Lev. 15:19

[RichardT]

And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even.


... um, I know this is the OT, but this is just insane...

[mesue]

You just called God insane.

[RichardT]

You just called God insane.

....

So, whenever you go through your "issue", you would like to be put away for 7 days?

[arunma]

Actually it's not that strange. In the ancient world, women were usually considered to be unclean during their period. To this day, Hindu women are generally not permitted to enter temples during their periods.

[Katakalupto]

....

So, whenever you go through your "issue", you would like to be put away for 7 days?


To be perfectly honest, yes it would be nice to have a 7 day break from everything at that time. :D

[mesue]

....

So, whenever you go through your "issue", you would like to be put away for 7 days?
Yes! That would be so cool. It's not like I'd be put in jail, or anything. But I would be left alone. Sometimes solitude is good. It's a chance to rest and reflect on things. This law shouldn't be seen as a negative thing.

[tulc]

uhmmm RichadT? I would suggest backing slowly out of this thread (don't make any sudden moves!) and leave any chocolate you may have on you. :sorry:
tulc(don't wander in to minefields if you can avoid them bro!) :eek:

[Joykins]

It would be nice to have 7 days of not hissing DON'T TOUCH ME.... ;)

*hm*

I have a question, does it make that woman's small kids unclean? How would a woman go 7 days without touching her kids every month? Or does this apply only to adults?

[Abbadon]

And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even.

... um, I know this is the OT, but this is just insane...

If a woman has her period or is hemorrhaging, noone can have intercourse with her is what it's saying. For that time, it was remarkably good hygene, since they didn't exactly bath as often as we do. Or with the antibacterial stuff we have.

As others have pointed out, however, it's probably better to leave women alone when they're having thier menses.

[tulc]

As others have pointed out, however, it's probably better to leave women alone when they're having thier menses.
...I'd recommend leaving them alone during their "PRE" menses also! :eek:
tulc(speaking as an old married guy who helped raise two daughters!) :sorry:

[Katakalupto]

...I'd recommend leaving them alone during their "PRE" menses also! :eek:
tulc(speaking as an old married guy who helped raise two daughters!) :sorry:


LOL!!!

worknprogress(laughing as the daughter of an old married guy who helped raise three daughters) :)

[Abbadon]

You just called God insane.

Well, He did make us. And the duck-billed platypus. And fermentation. There's a fine line between genius and insanity.

...I'd recommend leaving them alone during their "PRE" menses also!
tulc(speaking as an old married guy who helped raise two daughters!)

Thanks for the advice.

Women are like fire. I find them pretty, but deep down inside I'm afraid of them.

[JacobHall86]

I would love it if women would remove themselves during their periods. I would love it. Why? because they are moody and angry and fickle (more than normal, no offense meant ladies dont take it that way) and it would be great not to have to deal with that.

[Abbadon]

I would love it if women would remove themselves during their periods. I would love it. Why? because they are moody and angry and fickle (more than normal, no offense meant ladies dont take it that way) and it would be great not to have to deal with that.

:eek:

*Abbadon hides behind the nearest large object*

[JacobHall86]

I know I know, i just angered every female here, but I grew up with two sisters, one was a twin. Always having sleep overs and I always got yelled at for something about that time. It was horrible. Plus i have had some crazy ex gf's who were worse when that time rolled around.

[tulc]

I would love it if women would remove themselves during their periods. I would love it. Why? because they are moody and angry and fickle (more than normal, no offense meant ladies dont take it that way) and it would be great not to have to deal with that. (emph. added)

...uhmmm is there a GOOD way to take that? :sorry:
tulc(wondering if there's room behind Abbadons large object?!) :eek:

[Ringo84]

You just called God insane.
No, he called a stupid old rule that doesn't apply to us anymore "insane".
Ringo

[tulc]

No, he called a stupid old rule that doesn't apply to us anymore "insane".
Ringo

Or...he didn't understand the rule so he thought it was insane? :scratch:
tulc(finds most of those stupid old rules had pretty good reasons behind them) :)

[JacobHall86]

No, he called a stupid old rule that doesn't apply to us anymore "insane".
Ringo

The Word of God is not a stupid old rule. Anyone who says that it is is a blasphemer.

