Who Would Jesus Torture?

Religion • Views: 2,238

At RedState: Jesus would have waterboarded.

It’s likely even Jesus would have OK’d water boarding if it would have saved his Mom. He would’ve done the same to save his Dad, or any one of His disciples.

Excuse me while I pick up my jaw from the floor.

Among the other claims in this bizarre article: Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation because he was a Christian.

That’s highly doubtful.

Lincoln didn’t make things easy for historians. He was reticent and often inscrutable about his faith. Moreover, his ideas changed over time, as he dealt with the deaths of two sons and the pressure of the presidency amid the Civil War.

Most historians agree on this much: Lincoln never was baptized, never joined a church, and rarely, if ever, talked about Jesus.

“He was a religious man always,” Lincoln’s widow, Mary, said after his death, “but he was not a technical Christian.”

Jump to bottom

586 comments
1 livefreeor die  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:06:21am

Wow, I missed that Sunday school class.

2 Mithrax  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:06:24am

Wow.

I think I'm gonna have to pick up my jaw too.

3 simonml  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:06:34am
It’s likely even Jesus would have OK’d water boarding if it would have saved his Mom. He would’ve done the same to save his Dad, or any one of His disciples.

That changes the whole WWJD bracelet movement

4 Buck  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:06:49am

Jesus, when up against an enemy, was willing to die.

5 lawhawk  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:06:56am

Wow. Just wow.

I know I shouldn't be surprised by some of the clueless postings and comments found online, but these ones really take the cake.

6 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:07:12am

There's a "walking over waterboarding" joke here somewhere.

7 lawhawk  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:07:31am

Hmmm, 60% of commenters first words: Wow.

8 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:07:44am

"...to save his Dad"

LOL!

9 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:08:27am

Jesus is more of a scourge kind of guy.

John the Baptist on the other hand...

//

(I am so going to have to repent for this)

10 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:08:54am

Wasn't baptism a form of waterboarding....?
/

11 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:09:18am

re: #7 lawhawk

Hmmm, 60% of commenters first words: Wow.

and were overturned on appeal!

12 opnion  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:09:33am

Neither Jesus or Lincoln are available for comment.

13 JacksonTn  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:09:36am

Whack Jobs ...

14 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:09:43am

There are also rumors Abe was gay.

15 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:10:21am

re: #3 simonml

That changes the whole WWJD bracelet movement

Changed to WWJW*.

*Who Would Jesus Waterboard?

16 JacksonTn  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:10:26am

re: #10 LGoPs

Wasn't baptism a form of waterboarding....?
/

LGoPs ... a little dunk will do ya ...

17 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:10:27am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

There are also rumors Abe was gay.

Mrs. Lincoln was upset about the long hours in the Oval Office, she didn't really mean it. /

18 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:10:36am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

There are also rumors Abe was gay.

Abe ? Abe Glickman from the corner deli ?


Oh ,, wait ,,THAT Abe !

//

19 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:10:47am

My God can beat up your God.....
/ Sheesh

20 lostlakehiker  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:11:10am

Oh dear. What do you do when a snide comment will get you crucified?

You go ahead and pop off: "render unto Caesar...".

21 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:11:22am

The last supper

Youtube Video
22 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:11:28am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

There are also rumors Abe was gay.

Yep, and those rumors are just that, rumors.
It would seem everyone has an agenda when it comes to claiming Lincoln as theirs, Christians, gays, even Democrats. He was none of the above.

23 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:11:39am

What? Jesus would have never waterboarded anybody, for any reason. Not that I'm opposed to waterboarding (I'm not).

Also, did Mary Lincoln ever really use the phrase, "technical Christian"?

24 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:12:19am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

There are also rumors Abe was gay.

There were also rumors that Bill Clinton was black...later to be unfounded

25 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:12:22am

re: #22 Honorary Yooper

Yep, and those rumors are just that, rumors.
It would seem everyone has an agenda when it comes to claiming Lincoln as theirs, Christians, gays, even Democrats. He was none of the above.

but ,, But ,, BUT ,, Obama and the MSM told us he's just LIKE Lincoln !

//

26 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:12:28am

That from "The Onion"?

27 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:12:43am

re: #14 Killgore Trout

There are also rumors Abe was gay.

Here's the proof:

Youtube Video
28 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:13:05am

Good Afternoon Lizards! Hope is everyone doing today..
OK I hope when Jesus waterboards me he turns the water into wine.. I demand the right to get drunk during torture...
A merciful God would do that..
/////

29 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:13:28am

Is anybody else seeing double posts? No....I haven't been drinking. Yet.

30 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:13:41am

re: #28 HoosierHoops

That would be "Cana-nizing" you.

31 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:13:43am

re: #29 LGoPs

Is anybody else seeing double posts? No....I haven't been drinking. Yet.

no

32 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:13:49am

re: #29 LGoPs

Is anybody else seeing double posts? No....I haven't been drinking. Yet.

no

33 honestjay  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:13:54am

Jesus created a whip and drove the money-changers out of the temple, but he would not torture.

34 livefreeor die  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:13:55am

Um, did anyone from RedState read the New Testament?

35 Jack_ITA  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:14:09am

Oh my God, what an ignorant blasphemy.
Are we talking about the same Jesus here? The same Jesus who remprimand one of his disciples for drawing a sword against his own murderers?

I have to search for my jaw too, it is still somewhere on the floor.

36 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:14:38am

re: #32 sattv4u2 Heh.

37 simonml  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:14:49am

re: #25 sattv4u2

but ,, But ,, BUT ,, Obama and the MSM told us he's just LIKE Lincoln !

//

Forget the Lincoln comparison. Obama is Jesus. Therefore, Obama would have waterboarded.

/

38 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:14:49am

re: #33 honestjay

He created a whip?

39 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:14:55am

re: #31 sattv4u2

no


Heh.

40 VioletTiger  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:15:06am

That is so ridiculous, I can't even get the wow out. Why do people write this crap?

41 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:15:19am

re: #22 Honorary Yooper

Yep, and those rumors are just that, rumors.
It would seem everyone has an agenda when it comes to claiming Lincoln as theirs, Christians, gays, even Democrats. He was none of the above.

Although he did have a sense of humor. I watched the American Presidents series on CSPAN ten years ago, and the authority on Lincoln talked about how Lincoln met a visitor to their house in Springfield at the front door, a visitor who wanted to see Mary. He told the visitor that she was "upstairs putting on her overalls".

42 Samurai  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:15:46am

A better question is "How many people would Jesus allow to die if he refused to cause discomfort to a remorseless killer?"

43 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:15:50am

re: #27 Jimmah

Heh.

44 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:15:54am

re: #34 livefreeor die

Um, did anyone from RedState read the New Testament?

Don't think so - all they got are the snippets read at Sunday services ...

45 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:16:10am

What is interesting is that it is possible that none of the four Presidents on Mt Rushmore were Christians. On one extreme is Jefferson who was openly a Diest and Roosevelt who publically denied being Christian. Jury is out on Lincoln although he did not state one way or another, friends and such stated categorically that he wasn't. Washington might have been a Christian but in that age it was ungentlemanly to talk about it.

46 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:16:22am

re: #40 VioletTiger

That is so ridiculous, I can't even get the wow out. Why do people write this crap?

There was a time in a galaxy far far away when people had what was called LIVES, before the Dark Side Al Gore came along and invented the interwebbies

47 Vicious Babushka  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:16:23am

There's historical revisionism in this article too:

Many “alleged” Christians fail to see typical Christian responses to evil in the world. In the haste to stop the killing of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, thousands of Christians signed up to go and fight.

Oh really? They signed up to save the Jews and stop the Holocaust? Silly me, I thought it was because Hitler invaded Poland, occupied France and bombed the crap out of Britain, not to mention the Japanese attacking Pearl Harbor.

Saving the Jews was way, way, way down on the "Why We Fight" list.

48 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:16:42am

Sadly this stuff is all too common on right wing blogs.

49 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:16:58am

re: #30 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

That would be "Cana-nizing" you.

You know how Jesus rolls..The wine just keeps getting better..
After a few hours I'b be like, Lord..Can we move from the Cabs to the Merlots?
/

50 avanti  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:17:12am

It gets complicated. Say he water boarded Judas to get the information on the betrayal, would his dad stop him it so as not to screw up the entire dieing for our sins plan ?

51 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:17:37am

re: #45 big steve

Huh, I never thought of that before.

52 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:17:54am

I can't speak for Jesus' hypothetical use of enhanced interrogation techniques, but based on His statements like "I come not to bring peace, but a sword" and "Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour", I'm almost positive Dick Cheney would waterboard Him based on the ticking-clock theory.

And, you know, because he looks funny, swarthy, bearded, Middle Eastern features, and all.

53 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:17:58am

re: #38 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

He created a whip?

It is referenced in Matthew 21:15

He created a scourge (whip) out of small chords to drive the money changers out of the Temple.

54 simonml  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:18:07am

re: #47 Alouette

There's historical revisionism in this article too:

Oh really? They signed up to save the Jews and stop the Holocaust? Silly me, I thought it was because Hitler invaded Poland, occupied France and bombed the crap out of Britain, not to mention the Japanese attacking Pearl Harbor.

Saving the Jews was way, way, way down on the "Why We Fight" list.

There are several (not thousands) of cases of Catholic priests opting to take the place of Jews on the trains to concentration camps. Not what the person in the article was saying, but there it is for what its worth

55 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:18:13am

re: #36 DaddyG

Heh.

Did Sattv answer me twice?

56 Pawn of the Oppressor  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:18:28am

Wow.

...

WSJ had an interesting piece on Lincoln's religion, or lack thereof:

Lincoln and the Will of God

As for Jesus, "Render unto Caesar" comes to mind, but I'm no expert on what he really intended to teach.

57 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:18:31am

re: #51 Killgore Trout

Huh, I never thought of that before.

It is somewhat controversial and generally provokes arguments here.....

58 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:18:52am

This is what I have been on about with the whole ID/Creationist deabte. The issue is not science---it's history. Admittedly, opinions are like anuses--everyone's got one. But, when people like this start claiming that the primary, if not sole, motivation for the Emancipation Proclamation was because Lincoln asked "WWJD?", then we have a real problem in the making.

Again, the war is about culture and history--and we might be losing.

59 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:19:07am

What kind of mind would even attempt to unnecessarily bring Jesus into this debate over waterboarding? I'm still not sure what he'd drive.

60 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:19:24am

re: #55 LGoPs

Did Sattv answer me twice?

Yes I did,, sorry ,, that was mean considering you're having internet/ puter problems of some sort

(mean ,,,, but kinda funny!)

61 simonml  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:19:27am

re: #59 unrealizedviewpoint

What kind of mind would even attempt to unnecessarily bring Jesus into this debate over waterboarding? I'm still not sure what he'd drive.

He'd buy American.

/

62 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:19:54am

re: #32 sattv4u2

no

Very funny

Very funny

:)

63 lawhawk  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:20:03am

re: #45 big steve

Ah, but if Sotomayor gets confirmed, she would make 6 of 9 justices on the Supreme Court Catholic. How about those statistics.

64 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:20:10am

re: #50 avanti

It gets complicated. Say he water boarded Judas to get the information on the betrayal, would his dad stop him it so as not to screw up the entire dieing for our sins plan ?

I have a personal theory that Judas was intended to "betray" Jesus so that the events could be set in motion. It's not entirely unfounded, but there are those it would seriously piss off.

65 VioletTiger  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:20:25am

re: #46 sattv4u2

There was a time in a galaxy far far away when people had what was called LIVES, before the Dark Side Al Gore came along and invented the interwebbies

Seriously, that is no small part of the silliness we see out there. Once upon a time, a person would get a ridiculous idea like this, mention it to his wife or husband, who would mumble in response, and then forget all about it. Now, they share their drivel with the globe.

66 Joan Not of Arc  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:20:38am

To Red State:

"You shall not take the Name of the Lord your God in vain."

If people need to resort to defaming Christ while making some political point, then it's sad.

67 Sabnen  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:20:49am

re: #52 Cato the Elder

What a stupid thing to write. You did yourself a disservice.

68 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:01am

Wasn't Jesus himself tortured?

69 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:05am

re: #55 LGoPs

Did Sattv answer me twice?


Yes.

Yes.

70 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:08am

re: #59 unrealizedviewpoint

I'm still not sure what he'd drive.

Money changers from the temple.

After that, the debate is an exercise in mental masturbation.

71 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:35am

re: #66 Joan Not of Arc

To Red State:

"You shall not take the Name of the Lord your God in vain."

If people need to resort to defaming Christ while making some political point, then it's sad.

I bet these people have no idea what the Ten Commandments actually say.

72 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:36am

I'm sorry but what part of "turn the other cheek" would allow waterboarding?re: #63 lawhawk

Ah, but if Sotomayor gets confirmed, she would make 6 of 9 justices on the Supreme Court Catholic. How about those statistics.

Interesting....which are catholics and which aren't?

73 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:51am

re: #67 Sabnen

What a stupid thing to write. You did yourself a disservice.

Right. Because Jesus' message would be nothing but welcome to the people in power today.

Heh.

74 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:53am

re: #52 Cato the Elder

I'm almost positive Dick Cheney would waterboard Him based on the ticking-clock theory.

/Having the ability to walk on water would probably be helpful, then.

75 kynna  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:21:54am

re: #35 Jack_ITA


Are we talking about the same Jesus here?

When I was baptized I was dunked in a big pool of water. It was a little like drowning.

Other than that ... I'm not really seeing the connection.

76 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:22:01am

re: #50 avanti

It gets complicated. Say he water boarded Judas to get the information on the betrayal, would his dad stop him it so as not to screw up the entire dieing for our sins plan ?

LOL. I'm working on something that's not a million miles removed from that question.

77 simonml  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:22:18am

re: #72 big steve

I'm sorry but what part of "turn the other cheek" would allow waterboarding?

Interesting....which are catholics and which aren't?

Justice Affiliation
John Roberts
(Chief Justice) Catholic
Stephen G. Breyer Jewish
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Jewish
Anthony M. Kennedy Catholic
Antonin Scalia Catholic
David H. Souter Episcopalian
John Paul Stevens Protestant
Clarence Thomas Catholic
Samuel Alito Catholic

78 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:23:04am

re: #52 Cato the Elder

And, you know, because he looks funny, swarthy, bearded, Middle Eastern features, and all.

Gee.....I thought he had milky white skin and long reddish hair.....or are all those painters wrong?

79 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:23:38am

Crazy Pam posted a bizarre thread about Obama being Hitler or something.

80 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:23:50am

re: #77 simonml

Justice Affiliation
John Roberts
(Chief Justice) Catholic
Stephen G. Breyer Jewish
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Jewish
Anthony M. Kennedy Catholic
Antonin Scalia Catholic
David H. Souter Episcopalian
John Paul Stevens Protestant
Clarence Thomas Catholic
Samuel Alito Catholic


phooey....not a Wiccan in the bunch!

81 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:23:57am

re: #73 Cato the Elder

... Jesus' message would be nothing but welcome to the people in power today.

I'm sure it is welcomed. It's just getting the other 300,000,000 of us to sign on to the whole "love thy neighbor as yourself", "turn the other cheek" and forgive "70 times 7 times" ideas that might prove tricky.

82 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:24:02am

re: #72 big steve

I'm sorry but what part of "turn the other cheek" would allow waterboarding?


Interesting....which are catholics and which aren't?

You can tell the difference. The catholics are wearing the robes!


oh ,, ummm,,wait ,,, somethings wrong there !

83 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:24:02am

Jesus was way cool!

Youtube Video
84 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:24:06am

re: #78 big steve

Gee.....I thought he had milky white skin and long reddish hair.....or are all those painters wrong?

They sure are.
He also never wore his heart outside his body, on his clothes ...

85 simonml  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:24:18am

re: #77 simonml

Sorry. Hastily copied and pasted. Formatting is off but it still makes sense I think

86 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:24:20am

re: #79 Killgore Trout

Crazy Pam posted a bizarre thread about Obama being Hitler or something.

She is absolutely hilarious these days. I'm going to have to have a look.

87 kynna  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:24:26am

re: #50 avanti

It gets complicated. Say he water boarded Judas to get the information on the betrayal, would his dad stop him it so as not to screw up the entire dieing for our sins plan ?

He knew about the betrayal in advance, so enhanced interrogation was unnecessary.

I'm not sure who he might have felt the need to water board. He just kind of knew stuff already.

And, BTW, he did Save his mom. And his disciples. And his dad.

I don't think this guy is talking about the same Jesus as the bible does.

88 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:25:00am

re: #84 yma o hyd

They sure are.
He also never wore his heart outside his body, on his clothes ...

Why are we making fun of the iconography of the Catholic Church?

89 Pawn of the Oppressor  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:25:25am

re: #52 Cato the Elder

And, you know, because he looks funny, swarthy, bearded, Middle Eastern features, and all.

Yeah, but he was born Jewish, and therefore not really a person by the standards of the modern elite. They'd probably tell him where he couldn't build things.

90 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:25:31am

Jesus Meets the Terminator

Youtube Video
91 mikalm  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:25:54am

re: #75 kynna

When I was baptized I was dunked in a big pool of water. It was a little like drowning.

Other than that ... I'm not really seeing the connection.

With me, it was a Catholic-style sprinkling of water on my head, and some Signs of the Cross.

That being said, this "Jesus would waterboard" article is beyond absurd.

92 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:25:57am

re: #87 kynna

He knew about the betrayal in advance, so enhanced interrogation was unnecessary.

I'm not sure who he might have felt the need to water board. He just kind of knew stuff already.

And, BTW, he did Save his mom. And his disciples. And his dad.

I don't think this guy is talking about the same Jesus as the bible does.

Aww - the bible is sooo yesterday!

////////

93 Mad Al-Jaffee  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:26:06am
Most historians agree on this much: Lincoln never was baptized, never joined a church, and rarely, if ever, talked about Jesus.

Have we ever seen Lincoln's birth certificate?!

94 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:26:10am

re: #54 simonml

There are several (not thousands) of cases of Catholic priests opting to take the place of Jews on the trains to concentration camps. Not what the person in the article was saying, but there it is for what its worth

That's what Fr. (now St.) Maximilian Kolbe did (he died in someone else's place), at Auschwitz. He was imprisoned there for sheltering as many as 2,000 Jews at his friary near Warsaw.

95 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:26:14am

re: #79 Killgore Trout

Crazy Pam posted a bizarre thread about Obama being Hitler or something.

Yeah, I saw that, and I had a very hard time making heads or tails of it. It's a fricking mess. Found out about via Lex's site, and apparently more is at Hates of Vienna*.

*h/t to Lex of GoV vs. The World for that term for GoV.

96 lawhawk  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:26:24am

re: #72 big steve

Here you go:

Of the 110 people who have served on the Supreme Court, 11 have been Catholic. Five of those justices -- Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts -- are currently on the court.

It may be coincidence, but all the named justices are the conservative branch, with Kennedy as the swing vote. Ginsberg and Breyer are Jewish. Souter is Episcopalian. Stevens is Protestant.

97 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:27:02am

re: #88 Walter L. Newton

Why are we making fun of the iconography of the Catholic Church?

People don't understand that an icon is not meant as a form of documentation, but rather as a physical token or symbol of spiritual truths. It's easy to mock a symbolism that passes understanding. (I'm a Hebrew, so I'm not supposed to know about these things, but I do....)

98 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:27:30am
99 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:27:56am

re: #78 big steve

Gee.....I thought he had milky white skin and long reddish hair.....or are all those painters wrong?

The Byzantines generally got it right, in my opinion.

I'm a Catholic, but I far prefer Eastern Orthodox iconography to the pseudo-Renaissance kitsch that floods the RC religious shops.

100 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:28:11am

re: #52 Cato the Elder

I can't speak for Jesus' hypothetical use of enhanced interrogation techniques, but based on His statements like "I come not to bring peace, but a sword" and "Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour", I'm almost positive Dick Cheney would waterboard Him based on the ticking-clock theory.

And, you know, because he looks funny, swarthy, bearded, Middle Eastern features, and all.

Which might have been preferable to the Roman practice of crucifixion. That might even qualify as torture.

101 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:28:51am

re: #86 Jimmah

She is absolutely hilarious these days. I'm going to have to have a look.

Someone needs to tell her about hormone replacement therapy.

/ducking

102 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:28:52am

re: #88 Walter L. Newton

Why are we making fun of the iconography of the Catholic Church?

Dunno ...

Must be the theme of the thread, perhaps ...

103 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:18am

re: #81 calcajun

I'm sure it is welcomed. It's just getting the other 300,000,000 of us to sign on to the whole "love thy neighbor as yourself", "turn the other cheek" and forgive "70 times 7 times" ideas that might prove tricky.

Really? The powerful are all on board with that?

I must be reading the wrong papers.

104 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:26am

re: #95 Honorary Yooper

Yeah, I couldn't make sense of it either.

105 kulhwch  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:27am

re: #80 big steve

phooey....not a Wiccan in the bunch!

Well ... maybe ...

};)     [ ... and then again ... maybe not ... LOL ... ]

106 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:31am

re: #97 Guanxi88

People don't understand that an icon is not meant as a form of documentation, but rather as a physical token or symbol of spiritual truths. It's easy to mock a symbolism that passes understanding. (I'm a Hebrew, so I'm not supposed to know about these things, but I do....)

Correct, and I don't know what it is alright to make fun of that. In general, there is not much dumping on Protestant sects here on LGF.

107 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:36am

re: #99 Cato the Elder

The Byzantines generally got it right, in my opinion.

I'm a Catholic, but I far prefer Eastern Orthodox iconography to the pseudo-Renaissance kitsch that floods the RC religious shops.

Me too.

108 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:36am

re: #78 big steve

Gee.....I thought he had milky white skin and long reddish hair.....or are all those painters wrong?

Yes.

Here is a neat image of what a contemporary man of Jesus time would have looked like. Face of Jesus?

109 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:39am

re: #89 Pawn of the Oppressor

Yeah, but he was born Jewish, and therefore not really a person by the standards of the modern elite. They'd probably tell him where he couldn't build things.

They'd have been interested in his vote. Beyond that, meh.

110 J.S.  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:29:59am

re: #48 Killgore Trout

O please. It's not confined to "right-wing" blogs. Rank stupidity, viciously ludicrous commentary, hatred, absurdities, obscentities, foulness, etc., is found on every unedited blog, regardless of political orientation.

111 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:30:50am

re: #102 yma o hyd

Dunno ...

Must be the theme of the thread, perhaps ...

Really?

112 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:30:52am

re: #99 Cato the Elder

The Byzantines generally got it right, in my opinion.

I'm a Catholic, but I far prefer Eastern Orthodox iconography to the pseudo-Renaissance kitsch that floods the RC religious shops.

In the Icons shown, what is the meaning of Jesus having his fingers touching his thumb on his right hand?

113 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:31:10am

re: #108 DaddyG

Yes.

Here is a neat image of what a contemporary man of Jesus time would have looked like. Face of Jesus?

he looks surprised !

114 avanti  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:31:22am

re: #64 Honorary Yooper

I have a personal theory that Judas was intended to "betray" Jesus so that the events could be set in motion. It's not entirely unfounded, but there are those it would seriously piss off.

The Gospel of Judas suggests just that. Judas was the praised by Jesus in that book.

JUDAS.

115 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:31:25am
116 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:31:38am

re: #103 Cato the Elder

I'm sure a few are. It's putting it into practice that's hard for them.

117 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:31:39am

re: #113 sattv4u2

he looks surprised !

He looks Jewish, that can't be true.
/

118 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:31:48am

re: #79 Killgore Trout

Her stunning thesis, in a nutshell: people like Obama. People liked Hitler, ergo Obama=Hitler.

119 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:31:54am

re: #112 big steve

In the Icons shown, what is the meaning of Jesus having his fingers touching his thumb on his right hand?

It is a gesture that symbolizes wisdom and teaching.

