I don't care to belong to any club that will have me as a member
Yes, TOZ, an empty room.
I think this thread has become a good example of faith, since the people arguing with LT seem to believe that he can be swayed by a rational argument and the presentation of facts.
This has never been shown to be the case, in fact quite the opposite. Facts merely make him recalcitrant.
FWIW I think LT's faith that anything short of certitude requires faith is stronger than everyone's faith that reason will prevail.
I think this thread has become a good example of faith, since the people arguing with LT seem to believe that he can be swayed by a rational argument and the presentation of facts.
This has never been shown to be the case, in fact quite the opposite. Facts merely make him recalcitrant.
FWIW I think LT's faith that anything short of certitude requires faith is stronger than everyone's faith that reason will prevail.
Certainty itself requires faith, if you broaden the definition enough.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I have faith that, upon encountering pie, I will eat and enjoy said pie. Unless it is some nasty f%+@ed up English version of pie, made from a grab bag of random organs and blood rather than fruity/chocolaty goodness.
To be fair, such desserts aren't even pies to begin with. A "pie" is something with fruity/chocolaty goodness. The other thing is properly called an "abomination" and serves as absolute proof of the righteousness of the revolutionary war. That and spelling color, honor, etc. wrong.
I require only myself.
And there's that Onan thing again.
I don't care to belong to any club that will have me as a member
And there's that Annie Hall thing again.
I think this thread has become a good example of faith, since the people arguing with LT seem to believe that he can be swayed by a rational argument and the presentation of facts.
Yes, s/he (?--sorry) is certainly alone around here on that score.
Could Conan whup onanism?
Could Conan whup onanism?
lol nm that I was misremembering.
But, maybe?I was under the impression that onanism was, under careful reexamination, actually oral sex (coitus interruptus).
How typical of these ontological, epistemological and scatalogical threads, Citizen Meatrace.
Now we're going to have to argue for 24 hours about the definition of "onanism."
How typical of these ontological, epistemological and scatalogical threads, Citizen Meatrace.
Now we're going to have to argue for 24 hours about the definition of "onanism."
How apropos.
I think this thread has become a good example of faith, since the people arguing with LT seem to believe that he can be swayed by a rational argument and the presentation of facts.
This has never been shown to be the case, in fact quite the opposite. Facts merely make him recalcitrant.
Amen. LT is the reason I went and got the ignore script for these boards.
There's ignore script for the board?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l0HMozEfD0&feature=player_detailpage#t= 63s
The last line at the end is classic! It got me thinking about some of my friends on the boards, you know who you are. ;)
Enjoy!
A cultural marxist musical interlude
I like it!
The last line at the end is classic! It got me thinking about some of my friends on the boards, you know who you are. ;)
Enjoy!
Here's a movie that reminds me of Citizen Aretas.
The last line at the end is classic! It got me thinking about some of my friends on the boards, you know who you are. ;)
Enjoy!Here's a movie that reminds me of Citizen Aretas.
I can't speak French. Gist of it is? I'm assuming the list at the end is some sort of banned list? Many of which are in my personal library.
Nice. Backhanded insults. Stay classy.
Oliver Stone is awesome!
It's about killing cultural Marxists and the establishing the Regime of the Colonels. I think you'd like it.
It's about killing cultural Marxists and the establishing the Regime of the Colonels. I think you'd like it.
Man you have a twisted mind! Remind me never to party with you alone. Try again with what you think I like.
Huh. How strange, it's a good movie, won an Oscar back in 1969. I know it's one of my faves.
Jesus was an atheist cultural marxist!
The Musical Interlude
Huh. How strange, it's a good movie, won an Oscar back in 1969. I know it's one of my faves.
I'll check it out, thanks. With sub titles I hope!
Jesus was an atheist cultural marxist!
You are entitled to an opinion, even if it is severely impaired.
Because getting one thread shut down with this "cultural marxist" bullshit wasn't enough?
Because getting one thread shut down with this "cultural marxist" b%+!&&&& wasn't enough?
Topics do not kill threads (side trek topic) People do with their behavior.
As are you. Although you're right, he wasn't an atheist.Jesus was an atheist cultural marxist!You are entitled to an opinion, even if it is severely impaired.
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/bill-kellys-truth-squad /2011/jun/17/what-if-jesus-ran-republican-president-2012/
This is pretty entertaining.
|
As are you. Although you're right, he wasn't an atheist.Jesus was an atheist cultural marxist!You are entitled to an opinion, even if it is severely impaired.http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/bill-kellys-truth-squad /2011/jun/17/what-if-jesus-ran-republican-president-2012/
This is pretty entertaining.
Link doesn't work.
Trouble from the media =/= trouble getting elected.
Jesus is used to bad press.
Link doesn't work.As are you. Although you're right, he wasn't an atheist.Jesus was an atheist cultural marxist!You are entitled to an opinion, even if it is severely impaired.http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/bill-kellys-truth-squad /2011/jun/17/what-if-jesus-ran-republican-president-2012/
This is pretty entertaining.
CHICAGO, July 17, 2011 — Now that Rep. Anthony Weiner has resigned, what will the mainstream media do? Continue to bash Republican presidential candidates, no doubt.
According to the mainstream media, Mitt Romney, Michelle Bachman, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, Hermain Cain, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum aren’t enough. If you believe the media, the 2012 Republican presidential field is “boring,” “white” (if you don’t count Cain), male (if you don’t count Bachman), and “angry.”