[TwinCrier]

Let's look at this question another way:
Are there any men out there who like to have intercourse with menstruating women? :sick:

[Ringo84]

The Word of God is not a stupid old rule. Anyone who says that it is is a blasphemer.
Not only is it a stupid rule, but it's a stupid rule that no longer applies to us. It applied to the Israelites. Calling a spade a spade isn't blasphemy.
Ringo

[tulc]

The Word of God is not a stupid old rule. Anyone who says that it is is a blasphemer.

LOL! A bit harsh, much? :D "blasphemer"? not really, poor choice of words? perhaps.
tulc( :) )

[tulc]

REPORTED!

Gezzz dude, lighten up, it's a legitimate question! That's the other side of the unclean Laws.
tulc(I warned you about walking into minefields, remember?) :)

[Ringo84]

The Word of God is not a stupid old rule. Anyone who says that it is is a blasphemer.
I'm not saying that your beliefs are "stupid", but that the RULE is stupid. There's a difference. I wanted to say that in case somebody tried to make the case that I was attacking your beliefs. Not true; I'm stating an opinion about an outdated rule in Lvviticus.
Ringo

[arunma]

REPORTED!

Uh, Richard, what's going on with you?

[edb19]

:eek:

*Abbadon hides behind the nearest large object*

wise move

[JacobHall86]

Not only is it a stupid rule, but it's a stupid rule that no longer applies to us. It applied to the Israelites. Calling a spade a spade isn't blasphemy.
Ringo

The only part of your post that actual carries weight is that it was for the Isrealites.

It is not stupid, nor does it no longer apply to us, because it never applied to us to begin with.

Calling the word of God insane and stupid is Blasphemy.

[JacobHall86]

REPORTED!

For understanding Biblical Text and Context?

[Ringo84]

The only part of your post that actual carries weight is that it was for the Isrealites.

It is not stupid, nor does it no longer apply to us, because it never applied to us to begin with.

Calling the word of God insane and stupid is Blasphemy.
I'm glad you agree about "applying to us". But understand that I'm calling the RULE stupid. Not the Bible. Not God.
Ringo

[JacobHall86]

I'm glad you agree about "applying to us". But understand that I'm calling the RULE stupid. Not the Bible. Not God.
Ringo


You cannot seperate God from teh Bible or the Law.

Calling the Law stupid is calling the Bible Stupid and God Stupid.

[Joykins]

Let's look at this question another way:
Are there any men out there who like to have intercourse with menstruating women? :sick:

My understanding is that it is not only during the period but also for 7 days after.

Which puts a lot of women with typical menstrual cycles into the most fertile part of their cycles, and most likely to conceive a boy if their husbands resume sex with them at that point.

[tulc]

You cannot seperate God from teh Bible or the Law.
Why not? They aren't the same. That's like saying what I know ABOUT my wife, IS my wife. See?
Calling the Law stupid is calling the Bible Stupid and God Stupid.
If the Law and the Bible had created me, died for me, rose again for me and now lived in my heart I could see your point. But they didn't. He did. So while they are important they aren't the same thing. :)
tulc(if you get my meaning) ;)

[JacobHall86]

Why not? They aren't the same. That's like saying what I know ABOUT my wife, IS my wife. See?

If the Law and the Bible had created me, died for me, rose again for me and now lived in my heart I could see your point. But they didn't. He did. So while they are important they aren't the same thing. :)
tulc(if you get my meaning) ;)

The Law is what God has given us, it is his design.

Your comparison is faulty because your wife is not the one who created you and gave you the rules to live by.

The Gospel of John calls Jesus Christ the Word, or Logos, Which is what he is, to say any part of the Old Law is stupid is calling his plan stupid and his design stupid, and calling his redemption from that law stupid as well.

[Abbadon]

You cannot seperate God from teh Bible or the Law.

Calling the Law stupid is calling the Bible Stupid and God Stupid.


I dunno about you, but I worship God, and not the Bible (I'm not one for idolatry), and I ate pork a couple hours ago. And I enjoyed that chili dog with fried balonge between the hotdog and the bun. Now, not eating pork was a law for the Israelites, but it's not for us. The law that was brought up is along with the pork ones: it was a matter of hygenics back then, not something under "Love God, Love thy neighbor."

The Creator is not the same as His creation. To call a particlar portion that was only there as a hygenic measure stupid is not the same as calling God stupid.

