Quote# 140867

Today's Laugh 10-7-18



TRANSCRIPTION:
(Presumably) Chuck Schumer: We overplayed our hand.
(Presumably) Dianne Feinstein: We must keep going left!
(Signpost reads LAST CHANCE)

Caption: 1,000,000 years later
Schumer: How much further left can we go?
Feinstein: Shut up and pump.

Mick Williams, Disqus - Faith & Religion 10 Comments [10/11/2018 4:00:18 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 140861


Martin: Since Jesus said that God alone is good, it follows that the Samaritan is not good.
Calvinistic dogma is right there beside Jesus.

Peter: You now don't even pretend to address any of the points I made do you?

Martin: Peter
I addressed every one. You, however, do not understand the parable, its point was to answer the question "who is my neighbour". As I pointed out, Jesus never calls the Samaritan good.

Peter: Jesus said someone who wasn't a believer could do good. He held his behaviour up as an example to believers. A non believer put into practice the command to love your neighbour. Nothing to do with his faith or his being predestined to believe or do good. You are claiming that's in line with Calvinist theology? Right.

Martin: Irrelevant. That men do 'good deeds' is no problem, they just aren't good and their motives are wrong.

Martin, Premier 8 Comments [10/11/2018 3:54:18 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: CC

Quote# 140860

Of course if God were truly good and WE were evil, an attempt by God to show us that we were not, in fact, good, would be met the majority of the time with hostility and rebellion.

Yet, since God in orthodox theory IS Good, there are two characteristics which He must embody: that of Justice and that of Mercy. If God were purely to act according to Justice, he has every right to destroy all evil. If, in fact, we are all evil, He has every right to destroy us without mercy.

Yet, God being Good, must also show Mercy. Therefore, it could be argued that if it were shown that in fact we ARE all evil, the more humble of us might see that they very fact that we have continued to exist and flourish DESPITE our evil, is proof that God is merciful, even if at times He has shown His wrath.

Jesus seemed to treat evil not as a wholly deliberate state, but more as a sickness. So… we must ask ourselves this: Is it possible that we ARE evil? If evil is a sickness, isn’t it a good thing that we know our true condition, so that we can seek a physician to heal us of our sickness?

If the Devil IS truly the adversary and destroyer of good, would he want us to know that we were evil? Or would he instead convince us that we were good, and that God was evil for judging us? Evil people rarely ever believe that they are evil. Hitler thought he was the savior of humanity. We all know that evil is highly unpleasant, and how pleasant is it for one who believes he is good to find out that he is, in fact, evil? I would assume it’s just about as pleasant as a seemingly healthy person finding out that they have terminal cancer. If it weren’t for the temporal authority of a medical doctor, we might well think that someone coming up to us and telling us we are going to die was evil for doing so, and we might react towards that person with hostility… not unlike they who believed they were righteous reacted towards Jesus.

Another thing to consider is this: If God created everything, everything is His to do with as he Wills. If, as it says in Genesis, He created everything good, and suddenly evil and death break out in the midst of his good creation, is it not within His perfectly Good authority to eradicate it? Some consider God’s wrath to be proof that God is evil… yet if Evil was destroying His good creation, it would not be God that was evil for destroying evil, but it would be those which were evil who were rebelling against Him, and in doing so, perpetuating the further degradation of His good Creation. Thus, God would still be Good if, by eradicating degrading elements from Creation, He was able to save His Creation.

Many people do not like the idea that they belong to God, and that they are both subject to His justice and at His mercy, but if this adversely affects them, why does that make God evil? If God is Good, and in fact they are evil, they have no basis for criticizing what God does with either them or the rest of His creation, because they seek to do evil and to destroy (whether or not they choose to see it that way).

Furthermore, it is logically inconsistent that God could possibly be evil, since if God were evil, everything that exists as a result of God’s will would also be evil, since there would be no other definition by which to counter an absolute evil source of all things.

Therefore, the claim that God is evil is self-refuting, since claiming evil presumes an absolute measure of good, yet an absolute measure of good implies God, thus proving that God is Good, not Evil.

Thus, to claim any moral superiority to God is also self-refuting, since claiming a moral superiority (especially an absolute one) depends on an absolute definition of Good, which implies the existence of God, the very being one is claiming moral superiority to. It is absolutely absurd to indirectly invoke God’s absolute goodness to directly condemn God’s supposed evil. Yet that is exactly what the argument presented in the post above does.

Whether or not one believes in God, one can use the logic of a hypothetical existence of God to come to the logical conclusion that, if God exists, He must be Good. Any conclusion other than that is either an appeal to emotion, an appeal to ignorance, or an appeal to absurdity.

As to whether humanity is inclined towards good or whether we are inclined towards evil, one only needs to study human history, especially the past 100 years, to come to the conclusion that it is extremely probable that humans are naturally bent towards evil, which is actually much more consistent with the Biblical view than it is with modern humanist views or even most other religious or philosophical views.

