In the new documentary “Religulous,” comedian Bill Maher (in photo) takes stands against religion and against the very notion of faith (as the word is generally used these days) some of the time, and against the intermingling of religion and public policy all of the time. Maher is not alone: For many of us, it makes about as much sense to take the Bible (or any of the other religions’ texts) as absolute truth as it does to regard “The Lord of the Rings” (or “Gulliver’s Travels” or “Story of O”) as holy writ. The Bible’s exceptional status is more an accident of history than a proof of divine origin. And thinking God is actually speaking to you is, well, a little bonkers, whether you’re Moses or Joan of Arc or the guy on his knees praying, right down the street. – Andy Klein, www.lacitybeat.com
“Religulous” has the theological depth of a religion documentary by a seventh-grade church dropout, which is exactly what filmmaker Bill Maher is. He uses a more fundamentalist reading of Scripture than most fundamentalists do. The film is an alleged quest to find out if “religion is detrimental to the progress of humanity.” He concludes that it is, even though most of the believers he meets treat him with far more respect than he treats them. He makes no mention of any good ever done in the name of God, or of the millions killed by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot in the name of atheism. There are intelligent arguments to be made against faith. This is not one of them. – Ann Rodgers, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
255 Comments
“Story of O” as holy writ? Well, when I read it it surely didn’t seem that way to me, but I get the argument…
I don’t know that it is so much skeptical about ‘faith’ as it is about dogma.
A couple of weeks ago Maher was really down on faith itself. I like his show but I disagree with his view of faith/religion. He’s pretty intolerant in my opinion.
I haven’t seen it, won’t have an opinion until I do.
“For many of us, it makes about as much sense to take the Bible (or any of the other religions’ texts) as absolute truth”
Oh Pul-EEEZE Phil!
Only seventy plus percent of Kansans take the bible literally. Literally enough to write hate into the Kansas Constitution.
GOD HATES SHRIMP!!!!!!!
Ben,
Faith and “dogma” are kind of interlinked.
If your faith involves a God who has laid down certain tenents and principles for you to follow then it is kind of hard to escape dogma now isn’t it?
KFG,
It has nothing to do with hate.
“And thinking God is actually speaking to you is, well, a little bonkers”
Wait, didnt the boy king say god told him to run for president?
Bonkers. Well, I’ve heard shrub called a lot of things but bonkers? heheheh. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Sure nathan. Sure.
GOD HATES SHRIMP!!!!!
Apparently Ann Rodgers has never been to Ks.!
I have no problem with religion or fundies, but the fundies are compelled to go out and propragate their faith and it ususally takes its form in trying to establish laws that conform to their beliefs. If they spread it by example rather than by dictate, they’d get further ahead in the game.
KFG,
You have shown far more hate here towards Christians than you accuse them of having hate towards you.
Phillip must be afraid of the new operation rescue website, trashtheeagle.
Why else would he ignore the obvious truths about the dominionists and bible literalists in kansas.
Perhaps he’s never heard of terry fox, joe wright, phred phelps, et al?
And yeah, I know barbara fox’s maiden name isnt ETAL.
hehehehehe.
nitwits
Faith is wrong.
Unless it is Faith in the prospect of a primordial soup composed of amino acids, which was formed after omnipresent cosmic material collided in a gigantic big bang, randomly arranging itself to produce a living organism.
That organism then procedes to flap about until it asexually produces an offspring that is a slightly more complex organism. This organism then engages in sexual incest with its parent to procreate once again to create an even more complex organism.
Wash and repeat for billions of years.
Then we have the fossil record without any presence of identifiable transitional forms along with human life with the capacity and desire to codify rights and wrongs (although those rights and wrongs change from year to year since there are no moral absolutes).
Yep Faith is wrong except for THAT Faith.
Nathaniel
Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
Ben,
Faith and “dogma” are kind of interlinked.
If your faith involves a God who has laid down certain tenents and principles for you to follow then it is kind of hard to escape dogma now isn’t it?
I think the difference lies in trying to force the dogma upon others through laws.
Who cares. It’s a movie. If you agree with Maher, you will love it I am sure.If you don’t, you will likely hate it. It is intended to do just that.
Me, I won;t likely go see it. Don;t see that many at the theater anyway, and this won’t make the cut.
WHo cares
The film is an alleged quest to find out if “religion is detrimental to the progress of humanity.”
Yes it is!!!
I cannot image how God can be so powerful to create a universe as large as it is and yet be so concerned about a tiny speck of dust called Earth floating in a vast sea of space.
Get real about it!!!
Man is self sabotaging his real progress with his own arrogant ego by believing that they are important.
Genesis 3 (King James Version) verse 22:
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as ONE OF US, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.
RFL your description of the faith that the left has is so right on. They call us crazy because we believe that a Creator was involved in this beautiful world in which we live. A world where everything from the position of the sun to the earth on which we walk is absolutely perfectly designed.
As they think that a blob of gook was hit with a big explosion of something and this gook turned into the miracle of the human species. And they think we are crazy. What a laugh!
Haven’t seen it and won’t be waiting for the DVD to come out.I’ll go with Ann Rodgers assessment on the movie.
bth
Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
Nathaniel
Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
Ben,
I think the difference lies in trying to force the dogma upon others through laws.
————-
Ben what law has my faith forced on you?
Not on me but on people I know – the prohibition of them attaining the legal status of Caeser’s “marriage” because they are gays who want to “marry” each other. Putting a sacrament of the church (marriage) into the legal/political arena.
Well Ben see there are trade offs. I happen to feel that a family unit is made up of one man and one woman. You happen to believe that a baby has no rights until it is born. Are these based on faith or on our own feelings of right and wrong?
Ben,
I don’t believe that the definition of dogma involves passing laws.
Look it up.
Nathan I hope you, your dad, regular and any others will be able to be at the Sedgwick CO. Repub meeting tomorrow night. If not we’ll plan lunch and meet sometime.
#
bth
Posted October 15, 2008 at 2:01 pm | Permalink
Not on me but on people I know – the prohibition of them attaining the legal status of Caeser’s “marriage” because they are gays who want to “marry” each other. Putting a sacrament of the church (marriage) into the legal/political arena.
—————————-
So when the state of California put on the ballot the gay marriage amendment (which was overturned by a Judge) this vote came from a church bth?
Are you saying there were no ‘godless’ people voting against the California Gay Marriage amendment?
Or, are you engaging in the usual, broad-stroke diatribe of “it’s them” cause we Liberals knows whats best.
bth-
While I understand your point, I don;t think history will support that it has been the “church” that has put the “sacrament of the church (marriage) into the legal/political arena.”
While I have not studied the issue, because I really don;t care eithe way, I know of, and none has ever been pointed out to me, any time in history, or any society, government, or civilization that has formalized or officially recognized gay/lesbian marriages. History seems to be on the side of those who want to not recognzie it. Is it time to change? Yeah, I think so. I don;t know of any reason to not. But, let’s not put out that the “church” has taken away some fundamental right, one that has never been granted, and predates (to my knowledge) the church. But,
I have not really studied the subject. Anybody willing to give alternate information would be welcome.
okob – my family unit is likewise one man one woman – been married 37+ years. However, I do not feel threatened by a gay couple who want the same legal protections that my wife and I share. Similarly I do not feel threatened by them. So, why not allow them the legal protections?
As for the abortion issue – as you know I work to reduce the incidence of abortion, not to increase it.
lj – I don’t know exactly what the history is of the state giving special priviledges/rights based upon a church sacrament (marriage). My view is that they should be totally separate. And, since many people consider marriage to be sacred I would simply not sully the term by using it in Caeser’s realm.
“Are you saying there were no ‘godless’ people voting against the California Gay Marriage amendment?”
There might be one or two in the entire state. But it is the churches who are camoaigning for it.
Haven’t seen the movie, but I understand Maher’s general view of religion, and it’s actually fairly reasonable. People do in fact believe a lot of really silly and crazy things in the name of faith. I could name them one by one.
But they’re perfectly entitled to do so. Specific guarantees of religious freedom aside, if you want to believe, say, that the Earth is flat, you should have every right, consistent with intellectual freedom and freedom of speech, to hold and express that view. While I wouldn’t want a flat-Earther on a school curriculum committee, their nutty views neither pick my pocket nor break my leg.
The problem comes up when you get people voting for politicians, propositions, laws, and Constitutional amendments based on unthinking prejudices and rationalizations instead of the merits of the issue itself.
I know that some reasonable Christians will get annoyed that Maher focuses on some fairly minor, pedantic things, but that’s precisely the point. The Judeo-Christian worldview is some internalized in America, that we often doesn’t notice the subtle absurdities unless someone like Maher shoves them in our face.
*******************************************
Ok Observer:
I happen to feel that a family unit is made up of one man and one woman.
Even assuming that was true (where is your data?), how does punishing these families with mean-spirited legal discrimination solve the “problem”? (I’m afraid to ask what would “solve” it! Perhaps some kind of “resettlement” plan?).
And why does your view get to be legally mandated by government? Is there any secular reason for it at all, and, if so, how would that reason come close to justifying a self-evident attack on both religious freedom and equality under the law?
Why does your church have more rights than churches that would marry same-sex couples? And why does your church have the right to dictate the terms of marriage to couples who are married by the justice of the peace, i.e., no religious involvement at all?
Why is it okay for a straight couple to get married by “Elvis” in Vegas, but a gay couple can’t get married at a Unitarian church in Wichita?
What makes it your business?
Since you types are famous at avoiding any answer to that question, I won’t hold my breath waiting for one.
Talk about religulous.
I am a lapsed agnostic. I’m not sure what it is I don’t believe in.
The Buddha observed a lot of things about the human condition and the universe we live in that nobody else ever thought about.
Confucius wasn’t just writing fortune cookies.
So much of the Koran is simply a different telling of the old testament. And neither was an eye-witness account.
I used to live among $cientologists and I think they’re pretty goofy. But if it cooks for them, what’s it to me?
I have my doubts about the Mormons who think the Garden of Eden was in Independence, Missouri. I have my doubts, though, when I visit Dixon’s Chili before a Roylz ballgame.
A former girlfriend felt so much more inspired after she attended Latin Mass. God probably appreciates the gesture (He’s that kinda guy, I think), but it’s probably really no big deal.
Gandhi said , “I love your Christ. Your Christians, not so much.” (something like that)
I admire the attitude of public officials such as Kansan Dwight David Eisenhower who defined an atheist as “…someone who watches SMU play Notre Dame and doesn’t care who wins.”