The Gospel of John calls Jesus Christ the Word, or Logos, Which is what he is, to say any part of the Old Law is stupid is calling his plan stupid and his design stupid, and calling his redemption from that law stupid as well.

Are you calling the Bible God? Do you worship the Bible? Jesus is the Word, the Bible is the word (notice the uppercase and lowercase.) While, Jesus came to fulfill the law, He got rid of what was completely unnecessary. If it's not a matter of "Love God with all your heart, love others as yourself", then it's not really the Law, just part of the law (notice the capitalization there as well.)

[Joykins]

I dunno about you, but I worship God, and not the Bible (I'm not one for idolatry), and I ate pork a couple hours ago. And I enjoyed that chili dog with fried balonge between the hotdog and the bun. Now, not eating pork was a law for the Israelites, but it's not for us.

Maybe there *should* be a law against eating a chili dog with fried bologna! :sick:

[Abbadon]

Maybe there *should* be a law against eating a chili dog with fried bologna! :sick:

Oh, that was when I had found the hot dog buns. I ate the first hot dog using fried bologna as bun.

[tulc]

Your comparison is faulty because your wife is not the one who created you and gave you the rules to live by.

Sooo you didn't get it. Let me try again. I have sent many notes to my wife and she has saved them all. Now if you read my notes (which might embarass us both :shy: ) you would know many things about me, you'd know I love my wife madly, you'd know I can't spell and that I have bad handwriting. But you wouldn't "know" me, see? The Bible is kind of like the letters God sent us, but they don't "contain" God. We still need a relationship to make the "letter" come alive.
I'm reminded of a Zen quote:
To point at the moon a finger is needed, but woe to those who take the finger for the moon.
tulc(always loved that quote) :)

[Joykins]

You must have a stomach of steel :eek:

[JacobHall86]

I honestly am having a hard time believing that you guys dont see calling the Bible stupid is Blasphemous.

You realize that what is written in it is what God has ordained right? Questioning the Bible is questioning God.

[tulc]

Questioning the Bible is questioning God.

No, it's not. :)
tulc(and by the way? God says we can question Him) ;)

[Abbadon]

I honestly am having a hard time believing that you guys dont see calling the Bible stupid is Blasphemous.

Noone here's called the Bible stupid. We've just pointed out that there are parts no longer in effect, and calling those parts stupid. At this point in time, it's stupid to say "God will be angry if you eat pork!" And the

You realize that what is written in it is what God has ordained right? Questioning the Bible is questioning God.

Seeking to understand the context in which things or written does not question God at all, and acknowledging the parts that are no longer in effect doesn't question God either.

And what's wrong with questioning God? Job did quite a bit of it. It was OK, because he didn't curse God.

I think dogs, squash, wisdom teeth, and duck billed platupi are stupid. They're God's creation, God intended for us to have them, but I'm not insulting God at all. In fact, I came to the conclusion that those things are stupid from using some of the gifts God has given me (the ability to think, the ability to hold an opinion, etc.)

[Joykins]

I thought they were just saying that God and the Bible are 2 separate things. :)

I don't think the law is stupid, just not applicable for non-Jews.

As a married woman--you get a 2-week break from sex (which probably has its good and bad points) and then you take a bath, and *poof* you're not unclean anymore. I did a little google and got a Jewish site that said that "unclean" means more like "in contact with death" (like the unfertiilized egg that has died) and so you have to wash up before you go worship again. Makes sense in its context. Also likely to get you preggers with a boy ;)

[Snow Angel]

I was just wondering what part of the bible are no longer in effect?

No one here's called the Bible stupid. We've just pointed out that there are parts no longer in effect, and calling those parts stupid. At this point in time, it's stupid to say "God will be angry if you eat pork!" And the

[Abbadon]

I was just wondering what part of the bible are no longer in effect?

Well, if it's not under "Love God with all your heart, love others as you love yourself," then it's probably isn't Law, but law. Lot of sanitation issues aren't in effect (pork being one of the more famous ones.)

[JacobHall86]

Calling any part of the Bible stupid is calling the whole thing stupid. It is not a living breathing document, it is what it is.

If any part is wrong the whole thing is.

[Abbadon]

Calling any part of the Bible stupid is calling the whole thing stupid. It is not a living breathing document, it is what it is.

