The Religion Discussion

[New_SPECIES]

And pertaining to Christmas, a greater issue for the world is not those who go overboard for Christmas, but those who read Sura 9:29 and plainly obeys what it commands.

With this statement… are you giving the general consensus that this "Religion Discussion" is really a means of attacking Muslims and Islam rather than discussing various person's misconceptions/concerns?

Attempts to learn from others based on a present and existing season… is somehow diverted to something not even close to the present discussion…
How radical "muslims" and terrorism reach in your "Meaning of Christmas" contribution?

Diversion?

(1)Nobody is attacking Muslims or Islam, stop appealing to pity. It was in response to AdamB, not really directed at you.

(2)You are asking for the meaning of Christmas and I gave you a direct answer with many biblical references. You somehow seemed to shrug it off and are pursuing an idea of Christmas that no one other than yourself is advocating here.Yet you are interpreting my reference to someone obeying Sura 9:29 (as any other command in the Quran) as me referencing terrorism.

(3)How come you are so adamant to distance terrorism from Islam, but you can't distance 21st century cultural Christmas tradition from how the Bible actually recounts the 1st century birth of Christ?

(1) Appealing to pity?
Anytime a question/concern/query is raised towards Christianity u somehow always end up referencing Terrorism and Radical/Fanatic Muslims - as a trump card when u ready to "lash out".
I could bring back your own "quotes" if u wish...

(2) Pursing an idea of Christmas that no one else has?
I am the one who brought up the "Christmas" thing and that's why my queries concerning it are the only one present (so far). Hide from it if u want, but the fact remains that due to 99% of the people involved in Christmas sway/incorporate the more "commercial" aspect of it, the "true meaning" is not commonly known (shocker?).

Due to this, there is much confusion as to what is really part of the true Christmas and what is based on paganism and what is commercialized... (if u deny that, then truly u are living in ignorance..)
Answers to my queries here will educate the Christians (who are not that informed) and persons of other religions who just don’t know the truth behind it.

The explanation that you gave and claim to be sufficient... was just, u defining and summarizing what Christianity is about and the foundation of the religion. It failed to address anything concerning Christmas and you know it. If at the end of the day... that’s all you could provide then I’ll wait for someone else with more insight and focus on the topic and less ignorance to issues in reality.

Although many people come here and accuse Adamb as a “copy/paste” individual... I am yet to see (from the majority) explanations and definitions from persons own words from their own mind.
Instead people continuously give either “Bible Quotes” or “Internet Quotes” as their contribution. As anyone can see from my “post history”, whenever I quote from the internet, it is surrounded by my own words and views from my own understanding. Like I said... yet to see that from the (Christian) majority here!

If you keep referencing Surah 9:29, in your efforts to divert, saying that u are concerned about muslims taking a literal meaning to this verse... then obviously u are referring to the Terrorists.

I see beyond your “tricks of the internet thread”... using words/references to highlight and stray from a point in order for others to be distracted from issues at hand, and give yourself that underhand advantage in a discussion.

Your actions of raising the issues of Surah 9:29 can be explained (to other viewers of this thread)...
By comparing it to this scenario:
Imagine an Ex-Convict, previously charged for a crime that he committed and released from jail after serving his due time.
Only to then be genuinely framed for a crime just after he came out of prison.
And every time the Ex-Convict tries to give his defence in court and the jury seems to be convinced that he is innocent.....
the prosecutor jumps up and say “but you were a criminal and just came out of jail for a crime committed”.... only to sway the jury.
That’s you Habit7... that’s your motive!

Everyone is against Terrorism but because these psychopathic people associate themselves with Islam and people like you judge all Muslims in the world based on this... you continuously use this, within your arguments to sway viewers of the discussion to “see things your way”. It’s not right and you know it.
I could easily do the same and reference all the Barbaric Killings by Christian leaders in the past and Judge all you Christians by it... But I don’t... and I don’t even bring it up!

