Yours truly does realize that when the Bible states that "God spoke to him . . ." it is most likely that the language used was either Hebrew or Greek (and, at least in the case of Old-Testament recipients: Hebrew only) . . . so the words used by the LORD in those instances were then obviously and concordantly alphabet letters of the Hebrew language [without the Yiddish, matzo balls, and gefilte fish].

It is assumed that God did not speak to anyone mentioned in Holy Writ using what some call "Aramaic" but which the KJV refers to only as Syriac. In fact, even the RSV translation never once uses the word "Aramaic" in its New Testament rendition . . . even though pseudo-"scholars presume that that was THE Biblical language of common use.

Utilizing my Larry-Pierce Bible software, I quickly located the lone three places in the entire RSV where "Aramaic" is mentioned:

Second Kings 18:26 Then Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebnah, and Joah, said to the Rabshakeh, "Pray, speak to your servants in the Aramaic language, for we understand it; do not speak to us in the language of Judah within the hearing of the people who are on the wall."
Ezra 4:7 And in the days of Artaxerxes, Bishlam and Mithredath and Tabeel and the rest of their associates wrote to Artaxerxes king of Persia; the letter was written in Aramaic and translated.
Isaiah 36:11 Then Eliakim, Shebna, and Joah said to the Rabshakeh, "Pray, speak to your servants in Aramaic, for we understand it; do not speak to us in the language of Judah within the hearing of the people who are on the wall."

Noteworthy it is that the KJV has the following dissimilar rendition of those same passages:

Second Kings 18:26 Then said Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebna, and Joah, unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, to thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and talk not with us in the Jews' language in the ears of the people that are on the wall.
Ezra 4:7 And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of their companions, unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian tongue, and interpreted in the Syrian tongue.
Isaiah 36:11 Then said Eliakim and Shebna and Joah unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, unto thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and speak not to us in the Jews' language, in the ears of the people that are on the wall.

So much for the wrong presumption by pseudo-"scholars" that Aramaic was the common Biblical language spoken and/or written.

I might mention a couple of comments in passing, the first of which relates to what some would misconsider "antisemitism" in the gospel of John and the book of Acts of the New Testament of The Holy Bible - when the phrase "the Jews" is used in a clearly negative way to describe anti-Christ "jews".

To being with, it behooves my readership to realize that Jesus Himself was The Master Jew, and his chosen Twelve Apostles and more (e.g. Matthew, Mark, John, Peter, Paul) were also blood-descendant-from-Jacob/Israel Jews in both the physical and spiritual senses of the word.

Perhaps it would have been preferable for English translations of The Holy Bible to instead have used the terms: some jews, or certain jews . . . instead of the overbroad? phrase: "THE Jews" (with a capital J).

Fascinating it is that not all Jews are bad guys by fortunately-mentioned qualifiers:

John 19:21 The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'This man said, I am King of the Jews.'"

Acts 21:27 When the seven days were almost completed, jews from Asia, who had seen him in the temple, stirred up all the crowd, and laid hands on him...

Acts 25:7 And when he had come, the Jews [should instead read: some, or certain "jews"] who had gone down from Jerusalem stood about him, bringing against him many serious charges which they could not prove.
8 Paul said in his defense, "Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all."
9 But Festus, wishing to do the Jews [should instead read: some, or certain "jews"] a favor, said to Paul, "Do you wish to go up to Jerusalem, and there be tried on these charges before me?"
10 But Paul said, "I am standing before Caesar's tribunal, where I ought to be tried; to the Jews I have done no wrong, as you know very well.
11 If then I am a wrongdoer, and have committed anything for which I deserve to die, I do not seek to escape death; but if there is nothing in their charges against me, no one can give me up to them. I appeal to Caesar."
12 Then Festus, when he had conferred with his council, answered, "You have appealed to Caesar; to Caesar you shall go."
13 Now when some days had passed, Agrippa the king and Bernice arrived at Caesarea to welcome Festus.
14 And as they stayed there many days, Festus laid Paul's case before the king, saying, "There is a man left prisoner by Felix;
15 and when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders [NOT all!] of the Jews gave information about him, asking for sentence against him.
16 I answered them that it was not the custom of the Romans to give up any one before the accused met the accusers face to face, and had opportunity to make his defense concerning the charge laid against him.
17 When therefore they came together here, I made no delay, but on the next day took my seat on the tribunal and ordered the man to be brought in.
18 When the accusers stood up, they brought no charge in his case of such evils as I supposed;
19 but they had certain points of dispute with him about their own superstition and about one Jesus, who was dead, but whom Paul asserted to be alive.
20 Being at a loss how to investigate these questions, I asked whether he wished to go to Jerusalem and be tried there regarding them.