There’s been research lately, that human beings’ brains might be hard-wired for religion. There’s so much happening out there in the world, we simply want it to make some sense some way.
Religions, whether worshiping Jehova or Bonzo the Sun Goad, tend to succeed by attempting to provide human-sized answers to God-sized questions. I suspect no human has come up with a God-sized answer, despite all the claims of the assorted sects.
I don’t particularly need the human-sized parlor tricks of virgin birth, walking on water, loaves and fishes, water-to-wine (actually, I kinda like that one), resurrection from the dead…
I read what Jesus purportedly said and I think it’s pretty good stuff; often metaphorical, always profound.
I just don’t know how all that love he apparently embodied turned into so much hate.
“I just don’t know how all that love he apparently embodied turned into so much hate”
I do. CHristians became pharisees. The LAW became more important than the LAWGIVER.
“I just don’t know how all that love he apparently embodied turned into so much hate”
I do. CHristians became pharisees. The LAW became more important than the LAWGIVER.
——
I haven’t seen this movie, but I’ve watched a trailer and read reviews. Far as I can tell BEFORE I see the movie, you two gentlemen have just written a very concise review of Maher’s message and reason for making the movie.
Ok Observer:
I happen to feel that a family unit is made up of one man and one woman.
Even assuming that was true (where is your data?), how does punishing these families with mean-spirited legal discrimination solve the “problem”? (I’m afraid to ask what would “solve” it! Perhaps some kind of “resettlement” plan?).
————–
You see I never said that my faith was why I felt this way. I have given my reasons on here several times. None of them are because of my faith. I feel that legal rights are available in civil unions.
Where is your data about when life begins? My faith isn’t the driving force here either. I just feel that innocent children have a right to life. It is in our constitution afterall.
Rage what makes it my business is that like you I am a citizen of this great country. I just don’t happen to agree with you on this one. And it appears that I have a lot of company in that view.
Why do you hate Christians?
‘Since you types are famous at avoiding any answer to that question, I won’t hold my breath waiting for one.’
‘
“I feel that legal rights are available in civil unions.”
They are not. That is what I want to see – civil union take the place of “marriage” under Caeser’s Law. Leave marriage to the churches.
Basically, if asked on a ballot if I define marriage as one woman and one man or anything else, I will always vote one woman and one man. It’s as simple as that. That used to be the beauty of American where what is marked in the ballot box matters. I am not offended by someone who thinks that marriage is something radically different. I just do not agree with them.
Furthermore, If our court system wants to overrule majority opinion on what constitues marriage, it is not a good precedent for the future of our democracy. Keep letting the court decide what the definition of marriage is and when life begins and other issues that a majority of Americans disagree with. It has a cascading effect and we wonder why Americans are not happy with the direction that their country is going.
okob – can a gay couple go to the County Courthouse and get a “civil union license” equivalent to a “marraige license”?
Ben I could agree with that to a point.
You see I never said that my faith was why I felt this way. I have given my reasons on here several times. None of them are because of my faith. I feel that legal rights are available in civil unions.
Oh really? I haven’t seen them. Enlighten me.
Since civil unions are so great, here’s a thought: civil unions for all, straight couples included. One form for all. The same rights. No distinctions. The “M” word stays in the churches–it’s not relevant to the contract.
Would you have any problem with that?
I like his show but I disagree with his view of faith/religion. He’s pretty intolerant in my opinion.
Sometimes I agree, but only to a point. It’s probably his Catholic upraising that colors his view. (No intended bash on the Catholics. I was one once, too.)
I did notice he stated that he is NOT an atheist, as some believe. Maybe, like many others, he just doesn’t like organized religion of any kind. I agree with that.
Not at this point Ben but that could be voted in. The only thing I can see that wouldn’t be addressed with legal papers is that of the SS issue and rights of survivors. You can make anyone you want you health care spokesperson, your beneficiary, your co-tenant, and on and on and on.
Even smart people in man/woman marriages should do this.
rage – that is my point as well.
ouch dow off 616 points why does God hate the investor class?
It’s a states’ issue. You want to be married and gay? Go to California or some other state that allows it.
Rage I have to leave in 3 minutes to get my granddaughter. If you are still around at 4:15 I will list them then.
Not at this point Ben but that could be voted in.
—————————————-
Why “vote in” legalizing a sexual deviancy.
“You can make anyone you want you health care spokesperson, your beneficiary, your co-tenant, and on and on and on.”
Problem is; that takes a huge amount of paperwork. Why not allow an equal starting point with a ‘unioned’ couple as with a ‘married’ couple?
And why deny SS and survivors rights for a couple?
biased1 – we should ban marriages between divorced people.
okob – give the munchkin a hug.
:)
Why “vote in” legalizing a sexual deviancy.
You’re behind the times. The Supreme Court legalized their basic humanity several years ago.
It was in Lawrence v. Texas.
Why do you hate Christians?
I believe the correct response to that would be “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
I read what Jesus purportedly said and I think it’s pretty good stuff; often metaphorical, always profound.
I just don’t know how all that love he apparently embodied turned into so much hate.
Well said, Monkeyhawk.
The Supreme Court legalized their basic humanity several years ago.
————————————-
“their basic humanity” is that the PC word for sticking your d*ck in any thing you want?
ok
I guess I’m just too far “behind the times”
It would make more sense than companies providing ins. coverage to same sex domestic partners, but not to domestic partners of opposite sex, heck, they should be forced to marry to provide coverage to mate too!
“Why “vote in” legalizing a sexual deviancy.”
That is your opinion; perhaps also your church position. But why should it be forced on others.
Should we ban marriage between divorced people?
Why should ‘marriage’ be bastardized?
bith- That is your opinion; perhaps also your church position. But why should it be forced on others.
—————————————-
An “opinion” apparently shared by mother nature.
Are natural laws “forced” on you?
ANTI
Posted October 15, 2008 at 3:33 pm | Permalink
Why should ‘marriage’ be bastardized?
Because it’s a legal contract, and it is plainly unfair and irrational not to ‘bastardize’ it, as you so colorfully put it.
Racists were asking the same questions in the 60s about the types of marital unions that produced the current Democratic candidate for president.
An “opinion” apparently shared by mother nature.
Out of curiosity, what are those natural laws? Can you give some examples?
Is that the PC word for sticking your d*ck in any thing you want?
So does your mom follow you around to make sure you don’t stick junior in anything harmful?
Adults don’t need that kind of supervision.
Rage, go to California if you want to marry someone of the same sex.
ANTI
Posted October 15, 2008 at 3:52 pm | Permalink
Rage, go to California if you want to marry someone of the same sex.
Why would I want to do that?
Rage
Posted October 15, 2008 at 3:55 pm | Permalink
ANTI
Posted October 15, 2008 at 3:52 pm | Permalink
Rage, go to California if you want to marry someone of the same sex.
Why would I want to do that?
======
They classify marriage between a ______ and a _____. And they need the tax revenue.
Why would I want to do that?
======
You know the answer is in the sentence you are questioning: ‘…if you want to marry someone of the same sex.’
I admire the attitude of public officials such as Kansan Dwight David Eisenhower who defined an atheist as “…someone who watches SMU play Notre Dame and doesn’t care who wins.”
__________________________________________________
I don’t care who you are, that’s funny!
So. . .I’m supposed to travel out-of-state, at great inconvenience, to marry some man I’ve never met, when I’m not even gay? Presumably because. . .I can? In California, anyway.
O. . .kay. You gotta love “reasoning” like that.
Go take your meds, ANTI.
Again Retard Rage: ‘‘…if you want to marry someone of the same sex.’
What does what I want have to do with anything?
I apologize for contributing in any way to changing of the subject of the Maher movie, and perhaps religion in general, to a discussion on gay marriage.
Rage
Posted October 15, 2008 at 4:03 pm | Permalink
What does what I want have to do with anything?
=======
Great, we will leave marriage the way it is here in Kansas.
littlejohn
Posted October 15, 2008 at 4:03 pm | Permalink
I apologize for contributing in any way to changing of the subject of the Maher movie, and perhaps religion in general, to a discussion on gay marriage.
=====
That’s OK, I have lost interest in the subject already.
And I apologize for feeding the trolls. I’ve been toying with the resident yahoos on this thread for too long.
Sorry about that, folks.
For those who have seen the movie, does it largely attack Christianity, or is it an equal religion offender?
I haven’t seen Religulous, but I think it visits most if not all of the major religions.
Here’s a quick explanation of the plot from IMDB:
Bill Maher’s take on the current state of world religion.
Keep in mind that it is satire.
And here’s a part of one of the User Comments about it on IMDB:
It addresses Christianity, Scientology, Mormonism,Islam, and other religions. Bill Maher travels around the word, visiting the Wailing Wall, USA Bible Belt, Salt Lake City, and other locations while interviewing a wide range of religious leaders and followers.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815241/
From Bill Maher in 2002…
“I’m not an Atheist. There’s a really big difference between an Atheist and someone who just doesn’t believe in religion. Religion to me is a bureaucracy between man and God that I just don’t need. But I’m not an Atheist, no. I believe there’s some force, If you want to call it God….. I don’t believe God is a single parent who writes books.”
Thank You Pre.
My wife and I seldom talk much about religion or politics. We know what each other believes and where there is conflict we long ago resolved between ourselves to live with the differences.
A few years ago we were talking about ‘gay marriage’. She said, (and I paraphrase) Love between two people is a prescious thing and it’s none of our business. Let ‘em marry if they want to.
My officail position on gay marriage is, “Love between two people is a prescious thing and it’s none of my business. Let ‘em marry if they want to.”
As a Christian I will still vote my conscience. It is my responsibility and right. No hate involved.
As far as Maher’s movie goes, I’ll watch it when it comes to HBO or Netflicks. It is what it is.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
“For many of us, it makes about as much sense to take the Bible (or any of the other religions’ texts) as absolute truth”
Oh Pul-EEEZE Phil!
Only seventy plus percent of Kansans take the bible literally. Literally enough to write hate into the Kansas Constitution.
GOD HATES SHRIMP!!!!!!!
- – - – – - — – - – – - – - – - – — – - – – - – - — – - – — – - – - – -
Wasamada ksfg, mean ole fundies won’t let you marry your carpet cruncher gal pal. I hear Connecticut is nice this time of year.
