don't feel I'm attacking you. It is clear from your replies that you were not under the understanding that this was wrong when you did it. That alone means you could not even be guilty of commiting a grave sin. And even if you did conclude that it was wrong at some point, you would be under no moral obligation whatsoever to have the procedure reversed, so don't think that that's what I am trying to get at Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwing Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Originally posted by Keyan Farlander It relates because God killed Onan for spilling his semen on the ground. Onan seperated the procreative purpose of sex from the unitive purpose, and was struck down for it. There are other possible interpretations of the passage, but this is the one that the early Church Fathers had, and that Christians have had until very recently. God killed Onan because of his disobedience. That is the most obvious interpretation. And as a Protestant, I don't believe that the early church fathers should be considered infallible...but there you have what is perhaps one of the most fundamental differences between Protestantism and Catholicism. And since we've had that argument before and got absolutely nowhere, I'm not going to attempt to resurrect it. EDIT: I completely agree with your previous post (that I missed), and I also certainly don't intend to turn the flame war button on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyan Farlander Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Indeed, but they need not be considered infallible to realize that their understandings of scripture are of great importance and that they had a very good perspective for deciding what those scriptures meant. But actually, this issue need not concern Onan at all. I was just trying to think of something that GUNNER would have intimate knowledge of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyan Farlander Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Oh, and I wasn't really concerned about flames - I was more concerned with the numerous people who might come in and say, "He said 'semen,' huh huh huh." And lets face it - this is XWA.net, and there are plently of people who would say exactly that. But now I've ruined for them, so hopefully they will realize that it won't be funny now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 I have to go with Gunner on this. God gave us free will as such we can get into situations that we cannot handle, not because he meant it, but because it just happened. Also if everyone was to do as you say Keyan, then the world would be over populated, and disease rampant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyan Farlander Posted June 21, 2002 Share Posted June 21, 2002 No, it wouldn't. As it is, the entire world population could fit into the state of Texas, with each person having a considerable amount of space to himself, leaving the rest of the planet absolutely empty. Not to mention there would be more than enough food for everyone if certain evil men stayed out of the way (and I think irradiating food could go a long way toward helping the situation, too, but people are far to afraid of it to accept so easily). This "overpopulation" thing is a complete myth. As it is, I'm not even sure the United States (along with several other developed countries) has enough live births every year to keep the population where it is. I'd have to check the exact numbers, but I can tell you we're not growing by leaps and bounds. Up until 1930, every Christian church regarded artificial contraception as a detestable evil, completely at odds with God's will and commands. Eventually, almost every Christian church began to allow it. Now that they are seeing how it links to abortions and divorce, some of them are starting to go back to the original teachings. And here's something to think about. If, as a Christian, you believe that the Holy Spirit guides the church on matters of faith and morals, why would he lead the church to believe something was evil for 19 centuries when it was really perfectly fine? Isn't it a little more reasonable to think that maybe some people strayed off the path a bit? And as I said, there are moral ways for spacing the births of children. We're not talking about everyone having 20 kids, here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.