Under Rumsfeld, Pentagon published Bible verses on top-secret intel reports.
Under Rumsfeld, Pentagon published Bible verses on top-secret intel reports.
In a lengthy article on Donald Rumsfeld’s rocky tenure as Defense Secretary, GQ published never-before-seen cover sheets from top-secret intelligence briefings produced by Rumsfeld’s Pentagon. Starting in the days surrounding the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the cover sheets featured inspirational Bible verses printed over military images, “and were delivered by Rumsfeld himself to the White House” to the president, “who referred to America’s war on terror as a ‘crusade,’” GQ writes. Below are some examples of the Bible quotes (view the images here):
“Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.” [The quote appears over an image of a tank at sunrise]
“Commit to the LORD whatever you do, and your plans will succeed.” [The quote appears over an image of a soldier in Baghdad]
“It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.” [The quote appears over an image of Saddam Hussein]
“Open the gates that the righteous nation may enter, The nation that keeps faith.” [The quote appears over an image of tanks entering an Iraqi city]
GQ’s Robert Draper writes that when colleagues complained to the Pentagon official who came up with the cover sheets, he replied, “‘my seniors’ — JCS chairman Richard Myers, Rumsfeld, and the commander in chief himself – appreciated the cover pages.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I love the smell of wingnuttery in the morning.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:00 amAnd they completely ignored the bible verse “Thou Shall Not Kill”
May 17th, 2009 at 10:04 amceltic cynic Says:
And they completely ignored the bible verse “Thou Shall Not Kill”
Not to mention the Commandment “Thou shall not bear false witness.”
May 17th, 2009 at 10:08 amGQ’s Robert Draper writes that when colleagues complained to the Pentagon official who came up with the cover sheets, he replied, “‘my seniors’ — JCS chairman Richard Myers, Rumsfeld, and the commander in chief himself – appreciated the cover pages.”
Wouldn’t this be considered proselytizing, and isn’t that a violation of DoD rules? It wouldn’t matter that his superiors approved it, it was still illegal.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:10 amWe also now know why Rummy said the WMDs were in points North, South, East and West of Baghdad. Crusadin’ Don was just repeating what they tortured out of the captives: false confessions.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:11 amSo what if it is illegal? They were Republicans, for God’s sake.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:14 amnot even his sweet lovin’ jeebus could save scummy rummy and the debacle known as the crusades….errrr iraq
May 17th, 2009 at 10:15 amAfter all this time the truth comes out.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:17 amgeorge didn’t hear gawd at all, it was rummy !
This, of course, will only make the Beck/Hannity crazies love him more…
May 17th, 2009 at 10:17 amOur military is clearly training Christian militia members of the future at tax payer expense.
This is a very dangerous trend that needs to stop. Remember what is happening here and at the Air Force Academy are not accidents.
It is also this Christain, arrogant thinking that leads to the belief in American Exceptionalism which does not really exist.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:22 amAnd of course this worked very nicely because Chimpy McFlightsuit thought god was talking directly to him all the time.
God help this nation is the GOP ever holds that much power again.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:23 amI have a question,
May 17th, 2009 at 10:23 amdid he also send 43 a box of crayons to color in the bible verses and images like they do in sunday school?
Rumsfeld’s GOD is money…..he used religion just to play to the weak side of people….Wizard of oz bullshit..
May 17th, 2009 at 10:24 amAs we fight with GOD on our side…..Onward Christian soldiers….
“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”
May 17th, 2009 at 10:26 amThis makes me sick at my stomach. There is a big evangelical movement within the military and it’s quite scary!!!
May 17th, 2009 at 10:30 amI think I’m going to be sick.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:31 amConcrete evidence of Bush’s Holy War. Went to the GQ slideshow link- could those covers be any more inappropriate?
Damning leakage from the BushCo sieve continues. Fun to watch isn’t it, as the drip drip of revelations starts to go from trickle to flood (I hope).
May 17th, 2009 at 10:33 amOf course this also means that God wanted us to torture the detainees. Georgie, Rummy and Dickie all just want everyone to know that God likes us. He really, really likes us! Medals of Freedom for all!
I wonder how long until some leader finally says aloud, “The United States has become a dangerous joke.”
May 17th, 2009 at 10:37 am“We go to war with the army we have”.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:43 amThis was Rumsfeld answer to a soldier question in Kuwait.
Now we find out of the BIG CRUSADE that this whole administration was planning.
This is sick. It is worse than going to war for the OIL in Iraq.
Bush was criticized for saying the word “crusade” so he didn’t use it anymore. However, Rumsfeld and Cheney knew that Bush believed he was on a mission from God so they purposefully fed into that belief with bible verses. They knew that the dim-witted George would think that his actions were validated and therefore justified. So sick!
May 17th, 2009 at 10:43 am“It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.”
Funny, this didn’t work on the Repugs after the presidential election.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:46 amThis is so similar to many small businesses making Bible study or religious dialogue part of the job. Going to work allows bosses to evangelize even though this coersion was banned by the SCOTUS rulings in the 80’s, I believe. The Air Force Academy is another scary part of this picture and soldiers prostilitizing in the Middle East; pure craziness for the foremost military power in the 21st Century. The current president must root this out and put an end to this cult of fanatic zealots inside our gov’t. Put it back inside the churches where it belongs.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:47 amEven while planning bombing campaigns which would certainly kill some innocent civilians along with scores of Iraqi soldiers they find time to dress up their reports with sunday school decorations.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:53 amI had the unfortunate experience to work with a reserve (ANG) fighter pilot- bat-shit crazy and believed in end times prophesy. Scary, scary person.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:55 amCan you imagine if Sarah Palin was the president today what these report covers would look like? Not only would they include bible passages but they would also have Neiman Marcus sale sheets on them too! Spit.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:57 amI’m surprised Uncle Donald left this one out, from the New Testament:
“You have heard as it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”
I’m shocked.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:58 amAnybody remember the scuttlebutt that the morning prayer meetings at the Justice Department under Holy John Ashcroft caused?
Good times. Holy rollers, Christian hypocrites, every g*dd*amned f**king one of the liars…
May 17th, 2009 at 11:02 amEvery now and then, against my better judgment, I come on here to see what the deluded are saying. I never cease to be shocked…shocked at the incredible cynicism, the intolerance, and indeed hatred of all things Christian, the re-writing of our history, the distortion of the Constitution, and the incessant character assassination of all Republicans or conservatives.
There is NOTHING wrong or inappropriate about Rumsfeld’s Bible quotes. It is the BIBLE, people. Our Bible is quoted all over Washington, D. C. There is NOTHING sectarian about quoting Holy Scripture in the manner in which Rumsfeld did. On the other hand, I find the judgmental mis-use of Scriptures on here disgusting and hypocritical.
And, yes, there is a Christian fervor that permeates, motivates, and strengthens many of our brave military personnel that protect our sorry butts every day! Thank Almighty God for men and women who are CALLED out of an overwhelming sense of duty to this nation, and yes to God, to be warriors for the cause of Freedom and Truth.
Wake up all you forlorn cynics! In spite of all your attestations to the contrary, America is great because of the Christian principles that have sustained all of us, believers and non-believers alike.
Whether many of you realize it or not, or want to admit it, we are and have been in a holy war (or Crusade) against militant Islam for a long time, and some of you are unwittingly on the wrong side!
May 17th, 2009 at 11:04 amNothing motivates conservatives like the biblical notions of “glory” and “righteousness”. They will cheerfully throw the facts and their fellow humans under the bus to get some of that.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:16 amPhilip 50,
It is unconstitutional to treat Christianity as the official religion of the government, much less to portray the war in Iraq as a biblical crusade. It may be consistent with your own war-loving brand of Christianity, if not with, say, Catholicism, but it is completely un-American.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:18 amPhilip50, seek help before it’s too late. Start by reading and UNDERSTANDING the Constitution of the United States! Take your time, there are some big words in there you might have trouble with. Then try to understand what those words mean.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:23 amPhillip50,
Your post at 29 is full of the same ignorance I hear from reich-wing Christianistas all the time.
It’s amazing have ignorant Christianistas like you actually are. You don’t shit about the Constitution, the founding fathers or even much about the Bible either. Typical loud mouth RePugniScum drivel is all I see in your idiotic post.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:35 amPhilip50 Says:
Wake up all you forlorn cynics! In spite of all your attestations to the contrary, America is great because of the Christian principles that have sustained all of us, believers and non-believers alike.
You should make the effort to finally read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, along with the copious documentation produced by the Founders while debating the direction the new country would take. You might finally realize that America’s greatness is a direct result of NOT being a Christian nation.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:37 amPhilip50 Says:
Thank Almighty God for men and women who are CALLED out of an overwhelming sense of duty to this nation, and yes to God, to be warriors for the cause of Freedom and Truth.
Truth? TRUTH? You’ve got to be fcuking kidding me. LMFAO
May 17th, 2009 at 11:37 amPhillip 50– It’s Sunday for god’s sake give it a rest. No amount of private, personal religious justification makes this story not seem weird. Would you be saying your baloney if we all had to recite a Confuscian Thought For The Day at our job or school or before going into battle against Lutherans or Methodists?
May 17th, 2009 at 11:38 amAs expected, your responses are either “high-brow”, name-calling, or putting the wrong words in my mouth.
Bullsmith, the United States is a secular state with no “official religion”. However, our laws are clearly founded upon Judeao-Christian principles. Where are those principles espoused? In the BIBLE. So you think it is un-American to quote Scripture?!
And, LiberalVoter, show me in the Constitution where quoting Schipture is prohibited? Indeed, virtually all of our earlier history invokes Scripture, Divine Providence, and references to our Creator. Even the more secular among our founding fathers had a deep appreciation and respect for Holy Scripture, and it was the basis for our identity as a nation. You may not be able to personally identify or appreciate this. But it is historic fact. The attempt to expunge Christian influence and principles from our government is historically flawed, it is against the will of our founders, and it will change the character of this great country in unforeseen and negative ways.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:45 amPhillip 50:There is NOTHING wrong or inappropriate about Rumsfeld’s Bible quotes. It is the BIBLE, people. Our Bible is quoted all over Washington, D. C. There is NOTHING sectarian about quoting Holy Scripture in the manner in which Rumsfeld did. On the other hand, I find the judgmental mis-use of Scriptures on here disgusting and hypocritical.
Separation of Church and State.Separation of Church and State.
Separation of Church and State.Separation of Church and State.
Separation of Church and State.Separation of Church and State.
Separation of Church and State.Separation of Church and State.
Separation of Church and State.Separation of Church and State.
Rendor unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.Rendor unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.Rendor unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.Rendor unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.Rendor unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.Rendor unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.Rendor unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.
Get the picture?
May 17th, 2009 at 11:49 amI never said scripture was prohibited. You have such a deep misunderstanding of things it us difficult to know where to start. When you are through with your “KILLING FOR GOD” meme, try reading some of this country’s founding documents, as was suggested. Here is a start. From the Treaty of Tripoli
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;
Here is the link: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp
And from Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
I guess facts are things you can’t seem to deal with but living in your fantasy world doesn’t make it right.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:54 amTo Conservitives;
May 17th, 2009 at 11:54 amJust checked my Bible and it was not wrapped in red, white and blue. The United States was not governed by godly people during the Cheney/Bush years. To claim so is a perversion of Christian principles. The God in heaven does not condone their misdeeds. The one conclusion I can draw is you don’t worship a Christian God. I surly don’t want anything to with the gods you are claiming!!
Hey, Glogrrl,
I hate to break it to you: There is no phrase “Separation of Church and State” in the Constitution of the United States.
The “Establishment clause” is to protect the “free exercise” of religion.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:55 amHey Philip50, I enjoy breaking it to you,
From the Treaty of Tripoli
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;
Just in case you missed this FACT!