“I believe there’s some force, If you want to call it God”
Maher is a Life Forcetarian. Really deep. He knows the mind and charactor of this force so much that he can determine absolutely that this life force character is not the God of the Bible.
How can Maher rule out positively that any one religion is wrong and that his life force idea is right?
He’s being a tad bit intolerant don’t you think?
Pandering Palin in N.H.:”Palin drew parallels between New Hampshire and Alaska, including a shared love of moose hunting,
Hank – as a Christian what do you think about the idea of separating Caeser from God – allowing ‘unions’ for legal purposes and leaving the sacraments to the Church.
“ANTI
Posted October 15, 2008 at 4:24 pm | Permalink
For those who have seen the movie, does it largely attack Christianity, or is it an equal religion offender?”
I haven’t seen it but I gather from the comments on Charlie Rose that he goes after them all.
#
Chrisfrommactown
Posted October 15, 2008 at 5:05 pm | Permalink
Wasamada ksfg, mean ole fundies won’t let you marry your carpet cruncher gal pal. I hear Connecticut is nice this time of year.
========================================================
Are you speaking as a Christian or just your plain ordinary everyday a**ho*e?
The number of people killed in the name of Atheism? That would be zero. Funny how Ann Rodgers criticizes the lack of depth but is clearly misguided when it comes to Atheism with her ignorant notion that Atheism has a doctrine. Anyway, why should it be up to Bill Maher to provide depth to the various nonsense religions that were conceived by bronze age tribes or lousy sci-fi writers?
Bill was talking to Jesus in the movie. Not the guy who played Jesus but the guy who said he was the second incarnation of Jesus. I suppose we should ponder the notion that this apparent scam artist is real just because he’s Hispanic, his name is Jesus, and he is the son of an invisible god merely because he says so. Well, as Bill pointed out, why should we take a religion seriously that allows, a kid at the age of 10, to become one of the religion’s prophets?
There must be a lot of depth coming from those 10 year old preachers.
No, the religions are a joke and judging by the constant laughter coming from the audience, Bill Maher isn’t alone in thinking so.
All religion just seems to me like man’s attempt to control his environment and explain his existance. I think the world would be better off without religion, there would fewer cultural conflicts and reasons to hate and judge each other.
No one knows what happens after you die..I can’t imagine that we’re so special we never die. That sounds more like denial and unwillingness to accept that fact that we’re not immortal.
“As they think that a blob of gook was hit with a big explosion of something and this gook turned into the miracle of the human species. And they think we are crazy. What a laugh!”
By your description, I really don’t think you understand the big bang theory or evolution…but how is saying the earth and humans were created in 7 days by some intelligent, all powerful being more realistic, OKobserver?
“The number of people killed in the name of Atheism? That would be zero.”
Wrong.
MP posts with willful ignorance of history. Atheism is the state religion of all known and existing communist governments. Many of which have murdered countless millions to enforce its attempt at a religion-free utopia.
I’ve been a psychiatric nurse for a long time…If I only had a dollar for everytime I’ve met Jesus.
RFL, Atheism isn’t a religion. Atheism isn’t Communism. Thanks for playing now pat yourself on the head and go play with your peers in the sandbox.
And how many people have been killed in the name of Christianity and Islam? I think religion is one of the most destructive forces on Earth.
So Phillip, after reading this thread, are you still feeling so charitable about religion? Still think Maher is exaggerating the harm religion has done concerning progress for human kind.
Thank you all for proving nathan ever so wrong when he said this:
“It has nothing to do with hate.”
Jesus wept.
Literally.
“but how is saying the earth and humans were created in 7 days by some intelligent, all powerful being more realistic.”
Because it adheres to the 2nd law of Thermo for starters. Namely that things do not develop increased complexity without influence acting from outside of its the control volume.
Mary, have you encountered any explosions that have resulted in machinery or life during yours anybody elses lifetime?
“Atheism is the state religion”
I think RFl must stand for Rolling on the Floor Laughing.
But he was too stupid to post it correctly.
I see chris is exibiting that christianity of his.
There is no one as dangerous as a person who says he is doing god’s will.
So RFL, what force created your god that created the universe in 7 days? It has to pertain to the 2nd law of thermodynamics you know otherwise you really didn’t have a point to begin with.
But anywho, physics doesn’t really apply before the Plank’s time does it? But your god is an end around that so tell me how your supernatural deity conforms to they physical laws.
Weren’t those guys in Laramie “doing God’s work” when they beat that guy and left him tied on a fence to die?
“No, the religions are a joke and judging by the constant laughter coming from the audience, Bill Maher isn’t alone in thinking so.”
Word
Hopefully, human kind will someday progress to the point where religion is a quaint footnote in the history books.
A sad note, but a quaint one.
“Weren’t those guys in Laramie “doing God’s work” when they beat that guy and left him tied on a fence to die?”
Yeah. Self professed christians.
“Atheism isn’t a religion.”
It is not an “organized” religion. But it is a worldview, and ideology, a belief, a Faith. It is a faith in the idea that there is no God and that therefore there is no need for anybody to attempt to know God since he does not exist.
Thanks for the charitable insult. I prize them highly. Do you have another?
Bth, Fred Phelps was in the film. I think I heard a collective teeth grinding in the theater.
I wonder how many posts will follow that they were not “real” christians.
I bet Matthew felt they were real…
“Thanks for the charitable insult. I prize them highly. Do you have another?”
None that you would be smart enough to understand.
RFL, are you telling me that not believe in Santa Claus is an ideology, a faith? Or maybe not believing that teacups revolve around the planet Mercury is a worldview? What sort of ideology is it when I prefer the flavor of vanilla over chocolate? Looks like you are over your head.
#
bth
Posted October 15, 2008 at 5:15 pm | Permalink
Hank – as a Christian what do you think about the idea of separating Caeser from God – allowing ‘unions’ for legal purposes and leaving the sacraments to the Church.
________________________________________________
Marriage is a sacred thing to me. More so the older I get. I have no problem with allowing legal unions between two people. Hell, call it marriage if you want.
I just won’t go to the ceremony. I’ll send a gift if I know you though.
“Weren’t those guys in Laramie “doing God’s work” when they beat that guy and left him tied on a fence to die?”
I dont fear atheists. When’s the last time you heard of an atheist doing something like that, or dragging James Byrd to death, or bombing the Murrah building in OKC?
I dont fear atheists. Christians?
Dangerous. Very dangerous.
God has always existed.
If you refuse to believe in God, You have to believe that matter has always existed or else where did it come from?
I choose to believe in an intelligent supreme being creating matter that defied the first law of thermodynamics during the singular event of the Creation.
You choose to believe in inanimate unintelligent matter accomplishing feats that are contrary to the first AND second laws of thermodynamics for all time past, present, and future.
Yours is a Faith just like mine. Yours requires MORE faith since it is more at odds with the observed scientific axioms that have been tested and proven to be true than that which I believe.
“Because it adheres to the 2nd law of Thermo for starters. Namely that things do not develop increased complexity without influence acting from outside of its the control volume.
Mary, have you encountered any explosions that have resulted in machinery or life during yours anybody elses lifetime?”
Obviously you don’t understand the big bang either…see, that’s what religion is all about…you don’t get how and why something happened, so you have to make it supernatural in order to understand and accept it. This has been going on ever since man has walked upright…but it doesn’t make the beliefs valid or true.
Just look at what people believed only 100 years ago when they didn’t understand how things worked. I have a medical book from the 1880s that would make you laugh..but at the time it made sense to the person who wrote it. When people are ignorant, they try to fill in the gaps with something…it’s just human nature.
I’ve never had an atheist threaten my life. Or stand in the way of my relationship. Or steal my property. Or hurt me in any way.
Christians? Not so much.
“Jesus, save me from your followers”
RFL…whatever.
“you don’t get how and why something happened, so you have to make it supernatural in order to understand and accept it.”
Ramen
There is just as much proof the Flying Spaghetti Monster did it.
ROFLMAO!!!!!
“I choose to believe in an intelligent supreme being creating matter that defied the first law of thermodynamics during the singular event of the Creation.”
Funny, that’s exactly the same thing Pastafarians belive the FSM did.
With an equal amount of evidence.
none
Sorry RFL, for something like god to exist that invalidates the second law of thermodynamics. Therefore it cannot exist unless you postulate your deity is getting fuel from some external source. However, given the time of the big bang your deity would have died due to the intense heat generated by the creation of the cosmos.
No RFL, it takes faith to believe in your fairy tale. The universe exists, we both agree on that, but you add an unnecessary component which you have no justification for.
Don’t the KKK burn crosses in the yards of their victims? There go some good Christians. You’re right Frmgrl…I’m more scared of those who think their horrible actions are being rightiously guided by some god. Religion is the ultimate weapon by which to justify hatred.
RFL whines:
“Yours requires MORE faith since it is more at odds with the observed scientific axioms that have been tested and proven to be true than that which I believe.”
Funny, I’ve often asked the creationists for the scientific evidence they claim to have. So far none has been presented. The great FSM tells me that this time RFL will be no different.
God has always existed.
If you refuse to believe in God, You have to believe that matter has always existed or else where did it come from?
Or you can ask the exact equivalent question:
You have to believe that God has always existed or else where did it come from?
Same problem either way.
what a coincidence farmgrrl.
P.S. The difference being that we knwo that matter exists.
I wish they didn’t keep screwing with the HTML configuration on this site. Pick an approach, and stick with it, folks!
Since the universe is 15 billion years old, as is observed through telescopes, for god to have always existed, as RFL claims, he must have access to some technology that enables him to look beyond the creation of the cosmos.
Care to enlighten the rest of us into this technology? I’m sure there’s a Nobel Prize waiting for anyone who can accomplish this feat. Or did you just make the entire thing up?
Personally I think the Hindus are right, that the Earth was carried into it’s place in the universe on the back of a giant elephant…LOL!
I can ask the evolutionist what evidence they have to show how the first organism was formed from primordial soup. None has been presented.
Maggotpunk,
If life on this planet were created, what evidence would you expect to find?
It’s true Mary. The elephant is merely invisible and ethereal. You know the elephant is real because if it wasn’t holding the Earth in orbit then the planet would fall into the sun. Gravity is just a theory you know.
Or is it rather some huge woman gave birth to the earth?
Hey, c’mon, MP, it’s magic! He (?) just waved his hands (or tentacles, or ethereal bosons, or whatever) and made it happen, from whatever dimension/reality/whatever he did it from!