(3) You accuse me of being “adamant to distance Islam from Terrorism”, but don’t you also distant Christianity from the Horrific Christian Terrorism that stained history?

Why do we both do it? Well it's because the actions of a misguided people claiming that they are a part of a particular organization but not following the fundamentals of that organization cannot therefore represent all the other true believing persons of that organization – for the history of time!

In other words... if they; misquote, misinterpret, take literal the verses of the respective holy books as justification for their Barbaric behaviour then that does not make them part of that organization (full stop!).

Concerning “21st Century Christmas” VS “1st Century Christmas” a clear difference can be seen.
I have already stated the confusion that presently exists (even among Christians) and (like I already said) hence the concerns raised and the request for Christians to simply say...

* What Christmas is really about?
* How is should really be celebrated?.... Are there stipulated guidelines as to the do's and don't's as in celebrations within other religions?
* What is allowed and what is frowned upon?.....
........are Christians involved in other forms of interpretations/celebrations “sinned” or “punished” for their involvement/encouragement/participation in the other aspects (paganism/commercialism) of the celebration or is okay for them to continue once they celebrate "Jesus" somehow?
* Why is the date for Christmas always fixed?
* How was the date derived?
* Why is it about “the birth of Jesus” when he was never born anywhere close to 25th December?
etc... etc...

[AdamB]

The true meaning of Christmas is God, entering into His creation as a man to save those who deserve His just wrath.

Well if they deserve HIS just wrath, then why intervene? That's like what you see on some movies, like Terminator, going back in time to kill someone in order to change the future...

So according to the above, all the ppl who deserve the just wrath of GOD will be saved? Just like the Trinity, makes absolutely no sense...

Thus by what you are saying, you are fulfilling exactly what the Bible says about you:

For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
And the cleverness of the clever I will set aside.”(Isaiah 29:14)
Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 1 Corinthians 1:18-25

You call the Gospel foolishness yet you want me to believe Allah deceived the witnesses of the crucifixion, thus spawn the greatest single religion on earth, all while he unjustly forgives men who are guilty of their sin.


And pertaining to Christmas, a greater issue for the world is not those who go overboard for Christmas, but those who read Sura 9:29 and plainly obeys what it commands.

Once again, like a typical christian, read something and misinterpret it ...leading yourself further astray from the truth. Just like those "muslims" whom you claim "obey it plainly". They are minute in number.

This verse was revealed in connection with expelling jews and christians from the haram, read the verse before: Quran 9:28. O you who believe! Verily, the Mushrikin are impure. So let them not come near Al-Masjid Al-Haram after this year; and if you fear poverty, Allah will enrich you if He wills, out of His bounty. Surely, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

Read the correct explanation from Ibn kathir:
The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
Allah said,

﴿قَـتِلُواْ الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَلاَ بِالْيَوْمِ الاٌّخِرِ وَلاَ يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَلاَ يَدِينُونَ دِينَ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَـبَ حَتَّى يُعْطُواْ الْجِزْيَةَ عَن يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَـغِرُونَ ﴾
(Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the People of the Scripture, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.) Therefore, when People of the Scriptures disbelieved in Muhammad , they had no beneficial faith in any Messenger or what the Messengers brought. Rather, they followed their religions because this conformed with their ideas, lusts and the ways of their forefathers, not because they are Allah's Law and religion. Had they been true believers in their religions, that faith would have directed them to believe in Muhammad , because all Prophets gave the good news of Muhammad's advent and commanded them to obey and follow him. Yet when he was sent, they disbelieved in him, even though he is the mightiest of all Messengers. Therefore, they do not follow the religion of earlier Prophets because these religions came from Allah, but because these suit their desires and lusts. Therefore, their claimed faith in an earlier Prophet will not benefit them because they disbelieved in the master, the mightiest, the last and most perfect of all Prophets . Hence Allah's statement,