Indeed, both Jewish Jesus and Paul acclaimed real, or true, Jews quite highly:

John 4:22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.

Romans 3:2 Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews are entrusted with the oracles of God.
Romans 11:1 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin.
Romans 11:28 As regards the gospel [Jews/jews] are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers.
First Corinthians 9:20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews; to those under the law I became as one under the law -- though not being myself under the law -- that I might win those under the law.

The second point in passing is the suppression which the wicked (even religiously wicked) attempt to impose against missionaries and evangelists:

Isaiah 30:7 For Egypt's help is worthless and empty, therefore I have called her "Rahab who sits still."
8 And now, go, write it before them on a tablet, and inscribe it in a book, that it may be for the time to come as a witness forever.
9 For they are a rebellious people, lying sons, sons who will not hear the instruction of the LORD;
10 who say to the seers, "See not"; and to the prophets, "Prophesy not to us what is right; speak to us smooth things, prophesy illusions,
11 leave the way, turn aside from the path, let us hear no more of the Holy One of Israel."
12 Therefore thus says the Holy One of Israel, "Because you despise this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and rely on them;
13 therefore this iniquity shall be to you like a break in a high wall, bulging out, and about to collapse, whose crash comes suddenly, in an instant;
14 and its breaking is like that of a potter's vessel which is smashed so ruthlessly that among its fragments not a sherd is found with which to take fire from the hearth, or to dip up water out of the cistern."

Amos 7:16 "Now therefore hear the word of the LORD. You say, 'Do not prophesy against Israel, and do not preach against the house of Isaac.'
Amos 7:17 Therefore thus says the LORD: 'Your wife shall be a harlot in the city, and your sons and your daughters shall fall by the sword, and your land shall be parceled out by line; you yourself shall die in an unclean land, and Israel shall surely go into exile away from its land.'"

Micah 2:6 "Do not preach" -- thus they preach -- "one should not preach of such things; disgrace will not overtake us."

In other words, such refractory a-holes revile both God and His messengers by repeatedly blattering out to them: "Are you going to quit rocking the boat, shut up now, and let us talk?" I recall one such police detective plus cultic-"catholic" pseudo-"priest" infesting an Anglican church in St Louis Park Minnesota, a pseudo-"pastor" at a Plymouth Minnesota lutheran church and a pseudo-chaplain at a Hudson Wisconsin "transport for Christ" truck stop angering me with such insidious disrespect in their vile and rancid NIV-twisted hypocritical jealousy and "quit-bothering-people" diatribes against my Bible-knowledge dissertations.

Matthew 23:13 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither enter yourselves, nor allow those who would enter to go in."

Acts 5:17 But the high priest rose up and all who were with him, that is, the party of the Sadducees, and filled with jealousy
18 they arrested the apostles and put them in the common prison.
19 But at night an angel of the Lord opened the prison doors and brought them out and said,
20 "Go and stand in the temple and speak to the people all the words of this Life."
21 And when they heard this, they entered the temple at daybreak and taught. Now the high priest came and those who were with him and called together the council and all the senate of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought.
22 But when the officers came, they did not find them in the prison, and they returned and reported,
23 "We found the prison securely locked and the sentries standing at the doors, but when we opened it we found no one inside." [silent prison break!]
24 Now when the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these words, they were much perplexed about them, wondering what this would come to.
25 And some one came and told them, "The men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people."
26 Then the captain with the officers went and brought them, but without violence, for they were afraid of being stoned by the people.
27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest questioned them,
28 saying, "We strictly charged you not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you intend to bring this man's blood upon us."
29 But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men."

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and wickedness of humans who by their wickedness suppress the truth.

Romans 10:14 But how are humans to call upon Him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in Him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?

First Thessalonians 2:1 For you yourselves know, brethren, that our visit to you was not in vain;
2 but though we had already suffered and been shamefully treated at Philippi, as you know, we had courage in our God to declare to you the gospel of God in the face of great opposition.
3 For our appeal does not spring from error or uncleanness, nor is it made with guile;
4 but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please men, but to please God who tests our hearts.
5 For we never used either words of flattery, as you know, or a cloak for greed, as God is witness;
6 nor did we seek glory from humans, whether from you or from others, though we might have made demands as apostles of Christ.
7 But we were gentle among you, like a nurse taking care of her children.
8 So, being affectionately desirous of you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us.
9 For you remember our labor and work, brethren; we worked night and day, that we might not burden any of you, while we preached to you the gospel of God.
10 You are witnesses, and God also, how holy and righteous and blameless was our behavior to you believers;
11 for you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you
12 to lead a life worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.
13 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.
14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea; for you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from "the" Jews,
15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all humans
16 by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved -- so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last!

