I think thats true to an extent - laughing and smiling and feel good endorphins do make things better, not reverse it but there we go - age does have its advantages, for one thing, it teaches us we cant have everything......... but back to this composite man we are working on, he has to be able to make me laugh
That used to be the case but times are changing since we got education for the masses, people now ask by what right does any particular group claim special treatment (actually, they always did but it used to be easier to silence people back in the day) and I believe that if treason was seriously cited for disagreeing with the royals nowadays, there would be rebellion on their hands.
The government wouldnt allow it... and the royals know better, they need to keep their heads down if the charade is to continue...
I can only think that other countries get the 'spun' version of the royal family, after all, they are the original masters of it...... (note to self: dont mention the church, this is not a god thread)
Its quite a heavy read, especially for a Saturday night but its full of stuff like this;
"A study of pagan mythology would establish similar parallels in the stories of Zoroaster (Persian), Perseus and Bacchus (Greek), Horus (Egyptian), Romulus and Remus (Roman), Gautama (the founder of Buddhism), and many others, because various pieces of the dangerous-child myth can be found in the stories of all these pagan gods and prophets. All of these myths antedate, usually by many centuries, Matthew's account of the massacre of the children at Bethlehem. Krishna, for example, was a Hindu savior who allegedly lived in the sixth century B. C., so when a study of ancient world literature shows that an unusual event like the slaughter of the innocents seemed to have happened everywhere, reasonable people will realize that it probably happened nowhere or, at best, that it happened only once and was subsequently plagiarized. Since the story occurs many times before Matthew's version of it, we can only conclude that no such event happened in Bethlehem as Matthew--and only Matthew--claimed. Just like that, then, fundamentalists who put so much stock in prophecy-fulfillment find one of their "fulfillments" vaporizing right before their eyes."
"Matthew also saw prophecy fulfillment in the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem. When the wise men inquired about the birth of the king of the Jews, Herod called the chief priests and scribes together and asked where the Christ would be born:
So they said unto him, "In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written by the prophet: `But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, Are not the least among the rulers of Judah; For out of you shall come a Ruler Who will shepherd My people Israel'" (2:5-6).
The place where this was written was Micah 5:2, which we should look at to get a sense of how New Testament writers sometimes distorted Old Testament scriptures to suit their needs:
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel."
As we will soon notice, the differences are important enough to show that Matthew tampered with the text to make it fit the situation he was applying it to. "
It wouldnt be quite so horrendous if it wasnt the stuff that people fight bloody wars over and cite as evidence for their claims.........
RE: LADIES only!
I tell you, I dont know whats come over me today, Ive been flirting and allsorts and Ive only been up a couple of hoursOhhhh shopping........