120 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:32:00am

re: #106 Walter L. Newton

Correct, and I don't know what it is alright to make fun of that. In general, there is not much dumping on Protestant sects here on LGF.

I dunno, I give the snake-chuckers a fair amount of grief, take the occasional dig at Pentecostals for their disturbing similarities, when struck by the Spirit, to Obots at his rallies, but, in general, I think the Catholic Church is an easier target because of its unity. It's hard to swipe at Protestantism, as there's always some sect or group within it that can claim exemption from the statement. ("well, you must be thinking of those Baptists. We Methodists," & etc.)

121 Golem Akbar  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:32:12am

How about them Lakers?

122 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:32:15am

re: #112 big steve

In the Icons shown, what is the meaning of Jesus having his fingers touching his thumb on his right hand?

silly ,, he's making the sign of the "O",, PROVING that he would have endoresed The One in the last election!

123 mikalm  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:32:16am

re: #108 DaddyG

Yes.

Here is a neat image of what a contemporary man of Jesus time would have looked like. Face of Jesus?

Hey, it looks like the guy on the corner who bums change for bottles of Mad Dog!

/I am so going to burn for that one!

124 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:32:24am

re: #99 Cato the Elder

The Byzantines generally got it right, in my opinion.

I'm a Catholic, but I far prefer Eastern Orthodox iconography to the pseudo-Renaissance kitsch that floods the RC religious shops.

Are you really trying to tell me he did not look like the leader singer from Deep Purple?

125 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:32:37am

re: #99 Cato the Elder

The Byzantines generally got it right, in my opinion.

I'm a Catholic, but I far prefer Eastern Orthodox iconography to the pseudo-Renaissance kitsch that floods the RC religious shops.

BTW, some Catholic book/gift shops sell the Eastern-style iconography, too. That stuff is way cool.

126 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:32:53am

re: #113 sattv4u2

he looks surprised !

Hmmm. Too Jewish. --Hedly Lamar.

127 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:33:12am

re: #113 sattv4u2

he looks surprised !

You would too if a photographer from Popular Mechanics showed up in 32AD to snap your picture. //

128 lawhawk  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:33:17am

re: #112 big steve

Christ's fingers are depicted in a pose that represents the letters IC, X and C, thereby making the Christogram ICXC (for "Jesus Christ"). .. More here.

129 mikalm  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:33:32am

re: #120 Guanxi88

I dunno, I give the snake-chuckers a fair amount of grief, take the occasional dig at Pentecostals for their disturbing similarities, when struck by the Spirit, to Obots at his rallies, but, in general, I think the Catholic Church is an easier target because of its unity. It's hard to swipe at Protestantism, as there's always some sect or group within it that can claim exemption from the statement. ("well, you must be thinking of those Baptists. We Methodists," & etc.)

I heard a Catholic priest once say, "Of course we get bashed much more than the Prots. Everyone knows our address."

130 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:33:33am

re: #79 Killgore Trout

Crazy Pam posted a bizarre thread about Obama being Hitler or something.

Wow. That one is a classic. Someone should let TIME/LIFE publishing know that she's stealing their copyrighted work wholesale.

131 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:33:59am

re: #100 capitalist piglet

Which might have been preferable to the Roman practice of crucifixion. That might even qualify as torture.

Might qualify as torture? Crucifixion is one of the worst ways I can name to die. First you get nailed to an upright and crossbeam. Then you get to slowly cut off the supply of air to your lungs as you are held up solely by your wrists. If they were feeling especially cruel, they'd place a block under your feet for you to "rest" your feet on while you slowly die. If you weren't dying fast enough for them, they'd break your legs so that you'd only be hanging on by your wrists. If lucky, you might have your body taken down when you die. If not, as many were not, you'd be left up there to rot.

I think I'd take waterboarding any day of the week over that. The Left would do good to keep in mind how cruel the ancients and medievals could be when compared to us.

132 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:03am

re: #121 Golem Akbar

Commissioner Stern and the networks are nervous at the chance of there being no Kobe vs Lebron in the finals.

133 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:03am

re: #122 sattv4u2

silly ,, he's making the sign of the "O",, PROVING that he would have endoresed The One in the last election!

OMG.....you are right!

134 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:09am

re: #114 avanti

The Gospel of Judas suggests just that. Judas was the praised by Jesus in that book.

JUDAS.

Well, if it was all in the plan, then Judas was absolutely necessary to the plan.

Some sects revered him as a saint for that reason. Still do, for all I know.

135 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:12am

re: #110 J.S.

O please. It's not confined to "right-wing" blogs. Rank stupidity, viciously ludicrous commentary, hatred, absurdities, obscentities, foulness, etc., is found on every unedited blog, regardless of political orientation.

Excellent point. Killgore maybe could have worded it = Sadly this stuff is all too common on extremist left & right wing blogs.

136 debutaunt  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:31am

re: #118 Jimmah

Her stunning thesis, in a nutshell: people like Obama. People liked Hitler, ergo Obama=Hitler.

Does she mention chocolate cake?

137 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:32am
138 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:32am

re: #95 Honorary Yooper

Yeah, I saw that, and I had a very hard time making heads or tails of it. It's a fricking mess. Found out about via Lex's site, and apparently more is at Hates of Vienna*.

*h/t to Lex of GoV vs. The World for that term for GoV.

That "Lex" moron is the same one who's been smearing and attacking me for years at LGF Watch, FYI.

139 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:36am

re: #114 avanti

The Gospel of Judas suggests just that. Judas was the praised by Jesus in that book.

JUDAS.

The lost concert of Judas (Priest, that is)

140 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:34:57am

re: #130 Charles

Wow. That one is a classic. Someone should let TIME/LIFE publishing know that she's stealing their copyrighted work wholesale.

Geller = Biden?

141 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:35:04am

re: #106 Walter L. Newton
re: #111 Walter L. Newton

Really?


I do get what you're driving at - but it looked to me as if the utterly jaw-dropping theme of Jesus waterboarding people induced some mild hilarity in some posters (after we removed our jaws and put them back where they belonged ...) - thus the 2 (two) posts, one of which was mine.

That doesn't look to me like a persistent and well-thought out attack on Catholic iconography.

142 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:35:08am

re: #131 Honorary Yooper

Might qualify as torture? Crucifixion is one of the worst ways I can name to die. First you get nailed to an upright and crossbeam. Then you get to slowly cut off the supply of air to your lungs as you are held up solely by your wrists. If they were feeling especially cruel, they'd place a block under your feet for you to "rest" your feet on while you slowly die. If you weren't dying fast enough for them, they'd break your legs so that you'd only be hanging on by your wrists. If lucky, you might have your body taken down when you die. If not, as many were not, you'd be left up there to rot.

I think I'd take waterboarding any day of the week over that. The Left would do good to keep in mind how cruel the ancients and medievals could be when compared to us.

I guess I needed a sarcasm tag. We agree.

143 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:35:22am

re: #137 buzzsawmonkey

I could be wrong, but I think that there are some Hindu statues which have a similar hand gesture.

I've seen the Buddha hold his hands the same way. (In statues, of course. In person, he just gives you a big thumbs up.)

144 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:35:24am

re: #123 mikalm Isaiah 53:2 - He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

I think God has a sense of humor. (I really really hope God has a sense of humor).

145 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:35:43am
It’s likely even Jesus would have OK’d water boarding if it would have saved his Mom. He would’ve done the same to save his Dad, or any one of His disciples.

Whoever wrote that obviously have no knowledge of what Christianity even is, or what Jesus' message was.

Matthew 5:39

"But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

If someone wants to be an aggressive pro-America patriot who will do "whatever it takes" to save American lives and America itself -- fine by me. But don't try to claim such an attitude has a religious basis. Because it doesn't. There is a built-in humility, passivity and principle of non-violence in Jesus' message. Not only should you not defend your countrymen by using violence yourself, you aren't supposed to defend yourself from violence by using violence in return. That's what "turn the other cheek" is all about.

If you can't cope with the passive non-violence that is part of the message of Christianity, then stop calling yourself a Christian.

146 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:35:46am

re: #143 Guanxi88

I've seen the Buddha hold his hands the same way. (In statues, of course. In person, he just gives you a big thumbs up.)

(slaps forehead)

147 JacksonTn  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:04am

Hey ... Hillary is on tv ... she looks like she needs a whiskey shot and beer chaser ... sound is off (as usual) ... but she is looking like she wants to be somewhere else ...

148 realwest  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:06am

re: #48 Killgore Trout
And of course, truly stupid stuff is hardly ever found on Left wing blogs.

149 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:19am

re: #48 Killgore Trout

Sadly this stuff is all too common on right wing blogs.

Why the need to slap down conservatives?

150 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:30am

re: #144 DaddyG

Isaiah 53:2 - He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

I think God has a sense of humor. (I really really hope God has a sense of humor).

I've seen platypuses and ostriches. i'm SURE he does

151 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:42am

re: #134 Cato the Elder

That's why those books are considered apocryphal - they don't fit in with the earlier canon.

152 Meryl Yourish  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:49am

re: #118 Jimmah

You know, Jimmah, she really is getting crazier by the day. I thought you were exaggerating.

You're not.

153 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:50am

re: #114 avanti

The Gospel of Judas suggests just that. Judas was the praised by Jesus in that book.

JUDAS.

This 'gospel' is a gnostic heresy.

154 experiencedtraveller  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:53am
From the time of the death of our little Edward, I believe my husband's heart was directed towards religion & as time passed on - when Mr. Lincoln became elevated to Office - with the care of a great Nation, upon his shoulders - when devastating war was upon us then indeed to my knowledge - did his great heart go up daily, hourly, in prayer to God - for his sustaining power When too - the overwhelming sorrow came upon us, our beautiful bright angelic boy, Willie was called away from us, to his Heavenly Home, with God's chastising hand upon us - he turned his heart to Christ.

-Mary Lincoln.

155 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:36:54am

re: #145 zombie

Zombie.....did you get any good protest pics yesterday?

156 Ward Cleaver  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:04am

re: #139 Desert Dog

The lost concert of Judas (Priest, that is)

Breakin' the law, breakin' the law...

157 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:12am

re: #110 J.S.

O please. It's not confined to "right-wing" blogs.

And Killgore didn't say that it was "confined" to right-wing blogs, either.

158 subsailor68  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:16am

Welll, well. From the "No? Really? File":

Toledo police layoffs leading to gun buying

Bottom line: Toledo lays off 75 officers, citizens begin buying guns and taking concealed carry courses.

Sigh. I'm getting a little tired of government using essential services as hostages to frighten citizens, rather than actually dealing with the situation.

Police officers? Fire fighters? Really?

How about taking a look at building inspectors, parks and recreation staff, human resources? How about figuring out why it takes six guys to fix a pothole? Hmm?

Disgusting.

159 abbyadams  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:26am

I'm coming out of my usual lurking to add my "Wow" to the list.

As far as Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Speed, I think it's just a a change in social norms - they shared a bed, yeah...but at the time, a whole dorm of soldiers would share a toothbrush.

160 kynna  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:32am

re: #52 Cato the Elder

I can't speak for Jesus' hypothetical use of enhanced interrogation techniques, but based on His statements like "I come not to bring peace, but a sword" and "Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour", I'm almost positive Dick Cheney would waterboard Him based on the ticking-clock theory.

And, you know, because he looks funny, swarthy, bearded, Middle Eastern features, and all.

So Jesus would have been one of the three who were water boarded? Apparently by Dick Cheney personally [insert eyeroll here]. And the reason those three (potentially including Jesus) were waterboarded was because of how they looked? Seems like a lot more than three would have gone through the process if that were the case.

Ascribing racism to a man who has shown absolutely no signs of that trait is truly obnoxious.

161 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:37am

re: #149 unrealizedviewpoint

Why the need to slap down conservatives?

It's in vogue right now.

162 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:40am

re: #149 unrealizedviewpoint

Why the need to slap down conservatives?

Ah, one reason comes to my mind... because it's true. Too evident?

163 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:47am

re: #149 unrealizedviewpoint

When they say such willfully ignorant things, then yes--they need to slapped down.

164 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:50am
165 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:37:52am

Racists at Tea Party screaming at a black woman and a black cop......
Cincinnati Tea Party Meltdown

Youtube Video
166 Dianna  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:38:05am

re: #149 unrealizedviewpoint

Why the need to slap down conservatives?

I think KT is troubled by the rise in irrationality on some sites. He is over-reacting a touch, but only a touch.

167 J.S.  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:38:21am

re: #135 unrealizedviewpoint

Although, I don't think it's confined to being associated with a political stance -- if there are any "free comments" sections, anywhere, on the Internet, regardless of topic, you'll find bizarre, off-the-wall crazoid "musings"...(i'm assuming it's somehow a feature of anonymous postings...)

168 big steve  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:38:44am

re: #154 experiencedtraveller

I would have to say that utterances of Mary Todd Lincoln might be the LEAST credible of any historical figure ever.

169 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:38:48am
170 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:38:56am

re: #130 Charles

Wow. That one is a classic. Someone should let TIME/LIFE publishing know that she's stealing their copyrighted work wholesale.

Pam gets sicker by the hour.

But right here on LGF we have a poster who has referred to the Obama administration as "the Hussein dictatorship". At least once. And it's always "Hussein", not Obama.

The ODS is strong in that one.

171 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:39:14am

re: #52 Cato the Elder

I can't speak for Jesus' hypothetical use of enhanced interrogation techniques, but based on His statements like "I come not to bring peace, but a sword" and "Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour", I'm almost positive Dick Cheney would waterboard Him based on the ticking-clock theory.

And, you know, because he looks funny, swarthy, bearded, Middle Eastern features, and all.

You sir, are a water bore.
/

172 wee fury  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:39:26am

re: #168 big steve

I would have to say that utterances of Mary Todd Lincoln might be the LEAST credible of any historical figure ever.

Yes.

173 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:39:27am

re: #138 Charles

That "Lex" moron is the same one who's been smearing and attacking me for years at LGF Watch, FYI.

I know, which makes it really funny to watch him now.

174 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:39:52am

re: #165 Killgore Trout

ugh, that is really sick.

175 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:39:53am

re: #155 big steve

Zombie.....did you get any good protest pics yesterday?

A few. The riot fizzled, but there were some entertaining signs. Having 1,000 cops surround the rally and march really can put the kibosh on any antics!

I'll have a funny-but-not-jawdropping post up later today, hopefully.

176 mikalm  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:39:57am

re: #145 zombie

Zom ol' pal, it's a bit more complicated than that.

177 bosforus  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:40:10am
It’s likely even Jesus would have OK’d water boarding if it would have saved his Mom. He would’ve done the same to save his Dad, or any one of His disciples. For that matter, He even died to save all humans.

I've rarely seen such an incoherent paragraph. The last sentence completely contradicts the setup of the first two.

178 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:40:32am

re: #174 Killgore Trout

It gets worse as you go along. I don't know if I can watch the whole thing.

179 Jim D  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:40:35am

re: #42 Samurai

A better question is "How many people would Jesus allow to die if he refused to cause discomfort to a remorseless killer?"


So you think Jesus would torture somone?

180 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:40:52am

re: #161 capitalist piglet

It's in vogue right now.

Seemingly in vogue for Killgore. He's also somehow managed to paint ALL Tea parties as lovefests for Paulians and Supremacists.

181 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:40:53am

re: #178 Killgore Trout

It gets worse as you go along. I don't know if I can watch the whole thing.

But we are all sure you will :-)

182 debutaunt  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:41:31am

re: #169 buzzsawmonkey

On that theory, both Obama and Hitler are ice cream.


...and chocolate cake. I love chocolate cake.

183 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:41:32am

re: #178 Killgore Trout
Omg.

184 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:41:38am

re: #168 big steve

Definitely someone whose elevator did not go to the top floor.

185 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:41:47am

re: #175 zombie

A few. The riot fizzled, but there were some entertaining signs. Having 1,000 cops surround the rally and march really can put the kibosh on any antics!

I'll have a funny-but-not-jawdropping post up later today, hopefully.

Any signs of wackos and nutjobs? Or, are they all over at the Teaparties?

186 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:41:48am

re: #179 Jim D

So you think Jesus would torture somone?

I don't think Jesus would do such a thing, nor allow it to be done. (not a follower, but an admirer.)

187 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:42:29am

re: #181 Desert Dog

I have 46 seconds left and had to stop it. I need to cool down a little bit I think.

188 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:42:34am

re: #180 unrealizedviewpoint

Seemingly in vogue for Killgore. He's also somehow managed to paint ALL Tea parties as lovefests for Paulians and Supremacists.

Not all (yet), just the ones that he has found Paulians and Supremacists attending.

Killgore, keep up the good work.

189 kynna  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:42:36am

re: #91 mikalm

With me, it was a Catholic-style sprinkling of water on my head, and some Signs of the Cross.

That being said, this "Jesus would waterboard" article is beyond absurd.

My kids got sprinkled. I only got dunked because we went to the church on base the pastor of the chapel was baptist so he went to the baptist church in town to do baptisms. Total immersion. It's an interesting experience, but I'll bet it's terrifying for a baby. I was about nine, IIRC.

Yes, anything that starts with "Jesus would" or "Jesus wouldn't" tends to be offensive on some level.

190 bosforus  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:42:40am

I also don't think Jesus would put on a clown suit and juggle while riding a unicycle but that won't stop ME from doing it!

191 hous bin pharteen  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:42:47am

Water boarding AGAIN! The limo-libs are just mad because they would have asked the suspected terrorists to a pot party. Then the mad stream media would have reported they didn't in-hale it.

192 Joan Not of Arc  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:42:57am

re: #71 yma o hyd

(sigh)

Probably.

(deeper sigh)

193 Jim D  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:43:25am

re: #186 Guanxi88

I don't think he would either. I'd just like to know if I understand Samurai's comment correctly.

194 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:43:27am

re: #184 calcajun

Definitely someone whose elevator did not go to the top floor.

Which, as I recall, she added to their original residence by some insanely complicated process whereby the roof was lifted, and the second floor built beneath it.

195 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:43:28am

re: #179 Jim D

So you think Jesus would torture somone?

Well, he did have several siblings. One can only imagine the rivalry there. I'm sure Mary always took his side in a few arguments.//

196 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:44:11am

re: #136 debutaunt

Does she mention chocolate cake?

No, but in a previous thread on the same page, she mentions "The presidential snack: Carrots, pear, cheese and Pepperidge Farm crackers - with the Butterfly crackers carefully positioned at the top. Pepperidge Farm's Butterfly crackers"

There is a big picture of the offending snack accompanying the comment as you could no doubt have guessed. It was posted apparently as evidence that Obama is not doing any real Presidential work.

197 Kenneth  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:44:15am
Youtube Video
198 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:44:20am

re: #186 Guanxi88

I don't think Jesus would do such a thing, nor allow it to be done. (not a follower, but an admirer.)


Well the whole burning in hell forever may be considered torture in some circles.

199 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:44:28am

re: #178 Killgore Trout

It gets worse as you go along. I don't know if I can watch the whole thing.

A couple of positives from it. Out of the many people in cameras view i notice that most of them turn away from the 3 idiots, and those that didn't tried to calm them down (see the old man about 1 minute in) Near the end the pople that are NOT turning away from the confrontation are also NOT adding to it

200 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:44:47am

re: #193 Jim D

I don't think he would either. I'd just like to know if I understand Samurai's comment correctly.

I don't think Samurai's question was well thought out; maybe it came out awkwardly in the expression. The other alternative is that Samurai did not understand what he was asking.

201 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:44:54am

re: #179 Jim D

So you think Jesus would torture somone?

Based on his record in the Bible, he would not torture anyone. He would allow himself to be tortured and even his followers, but he appeared to be a non- violent person. The moneychanger incident at the Temple aside.

Perhaps these chaps mean really would a Christian torture? That is a big 10-4.

202 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:45:30am

re: #198 HoosierHoops

Well the whole burning in hell forever may be considered torture in some circles.

To be fair, that was not his call.//

203 experiencedtraveller  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:45:46am

re: #168 big steve

I would have to say that utterances of Mary Todd Lincoln might be the LEAST credible of any historical figure ever.

You say a wife's first hand evidence on the religious beliefs of her husband is not credible? Please.

204 sattv4u2  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:46:27am

re: #178 Killgore Trout

re: #199 sattv4u2

A couple of positives from it. Out of the many people in cameras view i notice that most of them turn away from the 3 idiots, and those that didn't tried to calm them down (see the old man about 1 minute in) Near the end the pople that are NOT turning away from the confrontation are also NOT adding to it

Finally and MOST important everyone kept their hands to themselves!

205 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:46:48am

re: #188 Walter L. Newton

Not all (yet), just the ones that he has found Paulians and Supremacists attending.

IMO his brush and agenda is too broad.

206 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:47:07am

re: #196 Jimmah

What is it with Crazy Pam anyway? I know she's been off-kilter for a while now, but she's going into full-on complete bonkers with this shit.

The terrible thing is that you have other bloggers buying wholesale into this madness.

207 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:47:23am

re: #176 mikalm

Zom ol' pal, it's a bit more complicated than that.

No it's not. I don't care what later theologians came up with to justify their violence. Did Jesus speak of a "just war"? No. The rest is all garbage.

Using the Catholic Church's medieval and Renaissance's doctrines to justify violence is ridiculous -- because those doctrines have nothing to do with Christianity, really. The church back then routinely tortured heretics and witches and schimatics. They were power-hungry madmen, not Christians, despite what they called themselves.

208 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:47:28am

re: #203 experiencedtraveller

All depends on when she wrote it and when it was published. Mary was not the most reliable off sources and any of her diaries might have been redacted before publication. It's suspect.

209 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:47:28am

re: #205 unrealizedviewpoint

IMO his brush and agenda is too broad.

No, too true.

210 bosforus  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:47:53am

re: #42 Samurai

A better question is "How many people would Jesus allow to die if he refused to cause discomfort to a remorseless killer?"

If you believe that Jesus is omnipotent then you must realize that throughout history probably millions of Christians have already been killed mercilessly w/ little to no divine intercession.

211 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:48:14am

re: #178 Killgore Trout

It gets worse as you go along. I don't know if I can watch the whole thing.

The only comforting thing about that video is, if those citizens keep on like that, they'll all die of aneurysms.

212 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:48:23am

re: #198 HoosierHoops

Well the whole burning in hell forever may be considered torture in some circles.

Well, that side of things is deep. From Christian theology, I understand that Jesus sought to avoid that contingency at the cost of his life.

213 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:48:28am

re: #185 Desert Dog

Any signs of wackos and nutjobs? Or, are they all over at the Teaparties?

You'll just have to be patient and find out later today!

214 Lincolntf  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:48:57am

re: #158 subsailor68

It actually does take 6 (no more, no less) men to fix a pothole in MA. The public employee's union bargained for the "two-truck" minimum years ago, meaning that two trucks with three state workers in each must be present for roadwork. I knew guys who worked for the City/State and the biggest part of their day was figuring out who went where in which truck in order to maximize hours for the old guys and minimize actual work for the young guys. It was like a bidding war to see which crew could waste more taxpayer money in the course of a day.
Of course, the whole system collapsed into a pile of crap when the City/State went broke and virtually no repairs had been made, but as far as I know the rule is still there.

215 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:50:26am

re: #214 Lincolntf

It actually does take 6 (no more, no less) men to fix a pothole in MA. The public employee's union bargained for the "two-truck" minimum years ago, meaning that two trucks with three state workers in each must be present for roadwork. I knew guys who worked for the City/State and the biggest part of their day was figuring out who went where in which truck in order to maximize hours for the old guys and minimize actual work for the young guys. It was like a bidding war to see which crew could waste more taxpayer money in the course of a day.
Of course, the whole system collapsed into a pile of crap when the City/State went broke and virtually no repairs had been made, but as far as I know the rule is still there.

Wow -- they fix potholes in Massachussetts? I'm jealous. Maybe you should send some of those guys over here to California to fix ours.

