₦airaland Forum

slawormiir:
Damnnn niggar

That is one annoying thing about females

When you give them that toxic and bad treatment
Funny enough their love for you will just keep on increasing

I don't just understand females at all....am talking from experience

Behave like a bad guy to them...You bang them and dish them like they are nobody...then they will love you like mad

You show them care and simplicity...then they will lose interest in you

Its elementary economics. Laws of demand and supply. Anything freely given is hardly valued. That which is scarce is treasured.

wirinet:
The prick comes no where near the head of the unborn child. The prick stops at the vagina, the baby is safely tuck in the womb.

Haba, dem no fit follow you play again?

Even the law recognizes "conjugal rights". Both partners have conjugal rights, meaning a husband should not deny his wife her conjugal rights. If you wife demands sex, it is your duty to satisfy that desire unless there are other extraneous factors.

I dont subscribe to this no matter how many laws in the world may state so.

oyatz:
Who is the gangster and who has been convicted of any crime by the court?

Why not spend this same level of energy, time and resources to market a good candidate that is free of all vices and can turn Nigeria into Singapore, Dubai and all those nice places mentioned by the writer?

I reproduce my response to your brother-in-arms above:

You are free to allow your bias to govern you and defend it with such simplistic arguments.
After all, when asked why he had failed to try Babangida for corruption, Obasanjo replied with exactly the same words - if you have proof, bring it. Very easy and also very deceitful response.
Those of us who live in the real world know that the workings of the world are far more complex than your words suggest.

lugado:
How is he a criminal
You don't have proof
If you do fo to court to stop his aspirations

You are free to allow your bias to govern you and defend it with such simplistic arguments.
After all, when asked why he had failed to try Babangida for corruption, Obasanjo replied with exactly the same words - if you have proof, bring it. Very easy and also very deceitful response.
Those of us who live in the real world know that the workings of the world are far more complex than your words suggest.

oyatz:
In developed democracies, you won't see so many people asking that a particular citizen must not contest or people campaigning against a particular citizen like they are doing here.

Tinubu has a God given and constitutional right to aspire to the highest office in his country, it's evil trying to take away that right from any citizen.

You see the thing is this - when a known gangster and criminal decides the contest the presidency, people have a right to be alarmed: not only does it speak ill of the society as a whole, but there is the concern that the society being so corrupt, the known gangster may just succeed.

alphaNomega:
Tinubu the drug pusher? Has he been able to visit USA since he was declared wanted? Let him go and clear his case before you put a drug baron as your number one citizen.

You and other Nigerians are destined to suffer because you have severe amnesia

noisy45:
You are mad

Dubetex96:
Op you just succeeded in spewing rubbish here. Tinubu is a capital NO NO we cannot come and suffer for another 8years. If suffer no dey tire u may u go meet your God

How sarcasm is lost on you.
Sad.

Akaegwu, pity them.

InfinityFabric:
There's no alpha female, it's a misnomer.

You, and all the 110 people who liked your post, are medieval barbarian misogynist tramps.

GoodHardDick:
There's nothing like Alpha women! A woman cannot be an alpha. The word alpha is only attributed to a man and not a woman.

Women ain't made to lead, they were made to follow and hence, can never be an alpha.

You, and all the 178 people who liked your post, are medieval barbarian misogynist tramps.

obowunmi:
I’m getting my partner to sign a prenup.

Thats the path of wisdom, even for a couple in love. Because the future is simply unknown and even feelings change and evolve into something unrecognizable.

wirinet:
That's when prenuptial exist in the first place. Most marriages by couples smitten by the love bug don't even know what prenuptial means.
It's after being stung by a selfish partner that they insist subsequent marriages must come with prenuptials. Or if one party is from a wealthy home and the parents insisting on prenuptial to protect family fortune.

What I was trying to say is that you are wrong to say that the laws in the west compel a man to share his property while a woman is not so compelled. That exists for both parties. People with a prenup are better protected as they can share as per the prenup.

wirinet:
Why will sex not be on the table? Except there is a terminal disease like cancer, I don't understand why sex would not be on the table in a marriage.