That being most likely the case, and since proving moral superiority inevitably rests upon an appeal to absolute transcendent goodness AKA God, could one really say they are in a position to declare that God is evil even in His wrath, when humans have shown themselves to be so utterly incapable of the goodness they hypocritically and hypercritically accuse God of lacking?

I thinketh not.

Andrew McCombs, Quora 9 Comments [10/11/2018 3:53:02 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Denizen

Quote# 140855

THE WEAPON OF ACCUSATION

In recent days we have seen those who oppose Christian values use a very potent weapon against those who stand for what is right. It is a weapon that has been used since the beginning of time. It is a weapon Satan mastered and taught throughout the ages. It was first used in the garden of Eden against God. It has continued to be used throughout history. The Bible tells us that a sign of the times is the increase of the use of this weapon. What is the weapon you ask? It is a powerful weapon of accusation.

In our political arenas we have watched as the liberals have used accusation over and over again in an attempt to discredit an individual with whom they disagree. In recent days we have seen it used against politicians, Supreme Court nominees, and others who stand for conservative principles. Unfortunately we have also seen it used among preachers and Christians. Many an individual has been damaged permanently by an accusation that has been made against them. Political contests have been determined by accusation which were made. Nominees for positions in the president’s cabinet have been altered because of accusation. Accusation can literally alter the course of history.

In the Garden of Eden Satan began his attack on God by accusing him of not telling the complete truth. Joseph was placed into prison and stripped of his position because of an accusation. Our Saviour was hung on the cross to be crucified because of those who accused Him.

You may have noticed that I did not preface the word accusation with the word false. We often only deal with the subject of false accusation rather than the entire subject of accusation. I contend that accusation does not have to be false to be unjust. There are times when a true accusation is handled in an unjust manner. All accusation must be handled properly whether it be true or whether it be false. I am going to attempt in this article to lay some groundwork on how we deal with accusation.

1. Accusation must never stand alone. Please follow that statement carefully. Accusation must always be accompanied by several things.

It must be accompanied with the proper presentation. The Bible clearly tells us that we are not to bring an accusation against an elder. The presentation of accusation should not be in the public forum. Accusation should be presented in the proper fashion.
It must be given to the proper person. When we accuse someone publicly we are not looking for justice as much as we are looking to influence opinion. A public accusation does not fix a problem. A public accusation creates a problem because it changes public opinion without justice being carried out. We must only accuse to the proper authority or person who is responsible for finding truth behind the accusation.

It must be accompanied by evidence. Evidence alone is not enough. The evidence must be handled properly. Criminals have been judged innocent not because they did not commit the crime but because of the mishandling of evidence. Justice carefully takes into consideration the evidence and how it is gained and presented.

It must be with two or more witnesses. An accusation by one person does not guarantee a person’s guilt. A lone accuser is not enough to judge guilt or innocence. Interesting that Biblically the accuser was put on trial not the accused. The credibility of the accuser was of paramount importance according to God.

Accusation must not stand alone. All of these must accompany accusation to avoid injustice from being done.

2. Accusation should not be assumed as true. There was a day when we all believed that a person was innocent until proven guilty. We are now living in a society where guilt is assumed until innocence is proven. A person’s reputation is destroyed because we assume them to be guilty based upon what seems to be a credible accusation. In some cases we assume it to be true even if the evidence is by an unreliable witness. We seem to like assuming guilt. It is wrong to accept accusation as truth.

3. The accuser should be on trial as much as the accused. This is critical. People who have been accused are often times judged while the person who accuse them is allowed to freely make the accusation without scrutiny. When an accusation is made the first person that should be scrutinized is not the one accused. It should be the one who made the accusation. What was their motive for making this accusation? What was their agenda in making this accusation? Did they make the accusation to the proper person in the proper manner? These are questions we should be asking when someone accuses.

4. Public accusation should never be considered reliable. A person who makes a public accusation almost always has an ulterior motive. It is foolish to believe that someone who would use accusation to destroy a person’s reputation should be trusted. I am not saying that the accusation may or may not be true. I am saying that once it has been made into a public accusation we should reject it because of the reason the person made the accusation. Public accusations should ALWAYS be considered suspect. Do not receive public accusation.

5. We should not allow a person’s reputation to be changed by accusation. Someone who has done much good is accused and suddenly we think bad of them. We don’t know the facts. We don’t know the reason they were accused. We know nothing other than what we have heard. To change our opinion of the one being accused merely because there is an accusation made is foolhardy. It is unwise. Joseph was not guilty, but he was accused and his reputation was damaged. Christ was not guilty, but the mob cried for him to be crucified because of accusation. When someone is accused do not think the worst of them.

6. Do not be the judge or the jury when you hear of an accusation made. In fact, don’t be the private investigator either. May I just simply put it this way? Mind your own business. If it’s not your business to carry out justice then keep your nose out of it. You are doing no one a favor by deciding that you are going to be the one who investigates the person who has been accused. Do not make a judgment unless it is your area of judgment.