May 17th, 2009 at 11:57 amAh, yes, LiberalVoter…the over-used Treat of Tripoli language. Surely you can do better than that to attempt to reframe our history. Try quoting the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:58 amWow, he finds bible verses that he thinks supports his war efforts. Way to cherry pick and use the bible. I read an article once by a guy who showed that you could cherry pick passages from the bible (out of context) to justify just about everything you would want to do.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:58 amIF there truly is no separation of church and state then I demand the churches to start paying their taxes and to be held accountable in everything they say from the pulpit.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:59 amPhilip50 Says:
——————————————————————————–
However, our laws are clearly founded upon Judeao-Christian principles. Where are those principles espoused? In the BIBLE.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Philip50 Says:
Ah, yes, LiberalVoter…the over-used Treat of Tripoli language. Surely you can do better than that to attempt to reframe our history. Try quoting the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
You’re the one attempting to “reframe” history. Please quote from either document any mention of Jesus Christ. Take your time looking.
What baffles me about people like you is your assumption that moral behavior is purely a product of the Holy Bible, as though no other religion or philosophy is also built on moral behavior without any need to associate it with a single deity.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:01 pmPhilip50 Says:
Bullsmith, the United States is a secular state with no “official religion”. However, our laws are clearly founded upon Judeao-Christian principles. Where are those principles espoused? In the BIBLE. So you think it is un-American to quote Scripture?!
Please provide proof that “our laws are clearly founded upon Judeao-Christian principles”.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:01 pmYou can’t erase the FACTS Philip50. Not even a good try as a dodge. You are caught in your fantasy, or outright lie, and cannot defend your position against FACTS! The Treaty of Tripoli stands as fact against your lies. And if you look really hard, you will see I did quote the U.S. Constitution.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:01 pmPhillip50: Exactly–”free exercise of religion”. Your right to proselitize stops at the end of my nose. One of our cherished freedoms in these United States is the freedom FROM religion as well. All religions are equally welcome….hardly the mantra of people like you. I’m sure you are much less, if not, tolerant of Muslims, Hindus,Pagans, Atheists, Agnostics, etc. Live and let live…….you worry about your religious life and I’ll worry about mine. Enough cliches for you? Now STFU.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:01 pmKayInMaine Says:
“IF there truly is no separation of church and state then I demand the churches to start paying their taxes and to be held accountable in everything they say from the pulpit.”
Advocating government regulation of free speech and thought? Now that is a truly “liberal” proposal. Have you read the First Amendment?
May 17th, 2009 at 12:02 pmAs if hunting souls for Jesus wasn’t bad enough! I think all of the scriptures were put on his reports to soothe his guilty conscience – invading another country, killing civilians, lying to the American public, allowing torture, etc., can’t be wrong if we’re doing it for the LAWD! The Bush Crime Family’s hypocrisy just had no boundaries.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:06 pmglogrrl Says:
“All religions are equally welcome… Now STFU.”
Now that is “welcoming”, glogrrl.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:13 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
Wow, he finds bible verses that he thinks supports his war efforts. Way to cherry pick and use the bible. I read an article once by a guy who showed that you could cherry pick passages from the bible (out of context) to justify just about everything you would want to do.
I once met an old lady in Louisiana who quoted to me verses from the Old Testament that she believed justified both slavery and prejudice against Blacks. People will, indeed, cherry pick from the Scriptures to justify anything that, frankly, Jesus himself would have condemned.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:14 pmPhillip50: Re your statement “I hate to break it to you: There is no phrase “Separation of Church and State” in the Constitution of the United States.”
I never said there was…..but it has long been a cherished tenet of America, and I do believe, as stated below, Thomas Jefferson trumps Phillip50.
The phrase “separation of church and state” is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.[15]
May 17th, 2009 at 12:14 pmPhillip50–Now that is “welcoming”, glogrrl And, BTW, you are welcome to practice your religion in our country………just don’t force me to: hence, the STFU.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:16 pmCherry picking from the Bible,Constitution and the Declaration of Independence is all the REICH wing nuts can do…….because they live for half truths and the NOBLE LIE.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:21 pmAll of the judges and lawyers in the US trumps Phillip50 too. They commonly refer to it at the Separtion Clause of the constitution owing to the Jefferson letter and acceptance of the general construct.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:22 pmPhillip50,
With all due respect, you are flat wrong about most of what you said.
I am an atheist, and I served in the USAF for five years. I did not do it out of any religious calling, nor did God tell me to do it (because there is no God.)
Have you read the First Amendment?
Have you? You seem to only remember part of it. Let me help you – “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…”
It’s not just about the free exercise of religion, it’s also about the fact that our government is not allowed to choose one religion over another. Did you know that the US was the first nation to ever say “We will have no official religion”? I doubt it because you seem convinced that we are officially a Judeo-Christian nation.
But before you go off saying that we were founded by atheists, that’s not true, either. Our Founders were, for the most part, Deists. They did believe in God, but they did not ascribe to any particular religion, and they certainly didn’t think the government should be telling anyone what religion they have to practice.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:23 pmI know where the phrase comes from, glogrrl. Furthermore, I agree with everything that Jefferson says in his letter. However, this letter is abused and misconstrued. The wall of separation is to PROTECT “the free exercise” of religion, not to LIMIT it. There is no alleged freedom “from” religion. Religious influence is in every culture, and is unavoidable. And government should not interfere in the exercise of religion, as has happened throughout human history, and happens today in many parts of the world, especially in Muslim countries. When Rumsfeld speaks of the fear of Muslim Caliphates taking over Europe, we should all view that with serious concern. Militant Islam should not enjoy the protections of religion, when in effect it is more of a political movement to take over the world.
Be glad you folks were born in American, where you are still free to believe in any faith, or to NOT believe in anything, and where you can freely exchange your point of view and even “convert” to another without fear of retribution. Such freedoms do not exist in countries with a Muslim heritage.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:23 pmI believe, as many others, that devoutly religious people are the most dangerous people on earth. More dangerous are the devoutly religious who hold high office. Even more dangerous are people such as Rumsfeld who manipulate the devoutly religious as a means to an end.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:24 pmrummy was an idiot from the start.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:24 pmWayne Ant Schneider ,Excellent post,I could not of said it better.
Chris
May 17th, 2009 at 12:25 pmThe Time Has Come For Justice
Dick Hitler Adolf Cheney
Martin Bormann Better known as Karl Rove or better known as Paul Joseph Goebbels or better known as FOX NEWS
Donald Rumsfeld or better known as Joachim von Ribbentrop
May 17th, 2009 at 12:27 pmADAY Says:
“The Time Has Come For Justice
Dick Hitler Adolf Cheney
Martin Bormann Better known as Karl Rove or better known as Paul Joseph Goebbels or better known as FOX NEWS
Donald Rumsfeld or better known as Joachim von Ribbentrop”
Response: Broad-minded people offer ideas. Small-minded people resort to name-calling.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:32 pmPhilip50 Says:
Response: Broad-minded people offer ideas. Small-minded people resort to name-calling.
Did I strike a NERVE with a Scary Comparison?
May 17th, 2009 at 12:37 pmNo, ADAY. You just showed what a pea-brain you have. Got any IDEAS?
May 17th, 2009 at 12:38 pmHow can any of you say there is no GOD!
When I am posting right here and he’s my website proving it http://www.lemonparty.org
May 17th, 2009 at 12:39 pmThe Cheney/Bush adminstration were not godly men. Godly men do not act the way these guys did. The whole question of seperation of church and state is a bogus arguement. I will pose a question. If the Cheney/Bush adminstration really believed in the core chistians values, do you think we would be having this debate today?
May 17th, 2009 at 12:42 pmPhilip50 Says:
No, ADAY. You just showed what a pea-brain you have. Got any IDEAS?
Response: Broad-minded people offer ideas. Small-minded people resort to name-calling.
Thanks for avoiding any name-calling, hypocrite.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:44 pmAssessing the size of one’s brain based on what it produces, or the lack thereof, is not name calling. Now if I said, “ADAY” is a “pea-brain,” now that WOULD be name-calling.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:50 pmPhilip50 Says:
No, ADAY. You just showed what a pea-brain you have. Got any IDEAS?
Pea-Brain (would that be small minded?) Well that maybe something you probably can closely associate with yourself but I am very opened minded.
As far as ideas go how about this “PRISION” or is that too difficult of a concept for you to understand.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:53 pmCovering top-secret intel reports with Bible verses is the equivalent of OBL signing off his letters and videos with “Allah Akbar,” you bible totting moron.
The Secretary of Defense is supposed to evaluate with the generals the best and quickest way to KILL ENEMIES and control the area under combat. NOT TO DELIVER SERMONS.
This latest sample builds upon what we LEFTIES / PROGRESSIVES told you Neo-Clown enthusiasts. The Iraq war was sold as nothing but fear mongering bullshit, from the “Al-Queda is going to get WMDs from Saddam” to “We’ll be greeted by showers of candy and flowers” passing through “God told me to spray Freedumbs in the M.E.”
If you bible totting morons believe it is the USA’s destiny to spray freedumbs in the M.E., go spray your gospel, unarmed, unprotected on your mission. Just don’t forget your bible. It sure will keep bullets away from you and feed you manna from the heavens.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:55 pmThat’s a distinction without a difference you name calling idiot!
May 17th, 2009 at 12:59 pmYou can stop fighting like children.
I control everyting and there is a method in my madness. Even though you have not figured it out yet. Its quite complex my wonders, so none of you can figure out my brilliance. No use in insulting your fellow man.
Now go say 10 hail mary’s and pray tonight
May 17th, 2009 at 1:00 pm“Under Rumsfeld, Pentagon published Bible verses on top-secret intel reports.”
This makes it ok to kill brown-skinned people and steal their resources.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:01 pm“And government should not interfere in the exercise of religion, as has happened throughout human history, and happens today in many parts of the world, especially in Muslim countries. When Rumsfeld speaks of the fear of Muslim Caliphates taking over Europe, we should all view that with serious concern. Militant Islam should not enjoy the protections of religion, when in effect it is more of a political movement to take over the world”
—————————————————————
Philip50,What do you do with Muslim theocracy`s like Iran and why should militant Christians enjoy the protections of religion when your re-puke friends want a NEW WORLD ORDER?
Chris
May 17th, 2009 at 1:02 pmPhillip50 Says:
…shocked at the incredible cynicism, the intolerance, and indeed hatred of all things Christian, the re-writing of our history, the distortion of the Constitution, and the incessant character assassination of all Republicans or conservatives.
It’s not a matter of hatred of all things christian, etc. or character assassination of Republicans. It’s the pure disdain and abhorance towards people like Rumsfeld who use the Bible to justify their evil acts. I think it’s disgusting and shameful what the Bush Crime Family has done. Invade Iraq and Afghanistan and try to force christianity on the citizens. People like you just don’t get it?!
May 17th, 2009 at 1:05 pmSo, Johnny: Would it be permissible to you to quote Pres. Washington? How about Pres. Washington quoting Scripture to encourage his beleaguered troops at Valley Forge? Would that be permissible?
How dare you compare our troops with a just cause to OBL viciously attacking America! Is everything morally equivalent to you, or do you NOT see the difference?!
May 17th, 2009 at 1:06 pm# 80 Philip50
Dumbass, neither the Pope or George Washington, or the Founding Fathers if you want to go that route, are OR were INFALLIBLE.
And yes, quoting and encouraging your soldiers with promises of 72 virgins in heavens, as well as promises of eternal joy with Jeebus, IS A FUKCED UP IDEA.
Killing innocents, destruction, and torture in the name of Jeebus – GOOD.
Killing innocents, destruction, and torture in the name of Allah – BAD.
Obviously you can’t see that the problem here is religion claiming a fictional entity is using pawns to fulfill its ego.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:15 pmBible totting moron.
