C.S. Lewis (via rainydaysandblankets)

Jack. Jack just knew.

(Source: pureblyss, via moochiethinks)

Okay, so this is it! In an impossible feat of (not my own) strength and supernatural insanity, I’m going to be taking a long hiatus from this lovely place (you can read that sarcastically or not) to finish two years of high school by the end of the summer! So I will miss y’all for a few weeks or so until I’ve been detoxified of the Tumblr virus and being to assimilate myself back into normalcy. By which I mean I hope to get another job, start dancing a few times a week again, read St. Augustine, and go to daily Mass. In my free time not spent writing history essays.

A huge shoutout to God, my mother, and my pet betta fish up there in fish heaven for always supporting me! (Just kidding. Except for God. He has always been there and always will be)

I’m going to miss you, Frodo gifs, Martin Freeman, Catholic artwork, saint quotes, hipster flower children pictures, and bizarre text posts that no one off of this website would laugh at. Also, I will have to take up venting in a real journal again instead of making people angry by telling them they’re wrong…. But in the end it’s all for good. :)

P.S. If you can’t tell I had a lot of ice cream in various delicious forms today and Im kinda jacked up on sugar. BANAAJAKKKKKANANANANANAAAS okay Im good now. Byebyebye.

hislittleflower-throughconcrete:

made me spit out my drink

(Source: he-looks-like-love)

twocrowns:

#Jesus #Catholic

(Source: catholicknight)

pyrrhiccomedy:

milk-chiller2:

Reminder of: reason for eggplant’s name

OH MY GOD I HAVE WONDERED ABOUT THIS MY WHOLE LIFE

(via fattybolger)

le-desir-de-lautre:

Alfred Sisley (French, 1839-1899), Le Loing à Moret, 1885, oil on canvas, 46 cm x  55.5 cm.

(via madamescherzo)

d20crit:

“You shall keep my statutes. You shall not wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material.” - Leviticus 19:19

I think the correct phrase is, “Oh snap!” Nicely played, George!

Well that’s funny until you realize that Leviticus is Old Testament and many of those rules were given to the Hebrews for many reasons that don’t apply to the modern world…..aaaand the “anti-marriage equality” protester is an idiot.

Funny thing? Christians DO NOT follow all the rules of Leviticus any more. However, there are basic tenets of Christianity that are similar to laws outlined therein.

Here is a logical explanation of why Christianity holds that deviant sexual acts are wrong/harmful to the human person:

“Properly interpreted, the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Rather, it weighs against promiscuity — whether homosexual or heterosexual. Therefore, we have no reason to oppose loving homosexual relationships.”

As homosexual activity gains greater acceptance in our culture, there’ll be more pressure among Christians to explain away the Bible’s clear prohibition against it. It’s now the standard liberal party line to claim that the Bible — when understood correctly — doesn’t disallow homosexual activity.

But this claim flies in the face of clear passages in both the Old and New Testaments. The first, of course, is the famous story of Sodom and Gomorrah. If you recall, two angels were sent by God to Sodom to visit Lot:

“But before [the angels] lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; and they called to Lot, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.’ Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, and said, ‘I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Behold, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.’ But they said, ‘Stand back!’ And they said, ‘This fellow came to sojourn, and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.’ Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door. But the men put forth their hands and brought Lot into the house to them, and shut the door.” (Genesis 19:4-10)

The message of this passage is pretty clear. The men of Sodom were homosexuals who wanted to have relations with the men inside the house. Lot offered them his daughters, but they weren’t interested. Shortly thereafter, Sodom was destroyed by God in payment for the sins of its people — namely, their homosexual acts. This fact is confirmed in the New Testament:

“Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.” (Jude 7)

But these certainly aren’t the only passages in the Bible that condemn gay activity. The Old Testament contains another unambiguous condemnation: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22).

And these statements aren’t reserved to the Old Testament alone.

“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.” (Romans 1:26-27)

It’s awfully hard for a liberal Christian to explain this away. There’s simply no mention here merely of gay promiscuity or rape; rather, Paul is weighing against any homosexual relations (which he describes as “unnatural,” “shameless” and “dishonorable”).

Liberal Christians are in a bind. How, after all, does one harmonize homosexuality with the Bible? Their solution, it appears, is to strip the Bible of its moral power, and run in rhetorical circles trying to escape its clear message.

http://catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0140.html

hislittleflower-throughconcrete:

When people try to claim that Jesus didn’t even exist. 

There is more recorded historical evidence of Jesus than flippin Alexander the Great. 

(Disclaimer)

(via emilyannscorner)

breadtofleshwinetoblood:

buzzfeed:

George Takei responds to “traditional” marriage fans. 

The clothing law is not condoned in the New Testament. Anything like that which was in the Old Testament but not in the New is no longer part of the law. That is why many of these things are okay to do now. Just thought I’d [hopefully] set things straight.

I love how they picked the idiots out of the crowd who don’t have a clue why they are protesting when there are other people who have well-elucidated, logical, and thought-provoking arguments that the funny snarky Takei guy couldn’t defeat with witty comebacks.

Also, “traditional” marriage fans? If that’s not propagandist word play, what is?

Well, actually….. these people are uneducated enough that they might agree with that label. So whatever.

For the record, I’m not a “traditional marriage fan”. I hold the unwavering belief based on solid evidence, natural law, reasoning, and research that giving the label “marriage” to homosexual relationships is just more propagandist wordplay and totally irrelevant to whether having same-sex attraction is wrong or not.

Congratulations on bantering with idiot teenagers, George Takei. Its a real life accomplishment.

thedamage-is-done:

I love sitting in a train. Sure, you can listen to music everywhere but in a train … I don’t know. The way the nature passes and the thoughts begin to flow without even knowing it … it’s something really special. And I love the feeling. Sometimes I think there’s nothing better than sitting in a train and doing nothing but listen to some really good music that breaks your heart.

(Source: milky-nostalgia, via mrs-darcy)