﴿قَـتِلُواْ الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَلاَ بِالْيَوْمِ الاٌّخِرِ وَلاَ يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَلاَ يَدِينُونَ دِينَ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَـبَ﴾
(Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the People of the Scripture,) This honorable Ayah was revealed with the order to fight the People of the Book, after the pagans were defeated, the people entered Allah's religion in large numbers, and the Arabian Peninsula was secured under the Muslims' control. Allah commanded His Messenger to fight the People of the Scriptures, Jews and Christians, on the ninth year of Hijrah, and he prepared his army to fight the Romans and called the people to Jihad announcing his intent and destination. The Messenger sent his intent to various Arab areas around Al-Madinah to gather forces, and he collected an army of thirty thousand. Some people from Al-Madinah and some hypocrites, in and around it, lagged behind, for that year was a year of drought and intense heat. The Messenger of Allah marched, heading towards Ash-Sham to fight the Romans until he reached Tabuk, where he set camp for about twenty days next to its water resources. He then prayed to Allah for a decision and went back to Al-Madinah because it was a hard year and the people were weak, as we will mention, Allah willing.

[MG Man]

I feel Jesus / Muhammad / Bhudda / Krishna was / is a Time Lord..............that's the only way it makes sense
It's all just wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff

[AdamB]

I feel Jesus / Muhammad / Bhudda / Krishna was / is a Time Lord..............that's the only way it makes sense
It's all just wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff

In time....soon you shall come to know!

[Habit7]

^^^ AdamB please allow me to continue Ibn Kathir's commentary on 9:29:

Allah said, until they pay the Jizyah, if they do not choose to embrace Islam, with willing submission, in defeat and subservience, and feel themselves subdued, disgraced, humiliated and belittled. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah(non-Muslims) or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated.
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option ... &Itemid=64

New_SPECIES unless you understand what I succinctly explained to you before as the true meaning of Christmas and not believe that, "it failed to address anything concerning Christmas and (I) know it" then you, just like those you speak about, are confused too.

Did I mention bill maher? I just wanna know what makes your story so factual and no one else's? And I don't care about your religion so realize I'm being very fair to ask and be objective.

You early recommended ppl to watch Maher's Religulous and now you are rehashing a debunked argument he made with Horus.
You are the one who is alleging with the Horus/Jesus link, so you must prove. All I am giving is what scholarship actually says about the issue.

PS. I am still waiting on those 5 books

[AdamB]

And what would this world have been if the Muslims did not defeat the Romans. Look at what it was when the Romans were ruling and after when the muslims ruled.

People preferred to pay the Jizyah and live under muslim rule than otherwise.

[Habit7]

People didn't "prefer" to pay the Jizyah, if they choose not to they would have been "subdued, disgraced, humiliated and belittled."

[New_SPECIES]

New_SPECIES unless you understand what I succinctly explained to you before as the true meaning of Christmas and not believe that, "it failed to address anything concerning Christmas and (I) know it" then you, just like those you speak about, are confused too.

Like I said (over a hundred times already)...

How did your explanation clear up concerns and misconceptions, like these here for example:

* What Christmas is really about?
* How is should really be celebrated?.... Are there stipulated guidelines as to the do's and don't's as in celebrations within other religions?
* What is allowed and what is frowned upon?.....
........are Christians involved in other forms of interpretations/celebrations “sinned” or “punished” for their involvement/encouragement/participation in the other aspects (paganism/commercialism) of the celebration or is okay for them to continue once they celebrate "Jesus" somehow?
* Why is the date for Christmas always fixed?
* How was the date derived?
* Why is it about “the birth of Jesus” when he was never born anywhere close to 25th December?
etc... etc...

[AdamB]

People didn't "prefer" to pay the Jizyah, if they choose not to they would have been "subdued, disgraced, humiliated and belittled."

Study history, they did. It was the price to pay for safety and security. I said: compare with what options were present before and at the time of the advent of muslim rule, like the Romans, and other more ruthless, less "civilized" societies.