Asking how is not allowed!
Mary – I thought it was on a giant turtle.
And we all started with two dieties – one male and one female. He, of course, lusted after her and that led to populations. Then, in an attampt to get away from him she would change form. However, he would follow and also change form and that would start another population. Apparently he was a real horny guy and persistent – that led to all the species.
RFL, why would you ask an evolutionist about a question involving abiogenesis? But asking such a question doesn’t answer your claim about your deity existing before the Big Bang. Why not present your evidence you claim you have?
I read in a holy book by the prophet D. Adams that the universe was created by the sneeze of a giant goat.
There is no gravity
http://bjoern.brembs.net/theonion/intelligentfalling.html
KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held “theory of gravity” is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.
“Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, ‘God’ if you will, is pushing them down,” said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.
Burdett added: “Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, ‘I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.’ Of course, he is alluding to a higher power.”
Founded in 1987, the ECFR is the world’s leading institution of evangelical physics, a branch of physics based on literal interpretation of the Bible.
According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God’s Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.
The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue “so they can make an informed decision.”
“We just want the best possible education for Kansas’ kids,” Burdett said.
Proponents of Intelligent Falling assert that the different theories used by secular physicists to explain gravity are not internally consistent. Even critics of Intelligent Falling admit that Einstein’s ideas about gravity are mathematically irreconcilable with quantum mechanics. This fact, Intelligent Falling proponents say, proves that gravity is a theory in crisis.
“Let’s take a look at the evidence,” said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden.”In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, ‘And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.’ He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, ‘But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.’ If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling.”
Critics of Intelligent Falling point out that gravity is a provable law based on empirical observations of natural phenomena. Evangelical physicists, however, insist that there is no conflict between Newton’s mathematics and Holy Scripture.
“Closed-minded gravitists cannot find a way to make Einstein’s general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world,” said Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry. “They’ve been trying to do it for the better part of a century now, and despite all their empirical observation and carefully compiled data, they still don’t know how.”
“Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work,” Carson said. “What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that ‘gravity waves’ and ‘gravitons’ are just secular words for ‘God can do whatever He wants.’”
Some evangelical physicists propose that Intelligent Falling provides an elegant solution to the central problem of modern physics.
“Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the ‘electromagnetic force,’ the ‘weak nuclear force,’ the ’strong nuclear force,’ and so-called ‘force of gravity,’” Burdett said. “And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus.”
Ah, yes, brother Maggot, the answer is 42.
“Mary – I thought it was on a giant turtle.”
BLASPHEMER!
“primordial soup” is a term only a “creationist” would come up with.
Please PROVE to me how my belief of how the earth was created is LESS valid than yours?
“Ah, yes, brother Maggot, the answer is 42.”
We must get together and consult the holy, mystical, sacred Scrabble pieces to find the answer.
I went diving in Palau last year…those islands were created by a giant child who was eating the islanders out of house and home, so they tied her up one night while she slept and set her on fire..when she exploded, that created the other islands….I’ve seen it for myself, those islands DO exist! The proof is right there for everyone to see!
“We must get together and consult the holy, mystical, sacred Scrabble pieces to find the answer.”
Isnt there a Church of the Holy Chicken Guts that they can consult?
ksfarmgrrl someone here told me you would know the answer to sort of a religious question I have.
That so?
Mmmm. . soup. . .chicken.
I’m gonna go get a snack!
There was quite the hullaboo in India last year when a professor commented that a bridge to Sri Lanka was not built by thousands of monkeys, but it was a natural formation.
http://www.kamat.com/kalranga/mythology/ramayan/30041.htm
But RFL would place geology on par with magical bridge monkeys.
Perfect thread to bring the hits to a boring blog missing a Palin thread today. Give the godless heathen liberals something to baaaaa about.
“ksfarmgrrl someone here told me you would know the answer to sort of a religious question I have.
That so?”
Nope
You’d have to ask the “level headed dancer, on the road to alcohol.”
Heh Rage. Wish I could send you some of the homemade noodles in my freezer!
“Perfect thread to bring the hits to a boring blog:
Sorry to bore you. Dont let the door hit ya on the way out..
“RFL, why would you ask an evolutionist about a question involving abiogenesis?”
Because abiogenesis is fundamental to the entire theory of unguided evolution.
I have faith that God exists. please re-read my post at 5:51 for an answer to your request for evidence. I have not existed for all eternity, so I can not provide evidence for God having existed for all eternity.
I choose to believe in God when given the highly unlikely and improbably alternative that you have chosen.
At some point it time, it takes faith to answer the question of origins. This answer is based upon an interpretation of the evidence conforming to the laws of science and faith.
You believe that abiogensis happened. Yet you have no evidence. You have faith in abiogensis in order support your belief unguided evolution happened. This faith enables you to trust in the belief that there is no God.
ksfarmgrrl well I was gonna ask you if adam and eve had belly buttons, but then I read about the Church of the Navel on line. So I got that one answered.
Then I wondered if Jesus died on Good Friday (afternoon), how was it we go looking for easter eggs Sunday mornin’, which surely ain’t no three days and three nites even in liberal speak.
“Please PROVE to me how my belief of how the earth was created is LESS valid than yours?”
-Mary
Please tell me in detail exactly what your belief is.
This faith enables you to trust in the belief that there is no God.
It also makes a hell of good insurance policy if you die one day and wake up at the pearly gates.
“What da Fu-?” “How’d I git here?” “Oh hey dar! I’m on your list – I BELIEVES!!!”
RFL, I don’t know why you insist on sounding absurd. Why should a pilot have to explain the wave theory of light in order to fly a plane? He shouldn’t because it’s not in his field. A medical doctor doesn’t need to explain the theory of gravity. Oh but light is needed to fly a plane, and gravity is needed to keep a patient on a table. I suppose these theories are essential for a pilot and a medical doctor. But really, you sound absurd making such stretches of reason.
You said god has always existed. Why should I take your word for it simply because you announce that you have faith therefore there is no reason to justify your claim. Why doesn’t a car salesman say there really is an engine in the car but don’t look under the hood because the salesman has faith it’s in there. You sound absurd.
Easter just has to be on Sunday because we all gotta work on Monday. And even the kids know: Don’t talk to dad when he comes home grumpy from work on Monday night. Eggs or no eggs!
“At some point it time, it takes faith to answer the question of origins. This answer is based upon an interpretation of the evidence conforming to the laws of science and faith.
You believe that abiogensis happened. Yet you have no evidence. You have faith in abiogensis in order support your belief unguided evolution happened. This faith enables you to trust in the belief that there is no God.”
Clearly you are dodging because I made you look like a fool. Knowledge is the enemy of the fundy. We can see the age of the universe by peering through a telescope. We can see the creation of organic material from inorganic material by a simple lab experiment. We can see the evolution of new species through biological lab experiments. But what can’t be seen is the notion of god that you made up. You are not on the same level as a realist. You made up an imaginary friend that you want to be taken seriously but you are merely a child with an active imagination.
Besides, they later invented Sunday Night Football.
God most have known this in his FORKnowledge too.
I’ll bet Gawd is secretly watching the Monday night game sitting on his white couch sucking down a cold brewski and eating a braunsweiger
between two pieces of buttered bread, a piece of good camembert or brie cheese and a thick slab of onion.
And I’ll bet he is a Bronco’s fan too.
“and a thick slab of onion.”
If you hadnt said it, I was gonna add it!
But I hear god likes her sandwiches with mustard, not butter…
If the God of Abraham decided to make a public statement to the people of Earth, something along the lines of “Hi People, I’m here, and created life on Earth!” that would be a blow to abniogenesis.
It of course would have absolutely no effect on the theory of evolution.
The scientific revolution began in the 16th century, religion has been around for over 6,000 years. Guess which has provided more for humanity in providing knowledge, and which hasn’t provided anything to understanding our natural world?
Religion is useless and held onto by the immoral, the frightened, and those with emotional or mental impairments.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:18 pm | Permalink
Heh Rage. Wish I could send you some of the homemade noodles in my freezer!
Heh, don’t tempt me! Do you realize how the postage would cost? ;)
If this “god” fellow were supernatural then nobody would know a thing about it. By it’s own definition supernatural is beyond nature while we exist in the natural world. For such a god to be known it would have to be natural. Therefore it would have to exist in the physical state. So what comprises this being, where does it exist, and did it decay and rot with age? Or does the believer proclaim to have some superpower to see beyond the natural world into the realm of the supernatural? Nah, it’s merely a case of magical thinking which mentally stable children naturally grow out of.
What’s with all this abniogenesis talk? What eggzactly is that?
Isn’t that what we studied in sixth grade. Single cell animal, lives on a petrie dish under a microscope?
I never could figure that one out. Why on earth would Gawd Almighty invent a single cell animal which lives under a microscope? How would He like to live under that bright light all day?
I used to get in line twiced when we was looking at the bniogenesis. Teacher though it was cauze I liked science. Truth is, I liked looking at little suzy’s panties when SHE bent over to look at the little critter. Lot’s of ewwww! awwwwws! a goin on there.
god likes her sandwiches with mustard
HE, HER, I don’t recollect I no fer sure. But I am certain Gawd is a buttered bread guy.
Think cows. Gawd, is a meat eater.
RFL,
“It is not an “organized” religion. But it is a worldview, and ideology, a belief, a Faith.”
Hate to mention this, but there are probably as many different atheist world views as there are christian world views, and there are at least as many christian world views as there are christians. there is nothing more intensely singular than a person’s world view, and I highly doubt that if you explored the nuances, you would find two people in the world who actually share an indentical vision of the world. Your attempt to characterize either as a single world view would require oversimplification to the point of absurdity.
If this “god” fellow were supernatural then nobody would know a thing about it. By it’s own definition supernatural is beyond nature while we exist in the natural world. For such a god to be known it would have to be natural. Therefore it would have to exist in the physical state
Now Maggotpunk, I say Maggotpunk, now you just hold on there a second fella.
If’ns likes you says God, which I cain’t rightly say why u calls him a fellow like you be best of buds or some such. But if Gawd Almight truly be whatcha call it? SUPERNATURAL, taint that the word you used? Yeah it surely is. SUPERNATURAL!
Well then it just stands to reason that somfin which is of, coming from, or relating to forces or beings that exist outside the natural world, then you caint go ascribing natural world physics to it later in the paragraphing you be doing! Now, now ya just see here friend?