It is apparent that most of the dictionaries we use in America, and have used in our United States during our history from 1776 on, contain English words which rather accurately reflect English words (associated with whatever in existence or imagination being referred to) in precise accord with wording and common-sense meanings thereof (associated with whatever in existence or imagination being referred to) within the contents of the Judeo-Christian Sacred-66-books Holy Bible.

Scripture uses such terms as "marriage," "man," "woman," "male," and "female," -- and so do common everyday Webster-and-other dictionaries.

Did you know that there is never ever even one solitary instance in the entire Genesis to Revelation Bible where two named homosexuals are cited as being "married?" In fact, no two named homosexuals are ever recorded in the entire Bible as having homosexual relations!

The closest one comes to such (and, again, no named persons were ever recorded) is where a group of non-named male perverts demanded to molest a couple of guys:

Genesis 19:5 and they called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them."

Judges 19:22 As they were making their hearts merry, hey, the men of the city, base fellows, beset the house round about, beating on the door; and they said to the old man, the master of the house, "Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him."

There are, in stark contrast, plenty of references of named persons in both the Old and New Testaments of The Holy Bible engaging in heterosexual relationships of all types (e.g. monogamous marriage, polygamous marriage, incest, harlotry and prostitution).

I have wondered what semantics of Vow Words homoqueers concoct and mouth during their so-called "marriage" ceremonies which are instead, in fact, and in reality, merely homosodomy-union-licensing farces.

Between persons consisting of heterosexual couples comprised of a male human with female human, the traditional (and logically understandable) words are: "Do you take this woman to be your lawfully-wedded wife?" and "Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded husband?".

So, in a homosexual homosodomy-unions-licensing charade, who is the [presumed] male "husband" and who is the [presumed] female "wife?" Genderless "persons" without penis or vagina simply and honestly do not cut it.

Is it not true that "dogs" of both types (that is, human homos and canine animals) cannot marry?

Isaiah 56:11 The dogs have a mighty appetite; they never have enough. The shepherds also have no understanding; they have all turned to their own way, each to his own gain, one and all.
Philippians 3:2 Look out for the dogs, look out for the evil-workers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh.
Revelation 22:15 Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and every one who loves and practices falsehood.

I remember overhearing one male-human goof in a coffee shop a couple years ago utter: "Oh, I'll have to talk it over with my husband" -- and upon me hearing that, I wanted to go over and slap him in the face or kick him in the ass (the latter term being a crass but acceptable-in-his-case euphemism for him receiving my thrustworthy shoe covering my right foot quickly and firmly rammed and temporarily-implanted into his accursed anus or bung-hole, with or without a consequential 911 cellphone call by whoever).

To deliberately repeat myself, it almost "goes without saying" that most of the dictionaries we use our beloved country as sometimes-partisan patriots, and have used in America during said history from 1776 on, contain English words which rather accurately reflect English words (associated with whatever in existence or imagination being referred to) congruent with wording and common-sense meanings thereof (associated with whatever in existence or imagination being referred to) within the contents of the Judeo-Christian Sacred-66-books Holy Bible.

Scripture uses such terms as "marriage," "man," "woman," "male," and "female" -- and so do common everyday Webster-and-other dictionaries.

So I recently looked up some of those words in something entitled Webster's New World Dictionary (a Time-Warner book registered by Simon & Shuster of New York City, copywritten 1990).

Their definition of a "wife" = a married woman. [Duh]
Their definition of a "husband" = a married man [Again: Duh]
Their definition of "woman" = an adult female human being
Their definition of "man" = an adult male human being
Their definition of "adult" = grown up; mature
Their definition of "marriage" = the state of being married; being husband and wife; having a husband and wife
Their definition of "marry" = to join as husband and wife; to take as husband and wife
Their definition of "female" = designating or of the gender [that/which/who] bears offspring; feminine; having a hollow part for receiving an inserted part said of electrical sockets.

I, as a red-blooded Christian male human adult, like that last part mentioned. Kinky. A fuking good extension - if you'll pardon and adjustably accommodate to my praiseworthy-among-pure-and-broadminded vernacular.

In one sense, it is somewhat understandable why certain male humans would want to retaliate against and punish certain individuals of the female-human gender by directing their erotic affection merely to those of their own gender, but it is neither understandable nor acceptable to target all female humans for the sins of those select sinful females initially causing the problem.