The word dhimmi (plural dimam) literally means "protection, care, custody, covenant of protection, compact; responsibility, answerableness; financial obligation, liability, debt; inviolability, security of life and property; safeguard, guarantee, security; conscience". Ahl al-dhimmi is "the free non-Muslim subjects living in Muslim countries who, in return for paying the capital tax, enjoyed relative protection and safety."

[turbosingh]

Dedz New Species Ched get locked by Duane lolz!http://www.trinituner.com/v3/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=543365

[AdamB]

People didn't "prefer" to pay the Jizyah, if they choose not to they would have been "subdued, disgraced, humiliated and belittled."

And what about the alternative under Christian rule...enslave, poison or infect the natives with flu, small pox, etc?

[bluefete]

I'll just post this here for comment.


Somebody Else's (Homo)sexuality Is None of My (Muslim) Business!
Posted: 11/27/2013 2:18 pm

Follow Dr. David Liepert on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DrDavidLiepert


Lately, it seems Canada's cities are making headlines for all the wrong reasons, most recently my own birthplace: Calgary, Alberta. Here, our Muslim Council is now officially on report for granting the podium to alleged homophobes, despite the fact we have a Muslim mayor who celebrates diversity, including gay-pride events.

And despite the fact we didn't actually invite them to talk to us about sex, and despite the fact our city recently approved our building a $28 million Muslim community center, in part based upon our Muslim Council's commitment to celebrating diversity alongside him.

So what gives? Can Calgary's Muslims honor our faith and our Canadian values together? The answer we've repeatedly given is a resounding yes!

Now, I don't deny that there are Muslims who say otherwise, included some very popular Imams. However, those Muslims are "Jahiliyyah-level" ignorant of both the words of the Qur'an and the Sunnah of Muhammad.

For those of you unfamiliar with the term, Jahiliyyah is an Arabic word denoting one of Muhammad's predictions, that some otherwise seemingly pretty impressive followers would return to the ignorant and pre-Islamic practices that he -- while he was alive -- brought to an end.

Because before Muhammad, no question there was some stoning going on, in the pagan, Christian and Jewish communities of the Middle East, for a variety of reasons, including sex outside of heterosexual marriage.

Then, during Muhammad's final years, and for a few years afterwards, the stoning stopped, and more importantly our inappropriate fixation on other people's sexuality came to an end as well.
Why?

The truth is, Muslims, Christians and Jews together have a problem, if we want to use so-called "higher criticism" to pretend God doesn't care about our sexual choices, because our scriptures are clear He does.
But that isn't necessary: Rather than changing God's words, both Jesus and Muhammad serve as exemplars of how faithful believers are actually supposed to act toward others, while remaining personally continent in our choices. Clearly, we are expected to be guided by compassion and respect for another person's freedom to make their own choices, most of all.

Most of you are likely quite familiar of Jesus' own way of dealing with his community's enthusiasm for self-righteous stoning. When faced with an accused adulterer and an angry crowd he wrote something in the sand, and told them "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

He put them in their places -- as equals in the sight of God with each other -- disallowing their attempt to serve instead as judge, jury and executioner. He exemplified compassion.

And Muhammad? He did us all one better, and exemplified freedom and respect.

When sexual accusations directed at one of his wives almost tore that community apart, he asked God for guidance and received the requirement for four witnesses, of any form of sexual transgression: witnesses to the actual sex act, not heresay, not extrapolation from co-habitation, affection, or an inappropriate regard for Broadway musicals, no, it took four witnesses of the actual sexual penetration.

And someone who discussed someone else's sexual practices without four witnesses was punished almost as severely as the alleged transgressor would have been -- 80 vs 100 lashes -- and their testimony was ignored thereafter forevermore.

To the point that one of Muhammad's companions complained that, even if he walked in on his own wife having sex with his own best friend, he couldn't do anything but divorce her quietly and swallow his anger. Period. In fact, I think that sort of frustration might help explain why his first followers -- who were in every other way the most faithful to his legacy -- reinstituted stoning for sexual transgressions on a legal technicality almost before his body was cold in the ground.