Let’s just slow the dogs dowwwwwn boy! If you says the fella is SUPERNATURAL (and weren’t that a song in the early 70’s?), but SUPERNATURAL is your words
so’s you can’t go an then box the fella in using NATURAL world physical characteristics dontcha no?!
Maggotpunk you just can’t quite put your finger on it, but you just knows that the God stuff don’t all add up like 2+2 equal four right?
Therefore it would have to exist in the physical state.
There ya go! If God be SUPERNATURAL, then SUPERNATURAL it be. All the rules of the NATURAL world, no longer apply.
Only ifn’ you are trying real hard to see Him. You know straining yer mind so hard those veins be puffing out like when you are pushing a big stinker down the drain.
You just wanna see Him right? You wanna BELIEVE, so you’s got to put a box around the Fellow. And you can only box a critter in with what ya no.
No what I mean Vern?
You really cain’t be SUPERnatural and natural at the same time. You gotta think BIG.
Sorta got real quite here fer awhile.
Suppose the gawdless libs are sucking up chow for the second round?
Hells bells I’m just getting warmed up!
Let’s start some CRAZY talk about nasty ole religion! Let’s get crackin’!@
Let’s here it Libs:
Give me a “C”
Give me a “h”
Give me a “r”
Give me a “i”
Give me a “s”
Give me a “t”
Give me a “i”
Give me a “a”
Give me a “n”
Give me a “s”
What’s that spell?
CHRISTIANS!
Give me a “S”
Give me a “u”
Give me a “C”
Give me a “k”
What’s that spell?
Suck!
CHRISTIANS SUCK!!!!
Religious people all suck!
Religious believers are STUPID!
Christians are two-faced!
Christians are hypocrites!
GOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo Lib Team!
Judge weeeeeeeeeeeeelllllllllllll!
Give me a “C”
Give me a “C”
Give me a “C”
Give me a “C”
Give me a “C”
I’ll bet you all be taking notes.
So ends the lesson of the day.
No pass the hat and bring me my dough!
Whatever God wants he will reach down and grab as the plates come up to me.
“But I hear god likes her sandwiches with mustard, not butter…”
If it has meat on it it better NOT be butter. That is an abomination – Leviticus.
A creation “theory”:
The entire universe was created last night at midnight Central Time. We were all created with our memories implanted. Just for fun, some memories don’t quite match up with the facts as also created. For example, I was created with memories of doing the dishes – however a sinkful of dirty dishes were also created. That proves that God has a sense of humor.
PROVE that is not all true.
bth, would your theory on creation be preceded by anything? I mean SOMfin must have come first.
The Langoliers?
“However, he would follow and also change form and that would start another population. Apparently he was a real horny guy and persistent – that led to all the species.” [posted upthread]
Actually, that isnt all that far off… at least according to ancient Hebrew… The “Genesis” account (Gen. 1) states repeatedly, that “God said, Let the earth bring forth” such and such a thing(s)…
The words “bring forth” is a Hebraic form of “birthing” words… The EARTH, or feminine, “gives birth” after the direct intercourse with the Deity…
For the “two deity” folks, there you have a foundation… GOD (male deity) interacts with Earth (mother/Gaia) and Gaia (earth) gives birth… and gives birth finally, to the male and female Humans (Adam`ei — pronouned “Adamay”
Who knows? Maybe the same answer as what was here before “Day One”
For a more serious discussion:
http://aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/Age_of_the_Universe.asp
I see Chas the fake preacher has found time to google a few verse history for us.
Come on Chas! Be inventive! Any idiot can find that crap on the web. Be creative.
You certainly can’t be godly.
This thread turned out about like I thought it would when I saw it. It drew the most bitter atheists.
One thing I don’t completely understand is why atheists who are drawn to these types or threads feel they have to attack folks of faith. As if in trying to tear down others’ beliefs they can manage to convince themselves that they don’t continue to make a huge mistake in their denial of God. Very telling, I think.
I see no reason to respond in kind. In fact it would not be in accord with what my Master taught.
Good night all and God bless.
I see the WE Blog perpetuates a comedian’s – Maher – attack on Christians.
I also see the phony preacher not leaping to the defense.
And the other Lib Leftists deny God as well.
Suprise. Ho hum. Pointless topic.
No wonder McClatchy is losing money.
Buncha fuchinidiots work there.
If one is not skeptical of religion then they are ignorant. Talking snakes! My arse.
Seems to me religion serves a purpose for the human animal.
The problem comes when people start thinking religion is god-made and not what it actually is: man-made.*
*I hesitated for a moment; wondering if that was a sexist remark. Then it dawned on me I know of no religion that was founded by a woman. Maybe Christian Science.**
**Is it true that they installed a telephone in Mary Baker Eddy’s coffin? Okay. That’s weird.
Anyway. You can believe in whatever theology makes sense to you. But as soon as you think your particular dogma gives you an inside track to God, I have my doubts. I kinda think God might be bigger than the Baptists. And have more important things to tend to.
“If it has meat on it it better NOT be butter. That is an abomination – Leviticus.”
Heheheeh.
GOD HATES SHRIMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A court has dropped a lawsuit against God because god doesn’t exist and therefore couldn’t be served legal papers.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i2jb6VPJX4XBa5yiEEIuPjrcZmFwD93R8TH00
You mean god got off on a technicality?
Damn acteeeevist judges legislating from the bench!
David, I think those fundy, pentecostal, long haired, long skirted women DO have large litters every month!
Duggers anyone?
If god existed then he knew of the lawsuit. Clearly he knew he was guilty and had to hide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3VAEYEG53w
ksfarmgrrl said: I see chris is exibiting that christianity of his.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – — – - – - – - – - – - – - —
Maybe I was a little over the top yesterday. My apologies if I offended you.
However, your stock in trade is mocking Christians and Christ himself. Your so fond of adding “Jesus wept” to just about every post, while at the same time mocking and denying his existence. As far as I have been able to find, the only time the Bible refers to Jesus weeping is when He was told about the death of his good friend Lazarus, whom He proceeded to raise from the dead.
Why must you perpetuate the myth of the death of Matthew Sheppard. He was not killed by a couple of Christians because he was gay. His death was the result of a drug deal gone bad. His killers were a couple of thugs who are serving their time for the crimes they did. The truth about the Matthew Sheppard case is that the radical gay movement was looking for a martyr. They were looking for a James Bryd of their own. When word of a young homosexual man being brutally beaten and left to die in a frozen field came out, they had their martyr. The national media and gay activists by the thousands flocked to Wyoming and the entire phony story was created. Now here we are ten years on and you are still telling that lie.
What’s even more disgusting is that about the same time in 98 that the Sheppard case was all over the media, a couple of gay perverts in Arkansas abducted an eleven year old boy and brutalized him sexually and physically resulting in his death. The national media wouldn’t touch that one with a ten foot pole.
I guess only in a disgusting, perverted world such as this, would a Bill Maher be a cult celebrity.
Hey Chris, thanks for demonstrating the true christian attitude toward others. When you apologize and then make a different attack, it kinda lacks sincerity.
No wonder jesus weeps.
Brought anyone to god lately with that christian attitude?
‘Cause ya know, you make it so attractive and all…
(waiting for another meltdown from him in 3…2…1…)
Heheheh. I’m still laughing.
Matthew was STILL killed by christians, even in your explanation.
nitwit
Maybe those fictional guys in arkansas were not REAL gay people…
But thanks for confirming that old time christian hatred. You make my points for me so much better than I could ever do myself.
A living example of christian charity that chris is…
ksfarmgrrl
Posted October 16, 2008 at 9:51 am | Permalink
Heheheh. I’m still laughing.
Matthew was STILL killed by christians, even in your explanation.
*************************************
But not because he was gay, which because the cause celebre’
There is just one problem with this story. According to the evidence, it is not true. Money for drugs, not “homophobia,” was the motive for Matthew Shepard’s murder, as revealed by a 2004 ABC News “20/20″ report. Aaron McKinney, sentenced in 1999 to two life sentences for Matthew Shepard’s murder, was on a sleepless week-long methamphetamine binge and in search of money for more drugs when he and his accomplice, Russell Henderson, met Shepard at a bar.
Earlier that evening, McKinney said, he had tried and failed to take $10,000 from a drug dealer. He saw in Shepard, a well-dressed but slight young man, an easy robbery victim and readily obliged when Shepard asked for a lift home because he was too drunk. All three were in the front seat of McKinney’s truck, with Henderson driving, when Shepard grabbed McKinney’s leg. McKinney reacted by hitting Shepard with his gun butt, as he told ABC, “I was getting ready to pull it on him anyway.”
‘It wasn’t a hate crime’
Cal Rerucha, the prosecutor, said, “I don’t think the proof was there,” for the hate-crime allegation. Rerucha, who sought the death penalty for McKinney, thinks it was McKinney’s drug-addled state that led to the crime. “The methamphetamine just fueled to this point where there was no control. It was a horrible, horrible, horrible murder. It was a murder that was once again driven by drugs,” he said.
Laramie Police Detective Ben Fritzen, a lead investigator in the case, said, “Matthew Shepard’s sexual preference or sexual orientation certainly wasn’t the motive in the homicide. If it wasn’t Shepard, they would have found another easy target. What it came down to really is drugs and money and two punks that were out looking for it.”
Oh, so you believe these lying killers when they say it wasnt because Matthew was gay? Didnt one of them first use the “gay panic” defense?
But you take their word on this?
ok
Whatever gets you through the night…
They are still such nice christian boys, though!
ksfarmgrrl, I don’t bring people to God. I simply tell the truth and God (or more specifically the Holy Spirit) does the rest. I notice you did not attack anything I wrote, just me. Thats cool. I’m used to it. Besides, you can’t refute what I wrote so I guess you got nothing left but to attack me.
Hating God and God’s people may make you feel good for a while, but the long term prospects are lousy.
Want me to refute what you said?
Ok
There’s more than one reference to jesus weeping in the bible. And no, I’m not telling you. Look it up for yourself. Why do atheists always know more about the bible than you christian boys?
Prove the arkansas thing, and that it was done in retaliation for Matthew’s death.
The gay panic defense used by one of Matthew’s killers negates their lie that it was not because he was gay. You believe these killing christians? You think killers dont lie? Heheheh.
you AND your posts are nitwits
And you talk about telling the truth? Hehehehe.