216 Russkilitlover  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:50:30am

re: #204 sattv4u2

re: #199 sattv4u2


Finally and MOST important everyone kept their hands to themselves!


Silly sattv! Dontcha know that EVERYONE there is just a Paulian in waiting - they just need to hear the call of the right wing nutters and, BAM!, they'll all be Nazis.

/

217 legalpad  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:51:07am

2 rooms: You have to enter one of them. One has U.S. waterboarding team, the other has - an unknown country's - interrogators. Which room does everyone enter?

To claim that "torture" = torture is simply the statement of a liar. They are no where near the same, and they know it. They are different enough to have different words to label them. It is not a matter of euphemisms.

218 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:51:22am

re: #207 zombie

No it's not. I don't care what later theologians came up with to justify their violence. Did Jesus speak of a "just war"? No. The rest is all garbage.

Using the Catholic Church's medieval and Renaissance's doctrines to justify violence is ridiculous -- because those doctrines have nothing to do with Christianity, really. The church back then routinely tortured heretics and witches and schimatics. They were power-hungry madmen, not Christians, despite what they called themselves.

If you start to minimize the "church fathers" and other such theologians, who WERE the recognized apologist for Christian doctrine at the time, then you will have to dismiss all sorts of doctrinal "truths."

From the 4th century onward, doctrine of all sorts was defined by the same sort of scholars you are saying we should ignore.

Can't have it both ways.

219 Daria Emmons  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:51:27am

This whole nonsense on Redstate.org is ludicrous, because it is absurd to presume what Jesus would have done or not done.

With that said, I do not believe waterboarding is torture to begin with. This is a seperate matter and has nothing to do with what Jesus would have done.

220 avanti  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:52:09am

re: #204 sattv4u2

re: #199 sattv4u2

Finally and MOST important everyone kept their hands to themselves!

Take that brave old man, clone him to pack all the tea parties and you'd be golden. He stood up to the big mouth, when others just walked away. If a incident like that happens it could be positive PR if the majority of the tea party folks stood up to the idiots instead of ignoring them.

221 acwgusa  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:52:22am

OT - I thought we were broke - Obama said so.

Geithner unveils stimulus tax credits in Boston

Where's my fraking tax credit?

222 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:52:29am

re: #22 Honorary Yooper

Yep, and those rumors are just that, rumors.
It would seem everyone has an agenda when it comes to claiming Lincoln as theirs, Christians, gays, even Democrats. He was none of the above.

There seems to be more evidence that he was gay than of him being Christian, and certainly, Democrat.

[Link: query.nytimes.com...]

223 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:52:47am
224 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:53:33am

I don't buy the Jesus as peacenik hippie sch tick, he did put the beat down on the money changers for defiling the Temple. Having said that:

1) I would not presume to know as well as Jesus when someone deserved His righteous indignation and a scourging.

2) Even asking the question would Jesus Water-board is ignorance to the third power = Mind reading x time travel x presuming to know the mind of God (presuming a Christian wrote this).

3) Putting words in Jesus mouth is the very definition of taking the word of God in vain and/or priest-craft.

Quite disgusting really...

225 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:53:57am

re: #207 zombie

No it's not. I don't care what later theologians came up with to justify their violence. Did Jesus speak of a "just war"? No. The rest is all garbage.

Using the Catholic Church's medieval and Renaissance's doctrines to justify violence is ridiculous -- because those doctrines have nothing to do with Christianity, really. The church back then routinely tortured heretics and witches and schimatics. They were power-hungry madmen, not Christians, despite what they called themselves.

So (judging from this and your comments upthread) you believe Christians are commanded not to exercise physical self-defense? If someone attempts to rape me, I should allow my attacker to continue without resistance, otherwise I am not a real Christian? Do I understand you correctly?

You did say this:

Not only should you not defend your countrymen by using violence yourself, you aren't supposed to defend yourself from violence by using violence in return. That's what "turn the other cheek" is all about.

If you can't cope with the passive non-violence that is part of the message of Christianity, then stop calling yourself a Christian.

226 Bloodnok  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:54:00am

re: #180 unrealizedviewpoint

Seemingly in vogue for Killgore. He's also somehow managed to paint ALL Tea parties as lovefests for Paulians and Supremacists.

Here we go again. Same arguments, same strawmen.

227 Guanxi88  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:54:36am

re: #203 experiencedtraveller

You say a wife's first hand evidence on the religious beliefs of her husband is not credible? Please.

Well, under normal circumstances, they might be deemed reliable. But, for a grief-stricken widow of a man martyred in office, who had already lost a child and who was known to be mentally wobbly, and prone to spiritualism, things are a little shakier.

228 Leonidas Hoplite  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:54:39am

I know I'm late to this thread but WTF? More and more it seems to me the Republican party left me and not the other way around. Glad I began to settle in for 8 years of Obama sooner rather than later as it seems the Republicans are determined to wonder in the wilderness despite the easy victory the Dems are handing them in the next election with their foolhardy policies.

229 kansas  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:54:56am

I think the real question is "Would Jesus have nuked Japan?"

230 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:55:09am

re: #165 Killgore Trout

Racists at Tea Party screaming at a black woman and a black cop......
Cincinnati Tea Party Meltdown

Trash people. I don't think I'd be able to let that go if I were there. Tea party supporters here must be disappointed to see the lack of intervention there from this vast majority of normal, non racist, non extreme teabaggers they keep talking about.

231 SummerSong  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:55:27am

Well, the market seems to want to go lower...

232 Daria Emmons  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:55:34am

re: #224 DaddyG

I don't buy the Jesus as peacenik hippie sch tick, he did put the beat down on the money changers for defiling the Temple. Having said that:

1) I would not presume to know as well as Jesus when someone deserved His righteous indignation and a scourging.

2) Even asking the question would Jesus Water-board is ignorance to the third power = Mind reading x time travel x presuming to know the mind of God (presuming a Christian wrote this).

3) Putting words in Jesus mouth is the very definition of taking the word of God in vain and/or priest-craft.

Quite disgusting really...

I agree with all that you wrote. As I said, it is ludicrous to presume what Jesus would have done or not done; in fact, it borders on the crazy. However, that does not mean waterboarding is itself torture, or should be considered torture.

233 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:55:34am

re: #215 zombie

Wow -- they fix potholes in Massachussetts? I'm jealous. Maybe you should send some of those guys over here to California to fix ours.


But, but where would they throw the tax dollars then? /

234 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:55:53am

re: #229 kansas

I think the real question is "Would Jesus have nuked Japan?"


Would Jesus go to a tea party?

235 bosforus  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:56:22am

What would Jesus do for a Klondike bar?

236 Leonidas Hoplite  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:56:40am

Would Jesus prefer Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3? I think maybe he'd be a Wii guy.

237 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:57:35am
238 soccerdad  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:57:41am

Netherlands Closing Prisons for lack of crime

I'm wondering if it is really a lack of crime there, or is it a lack of balls for crime enforcement? any nederlanders or Euros care to comment?

239 hous bin pharteen  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:57:50am

re: #145 zombie

Your correct. The Catholic Church was for passive resistance. But I believed then and now with using violence to fight evil to protect innocent people when everything else doesn't work. Wearing a uniform reflects that. Even the Germans under Hitler wore uniforms. Now we have evil people using civilians clothes and killing innocent people. Even fellow Muslims who have different sub-titles.

240 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:57:56am

Before going on ad infinitum with the "WWJD" routines, everybody should take a break and read the "Grand Inquisitor" section of The Brothers Karamazov.

If you could build a world of perfect happiness and justice with the proviso that first a human infant must be tortured to death, would you do it? Would the gains outweigh the sin?

Dostoevsky has a way of bringing things to a focal point and making everybody very uncomfortable with pat answers.

And with that, it's back to the Kindle.

Ars longa, uita breuis.

241 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:58:02am

Would Jesus drive a big SUV or a Prius?
/Remember he had 12 guys in his entourage

242 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:58:09am

re: #215 zombie

Wow -- they fix potholes in Massachussetts? I'm jealous. Maybe you should send some of those guys over here to California to fix ours.


There are potholes in the Boston area big enough that you could literally break a leg if you accidentally stepped into one crossing the street.

243 Kenneth  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:58:11am

re: #169 buzzsawmonkey

There's more to it than that: both Hitler and Obama rode in cars at some point, gave speeches and have been to Berlin. The evidence is overwhelming.

/need I?

244 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:58:44am
245 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:58:58am

re: #223 Iron Fist

Crucifixion, buning at the stake, impaling, and other sundry forms of inflicting misery while the victim is dying is what the Bill of Rights is talking about when it forbids "cruel and unusual" punishment. It doesn't mean that the prisoner can't get cable TV, or that his cell is too cold. The Left have taken this reasonable safeguard, and used it to tie the hands of Law enforcement and the courts for decades.

Somehow, someway, that has to stop.

I assume you are joking about liberals construing the Bill of Rights to guarantee prisoners cable television. As far as cuel and unusual punishment tying the hands of law enforcment, did you mean to say the fourth amendment re: unreasonable search and seizure? I've never heard your cruel and unusual argument before.

246 ducktrapper  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:59:03am

Whether we can or should answer the "torture" questions using the WWJD formula, there can be no argument that the "scourging" that Jesus went through, shows that, if nothing else, torture has evolved over the past 2000 years. I'll take waterboarding over a good old fashioned scourging any day.

247 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:59:10am

re: #199 sattv4u2

It's completely beyond me how you can excuse or minimize that confrontation. It's openly racist and the surrounding crowd is participating.

248 kansas  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:59:13am

re: #237 buzzsawmonkey

Working for the ACLU when I was in law school, under the direction of someone who was very, very into "prisoners' rights," was one of the things that started me on the road to more conservative views.

We had all sorts of letters from triple axe murderers who were trying to get us to sue the state because their cable privileges had been revoked, or the mashed potatoes were lumpy.

Well gosh Buzz, if their mashed potatoes are lumpy isn't that torture?

249 ladycatnip  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:59:19am

I've tried more than several times to post a comment on that site but for some reason cannot, so I'll post my comment to them here:

The Second Commandment in Exodus 20:7 says: " You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name." This means DOING anything in His name, or invoking His name to justify deeds.

The WWJD is a sick presumption. He specifically stayed out of politics, yet commanded His disciples to render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar; so obviously He supported paying taxes. He also did not prevent the beheading of His cousin, which speaks to the author's assumption that He would "save His mom or His Father". Crucifixion and flogging were common in that day yet you'll never find Jesus decrying the cruelty of those methods. Instead He chose to die by those horrific means on our behalf.

For the pacifists, turning the other cheek was addressed to individuals not nations. Huge difference with even larger outcomes if a personal commandment is followed as a governmental policy.

This article is a stain on those who seriously follow Christ, as the author of this article is trying to fit history into his own template. Make the case for waterboarding, then take responsibility for the decision but don't invoke His name or presume what He would do.

Ladycatnip

250 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:59:23am

re: #232 Daria Emmons

I agree with all that you wrote. As I said, it is ludicrous to presume what Jesus would have done or not done; in fact, it borders on the crazy. However, that does not mean water-boarding is itself torture, or should be considered torture.


Agreed. Unfortunately bloggers and conservative pundits who write and say things like this get headlines and divert from the necessary discussion about what should be done with captured terrorists.

251 bosforus  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:59:25am

re: #240 Cato the Elder

Before going on ad infinitum with the "WWJD" routines, everybody should take a break and read the "Grand Inquisitor" section of The Brothers Karamazov.


This is the second reminder in the last few days that I need to go back and finish that book. I've tried twice in the past and only gotten about 100 pages into it. Which translates to roughly 6% of the book. /

252 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 10:59:57am

re: #237 buzzsawmonkey

Working for the ACLU when I was in law school, under the direction of someone who was very, very into "prisoners' rights," was one of the things that started me on the road to more conservative views.

We had all sorts of letters from triple axe murderers who were trying to get us to sue the state because their cable privileges had been revoked, or the mashed potatoes were lumpy.

I despise the ACLU. To me they are as un-American an organization as I can think of.

253 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:00:00am

re: #206 Honorary Yooper

What is it with Crazy Pam anyway? I know she's been off-kilter for a while now, but she's going into full-on complete bonkers with this shit.

The terrible thing is that you have other bloggers buying wholesale into this madness.

Probably a consequence of her increasingly extreme set of buddies. Being surrounded by extremist idiots is giving her the confidence to give her own idiocy full expression.

254 ConservatismNow!  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:00:15am

re: #234 HoosierHoops

Would Jesus go to a tea party?

Only if it was kosher.

255 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:00:29am

re: #204 sattv4u2

re: #199 sattv4u2

Finally and MOST important everyone kept their hands to themselves!

Now you're going to praise them for not getting violent?

256 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:00:51am

re: #251 bosforus

This is the second reminder in the last few days that I need to go back and finish that book. I've tried twice in the past and only gotten about 100 pages into it. Which translates to roughly 6% of the book. /

The Inquisitor can be had as a separate book, and can be read as such within the main story. If you have time for nothing else, read it. It will challenge your image of the world.

257 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:00:55am

re: #234 HoosierHoops

Would Jesus go to a tea party?

If kosher cucumber sandwiches were served, yes.

258 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:02:08am

re: #207 zombie

Yep - fully agree with that, zombie!

259 realwest  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:02:16am

Well it's been real y'all but I gotta go eat lunch and do more chores.
Have a great day and I hope to see you down the road.

260 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:02:30am

re: #237 buzzsawmonkey

Working for the ACLU when I was in law school, under the direction of someone who was very, very into "prisoners' rights," was one of the things that started me on the road to more conservative views.

We had all sorts of letters from triple axe murderers who were trying to get us to sue the state because their cable privileges had been revoked, or the mashed potatoes were lumpy.

Prisoners are notoriously litigious and the courts know this, both liberal and conservative. Just because a prisoner wants to sue for a frivilous reason, doesn't mean he'll find a lawyer willing to waste his time. And if he does, it doesn't mean the prisoner wins. Courts are very skeptical of prisoner lawsuits.

261 bosforus  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:02:49am

re: #256 Cato the Elder

I probably should. Life seems to be telling me to.

262 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:02:51am

re: #218 Walter L. Newton

If you start to minimize the "church fathers" and other such theologians, who WERE the recognized apologist for Christian doctrine at the time, then you will have to dismiss all sorts of doctrinal "truths."

From the 4th century onward, doctrine of all sorts was defined by the same sort of scholars you are saying we should ignore.

Can't have it both ways.

I care naught for "doctrinal truths." I'm not having it both ways. Whatever doctrine was established after the 4th century is irrelevant to the original Christian message. So I say, yes, ignore later scholars. Where did I say we should follow them?

I'm not a Christian myself, but if I was, I'd follow the words of Jesus and Jesus only, not what some later guys said about him. And that includes "later guys" all the way back to Paul. If it's not in the Gospels, it's a later addition.

(And yes, I'm fully conversant in the manner in which the "official canon" of Biblical texts was chosen centuries afterward, which left room for doctrinal interference even in the Gospels -- which is something I couldn't accept on faith, which is one reason why I'm not a member of a religion.)

263 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:03:17am

re: #258 yma o hyd

Yep - fully agree with that, zombie!

Well, I don't, as I commented above...

If you start to minimize the "church fathers" and other such theologians, who WERE the recognized apologist for Christian doctrine at the time, then you will have to dismiss all sorts of doctrinal "truths."

From the 4th century onward, doctrine of all sorts was defined by the same sort of scholars you are saying we should ignore.

Can't have it both ways.

264 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:03:28am

(In late:)

Kevin Roeten at RedState has told us FAR more about himself than Jesus.

Holier-than-those-others sanctimony.

265 shortshrift  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:03:52am

An historical point: the Inquisition used waterboarding - the "water cure" - in the name of Jesus.

266 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:04:20am

I think the question is sort of preposterous.

Jesus wasn't a head of state, therefore he didn't have the obligations nor perpsective of a head of state. At best asking what he might have done is speculative, and at worst its misleading.

Is there any question that Pontius Pilate or some other Roman executive would have authorized torture had he felt it necessary to protect the State?

Is there any question that said answer doesn't really inform us as to what appropriate policy for coercive interrogation is in the 21st century?

267 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:04:47am

re: #169 buzzsawmonkey

On that theory, both Obama and Hitler are ice cream.

I think she's got ice cream for brains.

268 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:05:21am

re: #262 zombie

I care naught for "doctrinal truths." I'm not having it both ways. Whatever doctrine was established after the 4th century is irrelevant to the original Christian message. So I say, yes, ignore later scholars. Where did I say we should follow them?

I'm not a Christian myself, but if I was, I'd follow the words of Jesus and Jesus only, not what some later guys said about him. And that includes "later guys" all the way back to Paul. If it's not in the Gospels, it's a later addition.

(And yes, I'm fully conversant in the manner in which the "official canon" of Biblical texts was chosen centuries afterward, which left room for doctrinal interference even in the Gospels -- which is something I couldn't accept on faith, which is one reason why I'm not a member of a religion.)

Then you actually agree with me, since I do agree with you. Most of Christianity, as we know it today, doctrinally and otherwise, is NOT the same Apostolic Christianity as set forth in the Greek scriptures.

269 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:05:21am

That video was shot by a Tea Party supporter. Here's another one of the crowd accosting a black reporter....
Cincinnati Tea Party Confrontation

Youtube Video
270 tokyobk  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:05:29am

I don't think Jesus would torture anyone or personally allow anyone to be tortured (though it depends on your belief if you believe Jesus authorizes the hell which I assume is worse than being water-boarded).

But "Render unto Caesar" may imply letting the government handle earthly justice.

271 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:05:33am

re: #262 zombie

(forgive an OT pun)

And yes, I'm fully conversant in the manner in which ...

Sounds like you're feathering your own Nestorian.

272 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:05:54am

re: #237 buzzsawmonkey

Working for the ACLU when I was in law school, under the direction of someone who was very, very into "prisoners' rights," was one of the things that started me on the road to more conservative views.

We had all sorts of letters from triple axe murderers who were trying to get us to sue the state because their cable privileges had been revoked, or the mashed potatoes were lumpy.

Geronimo Pratt sued the state because he claimed that his cell toilet gave him hemmorhoids.

273 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:06:03am

re: #265 shortshrift

An historical point: the Inquisition used waterboarding - the "water cure" - in the name of Jesus.

The "water cure" was nothing like waterboarding.

274 IslandLibertarian  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:06:05am

Jesus would go anywhere, talk to anybody, help anyone, but would not tolerate hypocrites.
WWJD is really easy to answer.

275 experiencedtraveller  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:06:18am

re: #208 calcajun

All depends on when she wrote it and when it was published. Mary was not the most reliable off sources and any of her diaries might have been redacted before publication. It's suspect.

For good order the source of my original quotation is:

Mary Todd Lincoln Letter to James Reed dated June 8, 1870

and paraphrased here. While her state of mind should always be regarded with suspicion I doubt very much the letters were edited.

And Charles I noticed your down-dings up-thread with regret. I have always enjoyed reading about Lincoln's (and Jefferson's) religiosity. Its fascinating stuff. My comments are simply historical study and not related to the bizarre Redstate article.

276 acwgusa  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:06:35am

re: #272 zombie

Geronimo Pratt sued the state because he claimed that his cell toilet gave him hemmorhoids.

Quick. Let me find my quantum violin.

277 Nevergiveup  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:06:40am

Good afternoon (EST Time) everyone out there. I just went to DD and got myself a cappuccino and got home poured off some and put in a pinch, OK more than a pinch, of Baily's Irish. Not Bad. So we're talking Jesus and water boarding? Well being Jewish I'll stay outa this, but anybody up for a dunking in the Jordan River?

278 ConservatismNow!  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:06:45am

What would Jesus say if he was here right now?
Probably something we can't understand because it's in Aramaic.

279 kansas  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:07:08am

re: #274 IslandLibertarian

Jesus would go anywhere, talk to anybody, help anyone, but would not tolerate hypocrites.
WWJD is really easy to answer.


Tea Party is on then.

280 acwgusa  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:07:14am

re: #278 ConservatismNow!

What would Jesus say if he was here right now?
Probably something we can't understand because it's in Aramaic.

Wouldn't Jesus be his own Universal Translator?

281 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:07:39am

re: #269 Killgore Trout

That video was shot by a Tea Party supporter. Here's another one of the crowd accosting a black reporter....
Cincinnati Tea Party Confrontation

Are you trying to say they were "accosting" her because she is black?

282 ConservatismNow!  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:08:10am

re: #280 acwgusa

Wouldn't Jesus be his own Universal Translator?

You mean a Tower of Babelfish?

283 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:08:19am
It’s likely even Jesus would have OK’d water boarding if it would have saved his Mom. He would’ve done the same to save his Dad, or any one of His disciples.

Did they miss the part where Jesus allowed himself to be arrested?

284 jvic  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:08:25am

re: #224 DaddyG

I don't buy the Jesus as peacenik hippie sch tick, he did put the beat down on the money changers for defiling the Temple. Having said that:

1) I would not presume to know as well as Jesus when someone deserved His righteous indignation and a scourging.

2) Even asking the question would Jesus Water-board is ignorance to the third power = Mind reading x time travel x presuming to know the mind of God (presuming a Christian wrote this).

3) Putting words in Jesus mouth is the very definition of taking the word of God in vain and/or priest-craft.

Quite disgusting really...

Redstater Kevin Roeten doesn't share your caution, DaddyG. He does more than put words in Jesus' mouth. Scroll down in his post to his comment:

He would also be for saving the life of every child aborted. Knowing Jesus personally, if He had no other choice, He would always be for the saving of a life–no matter how guilty.

(Boldface is mine; grammar is Roeten's.) How do you have a give-and-take discussion with someone like this? How do you share a Big Tent with someone like this?

285 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:08:38am

re: #252 LGoPs

I despise the ACLU. To me they are as un-American an organization as I can think of.

Un-American? My understanding is that they go to extremes in trying to have the Bill of Rights applied to defendants and that they tend to take pride in defending the worst defendants, (as well as defending odd people like Rush Limbaugh) but is that un-american?

286 acwgusa  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:09:08am

re: #282 ConservatismNow!

You mean a Tower of Babelfish?

I laughed at that one. My coworkers think I'm nuts now.

287 Nevergiveup  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:09:22am

Egyptian Culture Minister Farouk Hosni, a leading candidate to head UNESCO despite his vehement anti-Israeli rhetoric, has apologized for a number of his contentious statements claiming that they counter his own beliefs and devotion to culture.

[Link: www.haaretz.com...]

Putting an Egyptian in charge of another International Organization? I mean El Barridi did such a cracker jack job with Nukes?

288 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:09:31am

re: #286 acwgusa

I laughed at that one. My coworkers think I'm nuts now.

Now?
/

289 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:09:32am

re: #275 experiencedtraveller

and paraphrased here. While her state of mind should always be regarded with suspicion I doubt very much the letters were edited.

And Charles I noticed your down-dings up-thread with regret. I have always enjoyed reading about Lincoln's (and Jefferson's) religiosity. Its fascinating stuff. My comments are simply historical study and not related to the bizarre Redstate article.

I down-dinged your comments because you're downplaying the fact that Mary Todd Lincoln was very probably a schizophrenic. Whoever said she was one of the least reliable historic figures from whom to quote was exactly right.

290 jantjepietje  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:06am

re: #266 looking closely

Amen

Although the Roman leaders didn't have to authorize torture it was common practice in fact it was in the law that the testimony of a slave was only considered to have value in court if the slave was tortured first

291 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:09am

re: #263 Walter L. Newton

Well, I don't, as I commented above...

If you start to minimize the "church fathers" and other such theologians, who WERE the recognized apologist for Christian doctrine at the time, then you will have to dismiss all sorts of doctrinal "truths."

From the 4th century onward, doctrine of all sorts was defined by the same sort of scholars you are saying we should ignore.

Can't have it both ways.

The operational phrase here is 'from the 4th century onwards' - and yes, a lot of Christians have difficulties with that which became known as 'Christendom', in the wake of Constantine.
Thats why I agreed with zombie.