But just to be very clear, even then, that only pertained to Muslims: Nobody other than Muslims were subject to Sharia. During Muhammad's time, and -- according to the revered Hanbali jurist Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya for decades thereafter -- non-Muslims could do pretty much anything their own communities considered acceptable, including sexual practices, as long as they did it in private.

So public sex and Muslim porn stars not-withstanding, I think the rest of us are pretty much okay.

Can we all take a step back, and use a little bit of common sense? I know Muslims are commanded to "enjoin the good, and forbid the wrong" throughout the Qur'an, but as I pointed out in "Why I Think Islamists Are Anti-Islam," Muslims who try to impose their beliefs on others are actually doing the opposite of what they intend.

"Perhaps the reason why the Qur'an condemns coercion in matters of religion so explicitly is because anytime you try to impose something -- even something good -- you make sure that it's opposed. Human nature being what it is, imposing "good" actually promotes the opposite."

And every Muslim knows that regardless of God's Law, even a Muslim who sins does not cease being Muslim, no matter how they transgress: We are all sinners in need of Grace. The glory of Islam is the realization that God alone is All-Merciful and All-Forgiving, and rather than separating us from each, our failures and God's Grace bring us together.

I have gay and lesbian friends and colleagues, and some of them are Muslim, and I love and respect them for God's sake, and for their own sake. To be clear, we can even talk about things like faith and sexuality, and why I feel the way I do, and why they disagree: because we respect and like each other.

Personally, I don't think sex has anything to do with love, even though it's a nice thing to do for each other: Instead, I think the ultimate expression of love isn't sex, it's self-sacrifice.

In fact, I think that inappropriate linkage between love and sex is what's wrong with the way we are all currently approaching human sexuality regardless of our orientations; I love lots of people both male and female, some passionately, but I only have sex with the one I'm allowed to. But hey, that's just me.

And regardless, we all know that what any of us do in private is none of anybody else's business. Period.

So rest assured in Calgary, when ignorant Muslims say ignorant things and tell us to hate someone in God's name for any reason, we don't listen to them.

Instead, we listen to Muhammad, and we do our best to love everyone.

Before he died, Muhammad told us the greatest tragedy that would befall our faith would be Muslims forgetting the Love that began us, and that -- even though He hates sin, no question -- the God who made everyone loves everyone.

And then he told us,

"All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and it may be that the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me directly. Be my witness, O God, that I have conveyed your message to your people."

So my fellow Muslims, what can I tell you?
Go in peace, live in peace and love in peace.
And never forget to serve the Lord.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-david- ... lp00000592

[i am an idiot]

Love everyone. Yes. We are all human beings.

Doing things that are unnatural like same sex relationships is wrong in my eyes however.

Also having more than one wife is something i find totally ridiculous. How could a religion blind so many?

Why do we marry? We marry because we love. We want to be stable, secure and happy. And a meaningful, mutually loving, respectful, caring relationship, with someone of the opposite sex does add to the quality of one's life.

How could commiting to more than one woman give u this?

Is it loving to marry another woman whilst being commited to another even though permission is granted? Is this really a loving thing to do?

Women i knw who are devout muslims. From talking to them. I realized that they accept it. Because they think islam is the right path. But in their hearts, their minds, their nature, they say they don't want their husband with another woman.

For a religion to permit and endorse such behaviour is totally ridiculous. And in my mind, and heart makes no sense.

[MG Man]

dunno why people so obsessed with who stickin who piglet in whose bambam or who munchin whoever carpet
society is well and truly degenerating with our without the help of homosexuals :-/

[maj. tom]

but they're not obsessed with the religious authority protecting child molesters.

[desifemlove]

Love everyone. Yes. We are all human beings.

Doing things that are unnatural like same sex relationships is wrong in my eyes however.

Also having more than one wife is something i find totally ridiculous. How could a religion blind so many?

Why do we marry? We marry because we love. We want to be stable, secure and happy. And a meaningful, mutually loving, respectful, caring relationship, with someone of the opposite sex does add to the quality of one's life.