Not to detract from all the intelligent debate going on here, but perhaps all of us could use a little inspiration from a golden oldie with a great message:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTuwAo5sUik
By the way, don’t hold it against them, but Marilyn McCoo and Billy Davis, Jr. are Christians. Oh, I forgot, so is Pres. Obama! Just ask him.
Have a nice day!
May 17th, 2009 at 1:18 pmGod Says: You can stop fighting like children.
What’s the color of my shirt?
May 17th, 2009 at 1:18 pmJohnny,Now lets be fair Christians are better because the re-pukes say so and so it`s GOSPEL to the Sheeple.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:22 pmPhilip50 is delusional.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:22 pm#84 Philip50
And Buddha has gone through 10,000 rebirths.
Jeebus and his 1 time act has nothing on the jolly fat guy.
Come back soon, bible totting moron.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:25 pmrepublicans hate facts Says:
Philip50, you REVISIONISTS are just TOO FUNNY. Washington was a DEIST not an XTian.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:25 pm————————————————————–
RHF, They can`t handle the truth so they revise the revisions and next thing you know your a SHEEPLE.
Philip50 Says:
How dare you compare our troops with a just cause to OBL viciously attacking America! Is everything morally equivalent to you, or do you NOT see the difference?!
Some of the bible quotes in question accompany images related to the war in Iraq. What does the war in Iraq have to do with OBL?
And he did not “compare our troops with a just cause to OBL viciously attacking America.” That is simply false. When you begin with a false premise, you should not be surprised if you get vitriolic answers in response.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:26 pmHow nice. May you be in “heaven” before sunset.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:26 pmThose religious MOR(M)ONS will believe any sh*t, just look their entire religious based on reading a gold tablet from a hat!!!
I thought they based it on the second reading of the gold tablet in a hat, because they lost the first reading. (Something like that.)
May 17th, 2009 at 1:28 pmJohnny,Washington had a reverse copy press for his all of his writings so I`m a guessing that the re-puke are reading his writings backwards hence the revisions.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:29 pmPhilip50 left? I’m disappointed. He didn’t attack my comment even though I admitted I’m an atheist. Must be because I was right. Oh, well.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:30 pmJohnny says: This one sounds a like a common variety MOR(M)ON SECT that are *TAUGHT* to be delusional as children with nothing but b*llsh*t. I’ve noticed an incredibly high number of mormons on this site, most seem very young. This is probably some religious/republican club at byu that comes here and stirs up sh*t.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:31 pm—————————————————————
That`s what happens when you can`t drink caffeine and can`t think for yourself.
Churches these days are money-making businesses – TAX THE HELL OUT OF THEM!!!
So, Phillip, dear, explain to me please how Osama bin Laden killing people in the name of Allah is different from George W. Bush killing people in the name of God…?
I’ll be waiting.
Regards,
~A
p.s. I won’t hold my breath.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:38 pmPhilip50,Religion is man made so it is bound to be corrupt.Our founding fathers had it right and the Reich wing nut religious hypocrites have it all wrong.You Sheeple should step away from the keyboard and wake up the rest of your 21 percenters and open your eyes to the NOBLE LIE`s you have been taught about religion and Gov`t, separately of course or take your 21 percenters to the Red state of your choice and wall it up and police yourselves and really see what your in for when it comes time to pay taxes,have a military,police and fire and water and jobs and food.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:39 pmLogging off. See ya all later.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:40 pmBlessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
May 17th, 2009 at 1:40 pmThe religious right and GWB might be on to something in claiming GWB was God’s chosen one. The major theme in the bible is how man screws everything up including the entire planet. Perhaps God got bored and put GWB in the game to speed up the process. A cosmic fast forward if you think about it. If that’s the plan, is there anybody more qualified than GWB? Forrest Gump or Barney Fife don’t count.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:04 pm.
FREEDOM from RELIGION!
.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:49 pmFirst off, Jake@106, I like your way of thinking!
Now, I think Philip50 went away, but I want to comment on his and the other posters comments.
Philip50, I am a moderate, registered Independent (switched over from democrat in ‘92) and former Catholic, so I read all of your comments and strived to remain neutral, and I must say, I do believe you have been shot down in flames! You are attempting to argue religious FAITH against FACT. This is like the “argument” of the Christian who states he KNOWS he is going to heaven; He is stating something as FACT that is ONLY a matter of FAITH. He is (you are) therefore contradicting himself and shooting down his own “argument.”
Philip50, your arguments are like the one I had with a Catholic kid in college: I said war and killing were wrong, as the bible/10 Commandments clearly state; “Thou shalt not kill.” Pretty clear, plain and simple. My argument was that unless you or your allies are attacked, killing and war are WRONG. This Catholic kid then says, “Humph(!)You don’t understand anything! History is filled with religious wars, like the Crusades, for example. Lots and lots of wars were waged because of religious differences. It shows how much YOU know.” I have to admit, it left me scracthing my head in wonderment at his disingenius argument! Phillip50, this is how you and Rummy, Bush, Ascroft, etc and the rest of the 27 percenters argue. Now hear this Philip50, YOU MAKE NO SENSE!!!
May 17th, 2009 at 3:06 pmI am curious if Bush made it past the cover page on any given day….
May 17th, 2009 at 3:09 pmThe Prez is giving a great speech at ND right now. It’s on CNN.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:14 pm105-Guido the Benevolent Torturer Says:
“You know it’s highly unlikely that Gates isn’t a Jesus Warrior, too. He’s an Aggie. But I like Gates. Whereas I always thought Rumsfeld was a weirdo.”
Heh! He and Jack Palance both, with their one-armed pushups and strange demeanor! The difference is, I LIKE Palance.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:15 pmYou liberal, anti-Christian commenters are entitled to your opinions, even though many of you are intolerant and disrespectful of mine, or anyone with a different world-view than you.
I am not a Mormon, although I admire many of them for their values, faith, and devotion.
I am not a Right Winger, although I abhor the demonizing of conservatives on this thread.
I am not young, although I would like to be again with the insight that comes with age.
To believe many of you, Christians should be automatically disqualified to serve our country. Does that include Obama?
I have rarely witnessed such an arrogant, rude, judgmental, and crude bunch as many of you on here. Do you represent what is right about America? Is this the example you wish to pass to your children? Would you act this way face to face with someone?
The America I know is strong, but humble; has strong conviction, but is tolerant of others; It is also kind, generous, and polite. Do any of you know that America?
I can think of few better examples of the above than former Pres. Bush, who has conducted himself with dignity in spite of the vicious attacks on him. He was not always right, and we may all disagree with some of his decisions, but I believe he always tried to do what was right for America.
We can disagree, without being disagreeable. Or, at least some of us can. For the rest of you, I hope, for your own sake, that you do not reap what you sow.
Special note to Max: You may DESIRE freedom FROM religion. However, it is not a constitutional guarantee, any more than making certain that I do not have to hear or read blasphemous comments. The First Amendment guarantees the right to both express faith or to deny it. Isn’t this a great country?
May 17th, 2009 at 3:29 pmPhilip50, you still have not been able to FACTUALLY defend your stance against the Treaty of Tripoli. Care to list FACTs to refute the statement this country was NOT founded on the Christian religion? Please provide credible citations, such as the ones I did to the Treaty of Tripoli and Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:36 pmThanks, dixie blood. I just turned it on, and it is a great speech!
Hey, “we are all fishermen.”
May 17th, 2009 at 3:37 pmPhilip50 says: To believe many of you, Christians should be automatically disqualified to serve our country.
That is your strained conclusion. You know, community colleges have courses in reading comprehension and logic. You could benefit from such courses.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:42 pm.
Philip50,
You are incorrect.
It IS a Constitutional guarantee that I not be made subject to an institutionalized form of religion mandated by our Government. When Government letterheads are imprinted with Biblical Scripture, it IS a form of institutionalizing a religion IN Government. In fact, there are laws forbidding this.
HAD our Government have an approach as an equal purveyor of institutionalized forms of Religion, where then, were quotes and inspirations from the Quran, the Talmud, from Buddha, etc.?
.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:43 pmLiberalVoter: Treaty of Tripoli?! Are you kidding me? Do you have any IMPORTANT documents to cite?
With all due respect, when one’s mind is already made up, i.e. closed, one only seeks the “evidence” that agrees with his/her pre-conceptions.
The evidence to support my view that our Declaration of Independence, the American Revolution, the Constitution, and indeed our country was motivated and rooted in Christian thought and principles is overwhelming. The wording of this obscure treaty was a desperate and failed attempt to appease Muslim extremists. It was not based on historical fact.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:44 pmPhilip50 Says:
To believe many of you, Christians should be automatically disqualified to serve our country. Does that include Obama?
You misunderstand. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Christians serving in our government, any more than there is with Jews or Muslims serving in our government. What we object to is people in government using their position to promote any one religion over another.
I have rarely witnessed such an arrogant, rude, judgmental, and crude bunch as many of you on here. Do you represent what is right about America? Is this the example you wish to pass to your children? Would you act this way face to face with someone?
You should try seeing the vicious hate-filled comments at conservative websites.
Special note to Max: You may DESIRE freedom FROM religion. However, it is not a constitutional guarantee, any more than making certain that I do not have to hear or read blasphemous comments. The First Amendment guarantees the right to both express faith or to deny it. Isn’t this a great country?
Actually that’s not entirely accurate. What the First Amendment does is guarantee that the government will not interfere with your right to practice the religion of your choice. It does not guarantee that private citizens will let you do it in their house or on their property.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:45 pmMax: Do you thus advocate sand-blasting most of the historic buildings and monuments in Washington, D. C.? Do you see where your illogic takes you? You are out of step with historic practice and tradition in this country.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:46 pmNofltwlt @ 62 sums it up.
“I believe, as many others, that devoutly religious people are the most dangerous people on earth. More dangerous are the devoutly religious who hold high office. Even more dangerous are people such as Rumsfeld who manipulate the devoutly religious as a means to an end.”
Philip50, you and your kind are scary. Three things are needed to start and continue a war:
1) Your groups’ ignorance.
2) The ignorance of another group.
3) The availability of resources for the war to continue by both groups and/or a benevolent group looking to profit from the ignorance of one of both groups.
You allowed your believe system to be used for killing and profit. Doesn’t that anger you? Does the commandment, “Thou Shall Not Kill”, mean anything to you? That commandment is very straight forward. Try to argue that commandment without using scripture. Argue that as a human being with common sense based on a modern view point.
I await your response without justification.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pmWayne Ant Schneider Says:
“You should try seeing the vicious hate-filled comments at conservative websites.”
Those are no more defensible, Wayne.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:48 pm.
Dear Philip50,
You made a great list of what you are not. What you forgot is…
… You are not a Christian.
What did Christ quote when he talked about killing?
What did Christ quote when he talked about TORTURE?
What did Christ quote when he talked about WAR?
.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:48 pmPhilip50 Says:
The evidence to support my view that our Declaration of Independence, the American Revolution, the Constitution, and indeed our country was motivated and rooted in Christian thought and principles is overwhelming. The wording of this obscure treaty was a desperate and failed attempt to appease Muslim extremists. It was not based on historical fact.
Can you prove either of those assumptions? Or is the source which supports your second point the same source that supports your first one?
May 17th, 2009 at 3:48 pm.
Philip50 @#119,
STRAWMAN!
.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:49 pm.
Philip50 @#119,
You are out of step with the Law.
.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:52 pmright-wing left-wing:
Your comments are bogus and unwarranted.
I am against any loss of human life, including that of an innocent, unborn child.
There are legal instances in which killing someone else is legal and justified. Example: In self-defense in one’s own home against someone attempting to kill your family. That, in no way contradicts the Bible.