There are Church fathers who did live and write before Constantine, but I've not studied them as yet - I'm still working on getting to grips with the Paulian Epistles.

292 acwgusa  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:10am

re: #288 Walter L. Newton

Now?
/

There was some doubt among a couple of them.

293 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:17am

re: #281 loppyd

I think they were concerned that they filmed the racists screaming at the black woman. Did you notice the fear in the reporters eyes at the end of that clip? Very spooky.

294 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:19am

re: #287 Nevergiveup

Egyptian Culture Minister Farouk Hosni, a leading candidate to head UNESCO despite his vehement anti-Israeli rhetoric, has apologized for a number of his contentious statements claiming that they counter his own beliefs and devotion to culture.

[Link: www.haaretz.com...]

Putting an Egyptian in charge of another International Organization? I mean El Barridi did such a cracker jack job with Nukes?

He didn't do anything with nukes, he never even found one, how can you say that?
/

295 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:24am
296 ihateronpaul  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:25am

So if I am dialing into their wacked thinking correctly...we should do as the romans do and torture? I am SO confuuuzed!

297 Russkilitlover  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:40am

re: #247 Killgore Trout

It's completely beyond me how you can excuse or minimize that confrontation. It's openly racist and the surrounding crowd is participating.

If you "had trouble" getting through your video, you'll never make it far in this one. Enjoy!

Tea Party Anthem

298 Nevergiveup  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:10:53am

re: #294 Walter L. Newton

He didn't do anything with nukes, he never even found one, how can you say that?
/

Good point. Good point.

299 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:05am

Addendum: I've read several books on Lincoln, and the consensus of almost all historians is that Lincoln was definitely NOT a Christian.

300 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:08am

re: #252 LGoPs

I despise the ACLU. To me they are as un-American an organization as I can think of.

Imagine my shock at this statement from you.

301 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:15am

re: #292 acwgusa

There was some doubt among a couple of them.

Well, congratulations on clearing that up for the remaining few.
/////////

302 yma o hyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:32am

re: #268 Walter L. Newton

Then you actually agree with me, since I do agree with you. Most of Christianity, as we know it today, doctrinally and otherwise, is NOT the same Apostolic Christianity as set forth in the Greek scriptures.

Yep - thats how I see it meself.

303 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:35am

re: #270 tokyobk

I don't think Jesus would torture anyone or personally allow anyone to be tortured (though it depends on your belief if you believe Jesus authorizes the hell which I assume is worse than being water-boarded).


I don't think there is biblical precedent for weapons of mass destruction that might inform Jesus' opinion on the matter of "ticking time bomb" type coercive interrogation.

I think it IS fair to say that:

a. Jesus wasn't categorically against violence, as he permitted it in self-defense.
b. Jesus understood and permitted the authority of the State.

So adding these two things together, its reasonable to conclude that Jesus *might* condone torture by the State in cases of legitimate defensive emergency (ie the so-called "ticking time bomb" scenario). Again, this is speculative.

But to change the topic just a hair, isn't the Pope nominally Gods official representative on the Earth (ie if you are a Catholic)? So has the Pope opined on coercive interrogation? I doubt we ever will hear it, but I would like to hear his informed opinion on the matter with respect to Catholic/Christian theology.

304 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:36am

re: #247 Killgore Trout

It's completely beyond me how you can excuse or minimize that confrontation. It's openly racist and the surrounding crowd is participating.

It is, of course, a disgusting display, Killgore. But, what is your point here? To inform or condem? Every post you make lately is a negative towards the Republicans and these Tea Parties. By posting this and others are you attempting to imply everyone and anyone that attended these events are racists? Sure seems that way to me.

If that is your conclusion then anyone who attends some rally on the left is a hard core commie, Che Lovin Anarchist. I could probably load up 1000's of videos in a loop to show you over and over and over agian if you'd like.

305 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:47am

re: #285 Flyers1974

Un-American? My understanding is that they go to extremes in trying to have the Bill of Rights applied to defendants and that they tend to take pride in defending the worst defendants, (as well as defending odd people like Rush Limbaugh) but is that un-american?

Fucking A right. And the Limbaugh thing is a canard so they can disingenously deflect accusations of overwhelming bias by saying that they also defended Rush. Bullshit.

306 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:11:55am

re: #293 Killgore Trout

I think they were concerned that they filmed the racists screaming at the black woman. Did you notice the fear in the reporters eyes at the end of that clip? Very spooky.

That fits nicely into your narrative now doesn't it?

307 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:12:26am

re: #296 ihateronpaul

So if I am dialing into their wacked thinking correctly...we should do as the romans do and torture? I am SO confuuuzed!

Yeah- so much for Jesus telling his disciple to put away his sword.

308 Nevergiveup  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:13:03am

21:08 El Al plane en route to Rome forced to return to due smoke in the restroom (Haaretz)

Gee, smoke in the bathroom on an Israeli Airline?

309 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:13:14am
310 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:13:37am

re: #225 capitalist piglet

So (judging from this and your comments upthread) you believe Christians are commanded not to exercise physical self-defense? If someone attempts to rape me, I should allow my attacker to continue without resistance, otherwise I am not a real Christian? Do I understand you correctly?

Well, isn't that the message of Matthew 5:39? How else can you interpret "But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

My comment was directed toward the person who wrote the article published on RedState. But, yes, in general, it would seem to me that Matthew 5:39 commands people to not exercise physical self-defense. If someone strikes you -- or stabs you or rapes you or murders you or whatever -- "Do not resist" him.

Now, I personally do not follow this commandment, because I'm not a Christian nor do I call myself a Christian. But if I were to consider myself a Christian, wouldn't I necessarily need to follow Christ's words? Including and especially Matthew 5:39?

311 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:02am

re: #265 shortshrift

An historical point: the Inquisition used waterboarding - the "water cure" - in the name of Jesus.

Modern waterboarding is more psychological. The water cure was very much under the "cruel and unusual" category. Then there's other water tortures that include dunking and the Chinese water torture. You may be thinking of dunking.

312 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:15am

re: #306 loppyd

Watch the beginning of the clip. I'm pretty sure they were concerned that they filmed the racists yelling at the black lady.

313 ducktrapper  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:18am

re: #299 Charles

Addendum: I've read several books on Lincoln, and the consensus of almost all historians is that Lincoln was definitely NOT a Christian.

Might he have been a "moderate" Christian?

314 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:44am

re: #273 Charles

The "water cure" was nothing like waterboarding.


Depends what you mean by that term.

If you are referring to forced ingestion of huge amounts of water, then no, it isn't/

But the traditional "trial by ordeal" water-dunking (ie like done to alleged witches) is actually quite like waterboarding, in that its a form of controlled drowning.

315 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:45am

re: #300 Cato the Elder

Imagine my shock at this statement from you.

Shall I call an ambulance?
/

316 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:50am

re: #305 LGoPs

Fucking A right. And the Limbaugh thing is a canard so they can disingenously deflect accusations of overwhelming bias by saying that they also defended Rush. Bullshit.

As always, your reasoning powers overwhelm by their sheer force and beauty.

317 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:51am

re: #291 yma o hyd

The operational phrase here is 'from the 4th century onwards' - and yes, a lot of Christians have difficulties with that which became known as 'Christendom', in the wake of Constantine.
Thats why I agreed with zombie.

There are Church fathers who did live and write before Constantine, but I've not studied them as yet - I'm still working on getting to grips with the Paulian Epistles.

Seriously, leaders in the early Christian community were putting a apologetic spin on the events even before the end of the 1st century. I was using the 4th century as a recognizable dividing point, but, as you so point out yourself, there were bishops before the 4th century who where already reinventing the Apostolic principles.

It went down hill from there.

318 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:14:56am

re: #280 acwgusa

Wouldn't Jesus be his own Universal Translator?


I would think so..But if not..There are always sub titles

319 Russkilitlover  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:15:11am

re: #293 Killgore Trout

I think they were concerned that they filmed the racists screaming at the black woman. Did you notice the fear in the reporters eyes at the end of that clip? Very spooky.

Here's another. And.......*GASP*......can that be a black person at a Tea Party? Wha....? He wrote the anthem, too?

Lloyd Marcus, Composer, Tea Party Anthem.

320 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:15:36am

re: #309 buzzsawmonkey

I think that the writer of the article was confused by reading about Jesus saying to a confused follower, "Haven't I torture anything?"

And I'm sure the "Suffer the little children" sentence was mis-translated.

/

321 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:15:55am

re: #312 Killgore Trout

Watch the beginning of the clip. I'm pretty sure they were concerned that they filmed the racists yelling at the black lady.

Pretty sure doesn't cut it unless you were there to witness it first hand.

322 Lincolntf  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:16:05am

As to Abraham Lincoln's religiosity, there is really no pat answer that would satisfy today's tendency to declare people part of one "faction" or another and then judging them solely on that association. One of his most noteworthy acts in the area of Religion was his (personal) insistence that Jews be allowed to serve as chaplains during the Civil War. I have a book somewhere filled with letters to/from President Lincoln and in many of his letters, he touches on Religious/spiritual themes. I'll dig it out and see if there's any real declaration on his part. I don't remember one.

323 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:16:25am

re: #8 Jimmah

"...to save his Dad"

LOL!

Why would God need a spaceship?

324 Desert Dog  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:16:31am

re: #319 Russkilitlover

Here's another. And.......*GASP*......can that be a black person at a Tea Party? Wha....? He wrote the anthem, too?

Lloyd Marcus, Composer, Tea Party Anthem.

He's like Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell....he's not a "real" black person.

/

325 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:17:07am

re: #305 LGoPs

Fucking A right. And the Limbaugh thing is a canard so they can disingenously deflect accusations of overwhelming bias by saying that they also defended Rush. Bullshit.

Is there more to the story of the ACLU than their desire to broaden the Bill of Rights beyond what most legal scholars would agree with and their penchant for representing controversial Defendants? If not, doesn't anti-american sound a bit harsh?

326 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:17:08am

re: #275 experiencedtraveller

It all depends on the context. Also, Mrs. Lincoln's mental state at that time was not the best. As I recall, it was about that time that Robert Lincoln had her committed--around 1875. But she had been emotionally unstable for years and the death of her husband only made matters worse.

I do no doubt that Lincoln was a man possessed of religious values. Most everyone was at that time as it was a period of great religious revival. It's the source material with which I am uncertain. Any of the letters of Robert Lincoln or contemporaries like Ward Layman might provide better insight. As to what was really in the heart of the Great Man himself, that is know only to him and to God.

327 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:17:24am

re: #268 Walter L. Newton

Then you actually agree with me, since I do agree with you. Most of Christianity, as we know it today, doctrinally and otherwise, is NOT the same Apostolic Christianity as set forth in the Greek scriptures.

We are in total agreement on this point. That's pretty much what I was trying to say, albeit a bit awkwardly.

328 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:18:01am

re: #286 acwgusa

My coworkers think I'm nuts now.

Oh, I think the boat sailed on that one a while back...

329 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:18:03am

re: #313 ducktrapper

Might he have been a "moderate" Christian?

Lincoln was probably a deist.

330 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:18:19am

re: #316 Cato the Elder

As always, your reasoning powers overwhelm by their sheer force and beauty.

Thanks. I try to hone these skills regularly. Brevity and directness have their own elegance.
/

331 Nevergiveup  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:18:37am

N. Korea threatens to attack U.S. warships
By Hyung-Jin Kim - The Associated Press
Posted : Wednesday May 27, 2009 10:35:54 EDT
SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea threatened military action Wednesday against U.S. and South Korean warships plying the waters near the Koreas’ disputed maritime border, raising the specter of a naval clash just days after the regime’s underground nuclear test.

[Link: www.navytimes.com...]

I wonder who is charge over there? For that matter I wonder who is in charge over here?

332 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:18:41am

re: #321 loppyd

The problem isn't going to go away by denying it. It's getting worse because nobody's doing anything. The Tea Party leadership hasn't mentioned anything about the ADL press release. No condemnation of White Nationalists. Silence is consent. It's eesentially hanging out the welcome mat for them. There will be more of them at the next round of Tea Parties and they will be more vocal because they now feel welcome.

333 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:18:42am

re: #45 big steve

What is interesting is that it is possible that none of the four Presidents on Mt Rushmore were Christians. On one extreme is Jefferson who was openly a Diest and Roosevelt who publically denied being Christian. Jury is out on Lincoln although he did not state one way or another, friends and such stated categorically that he wasn't. Washington might have been a Christian but in that age it was ungentlemanly to talk about it.

Washington was also a Deist.

334 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:18:47am
335 hous bin pharteen  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:19:07am

re: #277 Nevergiveup

Your Jewish and drinking Baileys from Ireland? A drink made by Catholics ? Posting on comments about Jesus? There may be something here to complain about, but I have nothing. Nada. Zip. I think I am addicted to Baileys. It tastes great with a shot in your coffee. But at night. Not at breakfast.

336 IslandLibertarian  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:19:14am

By the way, which Jesus?
Anyone consider this persona?
19:11- I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war.
12- His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself...
13- He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God...
14- The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean...
15- From his mouth issues a sharp sword with which to smite the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron; he will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty..
16- On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: King of kings and Lord of lords...

337 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:19:18am

re: #310 zombie

Well, isn't that the message of Matthew 5:39? How else can you interpret "But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

My comment was directed toward the person who wrote the article published on RedState. But, yes, in general, it would seem to me that Matthew 5:39 commands people to not exercise physical self-defense. If someone strikes you -- or stabs you or rapes you or murders you or whatever -- "Do not resist" him.

Now, I personally do not follow this commandment, because I'm not a Christian nor do I call myself a Christian. But if I were to consider myself a Christian, wouldn't I necessarily need to follow Christ's words? Including and especially Matthew 5:39?

Of course, the evident answer is one that a lot of people are afraid of looking at, the fact that the Greek writings of scriptures, that finally made the cuts, are in many places a muddle of confusions and contradictions.

To the point that an industry of apologetics has arisen over the centuries to try playing knight-jump exegesis with the texts.

Easy answer, hard to swallow for a lot of folks.

338 tokyobk  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:19:27am

re: #303 looking closely

Jesus lived and died as a halachic Jew which would probably mean that he agreed with laws of the time on capture, trial and where appropriate execution.

Though I think the #who is without sins cast the first stone" story makes a good case that he would be against harsh violent state activity as a rule.

But again, has the issue of the tortures of hell been brought up already (though for me it doesn't matter because I think Jesus never declared himself divine, that Paul later ascribed this to him).

339 subsailor68  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:19:37am

OT, but important IMHO:

GM Bankruptcy Would Be 4th Largest In US History

From the article:

The government's stake in the company originally was to be 50 percent, according to GM's regulatory filings. But it now could be as high as 69 percent.

Why?

There was a small hope Tuesday that GM could avoid a bankruptcy filing when the United Auto Workers union disclosed that it would take a 20 percent stake in GM — down from the original plan of 39 percent. That seemingly freed 19 percent of the Detroit-based company's shares to sweeten the pot for its recalcitrant bondholders.

But, did the government do that? Nope. It decided to keep that 19 percent, which is what drove the potential government ownership percentage to 69 percent.

In related news, Merriam-Webster defines "socialism" as:

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

If 69 percent of a company isn't socialism, what is?

340 Nevergiveup  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:20:09am

re: #329 Charles

Lincoln was probably a deist.

Someone who lusted after Sandra Dee?

341 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:20:18am

Incidentally, there does seem to be some indication that Lincoln suffered from what would today be recognized as clinical depression.

[Link: www.theatlantic.com...]

342 ducktrapper  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:20:56am

re: #329 Charles

Lincoln was probably a deist.

I was joking. You know, "moderate", in the way that moderate muslims would not be considered muslims, at all, by most fundies.

343 Nevergiveup  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:20:58am

re: #335 hous bin pharteen

Your Jewish and drinking Baileys from Ireland? A drink made by Catholics ? Posting on comments about Jesus? There may be something here to complain about, but I have nothing. Nada. Zip. I think I am addicted to Baileys. It tastes great with a shot in your coffee. But at night. Not at breakfast.

Well it's lunchtime here? How about that?

344 gymmom  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:21:00am

There are other interpretations of turn the other cheek.

From Wiki:

A figurative interpretation relies on historical and other factors.[1] At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance.[2] If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed.[3] The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality.
full article - if you want


I had heard this interpretation before in church before.

345 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:21:00am

re: #323 Sharmuta

Why would God need a spaceship?

Jesus to terrorist:

"Ok buddy - this is your last chance - where is the omnipotent creator of the universe, and what have you done with him?"

346 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:21:32am
347 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:22:01am

re: #325 Flyers1974

Is there more to the story of the ACLU than their desire to broaden the Bill of Rights beyond what most legal scholars would agree with and their penchant for representing controversial Defendants? If not, doesn't anti-american sound a bit harsh?

I find one and only one use for the ACLU. On the rare occasion that I'm uncertain in how to think of an issue, I seek out their position and do the exact opposite.

348 J.D.  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:22:15am

re: #313 ducktrapper

Might he have been a "moderate" Christian?

I had really never considered whether he was or was not, but this is quite an interesting article.
The Puzzling Faith of Abraham Lincoln
I think Abe and I are on the same page about religion.

349 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:22:20am

re: #314 looking closely

Depends what you mean by that term.

If you are referring to forced ingestion of huge amounts of water, then no, it isn't/

But the traditional "trial by ordeal" water-dunking (ie like done to alleged witches) is actually quite like waterboarding, in that its a form of controlled drowning.

The "water cure" was a form of torture that involved closing off the nose, inserting a funnel down the throat, and forcing the victim to drink huge amounts of water or other more disgusting substances. Following this, they were often beaten in the stomach, just for that extra cruelty factor.

"Dunking" is more similar to waterboarding, but it's still much more extreme because the victim's entire body would be submerged -- and they often were drowned.

350 Ben Hur  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:22:32am

Two thoughts:

1. We know who Mo would torture.
2. Lincoln was a pot head.

351 KenJen  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:23:01am

OT: Here is a great decision by the Democratic governor of the broke state of Kentucky. We offer written driver's license tests in 22 different languages. Who knew?

352 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:23:04am

re: #334 buzzsawmonkey

I've been told that many children find "suffer them to come unto me" as being descriptive of parents making you attend Sunday morning services when you don't feel like it.

heh

I had to eat radishes (or else!) when they were served at supper.
Can we find a theological interpretation to THAT?

353 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:23:10am

re: #310 zombie

Well, isn't that the message of Matthew 5:39? How else can you interpret "But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

My comment was directed toward the person who wrote the article published on RedState. But, yes, in general, it would seem to me that Matthew 5:39 commands people to not exercise physical self-defense. If someone strikes you -- or stabs you or rapes you or murders you or whatever -- "Do not resist" him.

Now, I personally do not follow this commandment, because I'm not a Christian nor do I call myself a Christian. But if I were to consider myself a Christian, wouldn't I necessarily need to follow Christ's words? Including and especially Matthew 5:39?

Thank you for the reply, zombie.

First of all, a Christian is not someone who is able to follow Christ's teachings to the letter. A Christian is someone who looks to Christ for his salvation, because he himself is imperfect and unworthy to spend eternity in God's presence.

There are so many things in the Bible that require context. Sometimes you need to ask who Jesus was addressing, and why, for example. I will do some study on this verse, but it has never been my understanding that God forbids me the right to physically defend myself if I'm being attacked.

So...I'll check it out. But if I screw up and defend myself ; ), I can still call myself a Christian - which is the primary point I wanted to make.

354 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:23:21am

re: #340 Nevergiveup

Someone who lusted after Sandra Dee?

*WHAP*//

Ruby Dee, you mean.////

355 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:23:38am

Executive Mansion, Washington, November 21, 1864.

Mrs. Bixby, Boston, Massachusetts:

Dear Madam: I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant-General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle. I feel how weak and fruitless must be any words of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering to you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save. I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.

Yours very sincerely and respectfully,

Abraham Lincoln.

356 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:24:11am

re: #350 Ben Hur

We know who Mo would torture..

Larry and Curly?

357 J.D.  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:24:20am

re: #351 KenJen

OT: Here is a great decision by the Democratic governor of the broke state of Kentucky. We offer written driver's license tests in 22 different languages. Who knew?

You should see how many different languages the California Driver's Manual comes in.
Blew me away.

358 itellu3times  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:25:18am

re: #310 zombie

Well, isn't that the message of Matthew 5:39? How else can you interpret "But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

My comment was directed toward the person who wrote the article published on RedState. But, yes, in general, it would seem to me that Matthew 5:39 commands people to not exercise physical self-defense. If someone strikes you -- or stabs you or rapes you or murders you or whatever -- "Do not resist" him.

Now, I personally do not follow this commandment, because I'm not a Christian nor do I call myself a Christian. But if I were to consider myself a Christian, wouldn't I necessarily need to follow Christ's words? Including and especially Matthew 5:39?

As long as we're talking cheek-slapping, sure.

This is often quoted in opposition to the old-testament "eye for an eye", which we have discussed before and is not really meant as simply as it sounds, either.

The old testament was basically making the case for the rule of law and appropriate response - which is certainly better than no discipline or proportionality at all. The new testament makes a different argument - overlook small things, in the interests of peace.

I think it is an incorrect reading to think it forbids self-defense.

359 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:25:22am

re: #355 loppyd

That's not proof that Lincoln was a "Christian." It's entirely consistent with deism -- and even more consistent with the words all American politicians use.

360 Dianna  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:25:30am

re: #349 Charles

The "water cure" was a form of torture that involved closing off the nose, inserting a funnel down the throat, and forcing the victim to drink huge amounts of water or other more disgusting substances. Following this, they were often beaten in the stomach, just for that extra cruelty factor.

"Dunking" is more similar to waterboarding, but it's still much more extreme because the victim's entire body would be submerged -- and they often were drowned.

The real fun being that if you drowned, you were innocent. If you floated, you stood a good chance of being hung.

Remember that "swimming" was not a legal test, but a popular one, usually leading to a lynching.

Aren't folk customs charming?

Not that the inquisition's methods were any better; the medieval notion of what was acceptable tends to boggle the modern mind. For very good reasons!

361 Kenneth  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:25:55am

re: #240 Cato the Elder

Before going on ad infinitum with the "WWJD" routines, everybody should take a break and read the "Grand Inquisitor" section of The Brothers Karamazov.

If you could build a world of perfect happiness and justice with the proviso that first a human infant must be tortured to death, would you do it? Would the gains outweigh the sin?

Dostoevsky has a way of bringing things to a focal point and making everybody very uncomfortable with pat answers.
Ars longa, uita breuis.

The correct answer is of course, no. Because there is not such thing as a world of perfect happiness and justice. Certainly not one which can be created by torturing to death an infant. This is the lie of all those who believe in utopias fall for. The result is never just one infant child, but 6 million Jews, 10 million Ukrainians, 3 million Cambodians, and so on. That is the devil's bargain.

362 subsailor68  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:26:10am

re: #351 KenJen

OT: Here is a great decision by the Democratic governor of the broke state of Kentucky. We offer written driver's license tests in 22 different languages. Who knew?

Hi KenJen! Wow! That goes to my point in post 158, about essential services versus things that should be looked at in recessionary times. And how the heck do they come up with 22 languages? Recent influx of Bantu to the state?

363 charles_martel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:26:17am

Jesus would never, ever condone torture. Those who even suggest it are ignorant of scripture. I've seen comments above that say that He allowed self-defense but that ignores one of His most important commandments: turn the other cheek. When someone hits you, do not retaliate, but turn the other cheek. Nothing else needs to be said.

364 LGoPs  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:26:26am

My computer is acting really bizzare. Probably an ACLU Communist plot to block my eloquent posts.....
/ Later.

365 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:26:26am

re: #173 Honorary Yooper

I know, which makes it really funny to watch him now.

BTW- it's a her.