How could commiting to more than one woman give u this?

Is it loving to marry another woman whilst being commited to another even though permission is granted? Is this really a loving thing to do?

Women i knw who are devout muslims. From talking to them. I realized that they accept it. Because they think islam is the right path. But in their hearts, their minds, their nature, they say they don't want their husband with another woman.

For a religion to permit and endorse such behaviour is totally ridiculous. And in my mind, and heart makes no sense.

is it proven that humans are inherently monogamous?

monogamy IMO is jus a social norm.

[AdamB]

Also having more than one wife is something i find totally ridiculous. How could a religion blind so many?

Why do we marry? We marry because we love. We want to be stable, secure and happy. And a meaningful, mutually loving, respectful, caring relationship, with someone of the opposite sex does add to the quality of one's life.

How could commiting to more than one woman give u this?

Is it loving to marry another woman whilst being commited to another even though permission is granted? Is this really a loving thing to do?

Women i knw who are devout muslims. From talking to them. I realized that they accept it. Because they think islam is the right path. But in their hearts, their minds, their nature, they say they don't want their husband with another woman.

For a religion to permit and endorse such behaviour is totally ridiculous. And in my mind, and heart makes no sense.

This has been legislated by GOD, not only for muslims but for all (just like worship of GOD is legislated for all).

Some or most women raised in "western society" may not be ok with it or have some type of problem because it is what the society promotes as to what is normal, what is acceptable, etc.

The irony is that it is a proven fact in western society that this works because it is quite the norm that men will horn their wives and be very happy. The wives are happy too, it's just that they don't know! Why they (the men) do it? There will always be valid reasons and maybe it's natural and inevitable (like the Monroe doctrine).

However, only ISLAM legalizes it and gives rights to both or all (up to 4) wives and their children. Thank GOD for that. There are examples in the Bible of prophets who practised polygyny, like Abraham, Jacob, Saul, David and Solomon. Christians would deny it but those prophets were not their prophets (of Christianity).

[MG Man]

can a muslim woman have multiple husbands?

[AdamB]

can a muslim woman have multiple husbands?

No, sorry it is not legal in the laws of the religion. However, she could have multiple orgasms with her 1 husband.

Anticipating your response, divorce is legal in Islam.

[i am an idiot]

can a muslim woman have multiple husbands?

No, sorry it is not legal in the laws of the religion. However, she could have multiple orgasms with her 1 husband.

U serious with that response?

[MG Man]

bahahahahahahaha
whoharrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdoye
equity and equality like DAT!

[AdamB]

can a muslim woman have multiple husbands?

No, sorry it is not legal in the laws of the religion. However, she could have multiple orgasms with her 1 husband.

U serious with that response?

Yes, you think muslim women (who cover themselves fully) are not whores in bed for their husband?

[AdamB]

bahahahahahahaha
whoharrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdoye
equity and equality like DAT!

Equity and equality are two totally different concepts, MG!

[AdamB]

Hey, gotta go...my whore, sorry wife waiting for me at home!

[MG Man]

such disrespect, even in jest, AdamB....this saddens me

[DFC]

Adamb you ever had a 1 day marriage with a teenage girl?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

can a muslim woman have multiple husbands?

No, sorry it is not legal in the laws of the religion. However, she could have multiple orgasms with her 1 husband.

U serious with that response?

Yes, you think muslim women (who cover themselves fully) are not whores in bed for their husband?

this is acceptable?

[MG Man]

interesting
whore (hôr, hr)
n.
1. A prostitute.
2. A person considered sexually promiscuous.
3. A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.
intr.v. whored, whor·ing, whores
1. To associate or have sexual relations with prostitutes or a prostitute.
2. To accept payment in exchange for sexual relations.
3. To compromise one's principles for personal gain.

[i am an idiot]

Hey, gotta go...my whore, sorry wife waiting for me at home!

Disrespectful. U really refer to ur wife like that.

[maj. tom]