All wars are horrible and should be avoided if possible. There are just wars. I will leave it at that.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:52 pmPhilip50
May 17th, 2009 at 3:54 pmYou want me to by the argument that Cheney/Bush were godly men whose action were governed by deep seated Christian values? I am a Christian, and I am finding it difficult to reconcile what I hold as core Christian values, and what these people did in God’s name. The very idea I find revolting and a perversion of Christianity.
Looks like Philip50 is now deciding which documents are important. It must be a real bummer to have facts disrupt his little fantasy. Typical conservative trick, when you can’t refute the facts spray crap and try to discredit them. Maybe the FSM will forgive you when it arrives.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:55 pm.
Philip50 Says:
Is that what Christ argued?
.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:55 pmHey, LV. Give me something but the Treaty of Tripoli, for goodness sake. Gee!
May 17th, 2009 at 3:56 pmLiberalVoter,
May 17th, 2009 at 3:57 pmI’m waiting for Philip50 to argue which Christ argued what, about humanity.
Max: Christ always stood on the side of Love and Reconciliation. However, we live in a fallen world with evil that would do us harm. Christ would expect us to defend those that cannot defend themselves, whether it be our family or fellow citizens. That is not to justify all wars or all the actions of war.
May 17th, 2009 at 3:58 pmHey Philip50. Refute the Treaty of Tripoli first. It was read, in full, in the U.S. Senate, passed unanimously, and signed by the president. Why don’t you have a look at history and see who those Senators and the President was at the time. You can’t pass on reality and on facts. Refute them or admit you are wrong. No passes. Time to deal with reality.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:00 pmHi Max Anax junius -1, good point. We should take up a collection and buy him a bible so he could read it. It is obvious he doesn’t have one. I am also an atheist and I am sure I know a HELL of a lot more about scripture than this troll.
Time to do something productive. Dealing with a troll who has no facts and has no clue on logic has become boring. Later all.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:02 pm.
Philip50,
So you admit that you are NOT a perfect “Christian” then?
And just why are you defending THIS, THIS, THIS, or THIS?
Stone, meet whore!
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:05 pmLiberalVoter,
May 17th, 2009 at 4:07 pmI suspect it would be used for kindling before it be read to be understood.
After all, people like Philip50, used it to burn witches by.
LiberalVoter: It is pathetic that your only source to support your view is an obscure treaty. I will not do your homework for you, but you may want to read the following sources:
“Faith and Freedom” by Hart
“You’ve Heard It” Said by DeMar
“The Light and The Glory” by Marshall and Manuel
May 17th, 2009 at 4:07 pmPhilip50 Says:
——————————————————————————–
Max: Christ always stood on the side of Love and Reconciliation. However, we live in a fallen world with evil that would do us harm. Christ would expect us to defend those that cannot defend themselves, whether it be our family or fellow citizens. That is not to justify all wars or all the actions of war.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sounds good, Philip50, but what Cheney/Bush did was evil. I can’t see and way around it. Just look at the product of their efforts, a quagmire. Look at the number of deaths, a destruction of a country as a product of their divine inspiration. I can’t see a Godly thought in it. NONE
May 17th, 2009 at 4:08 pm.
Philip50 Says:
Funny, Christ never used “however” in his statements for clairity to not abide by Him. Eh?
May 17th, 2009 at 4:09 pm.
Philip50 Says:
This, from someone who holds up the Bible as his resource to support the needless death and destrution of mankind.
Whore, meet stone!
May 17th, 2009 at 4:11 pmMax: By “perfect” Christian, do you mean someone who is not allowed to defend himself? You have a distorted view of what is right or Christian. I believe our law has it right in regards to “justifiable homicide”.
But being a Christian means accepting Christ into your heart, not being perfect. Only Christ was perfect. I am far from it. But, I am a believer.
By the way, your crass stereotypical comment about “burn witches” has no place in our discussion. Many acts were done in the name of the church that were evil acts. I presume we would both condemn such acts.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:12 pm.
Christian mean to walk the path of Christ. Whitness FOR Christ, NO?
Whitness for me, what did Christ say about killing?
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:14 pmMax Anax junius -1 Says:
“This, from someone who holds up the Bible as his resource to support the needless death and destrution of mankind.’
Max, that is simply a lie. I have done no such thing. And, I am not defending the Iraq war, but to my knowledge, neither did Pres. Bush.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:16 pmSo your love “teh gays” now? God made them, right?
May 17th, 2009 at 4:17 pmRHF: Have you read these books? If not, then retract your ignorant comment. These books are scholarly works that cite many, many historic sources.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:18 pmRHF: You are sick!
May 17th, 2009 at 4:20 pm.
Philip50 @#141,
I suppose diverge when it comes to killing Muslims, NO?
Because then, it’s self defence?
Funny, I don’t recall the passage where Christ said to kill Muslims, or even kill. Offensively or defensively.
In fact, Christ stood and proclaimed that one should stand and allow your enemy to STRIKE YOUR LEFT CHEEK.
If you know anything about what it takes to strike the left cheek of the person before you, and what hand it requires, and why, you would know, that Christ ADVOCATED NON-VIOLENCE, even when faced by an enemy. Even when it meant you must be harmed, because in doing so, it reveals your enemies most inner demons of evil intent!
But I rest this on the big IF, of your knowing.
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:21 pmRHF: How can you look yourself in the mirror when you treat your fellow man with such arrogance and rudeness? Does that serve to promote your point of view? Does anyone else on here not object to this person’s language?
May 17th, 2009 at 4:22 pmAre you a believer, Max? If so, we can have this theological discussion. If not, you will just not understand the difference.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:23 pm.
Dear Philip50,
What’s more disgusting…
… Calling someone a liar or Blasphemy?
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:25 pmRHF: I am not a mormon.
P. S. I have reported you for abuse. Grow up!
May 17th, 2009 at 4:25 pm.
Philip50,
I believe in the Word of Christ. But your religion, not so much.
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:26 pmMax at 159: Answer: Being a liar or being a blasphemer.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:27 pm.
Dear Philip50,
Which passage did Christ command us to hit back?
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:32 pmWanna have a “theological discussion” with a non-believer Phillip50 (you can bring your brain if you find it) otherwise “you will just not understand the difference.”
<b?See how that backwards as$ thinking of yours sucks when pointed back at you?
May 17th, 2009 at 4:35 pmPhilip50 @ 126,
There are legal instances in which killing someone else is legal and justified. Example: In self-defense in one’s own home against someone attempting to kill your family. That, in no way contradicts the Bible.
Reframing the argument again are we? “Thou shall not kill”, is the subject. You use a law to reframe the justification for killing. Why not use restraint as oppose to killing in self defense? If someone is threatening to kill you or your family, restrain that individual till the authorities come.
If you feel that kill or “be” killed is the answer, then your bible and the 10 commandment are your justification to kill when you feel it convenient. That is hypocritical.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:36 pmAh, the great Christian soldier Rumsfeld!
It seems a special forces unit that this holy man, Donald Rumsfeld, put together is responsible for three of the worst incidents of civilian casualties in Afghanistan.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/rumsfelds-renegade-unit-blamed-for-afghan-deaths-1685704.html
May 17th, 2009 at 4:36 pmYou guys continue to go totally psycho on me, so I will end this exercise in futility with a quote from up top:
“It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.”
I have done my best. Thanks for your “kindness” and “respect”.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:38 pm.
Dear Philip50,
I can say that your profession of Christ is fake because in all of your rhetoric and support of masking the injustice the USA has brought to other people through it’s mass death and destruction through “Christianized” letterheads, you’ve failed to witness to us where Christ said killing and destruction is a good and necessary thing to do.
I would say that some deep reflection is in your future.
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:40 pmPhil always comes in here throwing punches and then leaves, offended, that he was hit back.
What a weirdo.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:42 pm“It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.”
Wow…as a foolish, ignorant man you just realized your Christianista a$$ is kicked…and we silenced your ignorant talk…finally…thank who???, well not God…where is your God now dum Bass?
Buh, Bye!!
May 17th, 2009 at 4:50 pm.
Right hand: Used to feed, build, construct
Left hand: Used to clean one’s anus, tear down
The Left Cheek hit by the right hand would be with an open face palm denoting a deep desire to not be seen as a worthy person to help bring positive influences into society. People who hit with their Right hand were outcasts.
The Left Cheek hit by the Left hand would require the use of a backhanded motion, thus underlying the intent that the hand used for dirty work and tearing down is reaffirming the position of the one doing the striking.
.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:54 pm.
Q U E S T I O N:
Why would Christ talk about being hit on the Right Cheek first and then exposing your Left Cheek next if NOT to reinforce that those who strike you with their Right hand are outcasts and those that strike you with their Left hand should be made to reaffirm their violence?
.
May 17th, 2009 at 5:00 pmDear Phillip…I’m still waiting for your explanation of the difference between Osama bin Laden killing people for Allah and George W. Bush killing people for God…
Any comment on that…?
And by the way, *before* you start blathering about the war on Iraq was justified because “they wanted to kill us” – the Pope himself called it an “unjust war.”
So, Phillip? Your explanation…?
I’m *still* waiting.
Regards,
~A
p.s. *Still* not holding my breath.
May 17th, 2009 at 5:03 pmAlthough I read this story with great interest, I, like many here, was not surprised in the slightest of the disclosure of this info. Why limit the discussion to foreign policy? Bush injected religion into the process of policy at every turn, be it the Schiavo case, the hiring of attorneys in the AG’s office or simply the disregard of science and logic / reason in every intellectual debate.
This thread is important to again demonstrate, however, why our founding fathers took great pains to neither establish religion via government authority or restrict the practice of the same outside the institutional boundaries of gov’t. Religion has a destructive effect upon the non-spiritual governing of man/woman. The entire concept of “one man/one vote” is inconsistent with a goverment authorized and beholden to a specific faith. The framers knew this because they saw first hand the natural course of such rule. At a minimum, bad policy without any ground in reality or knowledge. At most, tyranny under the legal impramatur of religious salvation.
Final note to the religious who believe it is the will of God and therefore their right to impose religious – based canon into the process of gov’t: God created humanity imperfectly and gave him/her the free will to to exercise reason in rendering judgment. If this were not the case, the world would still be flat. Just as it would be wrong to disavow moral principles gained via religion in our process of judgment and decision, it is equally wrong to disavow science and logic, gifts which u believe were given to us by God, while living in this world. If u are unwilling to accept this reality, u share the same path of those who kill in the name of God.
May 17th, 2009 at 5:10 pmI could not contain myself from responding to Philip. Philip, if u are a christian / roman catholic and can be intellectually honest for one moment (remember honesty is addressed on those stone tablets), u cannot dispute the clear fact that the Iraq invasion is violative of St. Augustine’s “Just War” doctrine. Augustine was quite clear that war is only justified in situations involving IMMEDIATE survival from an enemy who is seeks to kill at that moment. Augustine further required, however, that any response to such a threat in those circumstances needed to be consistent with the threat itself. Thus, Augustine placed limitations on the right to kill. U see, Augustine didn’t check his brain at the door. He recognized that humanity, being creatures of imperfection, could abuse such rights under the guise of God’s will as u clearly have. Even reading the bogus intell in a light most favorable to the Bush Admin. in 2003, Iraq was not an immediate threat or even a threat requiring a preemptive land-based invasion. By supporting this war, u have sinned and I recommend u seek immediate reconciliation with God.
May 17th, 2009 at 5:45 pmPhilip50 @ 178
“You guys continue to go totally psycho on me, so I will end this exercise in futility with a quote from up top:
“It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.”
I have done my best. Thanks for your “kindness” and “respect”".
I’m channeling my thought to you through prayer. Please come back to read these posts. If you do not come back, you are a blasphemer!
Oh, SNAP! Looks like the hypocrite can’t argue anymore. Come on Phil, don’t let the FACTS get in your way, you were doing such a good job! Funny, your quote above proves that if YOU wouldn’t come here and spew half-truths, we’d have LESS to say. DUUU! Practice what you preach MOR(M)ON!