You are a living example of christians.
Oh, and long term prospects? hehehhe. HAHAHAHAAH
We’ll BOTH be dead.
Ramen!
ksfarmgrrl
Posted October 16, 2008 at 10:05 am | Permalink
They are still such nice christian boys, though!
***************************
who says?
Oh, so you believe these lying killers when they say it wasnt because Matthew was gay? Didnt one of them first use the “gay panic” defense?
But you take their word on this?
ok
Whatever gets you through the night…
**************************
yeah, I think their attorney did. Why? WHo the hell knows. Maybe it was the real true, maybe it was the best defense the attorney could come up to try and get them off. WHo knows.
So you take their word the first time, because it fits your agenda, and not the second because it doesn’;t. Oh okay Whatever gets you thru the night.
Me, I would have fried them both. Slowly. Because of what they did, regardless of their motive.
How about the words of”
Cal Rerucha, the prosecutor, said, “I don’t think the proof was there,” for the hate-crime allegation. Rerucha, who sought the death penalty for McKinney, thinks it was McKinney’s drug-addled state that led to the crime. “The methamphetamine just fueled to this point where there was no control. It was a horrible, horrible, horrible murder. It was a murder that was once again driven by drugs,” he said.
Laramie Police Detective Ben Fritzen, a lead investigator in the case, said, “Matthew Shepard’s sexual preference or sexual orientation certainly wasn’t the motive in the homicide. If it wasn’t Shepard, they would have found another easy target. What it came down to really is drugs and money and two punks that were out looking for it.”
Oh, that’s right. They are not gay, so they are lying tooo.
Hmm, well…
There is a story about a THIRTEEN year old boy who died at the hands of pedophiles on meth. No mention that it was in retaliation for the death of Matthew, only that the media coverage was different.
There is also the killer’s statements that the death was accidental and the kid was a willing participant. He had been having sex with one of the killers for two months prior to the supposedly accidental death.
“] Brown also later claimed he was “under the influence of methamphetamine” when talking with his arresting officers.[1]
So I guess THAT was a drug related death too, not a hate crime, not a retaliation. Just another drug related death.
And the guys were pedophiles. Polly Klaas, et al?
Child abuse, pedophiles and meth are all horrible, HORRIBLE things. No matter who does them.
The only reference that I could find to support the oh so christian chris was from… wait for it… Covenant News. It was followed by a sermon on why homosexuality is wrong.
no mention of rape and child moslesting by straight folks.
nice try chris.
The google is your friend…
So Chris,
Please substantiate your claims. SOunds like maybe yoiu got bad info?
“So you take their word the first time, because it fits your agenda, and not the second because it doesn’;t.”
No, I’m just pointing out that first they said they killed him because of gay panic, then, to avoid the hate crime charge, they changed their story and said it was because of meth.
The prosecutors chose to believe one version. I chose to believe there is another version. You chose to believe the second version. Maybe the prosecutors just wanted the whole thing to go away? Can you say “plea bargain”?
They are liars. They ONLY went to the meth defense when it was clear the penelty for a failed gay panic defense was stronger.
He’s still dead. Killed by a couple of christians.
Those are the facts. Like I said, I dont fear for my life with atheists. I fear for my life around christians.
“They are still such nice christian boys, though!”
heheheh
You believe them that the murder was over meth, but you dont believe them that they are christians?
Heheheh. HAHAHAHAHA
See, I knew the “they are not christians” thing would come up.
“They are liars. They ONLY went to the meth defense when it was clear the penelty for a failed gay panic defense was stronger”
You don;t think their attorney knew that already?
***************************************
“He’s still dead. Killed by a couple of christians.”
Who says they were Christians?
“They are liars. They ONLY went to the meth defense when it was clear the penelty for a failed gay panic defense was stronger”
You don;t think their attorney knew that already?
***************************************
“He’s still dead. Killed by a couple of christians.”
Who says they were Christians?
I never said they were or they weren;t. I asked you who said they were.
“Laramie Police Detective Ben Fritzen, a lead investigator in the case, said, “Matthew Shepard’s sexual preference or sexual orientation certainly wasn’t the motive in the homicide.”
I guess that’s why the LEO originally charged them with a hate crime, and then later dropped the charge after the defendents changed their story about the gay panic defense?
like I said. Plea bargain. And after the outcry, LEO had to cover their asses somehow.
Heheheh. HAHAHAHAHA
See, I knew the “they are not christians” thing would come up.
“See, I knew the “they are not christians” thing would come up.”
Please read a little deeper. It never came up. You are the only on discussing their “christian” status.
I asked who said they were.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted October 16, 2008 at 10:32 am | Permalink
Heheheh. HAHAHAHAHA
See, I knew the “they are not christians” thing would come up.
***********************************
Yeah, by you. I will ask you again, who said they were Christians?
In case you don;t understand the question. Who stated that the killers were Christians. They did? Some Pastor did? Their friends and family? WHo?
No, the killers themselves stated it.
And it seems that not all LEO agrees.
From the ABC interview.
“In fact, former Laramie police Cmdr. Dave O’Malley got a call from a friend of Shepard suggesting that. Nevertheless, O’Malley doesn’t believe drug use motivated the attackers.
“I really don’t think he was in a methamphetamine-induced rage when this happened. I don’t buy it at all,” O’Malley said. “I feel comfortable in my own heart that they did what they did to Matt because they [had] hatred toward him for being gay,” he said. “
From the same interview you are quoting:
“Helping fuel the gay hate crime theory were statements made to police and the media by Kristen Price, McKinney’s girlfriend. (Price was charged with felony accessory after-the-fact to first-degree murder. She later pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of misdemeanor interference with police officers.)
Price now says that at the time of the crime she thought things would go easier for McKinney if his violence were seen as a panic reaction to an unwanted gay sexual advance.”
“I guess that’s why the LEO originally charged them with a hate crime, and then later dropped the charge after the defendents changed their story about the gay panic defense?
”
So, the prosecutor dropped the charges after the defense changed their story? Oh,okay. Everyone is lying to cover up the hate crime, except when they weren;t. Got it.
From the same 20/20 interview. Can you say “self loathing”?
“In his interview with Vargas, O’Connor reveals his belief that McKinney is bisexual. “I know of an instance where he had a three-way, two guys and one gal,” he said. “Because he did it with me.”
O’Connor added, “I know he’s bisexual. There ain’t no doubt in my mind. He is bisexual.”
McKinney’s former girlfriend Price says she now believes that as well. “He was always into trying to talk me into having a three-way with one of his guy friends,” she said.
In her prison interview with McKinney, Vargas asked McKinney directly whether he had had any sexual encounters with men. McKinney said no.
Displaying a strong aversion to homosexual sex was a tactic McKinney tried at his trial. His lawyers developed a so-called “gay panic defense,” claiming homosexual abuse McKinney suffered as a child caused him to overreact to a sexual advance by Shepard and triggered the violent attack.
Hoping a Wyoming jury would be sympathetic to gay panic did not pay off. McKinney was found guilty and wound up with two life sentences, assuring he’ll spend the rest of his life in prison, the same sentence received by his accomplice Russell Henderson.”
Whatever LJ. It’s clear, despite the evidence from your own source, you choose to believe it wasnt a hate crime committed by christians.
Carry on.
“No, the killers themselves stated it.”
Thank you.
So, you believe them about that, but not that it wasn’t about a hate crime. In other words, you choose, like everyone else, to beleive what they want. That’s fine. Just leave it at that. Just don’t be surprised when others challenge you on it
Me I don;t know, and I don;t care. They sh9uld have been roasted over a slow fire. Because of what they did, regardless of the motive.
carry on.
“His lawyers developed a so-called “gay panic defense,” claiming homosexual abuse McKinney suffered as a child caused him to overreact to a sexual advance by Shepard and triggered the violent attack.”
By the way, defense lawyers can be all kinds of creative on their own, no help from their clients needed.
For any reading here and want to think otherwise, Ksfarmgrrl excluded (because she already knows better) I do not condone violence against persons of any race, religion, political stance, gender, sexual orientation, etc. I have seen plenty of what people can do to themselves, and to each other. For reasons big and little. It sickens me. They should get whatever they deserve. Sometimes they don;t, for a myriad of reasons. That angers me.
ksfarmgrrl, I never said the Arkansas incident was in retaliation for the Sheppard death. I just said that it happened about the same time.
LJ,
The real problem is that fundie christians made gay people an issue simply because they thought they could get traction from it. Many mainstream churches jumped on the bandwagon because they didn’t want to appear soft on gay people, and very few spoke out against the growing hatred. As a result of the frenzy, the christian community built an atmosphere that promoted hate and hate crimes. Some may have been unaware of the lengths some of their members would go to carry out “the Word,” even though the historical examples of such action were plentiful, but many knew full well that gay people would be killed and didn’t give a damn- hey, siege mentality boosts pledges, so them damned sodomites are to blame for everything from warts to tsunamis!
And yes, there is hatred of gay people in the secular society as well, but it originated with the church, much the same way anti-semitism did.
Christians may not have actually held the weapons that killed Matthew Shepard and all the others, but they sure encouraged and facilitated the circumstances that allowed it to happen!
Jed,
While I appreciate your point, it is in my opinion, very shallow. It would be liking equating environmentalists in general to those of ELF. While it would be true that ELF could be described as environmentalists, it cannot be true that environmentalists can be described as “Elfs” Or is that Elves? :)
THis statement in particular
“but many knew full well that gay people would be killed and didn’t give a damn- hey, siege mentality boosts pledges,:
I don;t buy, and just serves them same purpose you object to. To inflame gay and lesbian people against Christians.
Yes,it is true that the church, or at least part of it, preaches against homosexuality. It also preaches against living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc. So what.
That doesn;t incite people to kill. Truthfully, there are some idiots of the Christian faith that go waaay overboard. Blaming America tolerating gays for all sorts of ills. They get the news, they get the headlines. The majority of churches, and their members, don;t care that much. Will they vote against gay marriage? Likely. Rightly or wrongly, they perceive homosexuality as a deviance, or a choice. Either way, they see no need to change society because someone wants to make choices they disagree with. To equate their disagreement with homosexuality as either hate, or not giving a damn ahether or not homosexuals are killed because it fills the coffers is not only disingenous, but just as hateful as you say the Christians are.
“Yes,it is true that the church, or at least part of it, preaches against homosexuality. It also preaches against living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc. So what.”