If any part is wrong the whole thing is.

:scratch: ... Can I buy pot from you?

Parts of it have said "that parts no longer valid." If you take the whole thing as valid, then you're required to avoid eating pork, but are free to do so because you're not required to avoid eating pork. We're under the Law, not the law, Love is the Law, not Pharisaical rhetoric.

[JacobHall86]

:scratch: ... Can I buy pot from you?

Parts of it have said "that parts no longer valid." If you take the whole thing as valid, then you're required to avoid eating pork, but are free to do so because you're not required to avoid eating pork. We're under the Law, not the law, Love is the Law, not Pharisaical rhetoric.

There is a differance in knowing the Law, and knowing we are free from the burden of the law, and calling the Law, and Scriptures stupid.

[Abbadon]

Noone called the Law stupid. The law (lowercase), sure.

And there's nothing wrong with saying a particular creation is stupid.

Lemme put it this way: I hate Jar Jar Binks, but I love Star Wars, and I really like George Lucas.

[JacobHall86]

wow, do you not understand that it is not ok to call the law, or Law stupid?

Why do you think it is ok to do so?

[Sweet Pea]

WOW this thread has got off track. It's funny the OP post is about females but the main ones debating is males. :P It might be the wrong gender needing time out :)

[Ringo84]

If I said that a cetain law in the Constitution was stupid, would I be calling the entire Constitution? Would I be calling the authors of the Constitution stupid? No.

That's all you need to know.
Ringo

[JacobHall86]

If I said that a cetain law in the Constitution was stupid, would I be calling the entire Constitution? Would I be calling the authors of the Constitution stupid? No.

That's all you need to know.
Ringo

Not a valid comparison.

The Constitution is a list of freedoms and rights that have been given to us as a nation.

The Law (there is no differance between a capital L and lowercase) was given to men so that they might become closer to God in their actions, becuase it showed them what they were doing wrong.

You cant compare the Constitution with the Bible. The Bible was written by the Perfect one, the One who does not make mistakes. Calling any part of his word stupid is calling the whole thign stupid.

Thats all you need to know.
Jacob

[RichardT]

Nothing is stupid in the bible, just some parts of it were only for the jews..

[arunma]

The Constitution is a list of freedoms and rights that have been given to us as a nation.

It also contains instructions on returning escaped African slaves to their masters. Not trying to get in the middle of this debate, but I think that's what he was alluding to. It's true that the Constitution is largely a work of genius, and has resulted in one of the longest-lasting democracies and bastions of freedom in history. But that the Constution as a whole is good does not make every part of it good. In essence, part of the Constitution is stupid. In fact, I think that "evil" would probably be a better word, because it is more apt in describing laws that regard men as property.

But on the other hand, it isn't the best idea to compare fallible works of men to the infallible Scriptures that speak about God.

I honestly am having a hard time believing that you guys dont see calling the Bible stupid is Blasphemous.

You realize that what is written in it is what God has ordained right? Questioning the Bible is questioning God.

Well, I agree that calling the Bible stupid is not a good idea. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it is blasphemous, because blasphemy largely depends on the intent of the heart. An atheist who calls the Bible stupid because of its testimony about Christ would certainly be committing blasphemy. But a person who loves Christ, and dislikes a particular verse in the Law of Moses, would not be committing blasphemy, since his intent is not against the Triune God. But again, having a low regard for the Scriptures is never a good idea.

As for questioning God, let us not say this as if it is a bad thing. Remember that Abraham, who was credited with righteousness, also questioned God. In the same way the Apostles questioned Christ on several occasions. A strong faith does not blindly accept everything that the Scriptures tell us. Rather a strong faith is one that regularly questions and examines things. Questioning and doubt are not the same thing.

[JacobHall86]

Nothing is stupid in the bible, just some parts of it were only for the jews..

You get no disagreement from me.

However someone called the Law Stupid. That person is wrong.

[arunma]

Nothing is stupid in the bible, just some parts of it were only for the jews..

I don't think that the laws were written only for Jews, since the Bible says that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile. As it is written in the first epistle to the Corinthians, these former things were written for our instruction. And since the Law of Moses speaks about Jesus Christ, it is just as much for the Gentile as it is for the Jew.