May 17th, 2009 at 6:05 pmI want to address what Philip50 said about the religious inscriptions, statues, monuments, etc in D.C.
Phillip, that was then, this is now. These monuments etc were built back when Americans did as they were told, pre-1960 or so. Once Americans found that they were getting used for cannon fodder, they rebelled and righfully so, finally rejecting the religion that had been, and continues to be per this blog’s example, injected into gov’t/military/taxpayer public facilities, etc. You see Philip, America has evolved. Not only do a large number of Americans now agree that mixing gov’t and Christian religion(or ANY religion) are improper, they also agree that this is improper and offensive to the large numbers of Buddists, Muslims, B’hais, Hindus etc, that have immigrated to the U.S. over the last 50 years or so. It’s part simple common sense and respect for other people and their religions, but it is also Americans standing up to their gov’t as is their right, in that gov’t and religion cannot and should not intermingle. Remember the part in the bible that says to pay Caesar his dues, and God his? And how about Hitler? He too, preached a twisted sort of puritanism, and look how that worked out! in fact, do yourself a favor Philip, and google “Ten Steps to Fascism” to understand how fascism wraps itself in religion and the flag. I’m not being insulting or petty here Philip, but merely informative, and I know that as a good Christian you want to be caring, open-minded and well-informed. After all, seek and ye shall find!
May 17th, 2009 at 6:12 pmHere you go Philip50, Step 8, I found it for you:
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
May 17th, 2009 at 6:19 pmGovernments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
@republicans hate facts
Wow, talk about intolerance, hatred and bigotry. You, sir, are displaying those qualities in your rants against religion and Mormons in particular. Take it easy and try to accept that others have different beliefs than you do. Beliefs that are important and meaningful to them.
Now, I firmly believe that people should keep those religious beliefs to themselves, as they are a personal thing and shouldn’t be pushed onto others…anyway, just think you should tone down your hateful rhetoric.
May 17th, 2009 at 6:31 pmthank you. Beatifull Archile !
sohpet sohbet odalar? sohbet siteleri sohbet sohbet sitesimirc
muhabbet sohpet çet sohbet chat seviyeli sohbet sohbet k?zlarla sohbet sohbet chat sohbet chat sohbet sohbet odalar? sohbet kanallar? mirc indir mirc bedava mirc burç burc siir haberler Sohbet
May 17th, 2009 at 7:10 pmgrick, Republicans Hate Facts is our “left” balance to the hateful rhetoric from the “right.” ;)
May 17th, 2009 at 7:11 pmThe belief that religious-centric symbols / teachings should be prohibited from government institutions and other PUBLIC zones does not represent a bigoted intolerance of religion. Such restriction is merely the recognition that the clear intent of the framers was that our government be secular and protect the rights of man regardless of race, creed, etc. Our government and has always exhibited great tolerance of the religious beliefs of individuals be it the grant of conscience objector status, protection from discrimination in the workplace, tax exempt status, workplace safety exemption (see cases involving the Amish), National Prayer Day,etc.
There is a clear constitutional difference between a government being TOLERANT of a faith and a government elevating the principles of a religious belief to the general citzenry at the exclusion of other religions or the non-religious for that matter. A govt which promotes the latter is saying through words and symbolism that some (really, many for that matter) individuals in the country are not “real” americans or citizens of this country. This is precisely what occurred in the segregated south. Sure, African Americans were “equal” but the seperation of them in public institutions either physically or via the creation of seperate facilities resulted in a decreased status as a citizen of this country. The same applies in private institutions as well.
May 17th, 2009 at 7:26 pmRE: the cover sheets featured inspirational Bible verses printed over military images, “and were delivered by Rumsfeld himself to the White House” to the president, “who referred to America’s war on terror as a ‘crusade,’”
BUSH TOLD CHIRAC: “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East”
FROM THE ARTICLE “When God Spoke to Me”: …..During those private interviews, Jacque Chirac had purportedly confessed to the journalist some personal remarks regarding the faith of George W. Bush that seemed quite daunting. He told the journalist that the latter called him twice beseeching him basically, in the name of their common “spiritual faith”, i.e., “Christianity”, to join the collective effort of the coalition being formed to wage a preemptive war against Iraq. In his first telephonic call he reportedly said to Jacque Chirac: “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East” and then added that “the biblical prophecies are being fulfilled”…..
ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details.php?id=14890
May 17th, 2009 at 7:36 pm.
Dear Philip50,
That STRAWMAN…
… “In God We Trust” added in the 1930’s due to heavy “Christian” influence. However so, please note that the term “God” is used universally, in meaning, just as “Maker” is when the Founders used the term. This “Godly Maker” can be any one’s maker, “Creator”, “God”. It is neutral in it’s use and it should stay neutral. For the life of me and America, I fail to see why promoting a Theocratic view upon Americans does this Nation one bit of good.
… Unless Sharia law is what you affirm.
.
May 17th, 2009 at 8:08 pm.
FLAGGED! #194 TAMER
ADULT SPAM!!!
.
May 17th, 2009 at 8:17 pmIt isn’t even porn. Is it me or is the gibberish totally harmless? It sort of amuse me as I totally don’t get it. Does anyone understand it? What is their thing all about?
May 17th, 2009 at 8:29 pmI think I’m going to puke….
May 17th, 2009 at 8:36 pmWise people have rejected religion as political policy since the dawn of time. All we need is the history of theocracy to realize just how smart they are.
What does that make the Reichwhiners?
May 17th, 2009 at 8:48 pmOT:
Good evening, dbadass.
There are goslings and ducklings on the ponds already!
May 17th, 2009 at 8:50 pmdbadass,
It’s a Turkish Adult website. Not quite XXX but qualifies as NC-17!
p.s.
May 17th, 2009 at 8:56 pmIt does host links and ads to the XXX stuff.
Philip50 Says:
——————————————————————————–
However, our laws are clearly founded upon Judeao-Christian principles. Where are those principles espoused? In the BIBLE. So you think it is un-American to quote Scripture?!
Last I checked, the Judeao-Christian Bible doesn’t own the concept of good behavior. They wrote it down, yes, but so has a ton of other “religions.” And it doesn’t take a belief in religion – or God for that matter – to know right from wrong.
May 17th, 2009 at 8:56 pmPhilip50 says: To believe many of you, Christians should be automatically disqualified to serve our country.
Well, back in the days of Thomas Paine and Jefferson, members of the clergy were refused the right to run for elected office. Jefferson eventually changed that view in 1800.
There is a fascinating read, Thomas Paine (by Craig Nelson), particularly the chapter on The Religion of Science, which highlights how our founding fathers really felt about religion, specifically Christianity:
John Locke: “truly the Christian religion is the worst of all religions and ought neither to be embraced by an particular person, nor tolerated by any commonwealth”
James Madison, explaining why a great majority of devout Americans at the time agreed with the “wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world” (world being government): “The people feared one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combine together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform”.
When Alexander Hamilton was asked by the Constitution made no mention of “God”, he said the country didn’t require “foreign aid”.
There is mention of Paine’s book, The Age of Reason, which today is considered radical, but back then was a fairly accurate reflection of then contemporary mainstream Anglo-American religious beliefs. “The Christian faith had appeared in that era less given to worshipping the Prince of Peace than to egnaging in near-constand warfare…”
Methinks Phillip50 needs to read more on our founding fathers…
Link to the book Thomas Paine, by Craig Nelson: http://books.google.com/books?id=gSb4xNZQ-4QC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0#PPP1,M1
May 17th, 2009 at 8:59 pmIsn’t our shit sort of Hammurabish?
Turkish Porn?…. Cool!
pete… Some good broadwing hawks but not too much lately…
May 17th, 2009 at 9:00 pmThe Buy-bull is just an old novel, Phil. No more, or less, important than Shakespeare or the Greek tragedies.
That being said, there are some good lines. “Though shalt not kill” and Jesus message of peace are prime examples. Of course, those have nothing to do with Reichwing politics.
May 17th, 2009 at 9:02 pmPhill 50
Our laws are in NO WAY based on Christianity or the bible saying they are based on JudeoChristian principles is meaningless since MOST ethical principles are universal and to the point they ARENT OUR law are not based on them. Our laws are based on British common law which predates Christianity being introduced into the British Isles and their roots predate CHRIST. IF our laws were based on JudeoChristian principles SPECIFICALLY why are only two or at most three of the 10 commandments illegal? Why is it that three of them are CLEARLY unconstitutional? You guys keep just repeating things you WISH were true in the vain hope they will magically BECOME true.
May 17th, 2009 at 9:11 pmThere’s another problem with a religious military. When soldiers are convinced they are “God’s chosen” they do things like killing civilians and torturing prisoners.
Heck! Show me a person with a Bible in one hand, and a gun in the other, I’ll show you a person who should not be trusted with either one.
May 17th, 2009 at 9:14 pmPhilip50, how do you respond to all the above arguments? They seem pretty solid to me, can you refute them? Seriously, I would like to see you respond to each and every one of them so we can determine who is right and who is all wet. If you don’t answer, you lose automatically! Hello???
May 17th, 2009 at 9:19 pmHere is what the freaks at Rapture Ready think about torture when one of them tries to point out it’s wrong:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArteestX
This isn’t whinly liberals redefining torture. .
Yes it is.
We are dealing with sub-human terrorist murderers here. This is how you get them to talk. And talk they do. We have 5 years of success with this method.
If they don’t like it, they should remember they chose this treatment when they became scum sucking mass murderers.
I’ll save my sympathy for the families of their victims, thank you.
If I were a guard at Gitmo, I would volunteer to water board these animals. As a Christian, I would have NO problem with such a procedure.
My faith is not based on wimpy theology. Its based on Jesus who drove the money lenders out of the temple-with a WHIP! Jesus advised his disciples to sell their cloaks and purchase swords.
As Christians we are called into a world of struggle.
We live in a time of wars and rumors of wars.
If you love your families, now is not the time for whiney theology.
These are the freaks who want to bring theocracy to America.
May 17th, 2009 at 9:21 pm__________________
@Republicans Hate Facts:
Do you think before you compose your rants, or just spew whatever vile insults come to mind?
Republicans Hate Facts says: HYPOCRITE MUCH?
Please, explain how I am a hypocrite for criticizing your intolerance? How did my post in any way display hatred, bigotry or intolerance? I was merely making an appeal to maturity and respect.
Republicans Hate Facts says:You can BELIEVE what ever the f*KKK you WANT, but when you start USING THE *GUVMENT* to preach your IDIOCY and don’t expect BLOWBACK you’re a F*KKKING MORON! My question is why *YOU* are so INTOLERANT OF *ATHEISTS*?
Please, tell me how I have been in any way intolerant of atheists, or any one else for that matter. How have I displayed any intolerance? Is it intolerant of me to point out that hateful rhetoric such as yours in uncalled for? I think not. And you know what? I agree with you on some of what you so eloquently expressed here…that religion shouldn’t try to use the gov’t to push itself. I don’t want religion and politics to mix…that’s something I am vehemently opposed to. So again, how am I intolerant and hypocritical?
Republicans Hate Facts says: Yet you attack ME for SLAMMING PEOPLE that don’t DO THAT? Yeah, *RIGHT*, I’m the INTOLERANT ONE! F*KKING IDIOT!
Yes, I ‘attack’ you for ’slamming’ people that do that…because the way you do it is immature and inflammatory. Is respectful discourse beyond you? All you seem capable of (at least on this particular thread) is throwing out expletives and denigrating other people.
I agree with you that religion has no place in our gov’t and that those of us who have religious conviction should keep it personal. I disagree with the negative and hateful tone that you use. I do like your name though…I’ve been telling my republican friends/family that they aren’t too fond of facts for years.
