C'mon, Cojak. his post was in the context of a couple of things. One, I defended some of the first ladies as classy when someone claimed that Melania is the first beautiful, classy lady we've had since Jackie Kennedy. (Now that same poster made comments about Hillary being overweight and Michelle Obama being ugly.) In defense of other ladies being classy and in opposition to the idea that Melania is classier, I did point out that Melania had posed nude, which I would think that particular poster would not find classy. Unfortunately, some people had no idea what I was doing and thought I was merely trying to demean Melania. (Sometimes I could bang my head on the desk. In addition, there was an oblique reference by a couple of posters that some people don't seem forgiving or need to repent Sunday in church about the things they are writing. Cojak, I suspect it's not a big deal to you that she posed nude, and it's not to me either. When the issue was first brought up on Acts, I think I demonstrated that in I did NOT think it was something that should be considered relevant in the election. That thread is still in existence, and I linked to it recently to show what I had said.)Second, if people want to carry on about the appearance of First Ladies, they shouldn't be scandalized by bare arms if they aren't scandalized by nudity.Mary Magdalene is irrelevant to the above context. But even in the context that was used, Mary Magdalene was not a good choice to use as comparison since we have no scriptural evidence that she was a prostitute or that she posed nude.
Quick links
FAQ
Register
Login