366 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:26:33am

re: #339 subsailor68

OT, but important IMHO:

GM Bankruptcy Would Be 4th Largest In US History

From the article:

The government's stake in the company originally was to be 50 percent, according to GM's regulatory filings. But it now could be as high as 69 percent.

Why?

There was a small hope Tuesday that GM could avoid a bankruptcy filing when the United Auto Workers union disclosed that it would take a 20 percent stake in GM — down from the original plan of 39 percent. That seemingly freed 19 percent of the Detroit-based company's shares to sweeten the pot for its recalcitrant bondholders.

But, did the government do that? Nope. It decided to keep that 19 percent, which is what drove the potential government ownership percentage to 69 percent.

In related news, Merriam-Webster defines "socialism" as:

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

If 69 percent of a company isn't socialism, what is?

For this to be socialism, wouldn't Obama and congress have to intend for government ownership to be the norm? You can obviously contend that this was not the right move, but does that make it socialism? I'm thinking Obama responded to a percieved emergency. Even if you think that the emergency was overstated, is there any evidence that Obama wants future government takeovers? I can't imagine that many Democrats would be ok with that. It would sure cause a backlash among supporters he would need for reelection.

367 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:26:39am

re: #359 Charles

That's not proof that Lincoln was a "Christian." It's entirely consistent with deism -- and even more consistent with the words all American politicians use.

I didn't say it proved or disproved anything.

368 Last Mohican  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:26:44am

re: #319 Russkilitlover

Here's another. And.......*GASP*......can that be a black person at a Tea Party? Wha....? He wrote the anthem, too?

Lloyd Marcus, Composer, Tea Party Anthem.

Damn, that's a real toe-tapper! Love the guy's voice, and the production's pretty happening, too (although I'm not sold on the backup singers' "ooh yeah" quite yet). Apparently it was quite the operation:

Symbolizing God's Grace and unity, our version moved seamlessly to various music genres. We used 148 singers and musicians. The recording session was truly heartwarming seeing purple haired rockers, black gospel singers, country artists and rappers all coming together for a great cause.

The lyrics... well... I think they need a little work.

369 kansas  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:27:09am

re: #363 charles_martel

Jesus would never, ever condone torture. Those who even suggest it are ignorant of scripture. I've seen comments above that say that He allowed self-defense but that ignores one of His most important commandments: turn the other cheek. When someone hits you, do not retaliate, but turn the other cheek. Nothing else needs to be said.

How does that turn the other cheek thing work out in real life?

370 tokyobk  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:27:37am

re: #355 loppyd

I think Deists were basically agnostics who respected science who also realized that in order to be in polite company they had to offer some non threatening status to society.

Jefferson literally tore out all of the supernatural aspects of the bible and left in the moral teachings.

The letter from Lincoln could just be a convention for expressing grief to probable believers.

From what I have read he was no active Christian.

371 debutaunt  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:27:46am

re: #344 gymmom

There are other interpretations of turn the other cheek.

From Wiki:

A figurative interpretation relies on historical and other factors.[1] At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance.[2] If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed.[3] The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality.
full article - if you want


I had heard this interpretation before in church before.

Ewwwwwwwwww. If I had lived back then, I'd have invented soft toilet paper.

372 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:27:59am

re: #293 Killgore Trout

To you any conservative standing up to the Messiah is "very spooky".

373 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:28:14am

re: #347 LGoPs

I find one and only one use for the ACLU. On the rare occasion that I'm uncertain in how to think of an issue, I seek out their position and do the exact opposite.

Now you've got me curious. I'm going to assume there is much more to this story than I'm aware of.

374 A Man for all Seasons  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:28:22am

re: #359 Charles

That's not proof that Lincoln was a "Christian." It's entirely consistent with deism -- and even more consistent with the words all American politicians use.

That letter always hits me hard.. What do you write to a mother that lost 5 sons on the battlefield? What can you say?
It's a graceful, beautiful letter..

375 ConservatismNow!  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:28:36am

re: #337 Walter L. Newton

Of course, the evident answer is one that a lot of people are afraid of looking at, the fact that the Greek writings of scriptures, that finally made the cuts, are in many places a muddle of confusions and contradictions.

To the point that an industry of apologetics has arisen over the centuries to try playing knight-jump exegesis with the texts.

Easy answer, hard to swallow for a lot of folks.

Paraphrasing Egg Shen from Big Trouble in Little China:

Well look what they had to work with! There's Judaism, Paganism, mysticism, astrology, and Roman pragmatism. They take what they want and leave the rest, kind of like your salad bar!
376 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:29:10am

Personally I don't give a damn whether Lincoln was an atheist, a deist, or a homosexual - he saved the Union.

377 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:29:51am

re: #370 tokyobk

I didn't say he was or wasn't a Christian.

That letter stands out in my mind after seeing Saving Private Ryan no less than a dozen times....and he says he will pray to our Heavenly Father which is interesting in the context of this thread.

378 subsailor68  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:30:08am

re: #366 Flyers1974

For this to be socialism, wouldn't Obama and congress have to intend for government ownership to be the norm? You can obviously contend that this was not the right move, but does that make it socialism? I'm thinking Obama responded to a percieved emergency. Even if you think that the emergency was overstated, is there any evidence that Obama wants future government takeovers? I can't imagine that many Democrats would be ok with that. It would sure cause a backlash among supporters he would need for reelection.

Hi Flyers! Good points. My point, I suppose, wasn't that someone intended anything, it was that, by definition that was the result. Given the "ownership" positions the government has taken in banking, insurance, and now the auto industry, even if it's "unintentional" it's troubling.

I'll feel better if and when the administration begins to divest itself. If it does not, I'll assume the takeover was intentional.

379 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:30:10am
380 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:30:19am

re: #370 tokyobk

Deists usually believed in God, but they questioned the Divinity of Christ. Here's more on Deism and our Founders:

[Link: earlyamericanhistory.net...]

381 Kenneth  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:30:32am
And Jesus was a sailor
When he walked upon the water
And he spent a long time watching
From his lonely wooden tower
And when he knew for certain
Only drowning men could see him
He said "All men will be sailors then
Until the sea shall free them"
But he himself was broken
Long before the sky would open
Forsaken, almost human
He sank beneath your wisdom like a stone
And you want to travel with him
And you want to travel blind
And you think maybe you'll trust him
For he's touched your perfect body with his mind.
Youtube Video
382 hous bin pharteen  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:30:44am

re: #339 subsailor68

The next thing will be Chevy does away with the new Camaro and replaces it with a new electric clown car. Will the new car take triple A or Double A batteries? They may come up with one solar powered. But how is that going to work at night? Star powered?

383 uptight  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:30:53am

...but only Liberals can turn water into whine

384 kansas  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:31:05am

re: #376 Joel

Personally I don't give a damn whether Lincoln was an atheist, a deist, or a homosexual - he saved the Union.

Stay in the Union or we'll kill you. I've always liked that.

385 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:31:13am

Matthew 5:38 specifically deals with "an eye for an eye".
First and foremost, 5:39 should be taken in that context.

Perhaps, indeed, it applies to other contexts as well, but let us not forget the first.

/just sayin', perhaps the statement should not be taken as an absolute?

386 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:31:20am

re: #226 Bloodnok

Here we go again. Same arguments, same strawmen.

If the argument hasn't been disproved it might be valid. Killgore uses a wide brush tainting ALL Tea Parties as though ALL are run by Paulian's and supremacists. When that's just not the case. He's also IMO far to general in his attacks on conservatives in general. I like Killgore. I just recognize he has an agenda.

387 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:32:13am

re: #332 Killgore Trout

The problem isn't going to go away by denying it. It's getting worse because nobody's doing anything. The Tea Party leadership hasn't mentioned anything about the ADL press release. No condemnation of White Nationalists. Silence is consent. It's eesentially hanging out the welcome mat for them. There will be more of them at the next round of Tea Parties and they will be more vocal because they now feel welcome.

Killgore, you probably think I don't like you, but that's not true. (I concede that you may very well hate my guts, nonetheless : ).

I do have to wonder why someone who chooses to talk about AllahPundit over here instead of at HotAir - as you yourself told me - to avoid confrontation with others considers silence to be "consent".

I consent to nothing these assholes stand for, personally, but what am I supposed to do? I can't help but have the feeling that a guy who won't even directly confront AllahPundit with his criticism expects me (a woman, and not a particularly buff one) to give a right hook to the first Paulian I see at a Tea Party.

When people have asked what sort of remedy you're seeking, you've said it's not your problem...but you continue to sound the alarm. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask what it is, specifically, that would satisfy your need to see action...keeping in mind that you won't even confront someone you're critical of online.

Help. Seriously.

388 subsailor68  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:32:34am

re: #382 hous bin pharteen

The next thing will be Chevy does away with the new Camaro and replaces it with a new electric clown car. Will the new car take triple A or Double A batteries? They may come up with one solar powered. But how is that going to work at night? Star powered?

LOL! Hmm...you may be onto something with that night thing. I believe I may put some money into the Acme Really Long Extension Cord Company.

;-)

389 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:32:55am
390 Dave the.....  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:33:25am

Lincoln was not a homosexual. That was created by the same types who think Jesus would have waterboarded people. You co-opt a dead person into your cause.

391 shortshrift  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:33:26am

re: #273 Charles

"Cure" or "torture", the essentials - a tipped board, pouring of water, sensation of drowning, suffocation - precisely the same. Sometimes instruments were used to keep the mouth open to pour in water. Sometimes a cloth was draped over the mouth, so that the cloth was forced into the throat...
But in any case, the point remains that simulating drowning - and other tortures , rack, hoist etc, - were carried out by the Inquisition in Jesus' name.

I do not say Jesus would have done it himself.
I do say that Jesus/God is invoked for good or evil.
Being an atheist, I think it is irrational either to inculpate or exculpate God.

392 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:33:47am

re: #386 unrealizedviewpoint

If the argument hasn't been disproved it might be valid. Killgore uses a wide brush tainting ALL Tea Parties as though ALL are run by Paulian's and supremacists. When that's just not the case. He's also IMO far to general in his attacks on conservatives in general. I like Killgore. I just recognize he has an agenda.

Not to mention the fact that he cherry picks links to bolster his cause.

393 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:33:51am

Hey Lizards! It's raining and generally dreary in the Very Far Western Suburbs of Chicagoland.

I'm not here for long. Paperwork beckons.

I did have to chime in on this post. Personally, I think Jesus is busy enough, we should leave the running of our government to, well, us. Or perhaps, our elected officials, with considerable voter oversight.

So many theories hover around regards to Lincoln. I think we should also leave him alone. The man worked hard enough while he was alive. Let him be in his rest.

How are you-all?

394 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:34:02am

re: #59 unrealizedviewpoint

What kind of mind would even attempt to unnecessarily bring Jesus into this debate over waterboarding? I'm still not sure what he'd drive.

VW bus, bought secondhand, and with all the disciples' sleeping bags piled up in the back. Painted all over with fish, and quotations, and things like "Ashkelon or Bust".

395 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:34:05am

re: #390 Dave the.....

...which is why teaching history is so damned important!

396 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:34:12am
397 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:34:57am

re: #389 buzzsawmonkey

The Union has to stay together, for the sake of the children.

That's de-vorce, crying in the wilderness.

398 Dayenu  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:35:05am

Now that I think about it, he /may/ have a better argument if he used Moses.

Moses did, after all, kill an Egyptian taskmaster who was beating an Israelite slave.

But he didn't torture him first. I think it was quick.

399 wrenchwench  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:35:07am

re: #394 SanFranciscoZionist

VW bus, bought secondhand, and with all the disciples' sleeping bags piled up in the back. Painted all over with fish, and quotations, and things like "Ashkelon or Bust".

Not a Hyundai Santa Fe?

400 KenJen  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:35:37am

re: #362 subsailor68

Hi KenJen! Wow! That goes to my point in post 158, about essential services versus things that should be looked at in recessionary times. And how the heck do they come up with 22 languages? Recent influx of Bantu to the state?

Went back and read your 158. Updinged ya. Totally agree.

401 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:35:55am

re: #353 capitalist piglet

OK! I know you will do your best.

402 debutaunt  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:36:00am

re: #382 hous bin pharteen

The next thing will be Chevy does away with the new Camaro and replaces it with a new electric clown car. Will the new car take triple A or Double A batteries? They may come up with one solar powered. But how is that going to work at night? Star powered?

It might have acceleration problems when the moon isn't full.

403 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:36:01am

If we or Britain or Israel got a hold of a jihadi who knew of future plans for "martyrdom" operations - then anything goes in my book. If we can save American or other innocent lives then it would be the height of irresponsibility to start reading these thugs their rights. They are not POW's as they are not in uniform and not fighting under a recognizable flag. They are cold hearted sociopaths. If we got a hold of one of the 19 and water boarded them then maybe Robert J. Mayo - my childhood friend, killed at WTC 4 on 9/11/01 - (a deputy fire safety director for the Port Authority) would be alive today. Andrew Sullivan can go to hell.

404 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:36:04am

re: #372 Joel

To you any conservative standing up to the Messiah is "very spooky".

So you didn't see any problem with what was going in in those videos?

No need to wonder then how you would have acted had you been there. Nothing to see here - just 'conservatives standing up to the messiah'./

405 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:36:23am

re: #357 J.D.

You should see how many different languages the California Driver's Manual comes in.
Blew me away.

I suspect the same number of languages Voter Information Guides come in.

406 Pythagoras  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:36:23am

. . . after picking jaw up from floor . . .

Waterboarding is to learn what someone knows that you don't know. Being all knowing kinda precludes that, eh?

407 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:36:44am

re: #386 unrealizedviewpoint

If the argument hasn't been disproved it might be valid. Killgore uses a wide brush tainting ALL Tea Parties as though ALL are run by Paulian's and supremacists. When that's just not the case. He's also IMO far to general in his attacks on conservatives in general. I like Killgore. I just recognize he has an agenda.

I've never seen Killgore use these words:

...a wide brush tainting ALL Tea Parties as though ALL are run by Paulian's and supremacists...

Never. This is absolutely a straw man argument.

And by the way, I agree with Killgore Trout that the organization of the tea parties has been taken over to a large extent by Ron Paul activists, and that white supremacists are eagerly trying to infiltrate and recruit new members. These are facts. It doesn't mean "ALL" of them are run by Paulians, but a LOT of them are.

408 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:36:48am

re: #338 tokyobk

Jesus lived and died as a halachic Jew which would probably mean that he agreed with laws of the time on capture, trial and where appropriate execution.


Isn't the whole point of the Jesus story (for lack of a better descriptor) about how Jesus broke with the older Jewish traditions in various ways?

Again, I'm not really qualified to render a contemporary Christian opinion on the morality of torture, though I really *would* like to hear one from the Pope, in particular.

Obviously, there has been pretty broad-based religious condemnation of "torture" as such within the USA, but a generic condemnation of torture (which is appropriate, IMO) doesn't apply to the specific "ticking time bomb case" where you have reasonable belief that a particular suspect is withholding knowledge that could save. . .or cost. . .many many lives.

409 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:37:11am

re: #78 big steve

Gee.....I thought he had milky white skin and long reddish hair.....or are all those painters wrong?

Contrary to popular belief, Jesus probably did not really look like a Northern Italian art student.

410 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:37:44am

re: #363 charles_martel

Jesus would never, ever condone torture. Those who even suggest it are ignorant of scripture. I've seen comments above that say that He allowed self-defense but that ignores one of His most important commandments: turn the other cheek. When someone hits you, do not retaliate, but turn the other cheek. Nothing else needs to be said.

How about when someone is hitting your baby and raping your wife?

411 Honorary Yooper  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:38:14am

re: #355 loppyd

That points to him possibly being a deist, not too dissimilar from Thomas Jefferson.

412 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:38:15am

re: #396 Iron Fist

Amendment Eight:


This is usually how prisoners challenge the Justice System. There has been a huge debate in this country as to whether "cruel and unusual" makes the Death Penalty Unconstitutional. So far, the Courts have been mixed in their view of this. I'd say the current Court wouldn't buy this as a valid position, but prisoners (especially those on Death Row) have used the Eighth Amendment for, as buzz said, things as frivolous as lumpy mashed potatoes and lack of cable TV.

So you've never heard of the Eighth Amendment and the debate about cruel and unusual punishment? What country do you live in?


THis is where I get confused and forgive me it it has already been disussed upthread.

The 8th amendment applies to US Citizens (or US Persons), right? It does not apply to POW's--and in this case--where the Geneva Conventions do not apply, although we've decided they do. How can anyone invoke the 8th amendment in the case of GITMO?

413 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:39:06am

re: #387 capitalist piglet

Allah Pundit posted a thread about a bogus story and Hot Air readers were all worker up talking about armed revolution and secession. Why should I talk to AP about it? He doesn't know who I am and I don't post on his blog. He couldn't care less. I don't talk with Kos every time I link to a Dkos diary. Kos doesn't know me either. He couldn't care less.

414 JCM  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:39:17am

re: #310 zombie

Well, isn't that the message of Matthew 5:39? How else can you interpret "But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

My comment was directed toward the person who wrote the article published on RedState. But, yes, in general, it would seem to me that Matthew 5:39 commands people to not exercise physical self-defense. If someone strikes you -- or stabs you or rapes you or murders you or whatever -- "Do not resist" him.

Now, I personally do not follow this commandment, because I'm not a Christian nor do I call myself a Christian. But if I were to consider myself a Christian, wouldn't I necessarily need to follow Christ's words? Including and especially Matthew 5:39?

Matt 5 speaks of what a spiritually perfected person would be like. Matthew's over all theme is the Kingdom of God, Matt. 5 presents this spiritually perfect person living in the Kingdom as it appears in prophecy (v17; Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.)

It presents the goal of a Christian in God's Kingdom, not the present reality. In present reality it doesn't apply so much as to real physical threat, i.e. someone attempting to murder you.

In a present context it it needs to be tied a spiritual aspect, is the person presenting the threat someone who is being taught or asking about the gospel? Will turning the other cheek (barring serious physical threat) result in this person being more receptive to the gospel and lead to the Kingdom of God? Then the idea is resistance will harm the furtherance of God's Kingdom it should be avoided.

415 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:39:22am
416 hous bin pharteen  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:39:36am

re: #402 debutaunt

Will it accelerate well when hit by a meteorite? Details, details.

417 Dave the.....  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:39:40am

Is there a tie-in that early Christians were Pacifists (Amish type, not Quakers...who try to force you to not defend yourself).

418 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:40:46am

re: #403 Joel

If we or Britain or Israel got a hold of a jihadi who knew of future plans for "martyrdom" operations - then anything goes in my book. If we can save American or other innocent lives then it would be the height of irresponsibility to start reading these thugs their rights. They are not POW's as they are not in uniform and not fighting under a recognizable flag. They are cold hearted sociopaths. If we got a hold of one of the 19 and water boarded them then maybe Robert J. Mayo - my childhood friend, killed at WTC 4 on 9/11/01 - (a deputy fire safety director for the Port Authority) would be alive today. Andrew Sullivan can go to hell.

I have always wondered what is so moral about letting innocent people die in the name of morality.

419 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:40:50am

re: #108 DaddyG

Yes.

Here is a neat image of what a contemporary man of Jesus time would have looked like. Face of Jesus?

Looks like my shul's board president, if he was abandoned on a deserted island for a couple weeks.

420 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:41:09am

re: #418 loppyd

and I'm very sorry about your friend, Joel.

421 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:41:20am

re: #404 Jimmah

So you didn't see any problem with what was going in in those videos?

No need to wonder then how you would have acted had you been there. Nothing to see here - just 'conservatives standing up to the messiah'./

Bullshit. I have no problem confronting left wing fascists and right wing ones . What I resent is people such as your self lumping a few crack pots with the rest of patriotic Americans saying "enough with the insane spending."

422 charles_martel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:41:44am

re: #369 kansas

How does that turn the other cheek thing work out in real life?

It's hard. It's a daily struggle. Nobody said being a Christian was easy. If someone were threatening my wife, I would defend her. I am imperfect, just like everybody else. But we were talking about Jesus, not me.

423 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:41:47am

re: #358 itellu3times

As long as we're talking cheek-slapping, sure.

This is often quoted in opposition to the old-testament "eye for an eye", which we have discussed before and is not really meant as simply as it sounds, either.

The old testament was basically making the case for the rule of law and appropriate response - which is certainly better than no discipline or proportionality at all. The new testament makes a different argument - overlook small things, in the interests of peace.

I think it is an incorrect reading to think it forbids self-defense.

The moment one opens the door to allowing each person to interpret or read each passage of the Gospels to suit that person's viewpoint, then the Bible becomes little more than a Rorshach Test -- people can see whatever they want in it. And yet, the Bible still maintains that air of "final authority" and still counts as "the word of God." But if the word of God is wholly open to individual interpretation and yet still carries the heft of being incontrovertible, we know where that leads -- tyrants and theocrats and bad people using their own interpretation of Scripture to justify their tyranny.

Yet another reason why I'm not a member of an organized religion.

424 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:42:32am

re: #419 SanFranciscoZionist

Looks like my shul's board president, if he was abandoned on a deserted island for a couple weeks.

You mean that Jesus did not look like a 16th century Florentine?

425 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:42:52am

re: #407 Charles

I've pretty much stopped responding to the strawman attacks. It's very clear why the Tea Parties have a problem. Those participating can't/won't acknowledge the problem much less do anything about it. The problem will most likely get worse. This is going to be very embarrassing.

426 Clemente  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:43:07am

Good news! Cell door slams on another HLF terror supporter:

Muslim Charity Leader Sentenced To 65 Years

Shukri Abu Baker, 50, of Garland, Texas, was the first of five members of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development to be sentenced.

427 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:43:25am

re: #422 charles_martel

It's hard. It's a daily struggle. Nobody said being a Christian was easy. If someone were threatening my wife, I would defend her. I am imperfect, just like everybody else. But we were talking about Jesus, not me.

You have a Christian responsibility to defend your own life, and the life of your family. I don't think "turning the other cheek" applies to situations involving bodily harm. If G-d gave us life, it is our responsibility to preserve it.

428 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:43:31am

re: #422 charles_martel

In fact, I have been taught that it is you who are to turn the other cheek, but at the same time, you are to defend those who cannot defend themselves. This is the idea behind Aquinas' "just war".

429 RajaBabu  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:43:36am

I'm usually not interested in speculating about the past, although I do
enjoy some science fiction such as The Man in the High Castle by
Philip Dick.
Here is another speculative question about Jesus.
If someone was physically attacking Jesus and no one else was
around, would he have fought back?
I believe Jesus was on Earth for spiritual reasons, and the Red State
blog's question is a ridiculous one.

430 zombie  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:43:40am

re: #414 JCM

Matt 5 speaks of what a spiritually perfected person would be like. Matthew's over all theme is the Kingdom of God, Matt. 5 presents this spiritually perfect person living in the Kingdom as it appears in prophecy (v17; Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.)

It presents the goal of a Christian in God's Kingdom, not the present reality. In present reality it doesn't apply so much as to real physical threat, i.e. someone attempting to murder you.

In a present context it it needs to be tied a spiritual aspect, is the person presenting the threat someone who is being taught or asking about the gospel? Will turning the other cheek (barring serious physical threat) result in this person being more receptive to the gospel and lead to the Kingdom of God? Then the idea is resistance will harm the furtherance of God's Kingdom it should be avoided.

I think it looks like...a butterfly!

431 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:43:42am

re: #414 JCM

Matt 5 speaks of what a spiritually perfected person would be like. Matthew's over all theme is the Kingdom of God, Matt. 5 presents this spiritually perfect person living in the Kingdom as it appears in prophecy (v17; Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.)

It presents the goal of a Christian in God's Kingdom, not the present reality. In present reality it doesn't apply so much as to real physical threat, i.e. someone attempting to murder you.