7. Defend the accused. This is not popular, but it is the right thing to do. A person who has been accused should be defended until they have been proven guilty. Tragically we are cowards when it comes to this. Someone with whom we have had a friendship with for years is accused and we get as far away from them as we can to protect ourselves. What a cowardly way to behave. Stand by your friends when they are accused. I would rather be wrong in defending an accused friend, than to be right in having attack them before knowing the truth.

8. Apply Philippians 4:8 to all accusation. It commands us, “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.” Most accusation would not stand up to that criteria so therefore we should not even entertain it in our thoughts. One reason to avoid receiving accusation is the danger of allowing your mind to think on the wrong things.

9. Never Never NEVER spread accusation. If you spread accusation you are as guilty as Satan of accusing one of your brethren. Satan is the accuser…not just the false accuser. He is the accuser of the brethren. Sometimes he is telling the truth but his accusations are never in the interest of justice, but in impeding the righteousness of God.

10. Identify yourself with the accused. This is one that I wish every Christian would follow. I would rather be identified with someone who has been accused than someone who is guilty of being an accuser. I run to the side of the accused. I identify myself with the accused. Christ was accused and I identify myself with him. In our lives we are all going to be accused by those who have an ulterior motive. We will wish that someone had run to our side when that happens to us.

Satan is using accusation more today than ever before. It is tragic how many reputations are damaged because of this weapon. May God give us good sense and wisdom to understand the danger of accusation and to handle it with care.

Bob Gray Sr, Solve Church Problems 10 Comments [10/11/2018 3:51:03 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 140822

(By "Baha'i", he means the Baha'i Faith, which the government of Iran hates with a passion)

The only sect that is not allowed to get the university degree in Iran, is Baha’i. Several reasons it has.

First, the Baha’i is not a religious sect. It is a political sect. Second, their background has shown that, unfortunately, many of them were spies. Third, they spread and propagate their beliefs in the universities. Many of their beliefs are dangerous, like marriage with close relatives (incest). And these kinds of propagation are beneath the universities.

Fourth, their great scholar, Abbas Afandi, insisted on obeying the commander. So, if it is the rule to ban them from educating in the universities, they should follow. Fifth, not only the government of Iran, Baha’i scholars forbid the educating for them! Ali Muhammad Shirazi, in his Arabic book, Bayan, said:

(???????? ????????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? (??? 10? ???? 4? ? 13

It means that, every Baha’i should only learn the book Bayan!

Muhammad Khan, Quora 3 Comments [10/11/2018 3:49:29 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 140818

The Scriptures are clear throughout the Old and New Testaments that woman was created for man, not man for woman. These are the uses for which God created woman for man:

1. Subordinate Helper (Genesis 2:18, I Peter 3:1-6)
2. Sex Object (Proverbs 5:15-20, Romans 1:27)
3. Companion (Malachi 2:14)
4. Comforter (Genesis 24:67)
5. Mother and Caretaker of his children (Genesis 49:25, Psalm 128:1-4, 1 Timothy 5:14)
6. Keeper of the Home (Proverbs 31:10-31, Titus 2:4)
7. Weaker vessel to need his love, leadership, strength, protection and provision (Ephesians 5:22-33, I Peter 3:7)

The fact that God created woman for man, not man for woman is extremely offensive to our modern feminist and egalitarian society but it the truth of God’s Word.

biblicalgenderroles, Biblical Gender Roles 14 Comments [10/11/2018 3:48:29 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 140797

These behaviors are NOT wrong or controlling for a husband from a Biblical worldview:

1. He completely controls the finances, even money his wife may earn, and gives her a weekly allowance for groceries, clothing and things that she or the children may need.
2. He sets the discipline polices and rules for the children.
3. He determines where the family goes to church.
4. While he allows his wife to express her opinions on all manner of subjects privately with him, he determines the public family opinions on religion and politics. He determines what the children will be taught from a religious, social and political viewpoint. He also teaches his wife from the Word of God. He does not always expect that his wife will agree with his interpretations, but he expects her to have a teachable spirit and respect for his right as her husband to teach her the Word of God.
5. He expects his wife to fulfill her duties as a wife, including having sex with him and caring for their home and their children.
6. He expects his wife not to disagree with him in public, but that she will keep her disagreements for private discussions with him. Even when she disagrees in private, he expects her to do so in respectful manner.
7. He expects his wife to be respectful of other men as well, especially in mixed gender gatherings. He expects that his wife will not correct other men, or be too opinionated in the presence of other men.
8. While his wife may be courteous with other men, he expects that his wife will never ever flirt with another man. While his wife may communicate with other men in his presence, he expects that his wife will never have a private friendship with any man other than her male relatives (father, brothers).
9. While his wife may find other men attractive, he expects her not to gawk or act in an unladylike manner toward other men.
10. While a husband should allow his wife to have lady friends with whom she can share her feelings and have a bond in a way only women can, he also has the right to restrict her from certain women whom he feels are a negative influence on his wife.