May 17th, 2009 at 9:31 pmpete@214,
May 17th, 2009 at 10:11 pmGreat find, these Wing Nuts are getting creepy.
grick,
Always room for reasonable people to disagree!!
flight
May 17th, 2009 at 10:14 pm@ Republicans Hate Facts
Wow, ok…you seem to be a very angry person. I am sorry for you. I merely was encouraging rational, respectful discourse. You don’t seem to be capable of that. Ha, sorry to break it to you, but I do actually know quite a bit about my religion. Also, my intent was not to defend or agree with the religious right posters, but to point out that you are using hateful rhetoric and showing intolerance of your own. Anyway, you failed to adequately explain how I am intolerant/hypocritical. Because I am not. I don’t care if someone is religious or if they aren’t. I just think we should be respectful to one another.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:22 pm@ Republicans Hate Facts
Why are you lumping me in with Phil? I am not trying to push my religion. I have said that more than once. I AGREE with you on this issue. I DISAGREE with the anger you display.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:24 pm@flight
You are right. Reasonable disagreement and discussion is fine. I just didn’t feel like republicans hate facts was being all that reasonable…resorting to put-downs and curse words isn’t very reasonable…at least not in my opinion.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:26 pmThis is why religious people have ABSOLUTELY NO business being in positions of power. Especially when they refuse to accept separation of church and state and cannot leave their religious beliefs at home in their private lives where it belongs!
May 17th, 2009 at 10:30 pmRHF, why don’t you STFU?
You spend post after post shouting incoherent rants at people you disagree with; no reasoned calm approach or even clever comebacks, just some bizarre capslock-tourettes style that all but renders your posts unreadable.
When I see that juvenile, telltale print, like your type is continually heaving to crap out your anger, I automatically scroll on past.
Take a break. Try decaf.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:31 pm@ Republicans Hate Facts
Ok. Fine. You ‘win’. I just can’t compete with your reasoned, rational arguments. I must be some ignorant religious nut that actually knows nothing about my own beliefs.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:37 pm227. republicans hate facts Says: When I need your OPINION I’ll squeeze the sh*t out of your head.
Poor baby. Apparently republicans aren’t the only ones who hate facts.
Then DON’T READ THEM.
I don’t, but you make progressives look like petulant morons. Petulant moron…
Try reasoned debate rather than trying to portray Sam Kinnison in type. Besides, he was much funnier and smarter.
You’re just tiresome.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:40 pm@ Republicans Hate Facts
Hah, way to generalise. I personally believe that torture, murder and persecution are evil (and I know many religious people that agree). I was attacking your use of hateful rhetoric and immature name calling. I did none of that, nor did I resort to ad hominem attacks like you have…thus I was not being hypocritical.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:41 pm228. republicans hate facts Says: Oh and HANSHIRO the IDIOT, if I post so LITTLE COHERENT in my POSTS, why are there SO MANY *BIBLICAL* and FOUNDING FATHER quotes in this thread from me? In one single thread I’ve post more *FACTS* then I’ve *EVER* seen from you. Jealous much?
Yes, RHF, you caught me. I’m somehow jealous of you…
I’m jealous of an incoherent poster who is so lacking in confidence in his vocabulary skills that he cannot trust that others will read and understand his post on any merit; He has to capitalize keywords, guaranteeing that his habits highlight his communication insecurities.
Oh, and buy a thesaurus, RHF. Capitalizing the same elementary descriptors over and over also points up your lack of command of language and keeps your particular posts boring and jejune.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:50 pmWell, now I am definitely calling you hateful and immature, because, well, you have proven that.
The posts I remember from Phil did not use the same hateful rhetoric and anger. If they had, I would have been critical of him as well.
One of my ‘pet-peeves’ is when people are unable to rationally debate an issue and instead switch into the mode you have been in for the past dozen or so posts.
Sigh, I have no need to debate religion with you. I don’t care what your views on my religion are. My religion is personal and I keep it that way.
I feel that you are giving progressives a bad name and I would like to avoid that. You seem fit the stereotype of the ‘angry intolerant liberal’ that all of my friends/family believe to exist (I am the only Dem in the entire family). I keep telling them that we are not that way…so when I see someone who is…it saddens me.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:52 pm235.republicans hate facts Says: I’m happy to debate anyone that’s CAPABLE and WILLING TO DO SO… Unfortunately *MOST* posters here that annoy the crap out of me have no *SKILLS* to do so. Care to *DEBATE* something with me? Happy to oblige if *YOU* are capable. Tell me, how do you feel about RELIGIOUS PEOPLE destroying our COUNTRY with their IDIOCY IN OUR GOVERNMENT?
Most reasonable people won’t debate an idiot whose idea of debate is capslock-tourettes screamfest.
Try typing like a grownup, and I’ll be happy to beat you like a drum.
I don’t think religion has any place in substantively deciding the course of state.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:56 pm@ hanshiro the antlion
Well said.
May 17th, 2009 at 10:57 pm239. republicans hate facts Says: Actually you said you DON’T READ THEM, now you’re saying YOU DO. Which is it? We both KNOW I have a lot more VOCABULARY SKILLS and UNDERSTANDING than you EVER WILL ;)
I don’t read them, but any cursory scan will disclose the vacuity of the content. That’s easy to do, even at your level, RHF.
ROTFL!! Funny coming from someone that says they DON’T READ my POSTS.
Attempting a grasping and lame “gotcha” so soon only reveals your unsuitability and unpreparedness to take me on, RHF. For example: Teachers don’t need to read a high school english paper to determine juvenile execution…
May 17th, 2009 at 11:01 pmRHF seems to believe that people of faith do not have the right to express an opinion on here. Regardless of your interpretation of “Separation of church and state”, this is a public forum. I have been respectful of other points of view, and have encouraged the same of others. In return, most responses have been rude or vulgar. That does not intimate me in the least; it is simply disappointing and sad.
I am not forcing my views on anyone; just expressing them in a dignified manner. How a person responds tells a lot about the character of the respondant.
To Jack Mehoff: Sir, you do not tell me what to do, and you do not decide who wins an argument. You sound like the uppity Pharisees who sought to entrap Jesus with their slick questions, as if they really wanted to know the answer. The truth is that they did not seek the truth; they only sought to attempt to discredit Jesus.
Here is what your liberal hero, a man with whom I have fundamental disagreements, but that I respect, said today: “…he..implored the University of Notre Dame’s graduating class and all in the U.S. to stop “reducing those with differing views to caricature. Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words. It’s a way of life that always has been the Notre Dame tradition.” We would all do well to take his advice.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:05 pm@ republicans hate facts
Thanks, glad I’m allowed my own opinions…and I actually consider myself pretty well informed. You wouldn’t know, but I spend a lot of time researching and forming my opinion on politics…it’s what I do.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:06 pm243. republicans hate facts Says: Hanshiro, would you care to state where my treatise on the nature of the values of the founding fathers and the aspects of XTian theology I’ve posted are incorrect?
I haven’t commented substantively on the content of your posts, just the tired delivery; and evaluating your question would demand that I wade through that asinine style of yours in post after post, which I won’t do.
Or would prefer to continue to belittle my *STYLE* while discounting the *SUBSTANCE* of my posts. Because so far the lack of relevance of you posts leave one with nothing but ennui… ;)
Again, I haven’t discounted the substance directly. Are you going to keep wasting my time having me talk you down from the conclusions to which you so eagerly jump?
May 17th, 2009 at 11:06 pm249. republicans hate facts Says: Hanshiro, telling someone their content stinks while saying you don’t read the content summarizes “juvenile execution”. You’re failed! ;)
Show me where I’ve directly addressed your content. Also where I claimed the content “stinks.”
Since your immaturity extends to attempts at semantic “gotchas,” please provide the two examples.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:12 pm@flight
You are right. Reasonable disagreement and discussion is fine. I just didn’t feel like republicans hate facts was being all that reasonable…resorting to put-downs and curse words isn’t very reasonable…at least not in my opinion.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
grick
Religion has been so abused that it is very hard to discuss in this forum. The scriptures have been perverted to such an extent that a positive perspective is hard to grasp. We can thank our Evangelical Brethren for the disharmony. I feel religion has a fundamental roll to play in the American society, but unfortunately too many people have been turned off.
Again, a country of Godly men, not a country of gods! That phrase says a lot.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:13 pm@ republicans hate facts
It seems that your idea of ‘debate’ (as based off your exchange with Phillip50) is angry, hate filled rhetoric. You merely attack your opponent and ignore substance. I have no desire to engage in such a childish pursuit.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:14 pmI am glad that RHF has pointed out that this is a private blog. Now will every reasonably sane person on here, regardless of political philosophy, report this abusive, vulgar sicko for his abuse so that we can actually communicate in an adult, respectful manner as Pres. Obama expressed so eloquently today.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:16 pm256. republicans hate facts Says:
Actually you *DID* comment on the substance. That’s a lie.
Read it again, little boy. The word is substantively…in other words, I did not address the content specifically. You really are a juvenile, aren’t you?
INCOHERENT RANTS and LACK OF COMMAND OF LANGUAGE says the “CONTENT” is incoherent.
*sigh*
You do, in fact, post a plethora of incoherent, stupid rants. Many in a row. Fact.
Lack of command of language doesn’t necessarily equate to lack of content; some of the deepest, most inspirational poems are in the simplest terms.
As far as the content in your posts, when you did decide to post facts, I wouldn’t know since your capslock-tourettes makes your posts tiresome to read, so I don’t bother. Did I type that slowly enough for you?
Am I just going to keep correcting you?
May 17th, 2009 at 11:23 pm262.republicans hate facts Says: Phil, I’ve voted for a XTian in *EVERY* election. Would you vote for an atheist so easily? Yeah, *I* am the hateful one…
Only two lines of type, and still you don’t trust your communications skills to convey your message, so much so that you have to over-emphasize it twice.
Tsk, no vocabulary…
May 17th, 2009 at 11:27 pmrepublicans hate facts Says:
“Phil, I’ve voted for a XTian in *EVERY* election. Would you vote for an atheist so easily? Yeah, *I* am the hateful one…”
Response: Wow, I can’t believe I am doing this, but I will respond to a half-way reasonable question, even though your inference is without any justification.
To your question: If I thought that an atheist was the best qualified to lead this great country, I would vote for him/her. After all, I believe that our ultimate destiny is in God’s hands anyway. God can use anyone to accomplish His purposes, even a non-believer. Further, many who call themselves “Christian” are flawed or just plain wrong. Your attempt to paint all Christians with a wide brush is foolish.
Based on your rhetoric and language on here, we both agree on your last statement.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:33 pm265. republicans hate facts Says: ROTFL!! Says the little boy that doesn’t know the meaning of “INCOHERENT”. Something can’t be “SUBSTANTIVE” and “INCOHERENT”. You *MUST* have COHERENCY to have SUBSTANCE. I suggest you read that “DICTIONARY”, instead of the THESAURUS, you seem confused on the meaning of basic words.
As I said, incoherent, stupid rants.
ACTUALLY it DOES.
Actually, it doesn’t.
As for my lack of command of language, that’s HYSTERICAL coming from someone that doesn’t seem to understand the meaning of “INCOHERENT”
I picked up the trait in you fast enough.
Which then contradicts your PREVIOUS POSTS that you had READ my POSTS.
No, it doesn’t. You just flat-out deny reality and language when it reveals your ignorance, don’t you? I can easily deduce a tiresome typing style, much like an art director can deduce when a particular font is tiresome to read before it’s used in a text. You’re trying to tell me the art director “reads” the alphabet? Draws content? No, he scans it and makes an informed appraisal.
I didn’t realize my having taught children would come in so handy with you…
May 17th, 2009 at 11:40 pmOh, and blathering, capslock-tourettes dismissals don’t strengthen your position or your communication skills, just exposes your insecurity to reply in a coherent manner.