Haba, marriage being a lifelong affair, there is bound to be "downtime" for either or both parties quite naturally.

Yes there are times when sex would not be an option, but a reason why it's not an option at a particular instance must be given and duscussed with the husband. She may be seeing her period, she may be ill, she may be too tired or stressed. But to deny your husband sex for months without reason is cruel and insensitive.

This sounds way too rigid and mechanical for the nuances of sexx as I understand them to be - complete with all the "human" nature and mood swings which may be attendant thereto. The bold in the above, in particular, make it sound like you expect a wife to write a formal application for "leave" from sexxual duties, which must be presented with justifications and defended before a panel of inquiry.

A woman can have sex a day before giving birth.

Kai, so you are among those who are okay with the practice of banging the head of an unborn child with your prick.
Yuck.

So what's your own ideas of marriage? What are the roles and obligations of each partner im a marriage? Are you married?

I dont know but it almost comes across as though you are designating the woman as a sexxual slave. I personally dont believe in "conjugal rights" as they are expressed in this context. There is too much nuance in sexxual matters for such a mechanical approach - and with that approach you reduce something that should be a natural chemical response to one another to a mere duty and physical chore. As far as I am concerned, even (and probably especially) within a marriage, the sexxual relations of the parties should be approached with as much gentle coaxing and seduction as was deployed prior to marriage. If not more.

wirinet:
you must share your properties with your wife (she is not obligated to share hers

No it generally works both ways, thats why you have prenuptial agreements.

Biodun556:
This woman practically sold Nigeria

For a mess of pottage at that.

Asiri1991:
Full-time X2.


Egypt win or draw. I don't support mediocre.




Super Eagles to exit the competition at quarter finals.


The trophy is for a north African team.

This I have decreed and it will come to pass.

Eat dust now, traitor!

AllahIsSatan:
But would an eternal, uncreated "god" define himself using the language of humans? Remember that Muslims claim the koran is the LITERAL word of their "god" allah, not the inspired word of God which is how Christians define the Bible.

All the same, Arabic is a human language.

PS: When you said the majestic plural signified that monarchs ruled with the consent of their people. This is not true. They didnt rule with the consent of their people. They were considered to be divinely appointed by inherited right or conquest. The plural generally signified their eminence and grandeur.

AllahIsSatan:
Majestic plurality is a man made concept. It is only used by a monarch when speaking officially in his capacity as the sovereign ruler of his subjects. It signifies that he speaks with the consent of the governed (his loyal subjects)
How does it apply to a supposedly uncreated, eternal God?

People of faith tend to also view God as a King.
Therefore the best you can quibble with on this will still amount to mere semantics.

AllahIsSatan:
Majestic plural is used by Kings when they speak about the plurality of themselves and their royal family/court. It is a human convention which a monarch uses to signify that he rules with the consent of his people. Does Allah need the consent of Muslims?

The majestic plural has variegated character and is also deployed to represent sovereignty. In the context used by the Quran, it may be called the plural of divinity.

Look, i abhor religion, especially the Abrahamic faiths, but you should find stronger points to quibble with.
This is a non-starter.

AllahIsSatan:
Linguistically, it is only when there's more than one person that the plural pronoun of "We" can be used!

Nah. There is the plural of royalty, also known as the "majestic plural."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we

.

Thank you LordReed for your responses thus far. I always appreciate it when a co-discussant takes time to go through a thought development process with a fine comb. Especially as I had feared that in this case the spambot may have dissuaded you. As per your earlier request I will await all your responses.

Bless.

guychidile:
How far if it's your child that hurts other children.
What will you say?

This is an excellent and most relevant question. Most modern urban parents are happy to play the ostrich in circumstances like this. They mostly will bluntly deny that their child hurt anyone or did any wrong even if there is a Video Assistant Referee with evidence. Where compelled to admit, most modern urban parents will be willing to do anything - and I mean anything - to protect their child from the consequences without a care or hoot for the well-being of the other child(ren) involved.

I refer mainly to the child-worship that is an emergent urban culture and which is mostly imported from the west. The worship which treats children as deities at whose feet modern parents grovel and worship.