In a present context it it needs to be tied a spiritual aspect, is the person presenting the threat someone who is being taught or asking about the gospel? Will turning the other cheek (barring serious physical threat) result in this person being more receptive to the gospel and lead to the Kingdom of God? Then the idea is resistance will harm the furtherance of God's Kingdom it should be avoided.

Excellent point!
This was a rabbi, teaching.

432 Walter L. Newton  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:43:47am

re: #422 charles_martel

It's hard. It's a daily struggle. Nobody said being a Christian was easy. If someone were threatening my wife, I would defend her. I am imperfect, just like everybody else. But we were talking about Jesus, not me.

If defending your wife or any other family member puts you into the position of feeling imperfect or even questioning your rightness in that action, is sick.

433 kansas  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:44:03am

re: #421 Joel

Bullshit. I have no problem confronting left wing fascists and right wing ones . What I resent is people such as your self lumping a few crack pots with the rest of patriotic Americans saying "enough with the insane spending."

Straw man, no true Scotsman, ad hominem, and my favorite, which is used here often, guilt by association.

434 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:44:53am

re: #420 loppyd

and I'm very sorry about your friend, Joel.

Thanks. I just found out that his wife (whom I heard had remarried) was diagnosed with breast cancer.

I know who the enemy is and it is not Dick Cheney or Rush Limbaugh.

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

435 debutaunt  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:45:22am

re: #422 charles_martel

It's hard. It's a daily struggle. Nobody said being a Christian was easy. If someone were threatening my wife, I would defend her. I am imperfect, just like everybody else. But we were talking about Jesus, not me.

I can't imagine not defending those you value against anyone else.

436 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:45:28am

re: #429 RajaBabu

I'm usually not interested in speculating about the past, although I do enjoy some science fiction such as The Man in the High Castle by
Philip Dick.

"Lest Darkness Fall" is a classic.

437 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:45:34am

re: #407 Charles

Never. This is absolutely a straw man argument.

And by the way, I agree with Killgore Trout that the organization of the tea parties has been taken over to a large extent by Ron Paul activists, and that white supremacists are eagerly trying to infiltrate and recruit new members. These are facts. It doesn't mean "ALL" of them are run by Paulians, but a LOT of them are.

"Large extent" is where we part. I don't believe at this point in time any of us can prove nor disprove any numbers. A few cherry picked videos are not going to change my mind.

438 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:45:59am

re: #169 buzzsawmonkey

On that theory, both Obama and Hitler are ice cream.

Vanilla ice cream is Hitler.

439 opnion  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:46:50am

re: #403 Joel

If we or Britain or Israel got a hold of a jihadi who knew of future plans for "martyrdom" operations - then anything goes in my book. If we can save American or other innocent lives then it would be the height of irresponsibility to start reading these thugs their rights. They are not POW's as they are not in uniform and not fighting under a recognizable flag. They are cold hearted sociopaths. If we got a hold of one of the 19 and water boarded them then maybe Robert J. Mayo - my childhood friend, killed at WTC 4 on 9/11/01 - (a deputy fire safety director for the Port Authority) would be alive today. Andrew Sullivan can go to hell.

You point out a dilema, much like the death penalty. I in general oppose it, but usually when it gets down to the conviction of a sadistic murderer, I can go for it.
Likewise, most Amricans oppose torture, however if the alternative is the loss of American lives & that includes our troops I can look the other way.

440 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:46:55am

Have a great afternoon all!

441 charles_martel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:47:00am

re: #410 looking closely

See 422 above.

442 bloodnok  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:47:14am

re: #386 unrealizedviewpoint

If the argument hasn't been disproved it might be valid. Killgore uses a wide brush tainting ALL Tea Parties as though ALL are run by Paulian's and supremacists. When that's just not the case. He's also IMO far to general in his attacks on conservatives in general. I like Killgore. I just recognize he has an agenda.

I disagree. He's been proven right more than he has been proven wrong. He has just served as a convenient foil for a lot of people who don't want to snark at Charles for posting many of the same facts.

443 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:48:09am

re: #349 Charles

The "water cure" was a form of torture that involved closing off the nose, inserting a funnel down the throat, and forcing the victim to drink huge amounts of water or other more disgusting substances. Following this, they were often beaten in the stomach, just for that extra cruelty factor.

"Dunking" is more similar to waterboarding, but it's still much more extreme because the victim's entire body would be submerged -- and they often were drowned.

Not just the cruelty factor, but also so the victim would puke and the tormentors could start all over again.

444 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:48:16am

re: #425 Killgore Trout

I've pretty much stopped responding to the strawman attacks. It's very clear why the Tea Parties have a problem. Those participating can't/won't acknowledge the problem much less do anything about it. The problem will most likely get worse. This is going to be very embarrassing.

You have no problem continuing to post links to prove your point and you call posts questioning your motives "attacks" so you don't have to respond.

It's your M.O.

445 Dianna  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:48:52am

re: #423 zombie

The moment one opens the door to allowing each person to interpret or read each passage of the Gospels to suit that person's viewpoint, then the Bible becomes little more than a Rorshach Test -- people can see whatever they want in it.

Well, that goes back to the thing a professor once told me: Fundamentalism is the meeting of wide-spread literacy and little or no historical knowledge.

I blame printing and Luther.

446 Killgore Trout  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:49:04am

re: #442 bloodnok

He has just served as a convenient foil for a lot of people who don't want to snark at Charles for posting many of the same facts.


Yup, I think that's pretty much what's going on.

447 capitalist piglet  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:49:56am

re: #413 Killgore Trout

Allah Pundit posted a thread about a bogus story and Hot Air readers were all worker up talking about armed revolution and secession. Why should I talk to AP about it? He doesn't know who I am and I don't post on his blog. He couldn't care less. I don't talk with Kos every time I link to a Dkos diary. Kos doesn't know me either. He couldn't care less.

I thought you said you hadn't investigated the validity of the story (?), but that's not the issue I'm taking.

You are registered at HotAir, you said, but you don't participate there because some people there are hostile to you...which I understand. What I don't understand is why you've been dropping comments critical of AllahPundit here lately, without a willingness to say what you have to say in his presence - but then you seem to expect some kind of confrontation between grandmothers at Tea Parties and Paulians, and anything less is defined as "consent".

People just don't know what you want. It's not that they don't believe there could be a problem...they just want a workable solution.

Having said that, I got a downding from Charles on my last one so with respect to him, I'll say no more.

Just know that I say this to you with no hard feelings.

448 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:49:57am

re: #442 bloodnok

I disagree. He's been proven right more than he has been proven wrong. He has just served as a convenient foil for a lot of people who don't want to snark at Charles for posting many of the same facts.

Lets make him a saint for having the "guts" to post links on a blog.

449 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:50:06am

re: #396 Iron Fist

Amendment Eight:


This is usually how prisoners challenge the Justice System. There has been a huge debate in this country as to whether "cruel and unusual" makes the Death Penalty Unconstitutional.


I subscribe to Chief Justice Scalia's interpretation on this issue, which is so common-sensical, its tough to debate seriously:

The US Constitution implicitly refers to the death penalty.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


If you can't be deprived of life without due process of law, by implication, you CAN be deprived of life WITH due process of law. There is no other way to read this passage that makes sense.

If the framers wanted to ban the death penalty, they would have done so explicitly. So arguments that the death penalty is unconstitutional because of the eight amendment are on their face ridiculous. The fifth amendment authorizes the death penalty, so long as it is applied with due process.

Now, it is fair to argue about how various METHODS of executing prisoners may be cruel or unusual (ie electrocution, etc). But clearly SOME methods must be legal, and I would conclude that the contemporary methods used by the State at the time of the ratification of the Constitution (eg hanging) are probably Constitutional.

450 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:50:30am

re: #418 loppyd

There is nothing moral about it. It is the essence of immorality.
"He who is merciful to the cruel will end up being cruel to the merciful".

451 [deleted]  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:51:37am
452 experiencedtraveller  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:52:04am

There is a lot of good Lincoln/religiosity stuff here.

453 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:52:27am

re: #278 ConservatismNow!

What would Jesus say if he was here right now?
Probably something we can't understand because it's in Aramaic.


If he'll talk really slowly, and write some stuff down, I may be able to translate. If we can get him to speak some Hebrew, even better.

454 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:52:35am

re: #446 Killgore Trout

Yup, I think that's pretty much what's going on.

Oh contraire mon fraire.

I will question anyone who tries to lump me in with Nazis.

455 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:53:40am

re: #442 bloodnok

I disagree. He's been proven right more than he has been proven wrong. He has just served as a convenient foil for a lot of people who don't want to snark at Charles for posting many of the same facts.

Here's an analogy that may take hold for some.
Gay Pride Parades.
At such events thousands and thousands of properly dressed (not flamboyant) people show up in support. Yet, when turn on the evening news, what do you see? The freak show.
Same thing here, thousands upon thousands of normal folks with a reasonable axe to grind show up and all some see is a freak show.

456 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:54:39am

re: #434 Joel

Thanks. I just found out that his wife (whom I heard had remarried) was diagnosed with breast cancer.

I know who the enemy is and it is not Dick Cheney or Rush Limbaugh.

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

Well, duh. Clearly the enemy is Karl Rove.

awful about your friend's widow....hopefully she caught it early.

457 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:54:53am

re: #454 loppyd

Then stop wearing those damned jodhpurs and riding boots!///

458 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:55:20am

re: #378 subsailor68

Hi Flyers! Good points. My point, I suppose, wasn't that someone intended anything, it was that, by definition that was the result. Given the "ownership" positions the government has taken in banking, insurance, and now the auto industry, even if it's "unintentional" it's troubling.

I'll feel better if and when the administration begins to divest itself. If it does not, I'll assume the takeover was intentional.

Hey, Subsailor, how have you been? I just think that people on the conservative side are greatly overestimating how left-wing the average Obama supporter is, and as a result think that Obama is going to take us to some new left-wing extreme. I have to believe there is a pretty big gap between your average Daily Kos poster and your average Obama voter. Not to mention, who is the average Obama voter and what are their priorities? I definitely don't think there is a monolithic left wing thought there. Is the average suburban mom even aware of the existence of half the issues discussed on DK for example? At the least, I'm going to guess there are quite a few who voted Republican in the past or who are capable of voting Republican in the future. I think there are many who voted for Obama because of the economy and republican social views. Again, if these people see there taxes go up substantively, they are quite capable of overcoming their distaste of GOP social issue nuttery, in my opinion.

459 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:55:36am

re: #454 loppyd

Oh contraire mon fraire.

I will question anyone who tries to lump me in with Nazis.

Where did that happen? Please link to the comment that "lumps you in with Nazis."

460 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:55:37am

re: #454 loppyd

Me too. I would not let the leftists here in NYC call me a Nazi and I would not let anyone else insinuate that I ahve sympathies for Pat Buchanan/Ron Paul/Lew Rockwell et al.

461 bloodnok  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:55:52am

re: #448 loppyd

Lets make him a saint for having the "guts" to post links on a blog.

Nah, it's much more fun to ignore facts and shoot the messenger. Isn't it?

462 charles_martel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:56:30am

re: #428 calcajun

In fact, I have been taught that it is you who are to turn the other cheek, but at the same time, you are to defend those who cannot defend themselves. This is the idea behind Aquinas' "just war".

That's true. What is the responsibility of the individual may not be the responsibility of the state. Jesus was addressing the individual in His "turn the other cheek". Unlike Islam, Christianity is an individual life choice, not a prescription for state authority.

463 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:57:34am

re: #456 loppyd

Well, duh. Clearly the enemy is Karl Rove.

awful about your friend's widow....hopefully she caught it early.

Let's not forget the 'neocons' and Halliburton. It seems as if they caught it early.

464 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:58:34am

re: #461 bloodnok

Nah, it's much more fun to ignore facts and shoot the messenger. Isn't it?

This is a guy who when this blog was right-center was pretty conservative and now that it is left-center has gone the other way.

465 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:58:50am

re: #463 Joel

I got a message for you in this thread: [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

...about your exculpation of Ann Coulter

466 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:59:24am

re: #421 Joel

Bullshit. I have no problem confronting left wing fascists and right wing ones .

You had an opportunity to do so here but instead you pretended that nothing was amiss in those videos, and went on to attack those who observed that there was.

467 ConservatismNow!  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:59:31am
"Doesn't matter what the press says. Doesn't matter what the politicians or the mobs say. Doesn't matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right. This nation was founded on one principle above all else: the requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or the consequences. When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world — No, you move."

OT: Captain America was and still is one of my heroes. Who says comic books don't teach you anything?

468 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 11:59:59am

re: #455 unrealizedviewpoint

Very good analogy.

469 subsailor68  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:01:06pm

re: #458 Flyers1974

Hi Flyers, doin' great! Hope you are too! In thinking about it, I tend to agree with ya. I suspect there are die-hard socialists out there, but it would be a stretch to assume that everyone who voted for President Obama falls into that category. In fact, I'd guess that most folks don't even think about socialism at all - they have their lives to lead, kids to take care of, and so on.

I also think you're right about voting for Obama over the economy, and a distaste for the Republicans, and that they could come back.

Let's hope!

;-)

470 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:01:06pm

re: #464 Joel

This is a guy who when this blog was right-center was pretty conservative and now that it is left-center has gone the other way.

Actually, he's a classic liberal
And that's fine.
I suspect I am also.
Still finding myself.

471 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:02:12pm

re: #459 Charles

Where did that happen? Please link to the comment that "lumps you in with Nazis."

I don't have time for that while I'm at work.

People have made statements that if you don't stand up to these groups then your silence is a tacit approval. I consider that being lumped in.

472 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:02:22pm

re: #465 medaura18586

I got a message for you in this thread: [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

...about your exculpation of Ann Coulter

I got a message to you - I do not spend my time getting my instructions from Ann Coulter. She is over the top a lot but she is not the problem for me. (Also she was right about McCain). Mark Steyn and Charles Krauthammer are the pundits that I respect the most.

473 J.S.  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:02:33pm

re: #425 Killgore Trout

this reminds me of a stats problem...Let's suppose you're a manufacturer of a certain product, and you're also concerned about "quality control." Now you realize that every widget produced cannot be 100 percent perfect (there may be some superficial blemish, but it's within the range of the acceptable.) However, there can be a "bad" widget (fails quality control). Now of course you lack the resources to inspect each and every widget. So you take a randomized sample after each production run. Depending on how many widgets are produced each run, you look up in a stats table the number you need to get a representative sample, you randomly select that number and check 'em out for quality. Question -- what's the cut-off point? that is, at what point does the whole batch end up in the garbage? this is a Chi-square problem. (and this relates to the Tea Parties...but what you need to know is this -- "who's attending? what's the composition of the group of attendees?" Then, you'd have to get a randomized sample and ask them questions. Get enough Ron Paulers or KKKers and "the batch is ruined." But if it's at a .001 percent level "bad" -- do you "garbage it"? In other words, would a single Ron Paul supporter in a group of 1,000 be sufficient to denounce Tea Parties? or should there be a different "cut off" mark?

474 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:02:40pm

I just got an IM from God. He says if you want to know what he'd do check his Twitter page. //

475 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:03:05pm

re: #472 Joel

I made a larger point. Doesn't sound like you read it.

476 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:03:23pm

re: #461 bloodnok

Nah, it's much more fun to ignore facts and shoot the messenger. Isn't it?

Dealing with him is as much fun as a root canal. So no.

477 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:04:02pm

re: #470 unrealizedviewpoint

Actually, he's a classic liberal
And that's fine.
I suspect I am also.
Still finding myself.

The classic liberal was actually John McCain who would have been right at home in the LBJ and JFK administrations (and so too would have been George W. Bush).

478 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:04:27pm

re: #477 Joel

The classic liberal was actually John McCain who would have been right at home in the LBJ and JFK administrations (and so too would have been George W. Bush).

In his second term....not his first.

479 Orangutan  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:04:54pm

Any time anyone resorts to telling me what "Jesus would do" it means the argument/logic is just about shut down. There are enough parables in the Bible to work with, after that, it's all to often an attempt to create "merit" where there is a lack of.

480 Throbert McGee  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:05:03pm

re: #97 Guanxi88

People don't understand that an icon is not meant as a form of documentation, but rather as a physical token or symbol of spiritual truths. It's easy to mock a symbolism that passes understanding.

I'm going to go way out on a limb and guess that "yma o hyd" understands perfectly well that Sacred Heart icons are not meant to be a literal representation of what Jesus looked like during his earthly career.

(The fact that the heart is not only located outside Jesus's chest cavity, but is often on fire, and has a tiny little crown perched on top of it, provide additional clues to the perceptive viewer that the icon is symbolic.)

481 Red Pencil  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:05:16pm

re: #390 Dave the.....

Lincoln was not a homosexual. That was created by the same types who think Jesus would have waterboarded people. You co-opt a dead person into your cause.

IIRC, in the 19th century the "Lincoln was a homosexual" rumor was propagated (not necessarily invented) by a Southerner who wanted to discredit him. It came before there was a gay movement to try to co-opt him.

482 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:05:18pm

Dinner time. BBL

483 charles_martel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:05:19pm

re: #435 debutaunt

I can't imagine not defending those you value against anyone else.

I guess the bottom line is that (I believe) Jesus was saying that we must always seek the peaceful path. Forgiveness is everything. Also, I think the context of that saying was that "if someone strikes you, turn the other cheek..." It was more about self-defense, rather than defending the helpless.

But, again, nobody can keep ALL God's commandments anyway. That's kinda the whole point of Christianity, really. If we were perfect, we wouldn't need Christ.

484 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:06:48pm

re: #475 medaura18586

I made a larger point. Doesn't sound like you read it.

I read the message. Yeah I am a racist too. /not

485 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:07:13pm

re: #424 Joel

You mean that Jesus did not look like a 16th century Florentine?

Well, no. But to be fair, Jesus, and Mary, and the Buddha, and lots of others, look the way they look to the artist. Although some of the Renaissance artists did show interest in historical accuracy as well, as they understood it.

There's a delightful bit on one of Margaret Irwin's novels, where one of Elizabeth of Bohemia's daughters is taking a painting lesson from some minor Dutch artist. He's complaining about Rembrandt, who gets all the big contracts, and also paints people in the Bible as though they were Jews.

Princess Louise points out that the people in the Bible were Jews. Her teacher is somewhat taken aback, but takes refuge in saying that it's blasphemous to paint Jesus as a Jew.

"Because it was only on his mother's side?" Louise suggests.

486 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:08:58pm

re: #478 loppyd

In his second term....not his first.

Correctamundo. However when he started spouting that "compassionate conservative" rhetoric I started to cringe. Nixon was pretty classic liberal too by the way - Affirmative Action, EPA, Clean Water Act, Wage & Price Controls, Endangered Species Act.

487 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:09:31pm

re: #464 Joel

This is a guy who when this blog was right-center was pretty conservative and now that it is left-center has gone the other way.

I think you're taking too many liberties with the political ideologies of others.

488 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:10:25pm

re: #396 Iron Fist

Amendment Eight:


This is usually how prisoners challenge the Justice System. There has been a huge debate in this country as to whether "cruel and unusual" makes the Death Penalty Unconstitutional. So far, the Courts have been mixed in their view of this. I'd say the current Court wouldn't buy this as a valid position, but prisoners (especially those on Death Row) have used the Eighth Amendment for, as buzz said, things as frivolous as lumpy mashed potatoes and lack of cable TV.

So you've never heard of the Eighth Amendment and the debate about cruel and unusual punishment? What country do you live in?

Hey, whoa, easy there. I have indeed heard of the eighth amendment, but not in the context of tying the hands of law enforcement as you said in your post. When one thinks of tying the hands of law enforcement, it is usually in regard to the fourth amendment, i.e., search and seizure. Sounds like an innocent miscommunication here. By law enforcement, I assumed you meant police, not prison officials, etc... . However, as far as cruel and unusual punishment is concerned, I don't think the eight amendment is causing frivolous prisoner lawsuits. Prisoners are going to sue, because that is their nature. It is what they do. Get rid of the eight amendment or restrict its application and prisoners will still sue. The question is, will they win? No judge is going to allow a prisoner to prevail in a case about mashed potatoes.

489 bloodnok  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:10:31pm

re: #464 Joel

This is a guy who when this blog was right-center was pretty conservative and now that it is left-center has gone the other way.

I don't see the blog changing course. It's just that there are more idiotarians on the right these days that need to be exposed. That's a pretty strong statement to make, by the way.

490 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:11:22pm

re: #487 Sharmuta

I can only judge by how they used to post here and how they post now. People of course are entitled to change.

491 calcajun  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:12:40pm

re: #462 charles_martel

and hence the "personal relationship" angle. I agree.

492 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:12:52pm

re: #489 bloodnok

I don't see the blog changing course. It's just that there are more idiotarians on the right these days that need to be exposed. That's a pretty strong statement to make, by the way.

How is it strong? Hey it is Charles's blog and he can run it the way he wants to.

The idiotarians are still on the left.

493 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:14:06pm

re: #492 Joel

How is it strong? Hey it is Charles's blog and he can run it the way he wants to.

The idiotarians are still on the left.

It's just not exclusive to the left. Kind of the point of this thread, btw.

494 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:16:48pm

re: #473 J.S.

Interesting way to put it, and in many respects, I sympathize with your point. However, the organization of Tea Parties is not the product of a standardized factory-line. This is not an all-or-nothing dilemma: "Do we 'garbage' any Tea Party with any White Power groups in attendance, no matter how small their numbers as a percentage of the attendance?"

Of course not, but the organizers have the ability and authority to vocally condemn such participants, don't they? I don't know that they have exercised their authority in doing so, and there's nothing preventing them. After such incidents as the one portrayed in KG's video, there should come loud unequivocal condemnations from the organizers, and clear statements that racist fringes are not welcome.

All I hear is deafening silence.

495 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:16:57pm

re: #485 SanFranciscoZionist

I always found the articles on Jesus's family (he had 4 brothers and at least two sisters) to be fascinating. His brother Jacob (James) the Jsut was the head of the early church in Jerusalem and was executed by the Romans in 62 AD.

496 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:17:25pm

re: #493 Sharmuta

It's just not exclusive to the left. Kind of the point of this thread, btw.

Ain't that the truth.

497 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:19:00pm

re: #473 J.S.

this reminds me of a stats problem...Let's suppose you're a manufacturer of a certain product, and you're also concerned about "quality control." Now you realize that every widget produced cannot be 100 percent perfect (there may be some superficial blemish, but it's within the range of the acceptable.) However, there can be a "bad" widget (fails quality control). Now of course you lack the resources to inspect each and every widget. So you take a randomized sample after each production run. Depending on how many widgets are produced each run, you look up in a stats table the number you need to get a representative sample, you randomly select that number and check 'em out for quality. Question -- what's the cut-off point? that is, at what point does the whole batch end up in the garbage? this is a Chi-square problem. (and this relates to the Tea Parties...but what you need to know is this -- "who's attending? what's the composition of the group of attendees?" Then, you'd have to get a randomized sample and ask them questions. Get enough Ron Paulers or KKKers and "the batch is ruined." But if it's at a .001 percent level "bad" -- do you "garbage it"? In other words, would a single Ron Paul supporter in a group of 1,000 be sufficient to denounce Tea Parties? or should there be a different "cut off" mark?

Coming up as a kid I was taught that if I wanted to make a point use exaggeration so as it's more easily understood. That's what I did when I used the term "ALL". I exaggerated when I said:

He's also somehow managed to paint ALL Tea parties as lovefests for Paulians and Supremacists.


That was strawman attack I admit. But yet I don't see Killgore responding to this comment nor comment 455. He'll just keep posting videos.

498 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:22:59pm

re: #489 bloodnok

I don't see the blog changing course. It's just that there are more idiotarians on the right these days that need to be exposed. That's a pretty strong statement to make, by the way.

They've always been there. Unfortunately one only sees them when one looks. We've been busy trying to lose an election.