Which defective are essentially twofold in description:

(1) Feminist-sexist women (and their pervert male patsies) who claim "equality" and who get in charge over men and thus dominate, irritate, and in various ways sexually harass hapless and victimized men in clear violation against such Scriptural enlightenment as Leviticus 27:1-5, Numbers 5:31, Numbers chapter 30, Ecclesiastes 7:26-28, Isaiah 3:12, Nahum 3:13, First Corinthians 11:1-16 (KJV), First Corinthians 14:33-38, First Timothy 2:8-15, and First Peter 3:7.

(2) Indecently-exposed-in-general-public-view women who visually assault and attack men with immodest loose-long-haired moheadedness (in ignorant or deliberate disregard against RSV's/NASV's Numbers 5:18 and Song 7:5), naked-armed sleeveslessness (in ignorant or deliberate disregard against RSV's/NASV's Second Samuel 13:18), nude-legged slackslessness or shortskirtedness (in ignorant or deliberate disregard against RSV's/NASV's Isaiah 47:1-4), and naked toes exposed in noisy flipflop sandals (in ignorant or deliberate disregard against RSV's/NASV's Isaiah 3:16-17 and Jeremiah 2:25) -- especially during warmer weather or for certain general-public-viewable sports activities.

However, concerning the case of male-with-male homosexuals, they go too far in their understandable aversion and hostility against those particular female humans mentioned in the above-alluded-to categories -- and in their case, acceptable philios (or brotherly love) becomes crossed-the-line non-acceptable eros (or sexually-affectionate) love . . . which in their case is certainly never "love" but always instead [perverted and pollutive] lust.

Such male-with-male-homosexuals cannot reproduce offspring between and with themselves alone, and so the true and not-revisionary dictionary definition of either husband or wife can never [legitimately] apply to them.

If followed through unabated without redemptive alteration, such [antisocial] homo-misbehavior of such often-arrogant and despicably-depraved males would result in extinction against humankind.

Not only that, but male humans who are erotically affectionate exclusively with members of their own [admittedly-superior] gender have neither desire nor time for those special female humans who need erotic-affection gratification in marriage to such now-wrong-headed males, and so such miserably-lacking females are sadistically deprived and then themselves resort to all sorts of inadequate and additional chauvinistic immorality substitutes in duressed disobedience against their Creator, lamentably harming all society in general.

Do they have a "constitutional" or "legal" "right" to commit (and not "perform") such aberrations?

It has been said that one is not allowed to shout 'Fire!' in a dark theater (unless there is a fire, in which case the lights should first be turned on).

But that does not mean that one cannot do such, because "not allowed" is certainly not synonymous with "not able" - particularly during pseudo-sacred audience silence while the titillated are gawking at a sex scene in some porn movie.

But loonies yet blatter that: "words don't mean anything" and: "it's only 'actions' which matter."

I wonder how far they would take that without being arrested for being a public nuisance, disturbing the peace, and even conspiracy to commit murder, if (for example) they remove the "poison" label off a bottle of cyanide and replace it with "tasty vitamins," or replace the "DANGER: ELECTROCUTION HAZARD" on a substation power transformer with the label "COLD FINGERS? TOUCH THESE ELECTRODES TO WARM UP." How about them replacing the 20 mph sign just before a sharp curve on an icy mountain road with a 55 mph sign? Or fool around with traffic-signal lights so that the color green shows up simultaneously at all four entrances at an intersection?

Deuteronomy 19:14 "In the inheritance which you will hold in the land that the LORD your God gives you to possess, you shall not remove your neighbor's landmark, which the men of old have set.
Deuteronomy 27:17 Cursed be he who removes his neighbor's landmark. And all the people shall say, 'Amen.'
Deuteronomy 27:18 Cursed be he who misleads a blind man on the road. And all the people shall say, 'Amen.'
Proverbs 22:28 Remove not the ancient landmark which your fathers have set.
Proverbs 23:10 Do not remove an ancient landmark or enter the fields of the fatherless

Indeed.

Does the Creator "foreknow" that homodeviant fools [never "born that way" with God to blame] will eventually be created at womb-conception (not simply remain a figment of God's prophetic power) and then choose of their own God-given free will to then actually become homosexual?

To expound upon that, does it really matter that God "foreknows" in predictive insight that such will finally, in fact, happen - and (to complete the lurid final product for judgmental condemnation purposes), homodikes themselves choose of their own free will to thus homosexually sin and insure their permanent solitary-confinement incarceration within the invisible flames of The Lake of Fire while suspended in the fervent-heat nothingness of The Outer Darkness?

