I Have ED
Yes, I'm a little embarrassed to admit but I apparently have ED. No, I'm not referring to Erectile Dysfunction; rather, I'm referring to former NFL great Eric Dickerson who goes by the nickname ED. What do I mean, you might ask? Well, I'm glad you asked.
See, I've been consumed lately with thinking about Eric Dickerson. In my free time, as I daydream, while singing along to Pavement in my car, in my dreams. I'm not sure why exactly I've been behaving this way, but I am. Yet it feels like a disease, which I why I feel I am infected with ED. Lately I have found myself wearing goggles and a mouthguard while piling up yardage at work. I've been exhausted and am constantly taking naps. I'm at a loss for what I can do. I Have ED!
Tags: * comedy * humor * funny * silly * entertainment * pop culture * Eric Dickerson * ED * Erectile Dysfunction * NFL * goggles * running back * Hall of Fame * mouthguard * Rams
posted by Tom G at 6/22/2006
6 Comments:
hmmmm..... sounds pretty gay (not that there's anything wrong with that). If you like Eric Dickerson so much, maybe you should find a photo of a nude black man and replace his head with Dickerson's. You'd be in heaven then, I guess.
I'd actually be in hell, since God hates gays. I've heard it says so in the Bible.
Well, the God of the Bible (both Testaments) does hate homosexuality, if not it's practicioners. If he doesn't hate them, I shudder to imagine the fate of those 'He' does hate, as the Bible is unambiguous about the fate of homosexuals - they are cursed by God damned to hell.
Of course, you don't have to believe in 'Him' - the God of the Bible - or any other God for that matter. I sure as hell don't.
But I am irritated by those who want to have it both ways. They say they believe in the God of the Bible, without admitting who teh God of the Bible is.
Imagine someome reading Shakespeare's MacBeth, and arguing that MacBeth never killed anyone; "I don't care what Shakespeare wrote, Mac Beth would never do such a thing". Yes, he would and did do such a thing - that's teh way the character is written. You don't have to like it, but don't say it ain't what it is.
Same with the Bible. The Bible is NOT tolerant towards homosexuals. If you don't believe that God curses homosexuals, I agree with you (how can an imaginary being curse anything?).But if you don't believe that God curses homosexuals, you also don't believe in the God of the Bible - you've created a new God (whic is fine, as the other one is just as made up)
does god hate bisexual women? Ones who enjoy being the meat in an occasional manwich?
I am so not like that. I was just wondering.
Melanaise-
Read carefully - I am talking about "the God of the Bible" here only. There are many ore possible conceptions of God, including one's in which God not only does not hate bisexual women, but IS one Herself.
I am objecting to people who want to have their cake and eat it too -to endorse behaviors forbidden by "the God of the Bible" and at the same time profess to be believers in "the God of the Bible". They are not beleivers in "the God of the Bible", they are making a new God. The God of the Bible ain't no liberal. The God of the Bible is rather schizo and inconsistent on many matters, but He is clear as the torquoise waters of the Bahamas on homosexuality - those who practice it are cursedd by God eternally damned. The God of the Bible doesn't necessarily hate bisexual women ( 'He' is supposed to hate noone), but He pledges to curse and burn them forever, so if that's how He treats those He loves, the term 'love' becomes mean ingless in the context of "the God of the Bible".
Again, I don't believe in the "God of the Bible"; I think anyone who thinks there is anything supernatural about the autuhorship of the Bible (whether they take it literally or figuratively) are ultimately as nuts as someone who would take the position that, say, Mark Twain's "Tom Sawyer" was either the figurative or literal word of God. It ain'[t neither,m and neither is the Bible. It's just a book - a man made book. You are free to love it or use it as a door stop (I recommend the latter) - but it's still a book. It wasn't written by God or by people possessed by God.
I also get a kick out of thoise who imkagine themselves superior to pudding headed Biblical literalists because they take the Bible figuratively, not literally. Look man, the leap int nonsense here isn't the degree of the supernatural you believe is involved in the writing of this book, it's the belief that the supernatural is involved in the writing of the book. THAT'S what's wacky. Trust me, a person who believes only in the existence of a verty few, small vamoires is JST AS DUMB as someone whio believes there are hordes of vampires in every city. It's not a matter of degree. [THERE! Wow, what a rant! I feel much better now... ahhhhh]
PS - Yeah, the typos-gremlins have struck again
JST AS DUMB = JUST AS DUMB
vmoires = vampires
ore possible conseptions = more possible conceptions
perhaps half a dozen more.. oh well, the gist is clear nonetheless...
Post a Comment
<< Main