[RichardT]

I don't think that the laws were written only for Jews, since the Bible says that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile. As it is written in the first epistle to the Corinthians, these former things were written for our instruction. And since the Law of Moses speaks about Jesus Christ, it is just as much for the Gentile as it is for the Jew.

i'm talking about things like the eating of pork for example..

edit : LOL... MY BAD

[Abbadon]

wow, do you not understand that it is not ok to call the law, or Law stupid?

Why do you think it is ok to do so?

Where does it say that it's not alright to call the law (lowercase) stupid? I understand the reasoning behind not calling the Law (uppercase) stupid, but not lowercase.

Again: I love Star Wars, but I hate Jar Jar Binks. God gave us animals, and I think dogs are stupid.

The Law (there is no differance between a capital L and lowercase)

So I'm unclean for eating a good amount of pork last night? There is a difference between uppercase Law and lowercase law: Christ said that the whole of the Law is summed up under "Love God, Love your neighbor," and eating pork and sleeping with one's(consenting) wife during her period has nothing to do with that. It's law, not Law.

However someone called the Law Stupid. That person is wrong.

Our icons say "Baptist," not "Messianic Jew," noone here insulted the LAW, just a law.

i'm talking about things like the eating of porn for example..

I had no idea that was edible. ;P

[arunma]

i'm talking about things like the eating of porn for example..

I'm guessing you meant to refer to pork.

Those laws are for Christians as well. Although Christ declared all foods clean, the dietary laws are important in reminding us about personal standards of holiness.

[tulc]

i'm talking about things like the eating of porn for example..
I had no idea that was edible. ;P
I only eat it for the articles. :sorry:
tulc( Mrs.tulc said looking at it is a sin, eating it? who knew?) :)

[Abbadon]

I only eat it for the articles. :sorry:
tulc( Mrs.tulc said looking at it is a sin, eating it? who knew?) :)

Christian Forums MessageYou must spread some Reputation around before giving it to tulc again.

[RichardT]

Lol Oh Man!

[tulc]

Lol Oh Man!
It's happened to all of us dude! ;)
tulc(true this one's a littler funnier then most but we've all mispelled things before!) :)

[JacobHall86]

The Law is made up of Laws. If one law is stupid, the Whole of the Law is stupid. If the whole of the law is stupid, Christ never needed to die for us.

[tulc]

The Law is made up of Laws. If one law is stupid, the Whole of the Law is stupid. If the whole of the law is stupid, Christ never needed to die for us.

:sigh: That's not really true you know?
tulc(who thought this thread was about "an issue of blood", time off and large quantities of chocolate) ;)

[Ringo84]

Well, it's true that the Constitution is a secular document. I'll give you that. However, the logic's the same.

If I said that a law in the Constitution was wrong or was stupid, I wouldn't mean that the people who wrote the Constitution were stupid or that the entire Constitution was stupid. That's a logical jump that's not valid even if the law from the book in question is the Bible.

I understand what you're trying to say, JacobHall. I appreciate the fact that you're trying to defend the book of our faith (I'm glad you care) and I'm sorry if I have offended you (or anyone else who might be reading). But I'm not criticizing the entire Bible. If I didn't care about God or Christianity or the Bible, I wouldn't care about the issues we discuss here - I probably wouldn't be here at all. I'm saying this so that we have an understanding of my position here.
Ringo

[Bruisedreed]

It is very risky to call any part of the bible stupid. If you calling the cerimonial law stupid when God gave it to them no matter if you see it or not you are implying God is foolish ie: "stupid". Now we no doubt all can agree that based on scripture certain parts of the law are fufilled in Christ and no longer effect us today. However they were indeed given by God for a certain time and season and thus it is at best an error to to call them "stupid" and indeed at worst is blasphemy. Just pray about it with a pure heart and ask God to show you the truth. There really is no reason to argue about it though as no ones mind will really be changed that way.:sigh:

[Abbadon]

I think Jar Jar Binks is stupid, and have utter hatred for that character created by George Lucas. However, I have no hatred for George Lucas, and think he's a smart man. I keep bringing this up for a reason: insulting part of a creation is not insulting it's creator, in and of itself. If someone wished to insult George Lucas, then they could insult Star Wars, but insulting Star Wars of itself is not insulting George Lucas. Likewise, insulting a part of the Bible is not insulting God, but insulting the Bible to insult God is possible (but it is not every case).