If you did attempt a mature, reasoned debate, you would soon confirm your worst fears: you are far out of your depth and would again have to resort to juvenile bleatings in which to run and hide.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:47 pm272.republicans hate facts Says:
Yet you seem quite capable of arguing the nuances of them. Lie much?
This makes no sense.
Yes it does. Either you read them, and they’re incoherent, or you don’t read them and they’re incoherent, or they’re incoherent yet you are able to respond to each of they without having to ask me to explain… You’re a lying loser.
This makes even less sense. You keep insisting I’ve read your posts. Apart from these I’ve responded to, I haven’t read them. Really.
You mean once again you don’t like the “style”, which has nothing to do with substance… Someone that understand what “substance” means realize this.
This makes no sense either. You’re attempting to restate what I’ve said clearly, but twist the intent. I’m guessing you aren’t, by any stretch, an english major…
May 17th, 2009 at 11:57 pmYet you DEFEND the IDIOT that DIDN’T KEEP IT PERSONAL and attacked ME for pointing out what a HYPOCRITE and IDIOT they are? ROTLF! You’re what’s called a CONCERN TROLL. You can SHOVE your CONCERN up your IGNORANT UNINFORMED *SS.
Yes, that is incoherent. No the least for the discouraging delivery and sophomoric writing style. (btw: “Incoherent” is also defined as “confusing;” much like “disconcerting.”)
Yes, I meant incoherent. But by all means, keep coming back for your english lessons. Glad to oblige such a needy student.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:03 amI also find it illogical, which is also a definition of incoherent, since you often depart from the poster’s point substantially to go off on the above-mentioned idiotic rant.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:06 am279.republicans hate facts Says: ROTFL! It’s nice to see that you’re so generous when it’s you have so little to offer. ;)
I always try to help those even less fortunate than myself.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:08 amrepublicans hate facts Says:
“Let me ask this differently Phil. If two candidates were equal in your eyes in terms of qualifications, but one was an XTian, which would you vote for? I bet I know the answer. That’s called a “prejudice”.”
Response: So you are saying that in the same situation you would not be prejudiced against the Christian? Again, based on your hate-speech against Christians, which of us is more likely to be the prejudiced one here? I have NOT railed against atheists or anyone else, just boorish behavior regardless of believe system.
Your question is too simplistic. No two candidates are ever exactly the same. I have no trouble voting for an atheist who is capable and who more closely fits my political philosophy and who demonstrates strong traits of character and integrity.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:11 amRHF is still going, huh? Well, as interesting as it has been, I’m off…early flight. hanshiro the antlion, you seem like a smart, reasonable person, I’ve appreciated your posts.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:13 am@ Philip50
While I may disagree with some of your politics and opinions, I respect that you kept things civil (esp compared to RHF). Thanks.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:15 am279.republicans hate facts Says:
If you’re confused by CAPS LOCKS, then you’re an IDIOT!
Aw, tsk, not one for conceptual expression, eh? Okay, I’ll type it slower for you: The style is a confusing mess, regardless of the content (which by now I suspect would not be any great loss by missing it if your current reasoning skills are any indication).
Got it? Text can convey ideas in a welcoming manner or be an impenetrable and hackneyed wall of type or, in your case, a tiresome, undulating, juvenile screed and squeal-palooza that discourages consideration.
In short, try writing like a grownup. Maybe the thinking like a grownup part will not be far behind, eh?
May 18th, 2009 at 12:16 amGrick, hope to see you again.
RHF, treat people with respect, and you will receive respect.
Again, it is the old “reap what you sow” thing. Who knows, even you might become more enlightened by listening more, yelling less.
Good night all.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:18 amHaha, there you go proving my points and validating my criticism from earlier.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:19 amThat last comment was toward RHF and his insane rantings, in case I left it too vague…
May 18th, 2009 at 12:20 amPhilip50 @ 248
“To Jack Mehoff: Sir, you do not tell me what to do, and you do not decide who wins an argument. You sound like the uppity Pharisees who sought to entrap Jesus with their slick questions, as if they really wanted to know the answer. The truth is that they did not seek the truth; they only sought to attempt to discredit Jesus.”
Philip, you have not answered anything I have asked of you because you have no sound arguements to challenge the facts the various posters have presented you with, and now you are comparing yourself to Jesus. Sir, I do not have to decide if you have one or lost. You have answered that for us all with your non-answers, and lofty, unrealistic comparisons. have officially LOST.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:24 amrepublicans hate facts Says:
“Phil, answer me this. Isn’t it true that your religion believes that I am so “evil” that I will be punished for eternity for not “believing” your way? How is *THAT* respectful in any way? Please explain?”
Response: Rhf, if you have felt condemned or judged by religious people, especially Christians I am sorry. I do not judge you, though I object to your language and the way YOU treat people. It is not my place to judge you or anyone else. I respect your right to your own opinion, and ask for the same, nothing more, nothing less. What I believe happens to your soul has just as much validity as your opinion about the afterlife, but it is simply my belief. I have not tried to push that onto you as you have alleged.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:27 am283.republicans hate facts Says: Illogical? That I pointed out that you attacked the person you “claimed” to share beliefs with? So far the only IDIOTIC rants are yours. What is INCOHERENT is how you JUSTIFY being so dishonest.
No, I attacked a poor writer who has to substitute capslack-tourettes and typing dingbats for proper prose to convey simple ideas, which is apparently the limit of your ability.
What you label as ‘dishonest’ are the cogent observations about your, shall we say, less than mature attempts at thread communication and dialogue. You suck at it.
You’re a poor communicator, and an insecure one to boot.
My posts are spot-on, however much cheesy denial and dismissal with which you want to approach them. Calling me names and wearing out your caplock won’t change that.
You indeed suck at it. So much so, you’ll be back jacking-off your little capslock key by tomorrow.
Your type is that predictable.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:30 am@ republicans hate facts
Haha, if nothing else, you’ve been good for a bemused laugh. It’s sad that you attack and belittle other people simply for having a different opinion. Anyway, this time I am actually signing off.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:31 amJack Mehoff Says:
“Philip, …and now you are comparing yourself to Jesus.”
Response: Nice try, Jack. I knew you would try that. No, I was comparing your tack to that of the Pharisees, and you know it.
Again, Sir Jack, you do not mandate answers on here or decide who wins. That is childish manipulation on your part, and I choose not to play.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:32 amRhf, it is not prejudiced and evil to “believe” that an unsaved person will go to Hell. It is simply a belief, not a wish. Prejudiced, hateful, and evil would be to tell someone to “Go to Hell” because of their beliefs, something you are very proficient at doing.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:38 amThe threads involving religion always draw the nutjobs like moths to a flame.
I thought Sunday was all y’all’s day off.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:45 amPhilip50 @ 305
Philip, again, you have not presented any solid arguments to bolster your position, only religious fluff, and “rightious” indignation. This is not an argument winning stategy, but merely a “feel good” session for you to convince yourself you are a great, holy person. You have presented nothing, nor proved anything. BTW, your hero GWB is going to burn in hell for all those innocent Iraqis he slaughtered. You do agree on that, don’t you? If not, tell me why not, ok?
May 18th, 2009 at 12:46 amCheney is the “Prince of Darkness”.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:48 amRumsfeld is the “Anti-Christ”.
George W. Bush is the “Grim Reaper”.
Condeleeza Rice is “Snake in the Garden of Eden”.
Colin Powell is “Judas”.
Zooey, don’t talk about yourself that way. Surely you have some redeeming quality.
And Mehoff, you seem obsessed with “winning”. Give it up.
Oh, one more reality check: not only do you not get to decide who “wins” on here, but you do not decide who goes to hell. Sorry to be the one to break it to you.
Now, does anyone still want to discuss substance?
May 18th, 2009 at 12:56 amPhilip50 you LOSE and your fellow “Christian soldiers” are cheney, rove, bush, rumsfeld, wolfowitz rice, etc are going to hell for breaking commandment # 6. And BTW, your holy, blessed, republican party lost too. Good night and good luck with your non-arguments and shaky beliefs.
May 18th, 2009 at 1:10 amYea, they obviously forgot about the “Thou Shall Not Kill” part.
What a sick bunch of Mother-Fathers!!!
May 18th, 2009 at 1:11 amPhilip50 Says:
Now, does anyone still want to discuss substance?
May 18th, 2009 at 12:56 am
Well, we’re still waiting for substance from you…
May 18th, 2009 at 1:34 amGreat Frank Rich article, which also links to an excellent GQ article about Donald Rumsfeld (along with the photos of the Bible quotes on military briefing cover pages).
Farther down in this GQ article it is revealed that Rumsfeld balked at sending U.S. search-and-rescue helicopters to New Orleans to rescue people on rooftops after Hurricane Katrina hit and the levees broke, delaying deployment of any search-and-rescue helicopters (stationed 200 miles away) for days while people died.
When I first read this, I thought of the story reported within two weeks after Katrina hit of one helicopter from a Pensacola airbase that did help rescue stranded people within hours after New Orleans flooded.
This helicopter had been dispatched on a resupply mission to an airbase located just outside New Orleans. After dropping off the supplies, the pilots then diverted to help pluck people from rooftops in NO, making dozens of rescue runs, until they ran low on fuel and had to return to their Pensacola airbase to for refueling.
Imagine their surprise when they got back to base, were ordered to stand-down and were subsequently severely reprimanded.
I was shocked when I read about this on-line back in September 2005. And now the GQ article fleshes this story out a little more, making it quite clear that Donald Rumsfeld wasn’t too interested in any U.S. military helicopters assisting U.S. citizens dying in New Orleans in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and makes me wonder if he ordered that these Pensacola helicopter pilots be reprimanded.
May 18th, 2009 at 3:55 am@ republicans hate facts
Thought I would check this before I leave for the airport…and rhf, you did not disappoint! I knew I could count on some immature attack like you provided. You are a predictable, angry person. Also, your claim is blatantly false…I never ‘attacked’ you because you’re not ‘a religious wacko’…I criticized you for immature, angry, irrational and, frankly, intolerant attacks on other people. I don’t care whether or not you are religious…that had nothing to do with my criticism…just the fact that you are full of vile, hateful rhetoric. It is not necessary. Polite and intelligent discourse is much preferred.
May 18th, 2009 at 3:58 am@ republicans hate facts
Hahaha…you are sad. You know nothing about me, yet you jump to these odd conclusions that I am some sort of religious nut. Do I believe in religion? Yes, I do. I enjoy my faith and what it brings me. However, it is an extremely personal thing. I don’t try to push my religion on anyone. I originally came to this particular comment board to criticize Rumsfeld and the inclusion of religion in our gov’t. Sadly, you had already launched into your childish tirades and I was hoping to get the rude tone tempered a bit.
And no, I never, ever attacked you for lacking religion. Again, I don’t care if you are religious or not. Is it really that hard to understand?
I have not engaged in any rude/intolerant/angry rants. The only thing I have ‘attacked’ has been your hateful attitude. It doesn’t seem to matter that I agree with you about the need to keep religion out of our politics. You just want to hate me for some reason..and that’s fine. Just stop it with the delusions…We probably have more in common and than not, we just differ in our presentation. I favour rational discussion and courtesy, while you favour anger and expletives.
May 18th, 2009 at 4:12 am@ republicans hate facts
I’ll gladly answer your question. No, I do not believe that you or atheists or anyone else that doesn’t share my beliefs will end up in hell. My belief on the matter is fairly complicated, but I will try to distill the basics for you. I (and my religion) don’t believe in ‘hell’ in the traditional sense, but rather that there are degrees of heaven. The more ‘righteous’ you are the better you fare. And atheists, or you, or anyone for that matter, can live a good, moral (righteous, if you will) life as well as I can and can make your own path to heaven, or glory. Yes, my religion believes that it can help you better achieve and realise that path, but I in no way believe that you or ‘non-believers’ are ‘doomed to hell’. Everyone will have a fair/equal chance of realizing the fullest degree of heaven. That’s the basics. It would be silly for Christians to believe that anyone is ‘condemned to torture for eternity’ as you put it. We believe in a just, kind and loving God…and in my opinion, such a god would not ‘torture’ anyone.