499 Yashmak  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:23:18pm

re: #479 Orangutan

Any time anyone resorts to telling me what "Jesus would do" it means the argument/logic is just about shut down. There are enough parables in the Bible to work with, after that, it's all to often an attempt to create "merit" where there is a lack of.

Yeah, it's similar to those who compare folks they disagree with to Hitler. It just means they've got no substantive argument to present.

500 J.S.  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:25:19pm

re: #497 unrealizedviewpoint

Yes. And, he could very well be using a "biased sample." That would be the equivalent of an inspector looking for "bad widgets", selecting out all the "bad widgets" for demonstration purposes, and then proclaiming that the operation needs to be immediately shut down.

501 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:30:17pm

re: #451 Iron Fist

By the way, lets revisit that fifth amendment again:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


So to be clear, this amendment is talking about criminal prosecution. Note that it explicitly excepts criminal prosecution under military jurisdiction, and during time of war or public danger. Note also that it PERMITS a person to be put in jeopardy of "life and limb" under due process. (IE again implicitly permitting the death penalty).

The point is, by excepting military cases and cases involving involving risk to the public, this amendment seems to acknowledge that those circumstances merit special legal standing.

Again, in context, Amendment VIII pretty clearly refers to CRIMINAL penalty/sanctions:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


To be clear, coercive interrogation, is NOT a criminal punishment. In fact, its not intended as a punishment at all, its a method of extracting information.

So I think you can make a good legal argument that Amendment VIII simply does not apply to "waterboarding" of foreign nationals caught on the battlefield for interrogation purposes. They aren't criminal defendants. They aren't being punished, and Amendement V suggests that wartime and risk to the public permit may limit their rights.

Which is NOT to say that there isn't other law (and a whole slew of other laws) that might prohibit this. But I don't see a Consitutional barrier.

502 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:31:24pm

re: #53 DaddyG

Never noticed that. Huh. Thanks!

503 Fearless Fred  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:32:26pm

re: #407 Charles

Never. This is absolutely a straw man argument.

And by the way, I agree with Killgore Trout that the organization of the tea parties has been taken over to a large extent by Ron Paul activists, and that white supremacists are eagerly trying to infiltrate and recruit new members. These are facts. It doesn't mean "ALL" of them are run by Paulians, but a LOT of them are.

Fortunately, not here in Austin. It was interesting too: I've never seen such a mix of protesters here - and I happen to see nearly all of the protests. There were some Paulians there at the last tea party, but the largest Paul crowd - back at the height of his popularity - was a very small crowd compared to the at least 10,000 people attending the tax day tea party (I counted that many (when they started marching down to the lake) and am guessing there were a good number more). I don't really know, but I would have thought Austin, Texas would be prime Paul territory.

504 DaddyG  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:36:58pm

re: #502 Fat Bastard Vegetarian Welcome. I believe he was justified but I'd be hard pressed to presume that I could do something similar and think my motives would be pure.

505 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:37:25pm

re: #497 unrealizedviewpoint

Re: your 455:

Here's an analogy that may take hold for some.
Gay Pride Parades.
At such events thousands and thousands of properly dressed (not flamboyant) people show up in support. Yet, when turn on the evening news, what do you see? The freak show.
Same thing here, thousands upon thousands of normal folks with a reasonable axe to grind show up and all some see is a freak show.

I'm not sure that's a proper analogy. Mainstream participants of Gay Pride parades may find the flamboyant flamers' style and attire in poor taste, and may be even embarrassed to associate with them, but they largely hold a permissive attitude toward that kind of behavior. After all, the "freaks" are not hurting anybody; they're just being ridiculous or disgusting, which they certainly should have a right to be. They don't merit spirited condemnation, and I won't think less of mainstream participants for not issuing such condemnation.

White Nationalists, by contrast, are not simply distasteful -- an attribute decent people can be permissive toward. They are dangerous and hateful, and the only appropriate reaction to them is loud condemnation. Permissive silence is not ethical in such case. I think mainstream participants of Tea Parties are under a moral obligation to actively try to drive out these hateful freaks if they encounter them (either that, or leave the Tea Party so as to not be associated with them). The organizers, even more so.

I'm not all that upset by these freaks' trying to co-opt the Tea Parties (it's to be expected), as I am by the silence and passivity of mainstream attendants and organizers.

506 Charles Johnson  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:43:35pm

re: #503 Fearless Fred

Fortunately, not here in Austin. It was interesting too: I've never seen such a mix of protesters here - and I happen to see nearly all of the protests. There were some Paulians there at the last tea party, but the largest Paul crowd - back at the height of his popularity - was a very small crowd compared to the at least 10,000 people attending the tax day tea party (I counted that many (when they started marching down to the lake) and am guessing there were a good number more). I don't really know, but I would have thought Austin, Texas would be prime Paul territory.

Uh ... At the Austin Tea Party:

Ron Paul’s non-partisan Campaign for Liberty was there, along with the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party and local issue groups whose interests cross party lines.

The Constitution Party is an even worse influence on the tea parties, by the way -- it's a theocratic group that wants to change the Constitution to make it more in line with "Biblical principles." And they're tied to paleocons like Pat Buchanan and kooks like Alan Keyes.

507 Yashmak  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:45:39pm

re: #505 medaura18586

Re: your 455:


Mainstream participants of Gay Pride parades may find the flamboyant flamers' style and attire in poor taste, and may be even embarrassed to associate with them, but they largely hold a permissive attitude toward that kind of behavior. After all, the "freaks" are not hurting anybody. . .

And no matter how flamboyantly the 'freaks' are dressed, they have the same goals as the non-freaks. . .which cannot be said for some of the groups infiltrating the Tea Parties, some of which have far more worrying agendas than simply protesting government spending and taxes.

508 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:46:00pm

re: #505 medaura18586

Re: your 455:

I'm not sure that's a proper analogy. Mainstream participants of Gay Pride parades may find the flamboyant flamers' style and attire in poor taste, and may be even embarrassed to associate with them, but they largely hold a permissive attitude toward that kind of behavior. After all, the "freaks" are not hurting anybody; they're just being ridiculous or disgusting, which they certainly should have a right to be. They don't merit spirited condemnation, and I won't think less of mainstream participants for not issuing such condemnation.

White Nationalists, by contrast, are not simply distasteful -- an attribute decent people can be permissive toward. They are dangerous and hateful, and the only appropriate reaction to them is loud condemnation. Permissive silence is not ethical in such case. I think mainstream participants of Tea Parties are under a moral obligation to actively try to drive out these hateful freaks if they encounter them (either that, or leave the Tea Party so as to not be associated with them). The organizers, even more so.

I'm not all that upset by these freaks' trying to co-opt the Tea Parties (it's to be expected), as I am by the silence and passivity of mainstream attendants and organizers.

One need keep in mind Tax Day (April 15th) Tea Parties were the first of their kind. No one knew what to expect, nor whom was going to show. Maybe we need be on the lookout. But certainly folks shouldn't abandon them entirely.

509 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 12:47:17pm

re: #473 J.S.

How many bad apples "spoil" the bunch, so to speak.

There is no absolute number that is "right". The answer depends on whose ox is being gored, to use another metaphor.

If you are ideologically against "tea parties" (for whatever reason), then you're going to let ANY involvement by questionable rightist elements negatively define them for you.

For me personally, I don't have a problem conceding that I share *SOME* ideologic common ground with the Ron Paulians. Specifically, I prefer low taxes and limited government, and not only do I not think that this is particularly crazy, but it ought to be (or is) a plank in the Republican platform. So long as "Tea parties" are about those things, I have no problem with them, even if Paulians are present.

Once the "Tea Parties" start revolving around whacko financial theories, international isolationism, "black helicopter" paranoia, anti-semitism, or other such ideology, I'll have no part in them.

510 Ezekiel2517  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:04:02pm

"Thou'd better cough up the info, my son..so help me me!"

511 J.S.  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:04:30pm

re: #509 looking closely

Exactly. I agree. (there's also the "what is your tolerance level?" and that really depends on the subject matter at hand. For example, a pharmacist who misreads a physician's prescriptions and the misreading results in the death of a patient? -- well, pretty much little to no tolerance for that one -- ditto for an airplane carrying passengers, and there's a "mistake" in inspecting its mechanical "flight worthiness" and passengers die as a consequence -- or the "bad" e-coli bacteria, with only 10 cells needed to make you sick -- again, there will be little to no tolerance...or with releasing/freeing terrorists? with the potential of hundreds/thousands, etc., potentially dying as a consequence? again, should be very little tolerance...especially with "life and death" issues...Tea Parties? well, I don't know...300,000-500,000 attended back in April ...how many whacked out idiots should/can be tolerated in a democracy with a First Amendment, Free Speech, etc. provision? )

512 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:06:08pm

Let's try another Tea Party analogy then.
Islam
There are radicals world over who participate in terrorists activities, yet I don't hear calls from reasonable folks to shut down mosques.

Let's monitor the situation at Tea parties and if and when extremists are found to be having a significant impact, take action by exposing them for what they are.

513 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:08:53pm

re: #512 unrealizedviewpoint

Let's try another Tea Party analogy then.
Islam
There are radicals world over who participate in terrorists activities, yet I don't hear calls from reasonable folks to shut down mosques.

Let's monitor the situation at Tea parties and if and when extremists are found to be having a significant impact, take action by exposing them for what they are.

By the time they're found to be having a "significant impact" it would be too much already. They should be exposed now so they don't reach that level and damage the message.

514 Ojoe  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:09:29pm

As we have Lincoln in this thread, I will post this description of him by a contemporary of his:

He had no love of arbitrary power, and indulged in no radical or revolutionary theories which could tempt him to such use of power. He was a conservative in the best sense of the term: not a conservator of party, but of national integrity.Thus he was better fitted to accomplish his divine mission. For it must be remembered that God, the great Disposer of all events, works not with the haste of man. Tares and wheat He lets grow together until the harvest, lest upon uprooting the tares upon impulse He uproot the wheat also. While Lincoln never vacillated, he was never in haste. He hesitated long before he issued his proclamation of emancipation. He laid it away, and weeks passed before he signed it — and then he acted in accordance with a solemn vow which he had made to God. Even after he issued this document he doubted weather the system of gradual and compensated emancipation might not be more just and better for the slaves. He looked on every side of every question, and was therefore slow in reaching conclusions. In Lincoln thought and prayer were mingled, and thus the final word which came in answer to thought and prayer sounded solemnly in his ears like the commandment of God. Following that voice, he had no doubt as to results: it was, “This do, and thou shalt be saved.”

In no life, perhaps, more that in Lincoln’s, did the outward appearance counterdict the inward fact and experience. A casual acquaintance with him would lead to the inference that he looked upon every subject only as the occasion of a joke or the point for an anecdote. But those who came nearer to him, or who carefully study the man, can not thus judge. Upon no man ever fell the weight of sadder care than upon him. Day by day he labored under a burden which he could not lay aside. Thus to his intimate friends he always seemed weary and sorrowful. In an equal degree his external awkwardness curiously contrasted with an inward grace and sweetness not common among men. He was as gentle as a woman. His compassion was infinite. As the hour of victory approached, when the enemies of the nation would lie prostrate at his feet, the desire nearest to his heart was to heal the wounds which the strife left open and bleeding, to pardon and restore. Thus, when the summer of triumph came, its glory wrapped him all about. He saw a nation restored, a race emancipated. He saw the seal of God set upon all which he had done. He looked upon a people inspired with solemn joy, and as their souls went up in anthems, his rose supreme above them all, crowned with an aureola such as never graced the head of Caesar or king.

— Guerensey & Alden, from Harper's Illustrated History of the Civil War (1866).

515 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:09:37pm

re: #508 unrealizedviewpoint

One need keep in mind Tax Day (April 15th) Tea Parties were the first of their kind. No one knew what to expect, nor whom was going to show. Maybe we need be on the lookout. But certainly folks shouldn't abandon them entirely.

I went to the NYC Tea Party, not exactly willingly, but it was not a kook fest either. The craziest person I came across was Pamela Geller (though that in and of itself, is saying something). Perhaps it's just my individualist non-conformist nature, intuitively disliking the prospect of joining a crowd... I didn't like the experience. More than that, though, I think is an understanding that just because the strangers standing next to me hold banners with slogans I support, I don't know what their other views are, and I'm not comfortable not knowing what I'm implicitly supporting by joining them. Case in point, one of the last speakers at the NYC Tea Party hijacked the discussion about taxes, debt, and spending, and went off on a rant against abortion. The crowd almost unanimously cheered. I was sick to my stomach and left, as I'm a strong proponent of abortion rights. Nothing enlightening comes out of crowds. These Tea Party participants aren't really learning anything at these events; they are merely showing their numbers. They can do that at the ballot box.

I don't think anything good will come out of them, though of course I don't think all, nearly all, or even a majority of their participants are nut jobs or racists. I wish they'd find more constructive ways of venting their frustration though, and moving the political machine in their direction. Crowds are too easily co-opted and compromised. I wish at least their organizers would formally denounce wackjob participants, but they haven't even done that yet.

I'm not at all impressed with the Tea Party movement.

516 Mardukhai  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:14:16pm

Actually, as a rabbi, Jesus' number one priority would always be the saving of human lives. He would have done whatever required of him.

517 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:14:40pm

re: #513 Sharmuta

By the time they're found to be having a "significant impact" it would be too much already. They should be exposed now so they don't reach that level and damage the message.

I really do not believe there are enough of them (white supremacist) to really have the impact being suggested (taking over). They're greatly outnumbered by the reasonable folks. All Paulian's are not supremacists. Idiots, but not supremacists.

518 Sharmuta  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:17:39pm

re: #517 unrealizedviewpoint

I really do not believe there are enough of them (white supremacist) to really have the impact being suggested (taking over). They're greatly outnumbered by the reasonable folks. All Paulian's are not supremacists. Idiots, but not supremacists.

You said "extremists" not paulians. Extremists should not be allowed to get to the point where they have any influence, much less a 'significant" one.

519 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:17:43pm

re: #517 unrealizedviewpoint

I really do not believe there are enough of them (white supremacist) to really have the impact being suggested (taking over). They're greatly outnumbered by the reasonable folks. All Paulian's are not supremacists. Idiots, but not supremacists.

But if we're to take Tea Parties seriously, they should take themselves seriously first. I see no attempt at weeding out participants, or giving these gatherings a direction. No efforts to keep fringe groups out, or, logistically failing that, at least condemning their presence. This hands-off approach I do not understand, but it will be the undoing of the movement. Wait, it's nearly dead already.

520 looking closely  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:18:19pm

re: #515 medaura18586

I'm not at all impressed with the Tea Party movement.


To the extent that it increases public exposure to the ideas of low taxes and limited government, its good.

To the extent that it helps increase organization of people who believe in those things, it *could* be good.

I don't particularly think its going to accomplish too much of either thing, frankly, though I also don't see all that much harm in these either.

For all the fears that these events are being co-opted by Paulians, I'll start to get worried when come next election cycle, Ron Paul can capture more than 1% of the Republican primary vote, as he actually did last year. Even third-place Mitt Romney took ten times as many votes as Paul did.

There were also 5-6 other Republican candidates who probably WOULD have taken more electoral votes than Paul, except (unlike Paul) all of them had the common decency to drop out of the race when it became apparent they had no chance of winning.

521 GreenSoccer  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:21:07pm

re: #142 capitalist piglet

Just as an interesting historical footnote Vlad III, Vlad the Impaler, Dracula, Prince of Wallachia, of Transylvania, Romania, around 1462, is remembered in Romania as a hero for dissuading an invasion of the Turks, the infidels, by .. read below. He not only impaled enemies, he also impaled his own citizens, by the tens of thousands, usually upside down. 10,000 on St Bartholomew Day, 30,000 from the city of Brasov.

1462 ”the Sultan (Sultan Mehamed II) decided to launch a full-scale invasion of Wallachia. Of course, his other goal was to transform this land into a Turkish province and he entered Wallachia with an army three times larger than Dracula's. Finding himself without allies, Dracula, forced to retreat towards Tirgoviste, burned his own fields and poisoned the wells along the way, so that the Turkish army would find nothing to eat or drink. When the Sultan, exhausted, finally reached the capital city, he was confronted by a most gruesome sight: thousands of stakes held the remaining carcasses of some 20,000 Turkish captives, a horror scene which was ultimately nicknamed the "Forest of the Impaled." This terror tactic deliberately stage-managed by Dracula was definitely successful, the scene had a strong effect on Mehmed's most stout-hearted officers, and the Sultan, tired and hungry, admitted defeat.”
[Link: www.mydracula.com...]

BTW, 1462 was 55 years before the Reformation.

The fall of Constantinople was 9 years earlier in 1453 by the same Sultan Mehmed 11.

BTW, the US has water boarded 3 Al Qaeda terrorists all of whom survived the ordeal without losing any fingers or toes or eyes or tongues. As I heard it, but about which Pres Obama refuses to release the documents, the breaking up of the plot to simultaneously blow up planes full of innocent passengers crossing the Atlantic Ocean, was a result of the intelligence that was collected from the water boarding. I think the words "enhanced interrogation techniques" should be continued to be used to cover water boarding, rather than switching to democrat use of words and calling water boarding "torture".
Saddam Hussein tortured. Remember throwing humans into shredding machines feet first? The US stopped that.

Americans need to know history to put things into context.

522 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:25:12pm

re: #519 medaura18586

But if we're to take Tea Parties seriously, they should take themselves seriously first. I see no attempt at weeding out participants, or giving these gatherings a direction. No efforts to keep fringe groups out, or, logistically failing that, at least condemning their presence. This hands-off approach I do not understand, but it will be the undoing of the movement. Wait, it's nearly dead already.

There was one event date 4/15/2009. There will another on 7/4/2009. How do you suppose we begin weeding out these undesirables today?

523 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:27:00pm

re: #518 Sharmuta

You said "extremists" not paulians. Extremists should not be allowed to get to the point where they have any influence, much less a 'significant" one.

As a people we need shed light on them. That can be done on the spot at the next event. I got a finger and a voice.

524 Former Belgian  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:31:04pm

re: #349 Charles

The "water cure" was a form of torture that involved closing off the nose, inserting a funnel down the throat, and forcing the victim to drink huge amounts of water or other more disgusting substances.


In Dutch the variety with (human or animal) "other more disgusting [liquids]" was called "giving a Swedish drink". Supposedly 17th Century Swedish soldiers applied it as a "harsh interrogation technique", or just for sick fun.

525 nikis-knight  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:31:58pm

re: #488 Flyers1974

However, as far as cruel and unusual punishment is concerned, I don't think the eight amendment is causing frivolous prisoner lawsuits.

There was a suit in CA arguing that lethal injection was cruel & unusual. I think it won.

526 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:35:18pm

re: #520 looking closely

I just don't see how attendance of Tea Parties can convince people of the virtues of limited government and fiscal discipline. The people who go already believe in these tenets, more or less. Random passers-by have already been exposed to better arguments for those principles than any third-rate Tea Party speaker can offer. These are choirs preaching to the converted; a mere display of numbers.

It's not that I'm afraid Ron Paul is taking over anything, but everything fringe kooks touch turn into shit. More generally, I'm fed up with the primary voice upholding principles of limited government and fiscal discipline comes from socially conservative circles. These people are not a bit sexy, and modern Americans recoil at them and everything they say. They smear the concepts of limited government by association. A narrower example, even more extreme than your run-of-the-mill so cons, are the Paulbots and other paleocons. They discard every idea they endorse, good or bad, because they're so apeshit crazy and retrograde. Sane people will drop like hot potatoes anything they stand for, just by association. I think that's doing a great disservice to the classical liberal cause, because very few non-nut-jobs are left standing to defend it. These fringes don't need to "take over" or win elections in order to cause fatal damage.

So long as the Social Conservatives (let alone Paulians) have a major say in the Republican Party, I will boycott it. I may consider voting Democrat out of spite, in fact. I'm not gonna subsidize insanity. The "lesser of two evils" argument is completely lost on me, unless my very life is on the line. Fiscal conservatives better smarten up and abandon their crazy so-con agendas. The country is moving in a diametrically opposed direction, and they better take heed if they want to remain relevant at all.

527 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:35:49pm

re: #522 unrealizedviewpoint

There was one event date 4/15/2009. There will another on 7/4/2009. How do you suppose we begin weeding out these undesirables today?

Set up official Tea Party website, condemning the participation of the undesirables. For one thing.

528 Cato the Elder  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:39:17pm

re: #361 Kenneth

The correct answer is of course, no. Because there is not such thing as a world of perfect happiness and justice. Certainly not one which can be created by torturing to death an infant. This is the lie of all those who believe in utopias fall for. The result is never just one infant child, but 6 million Jews, 10 million Ukrainians, 3 million Cambodians, and so on. That is the devil's bargain.

I know that, and you know that. But humans fall for it again and again, in great things and in small.

529 ShanghaiEd  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:40:12pm

re: #71 yma o hyd

I bet these people have no idea what the Ten Commandments actually say.

Technically, there are Eleven Commandments. Number 11 is from Jesus, in John 13:34:

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

There's also an argument that the 11th made the previous 10 superfluous, but I won't go into that here.

530 Kenneth  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:40:16pm

re: #349 Charles

The "water cure" was a form of torture that involved closing off the nose, inserting a funnel down the throat, and forcing the victim to drink huge amounts of water or other more disgusting substances. Following this, they were often beaten in the stomach, just for that extra cruelty factor.

"Dunking" is more similar to waterboarding, but it's still much more extreme because the victim's entire body would be submerged -- and they often were drowned.

Forcing somebody to drink too much water can kill them from renal failure.

The point about "waterboarding" is that there are a whole range of procedures which could be called "waterboarding". Some ways of doing it are clearly torture -as in full body dunking the Spanish Inquisition did it. Or as was done on the Marquis de Sade.

Few people would say it is torture as done on US personnel during SERE training. So is the form of waterboarding performed by the CIA on terrorists detainees torture when it is performed to the same procedure as SERE training? There is a strong argument that it is not.

531 nikis-knight  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:43:08pm

re: #526 medaura18586

I just don't see how attendance of Tea Parties can convince people of the virtues of limited government and fiscal discipline

It isn't so much to convince others that this view is correct, although that'd be great, it's to convince lawmakers that there are enough people who hold this view that they had better moderate their (imo) dangerous economic policies.
So it doesn't matter what else people think, or to an extent even say, just what the nominal reason for being there is and the number who are.

However, I believe that the number of people needed to demonstrate to our current executive and legislative branch that advancing breakneck spending in all aspects of civil society is untenable politically is well upwards of half the population, given the self-certainty that I think is inherent in the Obama administration, so I don't think it is worth bothering.

532 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:44:59pm

re: #527 medaura18586

Set up official Tea Party website, condemning the participation of the undesirables. For one thing.

A new voice, the official voice. TeaParty 2.0, maybe...not.

533 Former Belgian  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:46:25pm

re: #370 tokyobk

I think Deists were basically agnostics who respected science who also realized that in order to be in polite company they had to offer some non threatening status to society.

Jefferson literally tore out all of the supernatural aspects of the bible and left in the moral teachings.

The letter from Lincoln could just be a convention for expressing grief to probable believers.

From what I have read he was no active Christian.

I do know his family attended Presbyterian churches both in Springfield, IL and in DC (where they rented a pew), and that he joined them there at least on and off. I also know he publicly declared he "belong[ed] to no church".

His parents were "Hard-shell Baptists", i.e., they believed so strongly in predestination that they figured missionizing was useless since only G-d could decide to save you.

My hunch is that Lincoln definitely had a relationship with The Guy Upstairs, but that he had limited if any use for organized religion. He may have been either a Deist or a Theist --- you can still be the latter even if you don't subscribe to any religious "orthodoxy".

As for the claims that he was homosexual (sigh): the claimants should look long and hard at James Buchanan instead.

534 Flyers1974  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:46:25pm

re: #525 nikis-knight

There was a suit in CA arguing that lethal injection was cruel & unusual. I think it won.