[...]

Make sure your husband is truly a controlling husband. If you are bucking your husband for any of the 10 things I stated above that are NOT the marks of a controlling husband, then you need to repent to God and your husband for rebelling against his God given authority over you and your family.

If however, your husband is truly acting in controlling or unloving ways towards you, first examine if you have been a disrespectful or unloving wife toward him. Make sure you have made your own heart right with God first.

Once you have examined yourself, and have addressed any failings you have had toward your husband, try to address the situation with him in a private, and in a very respectful manner. If you are being physically abused –get out and try to get help for him. If he will not change, I do not believe you are bound to him in this case. If he is not physically abusive, but refuses to change, you need to pray for God’s grace and give your husband to God.

You are not the first wife to deal with an unkind or cruel husband, and you will not be the last. Our unchristian world says “leave the bum” if he treats you in unkind way. The Bible says to love him even more, and maybe, just maybe you may win his heart to Christ.

biblicalgenderroles, Biblical Gender Roles 15 Comments [10/9/2018 2:46:51 PM]
Fundie Index: 10

Quote# 140840

I feel sorry for foolish people who suffer throughout this life, and then they die and go to Hell without Christ in their unbelief. As a member of the Unitarian Universalist Church (a religious cult whose members are 17% atheist), Christopher Reeves rejected Jesus Christ. After spending the latter years of his life restricted to a wheelchair, he died in his sins and went to Hell forever. Mr. Reeve was in Minneapolis October 27, 1996 speaking at the Courage Center, a support organization for the disabled. According to David Peterson's story in the October 29, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the following exchange took place:

Question: “Do you believe in the Lord?”
Answer: “Even though I don't personally believe in the Lord, I try to behave as though He was watching.”

Mr. Peterson writes that the audience responded with, “Huge applause for a moment that was typical for its simplicity and candor.” It breaks my heart every time I think about Christopher Reeves. How sad and tragic! Christopher could have went to Heaven and had eternal life, just for the taking, by simply receiving Christ's sacrifice on the cross as payment for His sins, believing by faith that Christ DIED, was BURIED and BODILY resurrected three days later (1st Corinthians 15:1-6). How about you friend? Will you also reject Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? If you've never received Jesus as your Savior, please do so right now!

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Precious 11 Comments [10/9/2018 11:49:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 140839

(In response to an NBC article that says kids are in danger of losing their health coverage)

Kevin: I assume the rest of this article says, “If their parents don’t get decent jobs to provide for their needs.”

Kevin McCreary, (Say Goodnight Kevin), Twitter 12 Comments [10/9/2018 11:48:51 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: AJ Williams

Quote# 140838

If property is theft, then life is murder. I've concluded that to be a consistent Marxist....you should kill yourself.

Kevin McCreary, Twitter 10 Comments [10/9/2018 11:48:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: AJ Williams

Quote# 140837

A true Holy Spirit filled Christian that has the Revelation of Jesus Christ? No, it's impossible. You can never become an true atheist then. You are sealed by the Holy Spirit. You might go in some state or form of denial but not all the way, the seed of the Word will never leave that person. Such a person cannot help but to believe from the heart.

Anyone that has fallen to the state of being an true atheist or even joining some other religion never had what they thought they had. Even if they sacrificed all and lived everyday with all zeal and effort. They never saw what they thought they saw. Even if they were sincere like Cain bringing his offering. But like him, their sacrifice was incorrect without revelation.

No, its impossible. Scripture says “A son of God cannot sin for the seed remaineth in him” - 1 John 3:9. Sin means disbelief or unbelief. In other words, they failed to recognize the Truth.

Now for the strange thing. A person might go crazy, loose his mind and don't know who he is anymore but if you were once sealed by the Holy Ghost then God will remain in your soul no matter what. You can never be lost. Because insanity is in the mental realm. God lives in the soul realm.

If this gospel is hid, it's hid to them that are lost. If you are a christian turned atheist you are typed by Israel that died in the wilderness before reaching the promised land. Yet they carried out the feasts, partook in the things of God and even walked with the prophet and saw the miracles.

Jesus said they were all dead. In other words, lost. They served God with the mind but did not have God in their hearts and when difficulties came there was no anchor in the soul.

But if you are talking of the nominal steriotype christian? For sure. I think today's churches are probably to blame for most christian turned atheists. I hardly blame them from turning away from the churches.

Dion de Beer, Quora 10 Comments [10/9/2018 11:48:02 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Denizen

Quote# 140835

THE BROWN BROTHERS HARRIMAN BANK EXPOSED AT LAST!!

AS OF 2016, THE BROWN BROTHERS HARRIMAN BANK HAD ASSETS OF $4.2 TRILLION!!
On July 4, 1776, Israel was reborn in the city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. That was the greatest day since October 31, 1517:

You have increased the nation O JEHOVAH, you have increased the nation, you are glorified: you have removed it far unto the ends of the earth (Isaiah 26:15).