May 18th, 2009 at 4:41 am@ republicans hate facts
You are quite the joker. I focused on you because of how hateful you come across. I would prefer if progressives didn’t have to be associated with the vile language and intolerance that you employ. My response to you wasn’t hate filled. It was pointing out that you were being inappropriate and that there are better ways to conduct oneself.
May 18th, 2009 at 4:45 amçet
May 18th, 2009 at 6:26 amChat sitesi
Sohbet istanbul thank you very much.
And by “doing good” that obviously means demolishing an entire country.
May 18th, 2009 at 8:36 amPhilip50 Says:
I know where the phrase comes from, glogrrl. Furthermore, I agree with everything that Jefferson says in his letter. However, this letter is abused and misconstrued. The wall of separation is to PROTECT “the free exercise” of religion, not to LIMIT it. There is no alleged freedom “from” religion. Religious influence is in every culture, and is unavoidable. And government should not interfere in the exercise of religion, as has happened throughout human history, and happens today in many parts of the world, especially in Muslim countries. When Rumsfeld speaks of the fear of Muslim Caliphates taking over Europe, we should all view that with serious concern. Militant Islam should not enjoy the protections of religion, when in effect it is more of a political movement to take over the world.
Be glad you folks were born in American, where you are still free to believe in any faith, or to NOT believe in anything, and where you can freely exchange your point of view and even “convert” to another without fear of retribution. Such freedoms do not exist in countries with a Muslim heritage.
May 17th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Appreciate your effort…and your words.
bit always appreciates someone who knows that the greatness of America comes from Christianity in America. bit also appreciates someone who understands how important Christianity is to the future of the U.S…. if the U.S. is to have future.
May 18th, 2009 at 9:41 amthat there are better ways to conduct oneself.
Anyone who lives their life based on a fictional character and story, who pushes their fantasy on others in disparaging ways, really should be in a padded room alone, forever.
May 18th, 2009 at 9:42 amsomeone who understands how important Christianity is to the future of the U.S
You’d think the GOPinbreds would be more welcoming toward Mexican immigrants.
They’re way more Xtian than the likes of you.
May 18th, 2009 at 9:44 am“Killin’ in the name of…”
Baby Jesus?
May 18th, 2009 at 9:47 amDunno if anyone else has pointed this out yet, but keep in mind the guy who wrote the GQ story is a conservative Bush apologist. He may be dead-on about Rummy, but this whole article smells of Bush legacy revisionism based on things it leaves out, pointedly here in the case of Katrina. Clever of these guys to try to distract our attention away from Bush’s own complicity in all these matters by leaking the DOD covers, sure to outrage the left, and then by scapegoating the already polarizing Rumsfeld. Nice job, Neocons, but I’m not buying the meme of Bush as hapless victim. I mean, the notion that Rumsfeld got away with behaving the way he did for years without a single person in the administration ever bringing this to Bush’s attention because they didn’t want to bother him? C’mon now.
May 18th, 2009 at 12:32 pmPHILLIP 50, you are doing a great job without displaying an argumentative spirit!!! When I saw over 350 comments posted here, I knew this was going to be about GOD. The kids here blogging against you have GOT the numbers and a complete lack of appreciation for those who submit to the LORD. They’ve spent far more energy on refuting GOD than embracing him. They’ve obviously got their verbal weapons all sharpened up but are PROBABLY AND MOST LIKELY WORTHLESS IN TRUE LIFE & DEATH situations where they’d actualy have to defend themselves or their neighbor. So for the rest of you; THE MOST SAD FUNERALS I’VE BEEN TO WERE OF NON-BELIEVERS!!! YOU ARE YOUR OWN GODS and when you people die, YOU’RE TRULY GOING TO BE DEAD! No eternal life for you, no guarantees for PHILLIP50 either cause only GOD knows his heart, but for certain you other people don’t get it. Enjoy your little bubble here. I got one for all the agihaters, what is the final book in the bible and how does it not mirror what’s happening today? Let’s go secular, what did Gibbon write about in the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire that doesn’t apply today? SHOW ME THE LIGHT YOU OFFER OTHERS! I KNOW IT’S GOING TO BE HARD TO ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT YOURSELVES AS PEOPLE WHO GIVE OTHERS HOPE!!!!
May 18th, 2009 at 5:30 pmSheepdog,
When religion is used as a wedge issue between believers and non-believers, that is where you loose the young folks. Your comment above just alienated the non-believers from you once more. You need to learn to stop this if you want to attract the youth and others.
Religion would be best served if based on attraction not promotion. Isn’t that what Jesus did? Is this what you’re doing here? Is sadly is not.
Wars based on religious believes are flat out wrong and creates more of a wedge between believers and non-believers.
Religious believers should stay in their yard and be happy that they have a yard to play in within this country.
May 18th, 2009 at 6:00 pmTHE MOST SAD FUNERALS I’VE BEEN TO WERE OF NON-BELIEVERS!!!
GFU, shithead. Apparently you’ve never been to a funeral for an immediate family member. My parents were good Catholics, dumbf!ck, and their funerals, 3 weeks apart, were NOT fun. The freakin’ church gave us a list of rules for what we couldn’t DO at the funerals – no ’secular’ music, no speeches from family members who would not be able to keep their emotions under control (yes, really!), etc. My parents were 50-year members of the same church, my dad attended Mass every weekday, was a deacon, and my mum was a member of the Catholic Daughters. Their church funeral services were absolute shams. They deserved much better than that from the Church they had devoutly served all of their lives. F!ck that!
May 18th, 2009 at 8:09 pmJane, My condolences for your losses. Being a non-believer, I want to let you know I can still feel your losses (as I am sure you already know) and extend my heart to you.
Peace
May 18th, 2009 at 9:48 pmThank you so much, LiberalVoter. I had lost any faith I had in organized religion long before my parents died. It’s been about 4 1/2 years, and I miss them every day.
Funny what a contrast between they way they treated me after my ‘lapse’ and the way so-called religious people treat non-believers. My dad would occasionally say, “Why don’t you stop by the church one of these days and say hi to god?”, to which my stock answer was, “Because the church would be struck by lightning if I did.” They never tried to force me back at all, or make me feel as though I was a lesser, or less, moral person.
Thanks again for your empathy. ;)
May 18th, 2009 at 10:44 pmInteresting comments Jane Schneider. Where Religion and not relationship are the focus of GOD I can see how you’re angry. You have no “relationship” with GOD so religion/ritual/stained glass/genuflecting/pulpit is what you’re left with. Sorry! Now relationship with GOD is freedom and different. A typical Christian funeral is loaded with music, good friends and cheer, a celebration of the homecoming of that particular believer. I think you should reconsider your position which goes for everyone who responded. NONE OF YOU SEEMS TO UNDERSTAND RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD! Right Wing Left Wing, your comment seems to say it all for the conflict in belief and faith. Christianity is a huge life and death choice. I can’t overstate that enough and therefore can’t water down that message. If you just want to feel good and smile, watch Barney or Pooh Bear. If you can see, read, have fellowship with other Christians-a Jesus requirement by the way, then you get past the perception of Relationship with God being him telling what not to do. In a word picture if you’re a parent, you tell you’re kids whats best for them in life, and they either listen or they don’t. It’s your free choice because GOD gave us free will.
May 19th, 2009 at 12:23 amSheepdog,
Your rants are that of a mad man. Please seek help before you hurt yourself or some innocent bystander.
You’ve been blinded by your “faith”. I feel sorry for you.
May 19th, 2009 at 1:11 amthanks..
http://www.patronboard.com
porno izle
porno izle
porno izle
porno izle
May 19th, 2009 at 5:52 amporno
sex
turk porno
May 19th, 2009 at 5:54 amSheepdog, if you are truly a follower of Jesus, you would not write such things. You need to actually read and understand what Jesus was professing. Start with Matthew. Otherwise, you are just another hypocrite a la Mark 7:6 ‘This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.’”
May 19th, 2009 at 9:45 am— Jesus Christ
Miss Jane Schneider, in responding to your points yesterday I have to apologize for not expressing my sympathy for your loss. It’s tough to loose anybody you care about, especially your parents and if your parents didn’t receive a proper service here on earth, please know that they did receive an awesome one in heaven.
May 19th, 2009 at 1:25 pmrightwing-leftwing Says:
Sheepdog, Your rants are that of a mad man. Please seek help before you hurt yourself or some innocent bystander. You’ve been blinded by your “faith”. I feel sorry for you.
LiberalVoter Says: Sheepdog, if you are truly a follower of Jesus, you would not write such things. You need to actually read and understand what Jesus was professing. Start with Matthew. Otherwise, you are just another hypocrite a la Mark 7:6 ‘This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.’”
— Jesus Christ
Rt Wing/Lt Wing & LiberalVoter: I’m not ranting. Christians live in the world but are not suppose to be of the world. A very radical idea for sure. One of the best examples of a people who walk and live the walk are the Amish. You talk about how more is less, they are amazing and I respect them immensely. They are human and have faults but they really live their faith. If you want to talk about hypocrits and nutjobs in our society, YOU LIVE, WORK, AND PLAY WITH THEM EVERYDAY. Look around and then tell me why you still interact with them. On the contrary, there is this group of people who understand the human condition and are busy trying to become Christians and they’re loaded with faults. They’re trying to become all they can be. GIVE ME A LOGICAL REASON YOU’RE SO DISGUSTED WITH THEM. Similar logic would be to not attend Minor League Baseball games because, well you know, they’re wanna bees. Holy Smokes People!
Liberal Voter, good point. Can’t refute the bible!
May 19th, 2009 at 1:45 pmSheepdog, I hope you are not trying to direct my statements towards the Amish. That would be akin to bearing false witness now wouldn’t it? My statements were directed towards hypocrites such as JohnM who only selectively follow Jesus. And towards those that trumpet their piety are in direct conflict with the teachings of Jesus.
I refer you again to read Matthew. Specifically 6:1,5-8
1″Be careful not to do your ‘acts of righteousness’ before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
5″And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 6But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
The above said by Jesus.
I find it strange that I, an atheist, seem to have a better understanding of scripture than those who beat their chests and proclaim to be followers of Jesus. THAT is what I find disgusting. You will find your answer in Matthew 23: 14-15.
May 19th, 2009 at 11:40 pmCan we explore a new angle on this? Several blogs suggest faith is needed in battle. One suggested that nonbelievers make lousy soldiers. Would anyone question the extreme skill and courage of the Romans? Yet they considered Christian militants a joke. What about the Crusaders? Mostly mercenaries looking for loot. The few True Believers usually got in the way. Or created terror in civilian captives. Revolutionary War? Historical accounts are replete with scoundrels, opportunists, and mercenaries. Civil War? The South (bible belt) lost. World Wars? Ask your elders how few returned with faith in god. The best soldiers left god out and focused on killing the enemy. War is for killing. I’ll take a nonbeliever any day. The meaner the better.
May 20th, 2009 at 12:58 amI had a sheepdog once. Unfortunately my neighbors pit bull got a hold on him. His legendary herding instincts were useless against a true fighting dog. We don’t need any sheepdogs trying to shape this debate. Go home and watch your sheep. We need a pit bull. Better, we need a truth commission to root out these criminals and a prosecutor to go for the throat. Keep building the heat and increasing the steam. Justice is around the corner. ” I have been to the mountain….”.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:19 pmThank God these people are no longer in power!!!
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:58 am