That's a good example of using the Eighth Amendment as a means of blocking the death penalty. If there is no more to that case, I think its pretty stupid.

535 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:47:22pm

re: #512 unrealizedviewpoint

Let's try another Tea Party analogy then.
Islam
There are radicals world over who participate in terrorists activities, yet I don't hear calls from reasonable folks to shut down mosques.

Let's monitor the situation at Tea parties and if and when extremists are found to be having a significant impact, take action by exposing them for what they are.

When exactly are teabaggers going to start doing this? When you see racist abuse, do you "wait till it is found to be having a significant effect" before speaking up? I guess that must be why no-one in those videos seemed concerned about the racist screaming and bitching going on there- the criteria couldn't have been met yet.

This is BULLSHIT.

536 Kevin Shook  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:49:06pm
My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

Letter from A. Lincoln to Horace Greeley, Aug. 22, 1862

537 ShanghaiEd  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:52:17pm

re: #106 Walter L. Newton

Correct, and I don't know what it is alright to make fun of that. In general, there is not much dumping on Protestant sects here on LGF.

I bow to nobody (well, very few) when it comes to dumping on Protestant sects. If I have been slacking off, I apologize, and will remedy that very soon.

(PS: I am also against unprotected sects.)

538 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:54:47pm

re: #535 Jimmah

When exactly are teabaggers going to start doing this? When you see racist abuse, do you "wait till it is found to be having a significant effect" before speaking up? I guess that must be why no-one in those videos seemed concerned about the racist screaming and bitching going on there- the criteria couldn't have been met yet.

This is BULLSHIT.

If I recall correctly it was potty mouth Janeane Garofalo who uses the term teabaggers and the jokes that accompany its usage.

Do folks just want to abandon Tea Parties because a few racists have shown up? Other than that Jimmah, what do you propose?

539 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:58:19pm

re: #537 ShanghaiEd

I bow to nobody (well, very few) when it comes to dumping on Protestant sects. If I have been slacking off, I apologize, and will remedy that very soon.

(PS: I am also against unprotected sects.)

One of my sisters converted to a Protestant evangelical sect from Catholicism a few years ago. One change I noticed was that she now seems to be physically exhausted after sunday masses. I think I found out why:

Youtube Video
540 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:58:48pm

re: #535 Jimmah

When exactly are teabaggers going to start doing this? When you see racist abuse, do you "wait till it is found to be having a significant effect" before speaking up? I guess that must be why no-one in those videos seemed concerned about the racist screaming and bitching going on there- the criteria couldn't have been met yet.

This is BULLSHIT.

You guess that must be why? Were you in their minds? Quite a leap. But not surprising judging from your down ding spree on this thread.

I'm ready for your down ding in 5...4...3...2....1

541 EaterOfFood  Wed, May 27, 2009 1:59:37pm

re: #14 Killgore Trout

There are also rumors Abe was gay.

I wish that were true just so I could see the look on the face of homophobic blacks (this means you, Alan Keyes) when they learn that a gay man freed their ancestors.

Waterboarding terrorists is too good for them. An endless loop of Spice Girls music videos, on the other hand, should do the trick.

542 nikis-knight  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:00:16pm

re: #539 Jimmah

One of my sisters converted to a Protestant evangelical sect from Catholicism a few years ago. One change I noticed was that she now seems to be physically exhausted after sunday masses. I think I found out why:


Even after all the up and down of a Catholic mass? I don't buy it.

543 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:04:14pm

re: #538 unrealizedviewpoint

If I recall correctly it was potty mouth Janeane Garofalo who uses the term teabaggers and the jokes that accompany its usage.

Yeah there's a joke about it. but to me it's just an easy way to refer to "those who support and attend tea parties".

Do folks just want to abandon Tea Parties because a few racists have shown up? Other than that Jimmah, what do you propose?

How about the organizers condemn this crap and make it clear that those types are NOT WELCOME, as medaura aleady said?

544 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:06:08pm

re: #543 Jimmah

How about the organizers condemn this crap and make it clear that those types are NOT WELCOME, as medaura aleady said?

CALLING ALL NAZIS.....CALLING ALL NAZIS.....OH AND YOU PAULIANS, TOO.

You aren't welcome at the next tea party I attend.

There.

545 medaura18586  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:07:35pm

re: #531 nikis-knight

It isn't so much to convince others that this view is correct, although that'd be great, it's to convince lawmakers that there are enough people who hold this view that they had better moderate their (imo) dangerous economic policies.
So it doesn't matter what else people think, or to an extent even say, just what the nominal reason for being there is and the number who are.

However, I believe that the number of people needed to demonstrate to our current executive and legislative branch that advancing breakneck spending in all aspects of civil society is untenable politically is well upwards of half the population, given the self-certainty that I think is inherent in the Obama administration, so I don't think it is worth bothering.

So we're in agreement: Tea Parties are nothing but a display of numbers. Well, people can display their numbers by writing to their representatives, voting, etc. The crowd gatherings seem like poor outlets for that purpose: attendance numbers are not verified and their approximations often vary widely, and now that crazies are making an appearance, how can you ascertain, officially, how many of the participants were sane and how many were Paulbots or WN recruiters? Everything goes in a crowd. Best to make individual impact through contacting representatives and casting your vote at the ballot box. Nothing ambiguous about that.

546 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:07:56pm

re: #540 loppyd

You guess that must be why? Were you in their minds? Quite a leap. But not surprising judging from your down ding spree on this thread.

I'm ready for your down ding in 5...4...3...2....1

Stupid posts get down dinged - that's my policy. Posts that boohoo about getting downdinged also get downdinged.

547 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:08:02pm

re: #543 Jimmah

How about the organizers condemn this crap and make it clear that those types are NOT WELCOME, as medaura aleady said?

A sternly worded letter should work.

548 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:08:35pm

re: #542 nikis-knight

Even after all the up and down of a Catholic mass? I don't buy it.

What exactly don't you buy?

549 tjseagrove  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:11:09pm

He wouldn't need to waterboard, he would just know the answer before they could even think it.

550 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:11:09pm

re: #546 Jimmah

Stupid posts get down dinged - that's my policy. Posts that boohoo about getting downdinged also get downdinged.

Ah yes and your brilliance dazzles daily.

Unlike many here, I don't give a crap if I get up dinged or down dinged so feel free. In fact, a down ding from you is like a badge of honor.

551 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:12:20pm

re: #543 Jimmah

Yeah there's a joke about it. but to me it's just an easy way to refer to "those who support and attend tea parties".

The word Teabaggers is crude and rude.
I'm certain I could come with a derogatory divisive word to describe you. You would not appreciate it, therefore I will refrain.

552 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:16:17pm

re: #544 loppyd

CALLING ALL NAZIS.....CALLING ALL NAZIS.....OH AND YOU PAULIANS, TOO.

You aren't welcome at the next tea party I attend.

There.

That's a great example of a stupid post.

There's a lot that tea party organisers can do to discourage nuts, just as there was a lot that the so called 'normal' attendees of the events in the videos posted here could have done to oppose what was going on there, just as the vocal teabaggers on this thread who are so eager to attack anyone who identifies a problem could have done. So far, epic fail all round. Well done, guys.

553 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:18:17pm

re: #550 loppyd

Ah yes and your brilliance dazzles daily.

Unlike many here, I don't give a crap if I get up dinged or down dinged so feel free.

I don't - that's why I don't whine about it when I get downdinged, unlike you.

554 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:26:01pm

re: #553 Jimmah

I don't - that's why I don't whine about it when I get downdinged, unlike you.

I assure you it's not a whine.

I don't give a crap you think so I will not waste anymore of my time with you.

555 oldbluesboy  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:26:18pm

Jesus was a Jew.
So were Saint Paul and Saint Peter.
Gotta love the Catholics for reinventions.
Sotomayor must be a great Catholic.

556 Throbert McGee  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:30:27pm

re: #481 Red Pencil

IIRC, in the 19th century the "Lincoln was a homosexual" rumor was propagated (not necessarily invented) by a Southerner who wanted to discredit him. It came before there was a gay movement to try to co-opt him.

I've never, ever heard that claim before -- as far as I know, the "Lincoln Loved The Cock™" stuff is entirely the wishful thinking of 20th-century gay academics who are massively overreaching based on slender evidence.

Wikipedia has a thoroughly-sourced article devoted to the question of Lincoln's sexuality, and what it says, in a nutshell, is "Yes, it's conceivable that Abraham Lincoln and his close friend Joshua Speed might have done the circle-jerk thing once in a while during their years as 20-something bachelors, but the weight of the evidence suggests that both men were predominantly heterosexual."

And the article states, flatly, that "none of Lincoln's enemies hinted at any homosexual implication" in his relationship with Speed or with any other male friends.

Having said that, I'll add: the possibility that Lincoln and Speed were mildly bisexual and sometimes fooled around with each other should NOT be treated as "an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence," to borrow the phrase that skeptics use when talking about telekinesis, faith-healing, and UFOs. A physically erotic relationship between Lincoln and Speed is a little more improbable than the possibility that Lincoln had a heterosexual affair with a secret mistress while married to Mary Todd -- but it's not hugely more improbable.

557 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:32:20pm

re: #554 loppyd

You just ran out of arguments, that's all.

558 loppyd  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:33:35pm

re: #557 Jimmah

You just ran out of arguments, that's all.

Nope. Ran out of caring what you think.

Have a nice night.

559 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:37:34pm

re: #542 nikis-knight

Even after all the up and down of a Catholic mass? I don't buy it.

Ah...right - you mean all the sitting, kneeling, standing malarkey that goes on at Catholic mass ? It's been so long since I went to church I'd forgotten about all that. Still, in terms of energy expenditure, that still comes nowhere near this:

Youtube Video

I don't know how she can manage. Good music though ;-)

560 Throbert McGee  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:38:22pm

re: #537 ShanghaiEd

I bow to nobody (well, very few) when it comes to dumping on Protestant sects.

A Protestant woman named Alice
Took a leak in a Ca-tho-lic chalice,
But explained, "I did this
From a great need to piss,
And not from sectarian malice."

© Anonymous, collected by Gershon Legman

561 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:39:52pm

re: #558 loppyd

Nope. Ran out of caring what you think.

Have a nice night.

Thanks - I will, don't worry!

562 avspatti  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:50:04pm

What a silly question! Jesus, being God, would not need to torture anyone, now would He? He would already know the critical information.

563 nyc redneck  Wed, May 27, 2009 2:58:30pm

re: #425 Killgore Trout

I've pretty much stopped responding to the strawman attacks. It's very clear why the Tea Parties have a problem. Those participating can't/won't acknowledge the problem much less do anything about it. The problem will most likely get worse. This is going to be very embarrassing.

do you have actual statistics on the success rate of nazi recruitment efforts at the tea parties? i'm just curious if you have evidence that american patriots are seeing nazis and flocking to sign up and start goose stepping.
i am NOT seeing this. nor are many people who have been to tea parties all over the country.
my feeling is you are jumping the gun on your hysteria.
i have more faith in my fellow citizens, both democrats and republicans who are showing up to protest o's massive money grab.
i just don't think most people see the nazis as anything but evil.

564 ShanghaiEd  Wed, May 27, 2009 3:03:30pm

re: #437 unrealizedviewpoint

"Large extent" is where we part. I don't believe at this point in time any of us can prove nor disprove any numbers. A few cherry picked videos are not going to change my mind.

I think the term "cherry picking" has become so overused as to be irrelevant, much as the term "bashing" is used to describe legitimate criticism.

How do you not cherry-pick references, in a debate? Use every reference in the literature? Insist on an "equal time" doctrine, where you have to find one reference supporting your opponent's view for each reference that supports your own?

I'm sorry, the cherry-picking argument in this case is a straw man. Cast thy chips, and let them fall where they may.

565 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 3:06:51pm

re: #564 ShanghaiEd

I think the term "cherry picking" has become so overused as to be irrelevant, much as the term "bashing" is used to describe legitimate criticism.

How do you not cherry-pick references, in a debate? Use every reference in the literature? Insist on an "equal time" doctrine, where you have to find one reference supporting your opponent's view for each reference that supports your own?

I'm sorry, the cherry-picking argument in this case is a straw man. Cast thy chips, and let them fall where they may.

Oh c'mon. I got 300,000 attendees to about 10 ppl Killgore has spotlighted. I win!

566 Throbert McGee  Wed, May 27, 2009 3:08:15pm

re: #533 Former Belgian

As for the claims that [Lincoln] was homosexual (sigh): the claimants should look long and hard at James Buchanan instead.

But who'd want bragging rights to James Buchanan?

567 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, May 27, 2009 3:10:37pm

Oh, and Jimmah, nyc redneck yesterday volunteered to kick in the shins any supremacists she comes across at a Tea Party.

568 ShanghaiEd  Wed, May 27, 2009 3:28:00pm

re: #486 Joel

Correctamundo. However when he started spouting that "compassionate conservative" rhetoric I started to cringe. Nixon was pretty classic liberal too by the way - Affirmative Action, EPA, Clean Water Act, Wage & Price Controls, Endangered Species Act.

I don't think you cringed quite soon enough. GWB and his speechwriters began the "compassionate conservative" spiel when he was governor of Texas. Can't say he snuck that one in after he was prez.

569 ShanghaiEd  Wed, May 27, 2009 3:45:32pm

re: #530 Kenneth

Few people would say it is torture as done on US personnel during SERE training. So is the form of waterboarding performed by the CIA on terrorists detainees torture when it is performed to the same procedure as SERE training? There is a strong argument that it is not.

I disagree. Military personnel undergo SERE training voluntarily. And I've never read about a participant who required 83 examples before learning the lesson.

570 experiencedtraveller  Wed, May 27, 2009 4:56:18pm

re: #556 Throbert McGee

I think you are correct about the Lincoln/homosexual issue. I'd use your term but wouldn't want to pay the trademark license ;)

While the idea of '20 something' bachelors sharing a bed seems bizarre in today's world your link states the truth when it writes such an assumption is "based on a tortured misreading of conventional 19th century sleeping arrangements".

Heat, not to mention space, was at a great premium for the masses in those days. Not too long ago....

571 Achilles Tang  Wed, May 27, 2009 6:13:31pm

I find this quote the most interesting.

Lincoln didn’t make things easy for historians. He was reticent and often inscrutable about his faith.

Nobody like that could be elected today, for any significant public office, yet we admire people from that time greatly.

What am I missing here?/

572 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 6:22:00pm

re: #568 ShanghaiEd

Not being form Texas I had no idea. I also know that his father was not much of a conservative either.

573 Joel  Wed, May 27, 2009 6:25:37pm

re: #552 Jimmah

You (and Anderson Cooper, Mr. Rachel Maddow, and David Shuster) just love that term teabagging don't you?

574 Optimizer  Wed, May 27, 2009 9:08:57pm

re: #45 big steve

What is interesting is that it is possible that none of the four Presidents on Mt Rushmore were Christians. On one extreme is Jefferson who was openly a Diest and Roosevelt who publically denied being Christian. Jury is out on Lincoln although he did not state one way or another, friends and such stated categorically that he wasn't. Washington might have been a Christian but in that age it was ungentlemanly to talk about it.

Interesting. I had not heard that about TR. All I had heard about him was that he was against using "In God We Trust" on coins. But this was because, as he explained, "But it seems to me eminently unwise to cheapen such a motto by use on coins, just as it would be to cheapen it by use on postage stamps, or in advertisements." So it was a matter of being devout, not about Separation of Church and State. But of course, that doesn't make him Christian.

I've read quite a bit about Washington's religious inclinations, and the facts seem to point to him being a Deist. It's a situation very much like Lincoln's. He went to a church, but because his wife was a member (there was even an amusing story about how he used the preacher's remarks to give himself an excuse not to go!). He rarely, if ever, used the term "Jesus", "Christ", or even "our Lord". But he never spelled out where he stood. When he was asked point-blank once, he simply ignored the question, moving on to the next. One close friend lamented that he was pretty sure he was a Deist. Also like Lincoln, there are entire books devoted to the idea of his deep religious faith - that don't hold up to even the meagerest scrutiny. The Religious Right clings to a story about Washington on his knees praying (alone - ONCE!) at Valley Forge, but analysis of the details of the story prove it to be bogus folklore.

575 Optimizer  Wed, May 27, 2009 9:29:35pm

re: #329 Charles

Lincoln was probably a deist.

I've heard that theory, but I haven't heard much regarding the actual argument for that.

That being said, sometimes it almost seems like we're making the question much harder to answer than it really is. Take the Constitution, for example. There's all kinds of religious claims about how the Founders were these religiously-motivated individuals, and yet if you just READ THE THING what it trumpets into your ear (from the deafing SILENCE) was that they had in mind a secular government. It was unheard of at the time for such an important document to go on and on and have NO reference to religion (other than to preclude it from qualification for office) in the body of the text (some wiseguy dated it with "the Year of Our Lord").

Now consider Lincoln (and Washington, too). He rarely, if ever, spoke (or wrote) the name "Jesus" or "Christ", or even "the Lord" in his private speech and writings. And it's pretty much absent his the public works, too. He didn't belong to a church. He didn't speak about seeking people again after they die. Does that sound like a Christian? Here, too, the "silence is deafening".

But because of this deafening silence, there's the opportunity for people to insert the noise they want to hear into the void.

It seems a bit odd to me that Lincoln would adopt the same basic world view as the more influential Founders, when he lived a generation or two after them, and seemingly a world away (in KY/IL). It didn't seem to me that Deism was as big a deal in Lincoln's day (but I don't really know). Still - look at how Lincoln comes up with all kinds of synonyms for God, but it's never "Jesus", etc. The tell-tale sign of the Deist is clear.

576 Flavia  Wed, May 27, 2009 9:37:08pm

Please - Lincoln was Jewish!
His name was "Abe" & he was shot in the Temple!
C'mon...

577 Optimizer  Wed, May 27, 2009 9:37:54pm

re: #571 Naso Tang

I find this quote the most interesting.


Nobody like that could be elected today, for any significant public office, yet we admire people from that time greatly.

What am I missing here?/

What about "The One"? Like the consummate politician he is, he seems to take all sides on the religious question. Despite sitting in Rev Wright's pew for 20 years (for political reasons) he's a virtual pantheist, as best I can tell. He's not "reticent" about his faith, but is instead so vague and all-inclusive that what he says is virtually meaningless. He likely would not meet many definitions of the term "Christian".

578 Optimizer  Wed, May 27, 2009 9:45:25pm

re: #552 Jimmah

That's a great example of a stupid post.

There's a lot that tea party organisers can do to discourage nuts, just as there was a lot that the so called 'normal' attendees of the events in the videos posted here could have done to oppose what was going on there, just as the vocal teabaggers on this thread who are so eager to attack anyone who identifies a problem could have done. So far, epic fail all round. Well done, guys.

Seems like you're demanding a lot from the organizers and participants of these events. As I understand it, many (most?) of the attendees are rank amateurs (first-timers), the organizers are volunteers, and the budget for the events are often a fairly uncomplicated $0.

The significance of the tea parties (to the extent they're significant) lies in the fact that many people who have never gotten involved in polictics before are upset, and looking to make some noise. So you're ignoring the nature of the tea parties, in what you say.

579 Optimizer  Wed, May 27, 2009 9:58:01pm

Oh, and on the torture thing, the way I understand it, Jesus was supposed to be a "turn the other cheek" kind of guy. So, clearly, he would not involve himself in such things. He would accept the suffering and death of his people, confident of their devine reward in Heaven, which would be his overriding concern. Preserving life on Earth, for it's own sake, was never a priority for Him. Christians are supposed to simply accept the casualties from "man-made disasters" as part of His plan.

That being said, I'd call this attitude completely immoral. Probably many Christians realize this too, if they're trying to pretend that torture would be the answer to "WWJD?" Reality's a b**** sometimes, ain't it?

580 Ayeless in Ghazi  Thu, May 28, 2009 4:25:48am

re: #573 Joel

You (and Anderson Cooper, Mr. Rachel Maddow, and David Shuster) just love that term teabagging don't you?

Never used the word "teabagging". And I have no idea who those people are.

Would you prefer "tea-tards"?

581 Ayeless in Ghazi  Thu, May 28, 2009 4:50:28am

re: #578 Optimizer

Seems like you're demanding a lot from the organizers and participants of these events. As I understand it, many (most?) of the attendees are rank amateurs (first-timers), the organizers are volunteers, and the budget for the events are often a fairly uncomplicated $0.

The significance of the tea parties (to the extent they're significant) lies in the fact that many people who have never gotten involved in polictics before are upset, and looking to make some noise. So you're ignoring the nature of the tea parties, in what you say.

If the tea parties are that much of an uncontrollable rabble then fuck them - they're just a bad idea, and the sort of racist abuse we saw in the videos upthread is exactly what we should expect of them.

582 Ayeless in Ghazi  Thu, May 28, 2009 4:52:00am

re: #578 Optimizer

As above, but with formatting fixed:

Seems like you're demanding a lot from the organizers and participants of these events. As I understand it, many (most?) of the attendees are rank amateurs (first-timers), the organizers are volunteers, and the budget for the events are often a fairly uncomplicated $0.

The significance of the tea parties (to the extent they're significant) lies in the fact that many people who have never gotten involved in polictics before are upset, and looking to make some noise. So you're ignoring the nature of the tea parties, in what you say.

If the tea parties are that much of an uncontrollable rabble then fuck them - they're just a bad idea, and the sort of racist abuse we saw in the videos upthread is exactly what we should expect of them.

583 Ayeless in Ghazi  Thu, May 28, 2009 4:54:38am

re: #579 Optimizer

Oh, and on the torture thing, the way I understand it, Jesus was supposed to be a "turn the other cheek" kind of guy. So, clearly, he would not involve himself in such things. He would accept the suffering and death of his people, confident of their devine reward in Heaven, which would be his overriding concern. Preserving life on Earth, for it's own sake, was never a priority for Him. Christians are supposed to simply accept the casualties from "man-made disasters" as part of His plan.

That being said, I'd call this attitude completely immoral. Probably many Christians realize this too, if they're trying to pretend that torture would be the answer to "WWJD?" Reality's a b**** sometimes, ain't it?

I agree with you on that.

584 Darth Vader Gargoyle  Thu, May 28, 2009 5:47:45am

I'm a christian, have no problem with waterboarding, but I do not think Jesus would have waterboarded. Give me a large break!

585 nikis-knight  Thu, May 28, 2009 8:42:02am

re: #545 medaura18586

So we're in agreement: Tea Parties are nothing but a display of numbers. Well, people can display their numbers by writing to their representatives, voting, etc. The crowd gatherings seem like poor outlets for that purpose: attendance numbers are not verified and their approximations often vary widely, and now that crazies are making an appearance, how can you ascertain, officially, how many of the participants were sane and how many were Paulbots or WN recruiters? Everything goes in a crowd. Best to make individual impact through contacting representatives and casting your vote at the ballot box. Nothing ambiguous about that.


Oh, i know this is a late response, but anyway:
It's not just numbers, it's also enthusiasm. People who would protest would presumably vote, and the ballot box is some time away, so the ways to send messages are more limited. Also, voting is a multi-facted message--was the last election about the war or economy or charisma of the candidtates? With a protest it is much more focused, even if plenty of people have their pet causes that they try to advance, that's not what the pols will take form the gathering. If all those people wrote letters too, that might help, but I kind of doubt the efficacy of letters, since it could be assumed that one person wrote dozens. It also doesn't matter how many are sane, short of riots or the like, in terms of sending a message about how many people feel strongly about the issue in question.

Of course, I didn't protest since I think nothing will change Obama's mind about spending my children's money, so whatever.

586 cygnus  Thu, May 28, 2009 10:00:43am

re: #59 unrealizedviewpoint

What kind of mind would even attempt to unnecessarily bring Jesus into this debate over waterboarding? I'm still not sure what he'd drive.

A Honda. After all, the New Testament says 'the disciples were all in one Accord'. :)


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
3 days ago
Views: 154 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1