[Bruisedreed]

Well, I disagree. We all know that men are imperfect therefore their works are often imperfect. Thus they are sometimes "stupid" or imperfect. However God is completely perfect and thus cannot author anything "stupid" and be true to his nature. If you are interested I could provide scripture references.

[Abbadon]

But God made dogs, and I find dogs to be incredibly stupid. God has made plenty of imperfect things.

Wait, this isn't going to go anywhere, you're a "God wrote the Bible and gave it to us" type, I'm a "God inspired certain people to write parts, but those parts have been translated and copied to lead to some lack of perfection."

[Bruisedreed]

Well, according to scripture God makes everything perfect. Including lucifer. However then he rebeled and latter we had the fall. Thus many of the things that God created perfect no longer are because of sin. However unless one believes that the bible was tampered with by man and is not the pure word of God one cannot rightly call any part of the law foolishness as it is directly from a perfect God. And if a man holds the latter position he might as well believe what ever he wants for without the bible a christian has no foundation to stand on and God has no true witness in the world.

[JacobHall86]

But God made dogs, and I find dogs to be incredibly stupid. God has made plenty of imperfect things.

Wait, this isn't going to go anywhere, you're a "God wrote the Bible and gave it to us" type, I'm a "God inspired certain people to write parts, but those parts have been translated and copied to lead to some lack of perfection."

Name one thing God has made that is imperfect.

[Joykins]

Name one thing God has made that is imperfect.

Me.

[JacobHall86]

Me.

God made man perfect and in his image. Man sinned and that is why we are nto perfect, not because God didnt make us perfect.

[Joykins]

God made man perfect and in his image. Man sinned and that is why we are nto perfect, not because God didnt make us perfect.

Man fell a looooong time before I was created.

[JacobHall86]

Man fell a looooong time before I was created.

Adam and Eve were the original, Perfect Creation.

They fell and as a result we are not perfect. Not Because God made us imperfect, but because man Sinned.

[Joykins]

Adam and Eve were the original, Perfect Creation.

They fell and as a result we are not perfect. Not Because God made us imperfect, but because man Sinned.

So you are saying that I am not created?

[JacobHall86]

So you are saying that I am not created?

Before We go on, are you trying to bait me or are yuo geniunly wanting to discuss this.

[Ringo84]

I'm not shrinking away from the debate - I'd just rather not get into all that.

Just letting everyone know.
Ringo

[tulc]

Name one thing God has made that is imperfect.
Jesus said God tailored part of the Law because of mans own heart. So He was saying (I think) that even the Law wasn't as He intended. So it wasn't "perfect" according to Him. :)
tulc(just thought of that) ;)

[JacobHall86]

Jesus said God tailored part of the Law because of mans own heart. So He was saying (I think) that even the Law wasn't as He intended. So it wasn't "perfect" according to Him. :)
tulc(just thought of that) ;)

Reference?

[tulc]

Reference?
uhmmm here:
Mark 10: 2-5 2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. 3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (emph. added)

There you go!
tulc( :) )

[Joykins]

Before We go on, are you trying to bait me or are yuo geniunly wanting to discuss this.

I am trying to figure out if you think Adam and Eve were the only human beings created.

If you do, then you believe God didn't create me.

I believe God created everything, including me.

So if you believe I am not created, you do not believe God created everything. Certainly things exist that are not perfect, the question is did God create them?

I also wanted to know if this is a road you really wanted to go down ;)

[RajunCajun86]

And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even.


... um, I know this is the OT, but this is just insane...
my mom says that she would be fine being cast out from the city during "that" time

[Katakalupto]

I just wonder if the area we were cast out of the city into would have a chocolate factory. :confused: ;)

[BigNorsk]

While birth control pills were being developed a small seaside village, I think it was in Mexico, but could have been somewhere else like Puerto Rico, agreed to be a test village. All the women of child bearing age in the entire village took birth control pills, and all took them the same way and the same days so every woman's cycle was in sync with all the other women in the village.

It did not take long for a new tradition to start. Every month, for about a week, every man who could walk or crawl to the fishing boats took off to sea for a week of fishing.

Guess they just read Leviticus! And here I always thought it was because the village was not the most pleasant place to be for a few days.

Marv