So what?
Well, for one thing, they didnt amend the Kansas Constitution for two of those three things….
Candidates dont run and rallies are not held for “living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc.:
When’s the last time anyone held up signs that says “God hates gossips” or “God hates cohabitators?”
When is the last time someone got killed for “living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc.”
Yet another false equivalency
Quote of the day:
“Truth Justice and the American way–that’s all we ask. I refuse to subscribe to the culture of victimization that plagues white males in this country. The poor and the powerless are not the ones organized to screw me over.”
And neither are the gays . . .
What is “methamphetamine-fueled rage”? Yeah, I know meth tweaks behavior in the way one would expect bad speed to do so, making people more jumpy and irritable.
But at the end of the day, the people who lose it and go nuts are responsible for their own behavior. If McKinney was merely intending to rob Sheppard, why the extreme actions? Why not just take his money and call it a day?
The drugs didn’t it. A human being did, and humans have reasons, often stupid, strange, psychotic reasons, but reasons nonetheless.
The homophobia so openly stated would appear to be a reason.
“Well, for one thing, they didnt amend the Kansas Constitution for two of those three things….
Candidates dont run and rallies are not held for “living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc.:
When’s the last time anyone held up signs that says “God hates gossips” or “God hates cohabitators?”
When is the last time someone got killed for “living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc”
And when is the last time you saw me supporting any of those things?
“Well, for one thing, they didnt amend the Kansas Constitution for two of those three things….
*************************************
the Constituional Amendment passed by how much? 70%? So 70% of Kansans are for the beating or killing of gays? 70% of Kansans are “fundamental” christians?
***************************************
When’s the last time anyone held up signs that says “God hates gossips” or “God hates cohabitators?”
Phelps is a joke. To everyone not in his little band of trolls.
***************************
Candidates dont run and rallies are not held for “living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc.:
I don;t know candidates who ran on that issue. I am sure there were some. There are candidates than run on all sorts of things. If they did, they shouldn;t have. More importantly, did they win? On that single issue
*************************************
“When is the last time someone got killed for “living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc”
”
When is the last time someone got killed for being gay? And is that deathrate any higher than being killed for wearing the wrong colors, for being on the wrong side of the street, for being a woman, etc etc etc.
“But at the end of the day, the people who lose it and go nuts are responsible for their own behavior. If McKinney was merely intending to rob Sheppard, why the extreme actions? Why not just take his money and call it a day?”
yes, they are, and hence my belief that they should have been punished by being put to death. Why such extreme? Hell, you could likely ask that every single day of the week in some areas of the country.
Ksfarmgrrl-
I understand the issue is important to you. It is only in that violence towards anyone, including speech, is important to me. To homosexuals, to Muslims, to whomever and whatever. That includes Christians.
LJ,
As far as I’m concerned, if you are a believer in whatever cause, it’s essential to clean your own backyard first. That goes for environmentalists and ELF just as much as it goes for christians and Jerry Falwell and Fred Phelps. Probably the prime reason I don’t belong to most groups is that I can’t agree with everything any group says or does, and I need to be free to vocally disagree when I need to.
“Yes,it is true that the church, or at least part of it, preaches against homosexuality. It also preaches against living together without being married, about lying and gossiping, etc. So what.”
Personally I’ve never had to go to the hospital and visit someone who was nearly beaten to death for gossiping. I’ve never had to go to the funeral of a couple burned to death in their home, or beaten with tire irons until they were unrecognizable for a heterosexual unmarried relationship.
Yes, I know that most christians wouldn’t do such things, and yet they happen, and happen with much greater frequency when the christian rhetoric gets shrill. Preachers, televangelists and demagogues all know that while they won’t incite the average believer in to acts of violence very often, there is always a lunatic fringe that will commit such acts when given tacit permission and told that it’s the will of god, and all they’ve got to do is maintain a semblance of deniability to evade responsibility. Just look at all the preachers right now who tepidly condemn the actions of Paul Hill and Eric Rudolph, and yet quietly contribute to web sites in their honor.
I would think that most christians would object to such blatent hypocrisy, and to the materialism of so many preachers and churches. After all, christianity was founded on spiritual rather than worldly values. Where Jesus walked or occasionally rode a donkey, too many preachers in huge churches are known more for their Rolls Royces and Armani suits than the substance of their message. Since too many believers do value such things, the successful preacher is the one who can wring to most money out of his congregation. The way they do that is to find an enemy to protect them from. It wasn’t an accident that the rise of gay people as the ultimate enemy coincided with the waning of communism as the ultimate evil to be fought, and if some of them had to die in that war, then so be it.
I’m just the one who gets to sit by their coffin, missing someone who was a good and caring person, and wishing the hatred that got them killed wasn’t so coldly calculated.
Jed-
For whatever your losses are, I am deeply sorry. For the rest, I would like to answer, in depth, but I am afraid I must run. If I get a chance, I will return and reply.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081016/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_dubai_sex_on_beach;_ylt=AsfllFpPqscbUXPxgBVltphvaA8F Some places in the world you get jailed for kissing. And I do beilive that in some parts of the U.S. their are places where fornication is a crime.
LJ, it’s clear your mind is already made up on the subject, and no one, no fact, no example will change it. When it comes to examples one’s too many and a hundred’s not enough.
Google Paul Broussard.
Google Gwen Araujo.
Google “murder + gay”
See how many examples you come up with.
“littlejohn
Posted October 16, 2008 at 3:47 pm ”
You asked for examples, and I gave them to you.
Now you want to argue about the examples?
The shark called…
LJ, have you never heard of Harvey Milk?
Google Brandon McInerney. That just happened recently.
But oh no, you couldnt be bothered to look up the number of gay people killed for being gay.
And that doesnt include the ones who were merely assaaulted, burned out of their homes, fired from their jobs, had their property vandalized….
Oh yeah. And I’m SURE none of the perps were chrisitians
Oh, here’s another one.
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20182143,00.html
See how easy it is to find the answers?
“littlejohn
Posted October 16, 2008 at 3:47 pm ”
You asked for examples, and I gave them to you.
Now you want to argue about the examples?
The shark called…
What the hell are you talking about? What am I arguing about. By the way, did you ever answer the question
“And is that deathrate any higher than being killed for wearing the wrong colors, for being on the wrong side of the street, for being a woman, etc etc etc” ?
No of course not. Because either you don;t know, or don;t care.
“
“And that doesnt include the ones who were merely assaaulted, burned out of their homes, fired from their jobs, had their property vandalized….”
And I know people who’ve had all those things done to them and weren;t gay. so what? Do ya think being Gay gives you some special victim class?
“LJ, it’s clear your mind is already made up on the subject, and no one, no fact, no example will change it.”
My mind is made up about what? That I think killing people is bad? That I think brutalizing people is bad? That I think your own brand of bigotry is as bad as anybody elses? Tell me what my mind is made up about. That the Mathew Shepard case may ave been about hate crimes, but just as possible not?
So, you have given me four examples. Over how many years? So the murder rate is how much? NOw, I will grant than any is too much, when have I ever said anything different. Was the four listed killed by CHristians? DOn;t know, the story I got from google didn’t say. The Harvey Milk crime seemed to be linked with possibly gay, possibly because tghey guy wanted his job back, possibly both. The youth ones? I don’t see any evidence of Christian hate there, but they were certainly killed because they were gay. One likley because he had sex with hetereos under the false premisesthat he was a woman. A good search of gays + murdered turned up at least 10 pages. A google search of Christians + murdered the same amount. What is your point?
I have neve excused violence, or the calling for violence, against gays. YOu can dig all you want, you know you won;t find it.
LJ, thanks for proving my poin that when it comes to cons with their minds made up, no amount or quality of example is enough.
Every example is met with a request for more. One’s too many and a hundred’s not enough.
Go believe what you believe and disregard the facts. It’s what you wanted to do anyway.
You cant do your own research on statistics? Why am I not surprised…
Well.
I watched Maher’s film, and I found it interesting and at times certainly funny. I do not agree with his primary thesis, just as I do not agree with Sam Harris’ or Richard Dawkins’. I do not think that religion or theism in and of themselves necessarily lead to widespread irrationality or violence. I have certainly seen that they do in many people, but they also don’t in many people. The vast majority of people have beliefs that they cling to in spite of lack of evidence to support them, and I have found such behavior even among fellow atheists/agnostics/non-theists.
That being said, I do not believe that there is an empirical basis for pretty much any dogma or creed based religion, and while a person’s participation in such a faith does not in and of itself identify her/him as irrational, such religions do provide justifications for irrational and even anti-social behavior in some people.
The film itself I thought was very interesting. Bill Maher was uncompromising in questioning the basis of religious faith, but for the most part he was in fact polite. Bill Maher is the epitome of a militant agnostic (there is a bumper sticker that says Militant Agnostic: I Don’t Know and You Don’t Either!) in that he asks questions and he is not satisfied with self referential answers. And his fears about the dangers of religious extremism are certainly justified, I just don’t think that the widespread rejection of religion will eliminate extremism (South Park had a two part episode set in a future where religion was eliminated-it was as usual obnoxious and goofy, but the kidding on the sly was also very funny and I think there was some truth in it, also, “-isms” are not always on religious tenants, almost any philosophical viewpoint can develop an extremist fringe). Also, there are in fact movements that try to combine the best elements of religious communities (a supportive community) without a dogma or creed basis, and some of these movements do identify themselves as “religious”.
That being said, I certainly think that certain religious views are used to justify extremism and intolerance, and that certain religious views, with no more solid basis in reality than belief in Zeus, result wider acceptance of truly horrific bigotry among their adherents. That’s a fact. That’s what resulted in airplanes being flown into buildings and other hate crimes. I once recieved a death threat because I signed an online petition to spare the life of a Pakistani professor (convicted of “blasphemy”) who dared to suggest that Mohommad’s parent’s would not have been Muslims, since they died before their child founded the faith.
“Personally I’ve never had to go to the hospital and visit someone who was nearly beaten to death for gossiping. I’ve never had to go to the funeral of a couple burned to death in their home, or beaten with tire irons until they were unrecognizable for a heterosexual unmarried relationship.