The port city of Philadelphia was an excellent site for the new nation's capital because of its proximity to the sea, and midway between the northern and southern states.

Philadelphia was supposed to be the permanent capital of reborn Zion.

Philadelphia means "City of Brotherly Love."

On the liberty bell are inscribed these words from Leviticus 25:10

"Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof."

Lucifer, Satan, or Apollyon was not standing idly by while the Jewish Messiah reestablished Israel in the Wilderness. A Supreme Court, a bank, and a "deadly" doctor were parting presents to the newborn Republic from Lord Conwallis.

Apollyon's chief instrument to destroy newborn Israel was a bankster named Nicholas Biddle.

Biddle's Bank was founded in 1791, and alarmingly, in 1793, a deadly "yellow fever" epidemic swept the city.

5,000 souls perished in that epidemic, assisted by physician "Dr." Benjamin Rush of Philadelphia and London.

Brown Brothers became the recipient of the funds of the defunct Second Bank of the United States!!

Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (BBH) is the oldest and one of the largest private bank in the United States. In 1931, the merger of Brown Brothers & Co. (founded in 1818) and Harriman Brothers & Co. formed the current BBH. Assets Under Custody $4.2 trillion, September 30, 2016.

Brown Brothers Harriman was started by British Secret Service agent named Alexander Brown, and his son William, who was later knighted by Queen Victoria.

As a branch of the Bank of England, Brown Brothers Bank started in Philadelphia in 1818.

The founder was Alexander Brown, who arrived from Ireland in 1800.

Brown started business in Baltimore, and by 1821 he was the country's first millionaire.

Brown was succeeded by his son "Sir" William Brown.

Bank of England moneychanger Brown prospered mightily in Baltimore. In 1818, Brown's son William opened a branch in Philadelphia, because that was the HQ of the Second Bank of the United States, which had its charter renewed in 1816.

The corrupt Second Bank of the United States was a virtual subsidiary of the Brown Brothers Bank.

That octopus had a virtual stranglehold on the economic life of reborn Israel.

President Jackson fought a ferocious battle with that bank, and finally closed it down in 1836.

After the corrupt bank was shut down, Israel in the Wilderness expanded at a fantastic pace, and by 1848 it reached from sea to shining sea.

Most of the funds of the defunct Second Bank of the United States were transfered to the Brown Brothers Bank.

In 1835, the Brown brothers established a branch at 63 Pine St., near the present day Wall St.

From that time onward, New York did indeed become the British Empire State.

From that time onward, New York City began to replace Baltimore and Philadelphia as the leading port in the new and growing nation. With the opening of the Erie Canal in 1825, that dominant position was guaranteed.

Brown Brothers financed the rebels and built the Confederate raiders in Liverpool!!

During the Civil War, the Brown Brothers Bank financed the rebels, and their branch in Liverpool built the fearsome CSS Alabama commerce raider.

The Gilded Age robber barons were financed by the Brown Brothers Bank!!

Mark Twain called the time after the Civil War the Guilded Age. It was a time of unprecedented economic growth and massive Roman Catholic immigration from Europe. It was also the time that the robber barons created huge industrial combines.

Robber barons like Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, and J.P. Morgan became fantastically wealthy after the Civil War.

In 1865, financed by Brown Brothers, Andrew Carnegie founded the Keystone Bridge Company in Pittsburgh.

In 1870, financed by Brown Brothers, Rockefeller founded the Standard Oil Company, in Cleveland, Ohio.

Brown Brothers became Brown Brothers Harriman in 1931

It was right after the beginning of the Great Depression that Brown Brothers merged with the Harriman railroad empire.

Averell Harriman financed the Presidential campaign of his daughter Hillary Clinton!!

Averell Harriman first met courtesan Pamela Churchill in 1941, when he was working to enlist the U.S. as an ally of Britain against Winston's cousin Adolf Hitler.

Pamela got pregnant in April 1946, and then she sailed to New York to have the baby. Amazingly, the baby was adopted by a couple named Hugh and Dorothy Rodham, who lived in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Scranton Pennsylvania just happens to be a Jesuit stronghold.

Hugh and Dorothy then handed baby Hillary over to their son Hugh, and his wife Dorothy, who lived in Chicago, Illinois. 3 years later the Rodhams had enough money to buy a house in an upscale suburb named Park Ridge.

Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman was the real mother of Hillary Clinton, and bankster Averell Harriman was her real father.

The couple first met in London in 1941, but they were not officially married until 1971.

Baby Hillary was born around January 1947 and then adopted by the Rodhams.

Right after the '92 "election," the Clintons visited Pamela's Georgetown mansion to thank her for putting them in the White House.

The Harriman mansion in Georgetown was campaign HQ for the 1992 Clinton Presidential campaign.

After the election, a grateful Hillary visited her mother in Georgetown.

Bill was full of fulsome praise for his mother-in-law and her PamPAC.