"My child, my child" - no different from "My God, My God!"

Nellam:
I like how she speaks up for children

pretydiva:
Way to go!

DropsMic:
I will fuvkup anyone who tries such

jrusky:
Fact!!! Dare me by hurting any of my kids I will sink you no matter how connected and rich you are I will sink you then you will know devil pass devil.

Tonto I'm with you on this.

You know, while I no doubt understand how you all feel with respect to the very natural parental instinct of protection, I really believe we need to be wary of the way the actress in the OP expressed this instinct. Because in truth there is a very real tendency for parents to be so over-protective of their children that they are willing to go to unreasonable, even absurd and sometimes outrightly criminal lengths in this regard. You will therefore have those parents who will go ballistic if another adult so much as cautions or corrects their child (heaven forbid with a spank - the world will end that day), you have parents who regardless of the evidence will never believe that their child has done anything wrong anywhere (- or is even capable of wrong doing) - many parents act in such a way that one must conclude for all intents and purposes that they consider their child to be almighty God himself - perfect, infallible and pure - or some sort of royalty whose every whim and every desire must be attended to at once.

There is a proper place for others to correct and discipline a child but the sort of dangerous child-worship which is gradually permeating our urban culture is capable of creating monsters out of children and is something to be conscious of, and cautious about.

alanto:
Buhari has balls. Balls of steel in fact. And he has done his part for Nigeria and Nigerians.

Can you count three instances of these balls in action?

Awesomeking:
Islam was created during a time when wars were normal and eye for an eye was the most logical situation here, the reason why the Bible doesn't have much of its original Islam like violent parts is Cuz it was douced, by numerous people, numerous times, each for the benefit of himself.. Similar to. Animal farm when the animals kept changing the rules to fit them.. I know it sounds like I am attacking Christianity but I swear I am not, I am just explaining why the terrorists have Quran verses to back their claims.. The same Quran and hadiths that say Muslims who die while fighting in the cause of Islam are jihadists.. Also says that Muslims who go out of their way to feed the hungry are jihadists.. So u see what's happening here is that they are taking laws that were created thousands of years ago to protect Islam of that time, disregarding the laws that were also created back then to protect Islam of this current era (follow your leader and do not question his judgement because he too shall meet his end) that's why even under sharia law, muslims will follow the instructions of whoever is the president of nigeria, Muslim or Christian.. The passages that terrorists are citing are not only twisted but used out of context.. For example.. I can tell you to defend your home.. That doesn't mean you attack anybody who passes by it.. According to Islam, defence is not to attack first, its to repel any attack, and only after that can one attack.

Thank you. I sincerely empathize, and appreciate your reasoned response.

Awesomeking:
do you know how in Christianity, there is the pentecostal Church, Catholic Church and each sect of church believe they are practicing the true Christianity and the others are wrong.. That's what's happening here.. The terrorists are a small set of Muslims who think the non violent ones are wrong.. The problem is the world leaders politicising it.. Instead of saying a particular set of people are killing in the name of Islam.. They say Muslims are killing in the name of Islam, its painful to watch everyday... Now if you are a Catholic.. And the pentecostal churches start to kill both Christians and Muslims alike in the name of Christianity, I am sure it will hurt deeply, that's how we feel everyday.

I feel your pain here, still I have two thoughts in response -

1. Most Western Governments try strenuously to separate Islam from the ideas of extremist Islamist terrorists (except the lunatic Trump)
2. It would be nice if the terrorists were unable to cite anything in the Holy Quran on which they can place reliance. Sadly, this is not the case.

Awesomeking:
if you knew me, you wouldn't be asking if i know the history of naira land sir, I am speaking facts here..

In that case you must be aware of the threat to life I spoke about.
Mind you, I am not denying that people bash Islam - I certainly do myself - as I bash religion generally - especially the Abrahamic Faiths.

But if you know the history, then you surely know that someone proclaimed a fatwa against Seun at some point and there were genuine fears about violence being ignited from Islamic related issues here.

Interesting15:
The Will of God for sex is that all forms of sexual pleasures should be shared only between a married husband and his female wife inside the safe confines of their marriage institution, with no other party involved.