Yes, I know that most christians wouldn’t do such things, and yet they happen, and happen with much greater frequency when the christian rhetoric gets shrill. Preachers, televangelists and demagogues all know that while they won’t incite the average believer in to acts of violence very often, there is always a lunatic fringe that will commit such acts when given tacit permission and told that it’s the will of god, and all they’ve got to do is maintain a semblance of deniability to evade responsibility. Just look at all the preachers right now who tepidly condemn the actions of Paul Hill and Eric Rudolph, and yet quietly contribute to web sites in their honor.”
Well said Jed.
LJ, thanks for proving my poin that when it comes to cons with their minds made up, no amount or quality of example is enough.
Every example is met with a request for more. One’s too many and a hundred’s not enough.
Go believe what you believe and disregard the facts. It’s what you wanted to do anyway.
You cant do your own research on statistics? Why am I not surprised…
Full of crap as usual, I see. Can;t answer the question, so you want me to answer it for you. Sorry. Bigot is as bigot does. And you may or may not be, your yor blog postings are probably a good indication.
Which facts did I disregard? The fact that the number of gays killed by Christians, is smaller than the number of women killed just because they didn;t friggin cook the food right? Your links showed no trend, other than the fact that they got killed for being gay. Which I haven;t supported. And, I guess you know better than the prosecutor, and one of the lead investigators inthe Mathew Shepard case. Because youi want to believe it. And their attorney first tried to use that defense. Oh, and they said they were Christian. You beleive that, but you refuse to beleive it was drug related, money related, or anything else because it was a gay man that got killed.
What is my mind made up about? That I support the rights of gays to be married? Oh yeah, you forgot to mention that part didn;t you. THat I support not targetting gays or anybody else for violence or hate? Oh yeah, you forgot that part, didn;t You. That I didn;t support DOMA? Oh yeah, you forgot that part didn;t you. That I have repeatedly said that those who blame Gay/Lesbian issues for the nations woes are fricking lunatics? Oh yeah, you forgot that part didn;t you.
Yeah, thanks for proving my point.
Whatever LJ. No amount of posting from anyone will change your mind that christians dont hate and target gay people. That christians dont commit violence against gay people simply because they are gay.
No amount of facts, or links, or posts from any number of posters will convince you that gay folks are targeted for violence by christians.
Heheheh. A trend? We arent killed or assaulted by chrisitans in any greater number than the rest of the population.
Now there’s a vindication of christians….
Like I said, have it your way. I’m not wasting any more time on you by trying to prove something you refuse to believe. No matter what.
“, there is always a lunatic fringe that will commit such acts when given tacit permission and told that it’s the will of god,”
Please list examples where preachers give tacit permision to the violence against gays, and tell the doers that it is the will of God. How many?
I agree, anybody who does this should be investigated, and condemned. Publicly and often.
Now, there are thousands of churches of all stripes across the United States. There are over
159,030,000 self professed Christians in the United States. How many of them have commited crimes against gays? How many of them even care about the gay issue. How many gays have commited crimes against gays?
“Whatever LJ. No amount of posting from anyone will change your mind that christians dont hate and target gay people. That christians dont commit violence against gay people simply because they are gay.
”
BS. I never said any such thing. Please point out where I did. There are self professedhristians that target gay people. IS that what you want to hear? Okay. Fine.
If you fear for your life because of the few examples available where self professes christians killed gays for being gay versus the 159,000,000 self professed christians, please feel free to do so. And if you get hurt in my area, please call ems. I will be glad to help. Or if your car breaks down, or you are being hassled for being gay, or for whatever reason you feel for your safety of you or yours.
“Like I said, have it your way. I’m not wasting any more time on you by trying to prove something you refuse to believe. No matter what”
Becaue your basic premise is wrong and you know it.
Run. A christian might be behind you. Oh yeah, and
What is my mind made up about? That I support the rights of gays to be married? Oh yeah, you forgot to mention that part didn;t you. THat I support not targetting gays or anybody else for violence or hate? Oh yeah, you forgot that part, didn;t You. That I didn;t support DOMA? Oh yeah, you forgot that part didn;t you. That I have repeatedly said that those who blame Gay/Lesbian issues for the nations woes are fricking lunatics? Oh yeah, you forgot that part didn;t you.
Yeah, thanks for proving my point.
Haters
http://gaychristian.net/newmission.php
More haters
http://christiangays.com/marypearson.shtml
More haters
“every time a conservative dies, a gay angel gets their wings”
LJ,
You just can’t imagine your religion in anything other than a white hat, and although the facts to the contrary are all around you and have been your whole life, you simply refuse to see them, even when someone points them out. So keep your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes tight and repeat the phrase “Lalalalalala…” until it all goes away.
And pray that it doesn’t come knocking down your door. One of the dirtiest secrets of bigotry is that you don’t have to be gay to be gay-bashed; all it takes is someone spreading a rumor.
LJ,
You just can’t imagine your religion in anything other than a white hat, and although the facts to the contrary are all around you and have been your whole life, you simply refuse to see them, even when someone points them out. So keep your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes tight and repeat the phrase “Lalalalalala…” until it all goes away.
And pray that it doesn’t come knocking down your door. One of the dirtiest secrets of bigotry is that you don’t have to be gay to be gay-bashed; all it takes is someone spreading a rumor.
More crap. Useless meanderings. Sorry, you mistake me for someone else. I just pointed out the overhyped hysteria coming from Ksfarmgrrl. And asked a few questions, which never got answered.
So, go ahead, bleat all you want. I will take my stand onexactly what I said. i con;t done violence, physical, emotional,or in speech against anyone. I don;t approve of DOMA. I approve of allowing gays to be married. I think that people who who claim God is punishing ameiceria for a liberal stance on homosexuality is a nutcase.
I also stand by my stance that if Ksfarmgrrl is afraid for her life in the prescence of Christians, she has a problem.
Go ahead, take what I just said and try and paint it into your litle tinfoil hat
“You just can’t imagine your religion in anything other than a white hat, and although the facts to the contrary are all around you and have been your whole life, you simply refuse to see them, even when someone points them out. So keep your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes tight and repeat the phrase “Lalalalalala…” until it all goes away”
Your the one the worst for it.
One of the dirtiest secrets of people claiming “bigotry” against them is that they are the biggest bigots of all.
They are like the nutcase Christians that think there is a demon behind every tree, and everyone is persecuting them. And THOS EVIL ATHEISTS are behind it. Yeah, right.
And Gays should fear for their life inthe prescence of Christians. Yeah, right.
So you are saying that KFG is the biggest bigot of all?
Nope. I choose to attack ideas, not people. And you can quote me on that. If it sounded like I did, then I must apologize to KFG and Jed.
“One of the dirtiest secrets of people claiming “bigotry” against them is that they are the biggest bigots of all.”
Well, this was pretty clealry an attack on anyone who claimed bigotry.
WEll, then I apologize.
LJ,
“i con;t done violence, physical, emotional,or in speech against anyone. I don;t approve of DOMA. I approve of allowing gays to be married. I think that people who who claim God is punishing ameiceria for a liberal stance on homosexuality is a nutcase.”
And yet you support the institutions that have either specifically attacked gay people or stood silent while they were bashing them, and then denied seeing any bashing, or saw it as a few nutcases so as to deny the institutional and societal hatred it is.
If you are serious about what you said above, you need to sit down and talk with gay people and find out what’s actually happening. I’m sure you know and even like several already, and when you discover that they are gay, remember that they are still the same people you liked before they told you they were gay. Talk with them as openly as you did before you knew, only this time discuss the issues surrounding that aspect of their lives. You might even learn something. And if you can open your mind and heart, You might even find a way to matter in the world.
In the circles I travel, there are quite a number of gay men. I don’t care one way or the other. Yes, there are gay people being bashed because they are gay. Wow. DO you think that is news? Yes, there are people being bashed because they are ______. You fill it in. Yes, there ae people being killed the world over because they are Christian. No news to me. Yes, there were three thousand Americans killed simply because they were American. No news to me. I don;t condemn muslims for it. I condemn the idiots that did it.
WOw, I must be given my tacit support to terrorist Muslims becuae I don;t condemn Muslims.
Give me a break and take off your blinders.
“And if you can open your mind and heart, You might even find a way to matter in the world.”
And whether or not I matter to you is not important to me. However, I spend many hours working to make sure the world is a little better place. I am quite secure in what i do to “matter in the world”. I give to charities (not including my hateful church), I spend many, many volunteer hours doing meaningful community service. I don;t prejudge anyone, based on their gender, their gender identity, their sexual orientation, their race or any other thing than their character. I I have taught my children to do the same. I have givenmoney and temporary shelter to homeless. I have worked in soup kitchens, and around the clock helping people in disasters. i don;t prejudge that because some on is “christian” are they good either. Known to many that were not. But, none of that matters, because I don;t agree with you. Fine, go, make the world a better place. But until you know me, or know what I do, I wouldn;t shoot my mouth off about opening my heart and mind so I can matter in the world.
By the way, you do know that several “Christian” Congregations have ordained gay clergy, don;t you? I suppose they
“that have either specifically attacked gay people or stood silent while they were bashing them, and then denied seeing any bashing, or saw it as a few nutcases so as to deny the institutional and societal hatred it is.”:
Yeah, right.
By the way, my “christianness doesn;t come from affiliating with any particular body of beleivers, or body of laws, but my affiliaiton with the lawgiver. Take what shots you want. They are still way off the mark.
“you need to sit down and talk with gay people and find out what’s actually happening. I’m sure you know and even like several already, ”
Yep. I do.
LJ,
“By the way, you do know that several “Christian” Congregations have ordained gay clergy, don;t you?”
Well, I’ve watched the Episcopalian and Presbyterian churches tear themselves in shreds over the issue, which I consider an improvement in the situation since just a few years ago it wouldn’t have even been discussed, and of course the Catholic church has been ordaining gay priests and nuns for ages by simply denying the issue and/or redefining the terms. Other than that, only a very few smaller denominations have openly ordained gay and lesbian clergy. Since the early 1970’s for instance, the Unitarian church has not only openly ordained gay and lesbian clergy but have actively sought to. But then most christians don’t acknowlege Unitarianism as christian. Neither do a lot of Unitarians.
Up until the last decade or so, the vast majority of churches wouldn’t even accept an openly gay or lesbian couple as visitors, let alone members. Yes, they’re coming around, but it sure is slowly and with a lot of foot-dragging, kicking and screaming, much the way it was in the early 1960’s with mainstream white churches accepting black members. And with just as much death and destruction involved.
““religion is detrimental to the progress of humanity.”
Yup. It gets people looking up when they should be looking around.