At that time, Pamela and Hillary realized that the job was only half done when Bill was President and Hillary was just First Lady. Both of them knew that Brown Brothers Harriman had enough "filty lucre" to reverse the roles, and make Hillary the first female President.

Patrick Scrivener, Reformation 9 Comments [10/9/2018 11:46:45 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Jacob Harrison

Quote# 140831

Human beings are not the problem. The technological society that meshes human beings together is the true problem. Men are not made to bond to people they do not know, nor are women. The society we live in dehumanizes people by pushing them into something they aren't fit for.

We're supposed to be born into 150+ bands of human beings, but we are born into small nuclear families instead, and then we're forced to interact with foreign tribes. Do you understand why this is a bad thing?

Industrial society is the foil to love and meaningful human connection, not human beings themselves.

Whysomangry, Columbine High School Massacre Discussion Forum 7 Comments [10/9/2018 11:38:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 140830

1. Neither knowledge nor science are the truth, but are weapons used by Satan and evil demons to corrupt people. Seeking knowledge and science is the path of destruction;

2. Neither knowledge nor science can save mankind. They can only corrupt people, cause people to shun God and deny the truth, and wreak destruction on man;

3. The more knowledge people have, the more they defy God, and the more it can lead people’s outlook on life, values, ideas and viewpoints to become more evil, reactionary, absurd and preposterous;

4. Neither knowledge nor science can resolve the problems of man’s corruption—they can only accelerate mankind’s destruction. Only the truth can save mankind.

Church of Almighty God, Church of Almighty God 10 Comments [10/9/2018 11:37:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 140829

Any organization that lays claim to Marxism, yet has no qualms about throwing basic materialist analysis to the trashcan to pander to transgenderist ideology, is a joke. Like, good job, you've managed to alienate everyone who still adheres to actual Marxist tenets, all the while throwing half of your membership under the bus, and for what? To placate a bunch of narcissistic, autogynephilic men who can't get it up without everyone around them pretending they're a cute animu grill.

Throw in the orgies and the buying of prostitutes (it's not like pretty much every socialist nation that has ever existed saw prostitution as one of the greatest social ills and human rights violations in the history of humanity, and worked to abolish it entirely or anything, right?), and I can't fault any woman for getting the fuck out of there as fast as possible. There really is no two ways about this, everyone who claims to be a communist has to make a decision: either you stand with women, half of humanity and without whom no revolution can be possible, or you stand with these men in dresses, these pigs in wigs, these freaks who don't give a crap about anyone or anything but their personal gratification.

Quadronnn, YouTube 4 Comments [10/9/2018 11:36:56 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 140819

Yes, I believe autism is caused by a demon. I do not know if the demon stays in the person, or if it did the damage and has moved on…

When I was staying with that Jehovahs Witness family during the forest fire, I was witnessing to them about Jesus. (I didn’t know I was doing this at the time. I simply answered her questions best I could.) The Lord Jesus told me that I could have healed their autistic son (autistic from a vaccine,) if they had believed. But alas, they refused to believe, so the son was left autistic.

Dreams of Dunamis, Dreams of Dunamis 18 Comments [10/8/2018 4:16:28 PM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 140809

As long as they keep teaching the evolution theory in schools as a fact, we will always have bullying, "naturally selecting the weak and the vulnerable", and people in favor of abortion, the ultimate form of naturally selecting someone to extinction.

Is that not the source of all this drama anyway?

NBC News was going to do a special exposing the evolution theory as a lie, and they got harassed by a civil lawsuit and so the special never aired. Brian Williams was the anchorman at the time of that announcement for that special and the withdrawal of it.

Can anyone find that news item anywhere on the internet? I can't.

Just like I can't find that news item about how a Psychiatric Association or something to that order that had announced in the National News that homosexuality was a sexual dysfunction or something for which but then they got threatening phone calls at the work place and the bullies found out where they had lived and called them at home and even had a brick thrown in a window before the next day when the Association recanted in the news.

Maybe I am just not very adept at finding information on the internet. Either that or such items were removed by a threat of a civil lawsuit or maybe the search engines are designed to steer away from it, I don't know.

Well, anyway... signs of the times. I cannot see a reversal in this late in the game. America is corrupted and heading towards self destruction that it is bound to become a fascist police state soon where law abiding citizens will be the one chipped and under observation and control, but the illegal aliens are not. I would not be surprised they manage to take away arms from law abiding citizens while the bad guys still have access to illegal arms on the streets.

We have pastors preaching in the pulpit that do not believe in God any more because of the evolution theory. There is one locally whose son had informed me of this in the early 1990s when I was working with him at a store. I sent a book, "The Collapse of Evolution" by Huse anonymously at his door but I heard no result of it from his son afterwards.

Anyway.. seems we should be looking to our own house more than ever than in the political arena. It's bad out there.

I am hoping in Jesus Christ in being my Good Shepherd for help in abiding in Him & His words as well as His help in being willing to go when the Bridegroom comes.