From left, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and businessman Herman Cain (Image: Associated Press)
Theirs is a journalistic mantra. A helpful myth of the GOP as the party of old, white male dinosaurs with their “crazy,” “backward” Christian-thinking. This field of candidates and their “outmoded” religious-orientations, patriotic values, and staunch dedication to fiscal accountability clinches President Obama’s re-election or so says the current media storyline.
Republican presidential candidates are in a veritable “Catch-22.” They are caught between a biased hate-spewing media and an unforgiving GOP primary electorate which demands near perfection in its candidates. In other words, this isn’t the party of Anthony Weiner, Bill Clinton, Maxine Waters, or Charlie Rangel. Near perfection is a tough standard and there aren’t many GOP candidates that would fit that bill – save one:
What if Jesus ran as a Republican presidential candidate in 2012?
It is a compelling hypothetical: Back in 30 AD, Jesus was a controversial figure. He was gaining followers but it wasn’t universally agreed upon that he was, in fact, the “Son of Man.” That would be an understatement. So how would the media perceive his candidacy as a Republican candidate?
As a deeply religious man, Jesus would have been the subject of immediate attack by the mainstream media. Newsweek would probably have ridiculed him on its cover – as they did Mitt Romney this week – dancing in too-short robes and a holy Bible in his hand. Headline: “The Jesus Moment.” Maybe there would have been a Broadway musical mocking Christians to boot.
Jesus was also white i.e. of Jewish descent, and male, which would have made him a perfect target of the cultural elite. His intelligence would have been questioned (due to his “cave-dweller” religious beliefs), he would be attacked as a misogynist (because he is a man), and for his bigoted character (assumed because he is white and of Jewish descent).
Because Jesus chose to associate himself with sinners and outcasts of every kind, his personal life would have been fodder for the media’s attacks. But he didn’t worry about gossip or bad press and, without apology, spent his time among lepers, prostitutes, adulterers, drunkards, tax collectors, thieves, idolaters, and murderers. AOL/Huffington Post would have had a field day with and the New York Times would have led with a headline like, “GOP’s Jesus Fancies Thieves, Prostitutes.”
To make matters worse media-wise, Jesus had twelve male disciples and one female disciple, if you count Mary Magdalene. According to Luke 8:2 and Mark 16:9, Jesus cleansed Magdalene of “seven demons” – indicating to scholars that she was either full of sin or illness. Some have argued that she was literally a repentant “prostitute.” Others argue that Magdalene is merely the victim of historical defamation. Regardless, you can already hear what MSNBC’s Chris Matthews would have said: “Come on, he’s [Jesus] living with twelve men and a woman? The man’s a nutcase.” Ed Schultz would have chimed in calling Magdalene a “right-wing slut” as he did conservative radio show host Laura Ingraham just weeks ago.
With his stunning rhetorical skills, Jesus would have stirred GOP audiences, much like Sarah Palin did in 2008. What would he have said? While it is impossible to analyze Jesus’ political philosophy in the course of a single article, his belief in the significance of free will, a God-centered society, and individual responsibility is undeniable.
Ever since Karl Marx advocated a collectivist approach to organizing society, progressives have, through “social justice” propaganda, attempted to convert Jesus’ philosophy of voluntary giving into socialism. However, Jesus was not a socialist. He believed in free will, not government-forced “goodness.” For instance, in Matthew 10:8, Jesus says, "Freely you have received, freely give. In 2 Corinthians 9:7, the Apostle Paul confirms this point, stating, “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”
Jesus advocated a truly voluntary heart for a reason: because that is what benefits the soul. He wasn't for government interference. He definitely wasn't for the equalization of wealth. And there's the proof.
What if Jesus ran for President? Would he be too white, too male, too kind?
Jesus addresses the issue of wealth redistribution directly in the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-28). In this parable, Jesus speaks of three servants who were each given their master’s talents (money) to manage while he went on a journey. Two of the servants made their talents grow but the third did not. When the master returned and saw that the third servant failed to manage his talent, he commanded that the money be taken from him and given to the other servant. “Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents,” said the Master. “For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.” Jesus advocates aggressive charity but he also advocates – just as aggressively – individual responsibility.
Jesus’ teaching is consistent with property rights as they are generally defined in the Bible. In Genesis 2:15, the “Lord God took man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.” In Exodus 20:15, 17, the Ten Commandments firmly establish laws against theft and coveting (desiring) your neighbor’s goods. Consequently, property has value and there is a demarcation between the goods one possesses and the goods of everyone else.
Needless to say, Jesus would probably have been a crowd pleaser at Monday’s New Hampshire Republican debate.
But in the end, the media’s personal attacks on Jesus might still have had their intended effect. His poll numbers would probably have plummeted. He would have been seen as a risky candidate by the GOP Establishment. Republican voters say they want a more “impressive” field of presidential candidates. They say they want an iconic personality. A force of nature. But they are also a risk-adverse demographic and generally shift towards so-called “vanilla” candidates, like Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who are harder for the media to attack.
So what GOP candidate could ever hope to pass muster in a bigoted, anti-Christian, hate-filled media environment like this?
Only heaven knows.
You're right, Citizen Aretas. I wouldn't vote for Jesus.
If Jesus was running for president, I would become a Birther.
Also, he never lived to be 35.
And, finally, as for being "too religious," yes, I think having a living god be the president of the United States would violate separation of church and state.
I lied: one more. Has the Republican Party (or the Democrats, for that matter) ever fielded a Jewish presidential candidate?
The last line at the end is classic! I thought it was funny.