If this were true, the rising of prick would have been tied to the strings of the heart and the strings of the heart alone.

Awesomeking:
the reason why we are all made to swear an oath before commenting on an islam related thread is because of the constant insults done by Christians on that thread..

Perhaps you dont know the history of Nairaland. The Islamic Section was created and hived off because of threats to the owner by some Muslims. Threat to life. The threat of extremist Islamic violence is the reason.

MaxInDHouse:
Ọ̀gbẹ́ni i said past just one publication where a specific date is mentioned!

Look at these:


"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near." Matthew 3:2 this was what John the baptist said in the year 29 c.e.


"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near." Matthew 4:17 this was spoken by Jesus Christ in the year 29 c.e.


"Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?" Act 1:6 this was spoken by the Apostles in the year 33 c.e.

None of the aforementioned gave a specific date but they were talking about the same thing: "The end of the world"

So if i now find a global group of people who have fulfilled all the prophecies written in the Bible book of (Isaiah 2:2-4, Micah 4:1-5, Zephaniah 3:9; Zechariah 8:23) repeating the same thing in the year 1900 c.e.
Then i know they are on the same page with those who said the same thing about 2,000 years ago.

All what i need to observe closely as an intelligent observer is not the time they said it but the improvement in their worship.

I noticed that all these people have been repeating the same thing and it's almost 4,000 years ago now but things are getting better.
HOW?
They promised that God will bring a kingdom (government) to destroy all the wicked and their evil government! Daniel 2:44
The King will become a child and later grew up to be a WONDERFUL COUNSELOR, MIGHTY GOD, EVERLASTING FATHER and PRINCE OF PEACE! Isaiah 9:6
Then he will be killed for the redemption of obedient mankind! Daniel 9:26
Then a group will emerge visiting their neighbours (uninvited) discussing about what righteousness stand for! Malachi 3:16
Then they will gather obedient people from all the earth! Isaiah 2:2
Use the Bible to educate them thoroughly to the point where all of them will have the same line of thought! Isaiah 2:3 compare to John 17:20-23
Then they will erase politics and military services from their hearts so that none of them will think of raising weapons against anyone again! Isaiah 2:4

Then you're expecting me to dismiss all these successes only to concentrate on the repetitive reminders which has been for almost 5,000 years ago!

You must be out of your mind!

Enjoy your delusions.

murmee:
If someone pays to lodge in an hotel and his dead body is later discovered in the room, the right thing to do is to immediately report to the Police who will take the matter up and commence investigation appropriately. The very fact that they moved the body out of the hotel without informing the Police and the deceased family, makes the hotel liable.

Not for murder.

In 1966 the Watch Tower Society issued the first of what became a sequence of statements on the importance of a new date—1975—that raised the possibility of that year heralding the beginning of Christ's millennial reign and, along with it, doom for unbelievers. . .

The passing of 1975 without obvious incident left the Watch Tower Society open to new claims of prophetic failure. Instead of maintaining the prophetic significance of that year, however, the group's leaders embarked on a lengthy period of denial and purge, blaming rank-and-file membership for misreading the organization's interpretations.[16] The Watchtower initially explained that the reason for the failure of Armageddon's arrival was due to the time lapse between the creation of Adam and Eve. Although the Society had earlier argued that the gap was "weeks or months, not years", it now decided the time lapse could, after all, be years.[54] The following year the magazine repeated its explanation, but declared Witnesses themselves to blame for their eager expectations about 1975 because they had misread the Bible.[38] "It was not the word of God that failed or deceived [the individual Jehovah's Witness] and brought disappointment, but ... his own understanding was based on wrong premises."[55] In talks at conventions four years later, leading members of the Society finally acknowledged their error in the initial formulation of the prophecy, and in the March 15, 1980 Watchtower the Society said its claims about 1975 were regretted.[38] It assigned no different interpretation to the date and demanded that its members recognize that there never was an explicit prophecy.[16]