HopefulNChrist, BaptistBoard 18 Comments [10/7/2018 1:17:29 PM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 140805

I can no longer watch any movies that I used to enjoy, because they are saturated with wickedness and blasphemy. Every other sentence takes the holy Name of God in a dismissive, disrespectful, profane way. I read somewhere that all HELLywood movies are Jewish, and the Jews (NOT all) who produce and direct them all hate Jesus Christ with a passion. There's a red flag right there. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a movie that didn't curse in God's Name. So what are we watching? Filth, smut and Godlessness.

This country needs to repent and get right with God. Otherwise, judgment will fall, and you can't blame God for our punishment. We get what we deserve.

Silent Witness aka kingjameswriter1965, Dying to the Flesh, Living for the Lord Site 7 17 Comments [10/7/2018 10:12:44 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 140801

I think it’s embarrassing for the country to allow protesters. You don’t even know what side the protesters are on.

Donald Trump, Washington Post 34 Comments [10/7/2018 6:38:58 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
Submitted By: Doubting Thomas

Quote# 140798

[In response to Sherri: I’m battling with this…and feel like my husband is being controlling but he says he’s will within the confines of the scriptures so he’s not. Some examples he scolds me like a child when I 1) bought a dress a few days before an event instead of two weeks, 2) set up a play date in 3 weeks instead of 1-2 3) tells me how to dress, how to wear my hair 4) that I can’t visit a friend in another state… and then he says things like if I don’t want meatloaf on Mondays because I just don’t want it, I’m the head of the household so just deal with it. Is this controlling or do I have a “spirit of feminism?”]

Sherri,

Sometimes husbands may come off as being harsh in the same way that parents may come off as harsh with their children. Your husband might not always be right in the way he says things to you. Also he may be one of those people who likes things done way of ahead of time where as other people(like me and perhaps you) do things more at the last minute.

The thing to understand though is that as a wife God wants you to in essence “mold yourself” to how your husband operates. If he likes things done way ahead of time then do that.

Sherri – the Bible says to submit to your husband in “everything”(Ephesians 5:24). I know that is daunting for most Christian women when they first read and understand the gravity of that statement. Now from the husband’s perspective I tell men all the time to cut their wives some slack and remember to show them grace and mercy and to be flexible. But from your perspective as a wife even if your husband is not being as flexible as he should be on some things you need to submit to him.

He has the right to tell you how he likes you to dress, keep you hair, what friends you can visit and what he wants for dinner.

None of these things are wrong from a Biblical perspective of the relationship of a husband to his wife. Now perhaps the way he goes about it he could do in a more gentle and loving way.

biblicalgenderroles, Biblical Gender Roles 10 Comments [10/6/2018 7:56:34 PM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 140796

Today's Laugh 10-2-18



TRANSCRIPTION
(Presumably Dianne Feinstein): Have we overplayed our hand with this Kavanaugh thing? Could it blow up in our faces?

(Presumably Cory Booker): Did you see the cartoon poking fun at his kid? Ha ha ha haa!

(Presumably Anderson Cooper): Explosive new facts! Kavanaugh groped dozens of nuns at a Swedish convent!

Mick Williams, Disqus - Faith & Religion 31 Comments [10/5/2018 4:41:50 PM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 140794

Asians, East and South Asians, comprise about twenty percent of New York City high-school freshmen. Whites are around ten percent. Sun People—blacks and Hispanics—are seventy percent.

At the elite high schools admitting via the SHSAT exam Asians are 62 percent overall. Once again: They are twenty percent of the relevant population, 62 percent of those passing the SHSAT.

At Stuyvesant, the most popular of the specialized high schools, Asians are 73 percent (whites twenty percent, Sun People seven percent). Brooklyn Tech—which, by the way, Mayor de Blasio's son attended, is a mere 61 percent Asian (and again twenty percent white). Queens High School for the Sciences is seventy-six percent Asian.

Staten Island Tech bucks the trend somewhat. It's only 41 percent Asian, 52 percent white, seven percent Sun People. Yet more diverse is the High School of Math, Science, and Engineering up in Harlem: a paltry 37 percent Asian, 25 percent white, 38 percent Sun People.

They spoil the effect somewhat though by having a larger-than-average sex imbalance: seventy percent guys, thirty percent gals. The average for the specialized high schools is more like sixty-forty. Obviously some really flagrant discrimination going on there.

The local politics on this issue is getting pretty rancorous. June 10th there was a big demo outside City Hall: Asians—well-nigh all East Asians, to judge from the news pictures—protesting de Blasio's plan to scrap the SHSAT. Taking on those Tiger Moms, Comrade Bill, you're looking for trouble. [Protesters gather at City Hall to oppose de Blasio’s no-test plan, By Gina Daidone and Bruce Golding, NY Post, June 10, 2018]

For people who don't mind facing the realities of human nature, the two takeaways here are:

* One, the folly of mass non-European immigration—what elsewhere I have referred to as importing an overclass;

* Two, race and sex realism.