The striking thing - irregardless of God's "foreknowledge" - is that such homosexuals predestine themselves to perpetual isolation in Hell forever by their fateful errant choice, by their own ridiculous and absurd God-hating God-disobeying misuse of their own really-special sovereign free will to enslave themselves to self-deceived non-liberating captivity of wretched and disappointing homosexuality instead of fulfilling and exhilarating heterosexuality.

And, when it comes to the thought and concept of "eternity" (a term we humans have come upon mentioned within that Bible we did not author but which, nevertheless, non-deniably exists and so we must, as non-biased and non-prejudiced open-minded genuine scientists, deal with), it is to be expected that such previously-non-solicited-by-us-humans, non-asked-for-by-us-humans "eternity" is basically an obnoxious, repulsive, and scary concept . . . at least from a preliminary point of view.

Why?

We humans live and think in a given physical environment which only has beginnings and endings, and that is how we satisfyingly measure everything with cognitive contentment. If "eternity" had not merely a beginning for us, but also an eventual ending (however long that would take), "eternity" would be a tolerable concept to contemplate and endure, if not anticipate.

But, as it is, we are basically forced into an "eternity" we never asked for in the first place, nor first petitioned for our permission by our Creator [but would He have had to do that anyway, being that He alone is Omnipotent and Omniscient, and who could successfully withstand, oppose, or overpower Him even if they wanted to . . . and being that we were not even existing yet to be asked?], to so irrevocably and assuredly destine us to such a scenario with no possible nor conceivable escape.

However, knowing what the Bible describes as both Heaven, and Hell, the option of "Heaven" makes forever and non-ending "eternity" palatable and acceptable, even perhaps welcomed in certain cases of dire temporal circumstances humans find themselves suffering in and besieged with.

Almost ludicrously laughable it is to reiterate and remind each other how great God (the Creator) was and is. How almost-incredibly wise and imaginative The Divine and Supernature Entity we worship and adore and praise (consider the mighty galaxies and vast nebula and immense stars, the power of radioactive atoms and overwhelming radiation, the bizarre minute intricacy of DNA, the quasi-magical mystery of foliage reborn every spring as a perfect omen of past and future resurrection). How phenomenally powerful.

Yet, we do have the Biblical record of Him imposing The Two Great Stumbling Blocks in The Garden of Eden (namely, the Deceiving Serpent plus the lethally-poisonous and profoundly-non-guarded/readily-accessible Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil).

Could we say that it was inevitable that Eve [probably wandering around alone without Adam in investigative curiosity] would eventually "make use of" or at least "test out" crap of and off That Forbidden Tree - even without The Half-Lying Suggestive Snake egging her on? Sort of like God seditiously laying a rollerskate in the narrow walled-in path of a blind man?

The LORD did have a Contingency Plan, which involved and involves much less effort that raising one's arms to pick and eat non-eucharistic samples of healing fruit off some antidote tree (specifically: simply believing that crucified-and-risen Jesus, The Sacrificial Atoner, is THE Redeemer, Lord, and THE one-and-only Master of one's life and lifestyle).

But what kind of adequate? warning did inferior-gender Eve get (re-read First Timothy 2:14 and First Peter 3:7 about the deceived inferior gender who fell into transgression) about the far-reaching dire consequences of her ingesting fruit from The Diabolical Tree? How did she know what "death" meant and resulting devastation against her offspring and all nature would be before she ate of The Fatal Fruit? Why weren't high-security razor wire and electrical fences surrounding The Dangerous Tree?

A more important and even crucial question is: "How do we know that God is not going to repeatedly impose some new trick - something like what He did back in The Garden of Eden (concerning the unique Stumbling Blocks present back then) when we resurrected humans find ourselves alive and ready for action in "The New Heavens and The New Earth?"

Well, we do have the trustworthy testimony of His Infallible Word (the Bible) - obviously and admittedly eerily-accurate writings "not of this world." The prophecies-already-fulfilled Scripture is both supremely authoritative and impeccably reliable. We also have the respected and honored testimony of society-preserving civilized Christians throughout the ages, with the realization that everything we have already experienced which is good and worth keeping will be restored according to the promised testimony of the Bible and those past-and-present Christian witnesses. And finally, we have The indwelling Holy Spirit - a very real Presence of God Himself convincing us and "keeping our heads straight" under threat of prompt or painful or lingering Divinely-instigated execution.

It is said that "the" Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection (either of the righteous or the wicked):

Matthew 22:23 The same day Sadducees came to Him, who say that there is no resurrection; and they asked Him a question
Mark 12:18 And Sadducees came to Him, who say that there is no resurrection; and they asked Him a question
Luke 20:27 There came to him some Sadducees, those who say that there is no resurrection
Acts 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.

That is plainly why they were sad, you see?

A play-in-words groaner?

Not when the stakes are so high.