Singelenberg's analysis of Jehovah's Witness preaching activity in the Netherlands in the wake of the 1975 prophetic failure showed a drop in the group's membership from mid-1976, a trend that did not reverse until 1980. An estimated 5000 Witnesses in the Netherlands either left the movement, were expelled, or became marginal and inactive members.[38] Singelenberg suggested many of those expelled and shunned in the late 1970s had rebelled against the group's authority structure out of "post-prophecy frustration"; post-1975 defectors were described to him and to American researcher A. J. Brose as "opportunists" who had joined the group out of fear when the end seemed imminent, yet who lacked genuine commitment. One elder told Singelenberg: "It was good that Armageddon did not take place. It separated the wheat from the chaff."[38] Researcher Mathew N. Schmalz suggested the leadership drew attention from the disconfirmation by requiring an even greater loyalty from members, a demand enforced with the expulsion of almost 30,000 Witnesses in 1978 alone. The insistence on doctrinal orthodoxy reached the highest levels of the organization in 1980, with many in the writing committee disfellowshipped.[16]

In almost every country the annual growth rate of Jehovah's Witnesses fell markedly after the 1975 failure. In the US, the group's growth-rate fell from 6 percent to 2 percent; in South Korea it plummeted from 28 percent to 7 percent and the downward trend continued through to 1978. Even among the majority who remained, morale declined: in 1977 and 1978 the average "publisher" spent 140 hours a year proselytizing, compared to 196.8 hours in 1974.[56]

In his ethnographic study of Jehovah's Witnesses, English sociologist Andrew Holden quoted the testimony of a Witness who had been in the movement from the early 1970s, but found it impossible to remain as an active member after the failure of the 1975 prediction. He said that he, like many others, had been convinced the end would come in 1975:

I said it from the platform! We told everyone the end was near. When I became a Witness I gave up my insurance policies, I cancelled all my insurance endowments, I never bought a house because I knew I wouldn't need one, we didn't even want to put the kids' names down for school

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfulfilled_Watch_Tower_Society_predictions#1975:_The_worldwide_jubilee. . .

.

1925: Resurrection of the patriarchs

With Rutherford now the movement's chief theologian, another round of prophetic revision ensued, this time focusing on 1925.[5] In his 1920 booklet Millions Now Living Will Never Die, Rutherford wrote that he expected the ancient patriarchs and prophets, "the faithful ones of old", to be resurrected to earthly life in 1925 as a prelude to a general physical resurrection of faithful followers of God destined for everlasting life on earth. He explained:

This is the Golden Age of which the prophets prophesied and of which the Psalmist sang; and it is the privilege of the student of the divine Word today, by the eye of faith, to see that we are standing at the very portals of that blessed time! Let us look up and lift up our heads. Deliverance is at the door![32]

Newspaper advertisement for Rutherford's "Millions" lecture.

Rutherford's belief that the patriarchs' return would occur in 1925 was based on his calculations of the Jewish jubilee, counting forward 3500 years from 1575 BCE.[1][33] As the year advanced, he wrote of the urgency of witnessing in the "few remaining months",[34] though he also provided a caution that not all the expected events might occur.[35] When that prediction failed, the Watch Tower Society suspended the issuing of prophecies centered on a specific date.

Chryssides concluded: "This expectation was too specific and empirical for the date to be adjusted or the expected event spiritualised. At a convention the following year, Rutherford admitted his error, claiming that the 1925 date was 'merely an expressed opinion'."[1] Yet Rutherford did not abandon the prediction. In 1929 the Watch Tower Society bought a piece of land in San Diego, California, where a Spanish mansion was built and named Beth Sarim ("house of the Princes". As late as 1932 Rutherford was still delivering talks about the nearness of the kingdom: he declared that the preaching work of the Witnesses was "coming to a conclusion", that Armageddon was "only a short time away" and that the end was "much less than the length of a generation".[36] In the late 1930s Rutherford affirmed his intention that Beth Sarim should accommodate at least some of the returning "princes", and that it should stand as a monument to the organization's firm expectation, although no new date was ever assigned to the expected event.[1] The building was sold in 1948 and the doctrine of the return of the prophets dropped in 1950

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfulfilled_Watch_Tower_Society_predictions#1925:_Resurrection_of_the_patriarchs

.