Importing An Overclass: To import an overclass is to invite resentment and disharmony. How is this not obvious?

Race and Sex Realism: On the second point, the truly depressing thing is how far outside the boundary of acceptable commentary race and sex realism remain.

Men and women display, in the statistical generality, different inclinations and preferences. The human races, again in the statistical generality, profile differently on intelligence, personality, and characteristic behaviors.

None of this is astounding or outrageous; it's just basic biology.

Yet these truths are unmentionable. Even sensible, well-informed commentators—people as based as you can be while holding a job writing for Main Stream Media publications—steer clear of them.

John Derbyshire, VDARE 8 Comments [10/5/2018 4:38:02 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 140788

Question for the other guys out there:

How many of you had an experience in college where a girl was initially pretty unresponsive or even kind of weakly defensive but suddenly really got into it after you made a few moves? I certainly did, and it wasn't a situation where she was blackout drunk. She just ended up in my bed on some pretext (I think her roommate was hooking up with someone, but she had other options besides climbing into a twin bed with a single guy so it seemed pretty clear what her intent was). Her actions after getting in bed left me pretty confused, she was totally unresponsive to kissing and groping but didn't stop me. However, when I did the right thing she was suddenly all over me. I kind of figured out the boundaries through trial and error. On subsequent nights, I kept pushing and they gradually expanded too (lol).

I wasn't some sort of sexual predator, I was just a shy kid. I read the (nonverbal) signals correctly and it worked out, we dated for a few months after that.

While you might think this isn't related to the case, I think it is. The cultural (and maybe biological) necessity for the male to be aggressive and the female to put the brakes on things tends to really effect how these things go. And us males are stupid, we don't read the signs nearly as well as women hope we do. However we do share stories, and a lot of guys encourage their friends to be aggressive too, to make moves. That's when things can go wrong. It's messed up but it's also the reality.

Once you get older though, it all becomes a lot more natural and easier. You understand how to read signals and you learn what boundaries not to cross. Girls are also better at communicating those boundaries once they've had a few experiences themselves.

That's why, when I hear something like this, I think: here's a guy who's gotten the wrong message, but he's young and hasn't figured this whole dating/sex thing out yet. Make sure he knows that what he did is very wrong, punish him, but nothing that will impact his life long term. He deserves the chance to prove whether he's learned from his mistake.

Tonus, MMO Champion 12 Comments [10/4/2018 7:24:50 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 140787

The rapist is the only one causing the rape. Not both perp and victim.

I just don't think it's as black and white as that in many cases. The girl who goes out to a party where many people are hooking up, gets stinking drunk, too stupified to say no, and hooks up with a guy who's also drunk is vastly different from the evil predator who preys on women. I saw situations like this happen between friends of mine - I can remember one particular case where a girl was coming off a breakup and got near blackout drunk, then was basically dragged to bed by a friend of hers and she was pretty pissed afterwards. He clearly had feelings for her, went into the night trying to make his move now that she was single, they both got really drunk, and it ended unfortunately, but that's a volatile mix of circumstances where many people aren't at their best (particularly at age 20). Was that sexual assault/rape? By the letter of the law, probably - she was too drunk to consent. Did he deserve to spend the next 10 years or whatever in jail? Hell no. End of the day it was an asshole thing to do, but they both moved on from it and recognized it for the non-world-ending offense that it was.

The number of people who try to romanticize rape out of what it usually is is disturbing.

So do you think my friend should have gone to jail for a few years? I don't think "romanticize" is the right word here either... I don't see anything romantic about what happened there, it was messy and unfortunate and disappointing, left both sides feeling bad.

And just to be clear, my personal view on rape and enforcement is that it's basically impossible to get the laws right. Life isn't always black and white. The example I provided above illustrates a case where I believe the current standards wouldn't work well.

Tonus, MMO Champion 10 Comments [10/4/2018 7:24:37 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 140784

My only point is that shoot to kill should not be a cops first priority. How many police shootings have we seen in the past 2 or 3 years. Clearly there is a major problem with training that needs to be addressed.

Well the major issue here is that we don't collect good stats on police shootings. So there's no actual answer. Instead what we have is everyone picking out individual events and making huge generalizations based on them. We're a big country and we're armed to the teeth. Police shootings happen. Whether there are too many? That's a very tough question to answer.

And like sexual assault, the media loves hyping these cases because there tends to be a lot of ambiguity. Police are supposed to use force to subdue criminals, and sometimes the use of lethal force is necessary. It's very hard to tell definitively what happened in a lot of cases, so our "beyond a reasonable doubt" system tends to find people innocent. Likewise, people are supposed to have sex, and when one participant comes out crying rape it's unfortunately a he said/she said situation, and again, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means they get off. I'm mostly ok with this because I don't have an expectation that our system is going to be perfect in all situations - these are the situations where there's generally no great answer and I'm happier staying biased towards keeping people out of jail.

Tonus, MMO Champion 4 Comments [10/4/2018 6:21:03 PM]
Fundie Index: 4