BREAKING EXCLUSIVE MUST CREDIT TWITCHY! The liberal-biased interwebs are putting conservatives in Twitter jail, maybe (or maybe not) but probably (but probably not), just for being conservatives, OH NOES!
Michelle Malkin, conservative keyboard-banging hero and founder of the the site with NINE PAID STAFFERS (or, ugh, maybe even more by now) who collect random tweets, mostly by Pat Sajak, and call it “the news wire of the 21st century,” is on to you, Twitter!
Ken Ham doesn’t think we should worry about things like asteroid impacts because the Bible tells him so. Recently on his ridiculous “Answers in Genesis” blog, he wrote,
What you believe about the Earth’s past doesn’t just influence how you view it—your belief also determines how you view the future! Because of their beliefs about the past, many evolutionists are concerned that somehow mankind will be catastrophically wiped out and life as we know it will end on Earth. One of the most popular versions of this apocalyptic tale is that a massive asteroid, or several asteroids, will strike Earth and obliterate life.
Can you see where he’s going with this?
The Discovery Channel even recently made a video simulating what it would look like if a 500-kilometer (310-mile) asteroid smashed into the Pacific Ocean. According to their simulation, such an impact would destroy Earth and vaporize life.
And why shouldn’t we take them more seriously than someone like you? As bad as the Discovery Channel may be at times, they’re still far better when it comes to science than Ham, and that says a lot.
Why is it that evolutionists are so concerned that humanity will someday be catastrophically destroyed? Well, according to man’s ideas about the past, life arose naturalistically and the universe is governed completely by the merciless laws of physics. According to their worldview, evolutionists contend there isn’t anyone upholding or sustaining the universe. We are simply at the mercy of naturalistic processes. Also, according to one evolutionary idea about the supposed dinosaur extinction event, a massive asteroid impact wiped out the dinosaurs about 65 million years ago. If such an event happened once before, what’s to stop it from happening again and wiping out humanity this time?
Man’s ideas about the past? You mean what real science tells us, as opposed to your fundamentalist religious views that you try to pass off as “science” to the uneducated masses? Also contrary to what people like you seem to think, evolution is not incompatible with a belief in God. Being an “evolutionist” doesn’t make you are an atheist or mean that you believe that everything is governed by natural forces alone. You can be a Christian and not reject science, you just can’t be a creationist of any kind, and not reject science. Even if God exists through, he ( or she ) would have to have created the Universe through the same processes that science says the universe was created. If not than why do scientists, regardless of their religion come across all this evidence that shows us a universe vastly different than the one you believe in? Is God a liar?
Unfortunately there is abundent evidence that an asteroid really did wipe out the dinosaurs, who were thriving all over the world before it hit. It would not have been pleasant to be on the Earth’s surface for a long time after it hit either, given the fact that it plunged the planet into a the equivalent of a nuclear winter, minus the radiation. We have tons of data to back up the claim that asteroids have hit the Earth in the past, unlike the mythical Noah’s flood, that biblical fundamentalist like Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis insist happened somehow. I really hope his stupid “Ark Park” crashes and burns.
Asteroids, meteorites and commits on the other hand have hit the Earth throughout the planet’s history. There is nothing to stop it from happen again, unless we take action to protect ourselves. Extinction level events have occurred in the Earth’s past, multiple times. They’re as real as anthropogenic climate change, which I’m certain that Ham also denies or at least doesn’t think is a threat to human well being because of what he thinks the Bible says.
Even if there is a God of some sort out there, he/she doesn’t seem to answer prayers consistently, since people all over the world suffer through horrible natural disasters and die in horrible ways, regardless of how good or bad they were, and their faith, didn’t seem to matter much either.
Those who start with the Bible, however, get a completely different picture of Earth’s future because we start with a different picture of Earth’s past.
Yes, Mr. Ham, and one that is contrary to reality.
According to God’s Word, the universe is not here as the result of naturalistic processes. God created the universe and has imposed order on it. The universe is not strictly governed by unfeeling natural laws. God upholds and sustains the universe that He has made (Hebrews 1:3). And we don’t need to worry that an asteroid will obliterate life. The Bible has already told us how things will end—with judgment from God when Jesus Christ returns to Earth (2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 20:11–15).
Okay, and why should we believe the Bible over any other religious text when absolutely no evidence exists that supports things like a six thousand year old Earth, or a talking snake? Oh wait, you don’t want anyone to do actual science and you don’t care about evidence do you?
I have to agree with youtuber WildwoodClaire. It would be so much better if people like Ham, wouldn’t try to spread their delusions. As if we needed another reason to not let creationists destroy education. The long term survival of our species may literally depend on it. I for one do not want to go the way of the dinosaurs!
Update : 3/17/15 at 6:06 PM
Skip Intro has posted an excellent question for Mr. Ham, that I don’t think he’ll be able to answer!
Where did the moon come from, and why does it have all of those craters?
Right Wing Watch found Another Gem of stupidity, bigotry and godwins. Speaking at a local Tea party event, Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver, basically compared himself to Martin Luther King, and and claimed that obeying a supreme court ruling legalizing same sex marriage, is as morally horrendous as turning over Jews to the Nazis during world War 2.
Yeah Mat your cause is equivalent to the fight against segregation! And oh, allowing gay people to get married is the same as the Holocaust! Gag me with a spoon!
Also there’s something you should know about what MLK’s wife thought about gay rights. Tell me Mat, was Coretta Scott King equivalent to a Nazi for her support of gay rights? Would her husband have considered her equivalent to mass murderers?
This isn’t really that surprising unfortunately, given how some far right nut jobs have already compared pro marriage equality rulings to Jim Crow laws and slavery. I guess it was only a matter of time before they hit us with an insensitive holocaust comparison, after some unjustified analogies to Dred Scott. Man these guys must really hate gay people.
Updated: Homophobic Christian Taliban Psychopath Matt McLaughlin, Wants California to Kill the Gays!
Image via peaceproject.com
Matt McLaughlin wants to turn America into Uganda! Unlike some of our far right nut jobs, he isn’t content to just encourage their government kill homosexuals, for their “sinful lifestyle.” He recently tried to get something on the ballet that would eliminate any protections for gay people in the state, even going so far as to have them put to death for homosexual sex. I don’t have a picture what of this psychotic hate monger looks like, which is why you don’t see one here. I would like to know what he looks like so I could avoid him if I ever happen to see him.
Anyway his disgusting “Sodomite Suppression Act” would have gay people executed by firing squad and fine anyone who defends gay rights. That means that in addition to killing gay people for being gay, the law would take away our first amendment rights. Not surprising that someone like McLaughlin, who wants America to Kill the gays like Uganda, The Taliban and Saudi Arabia, wouldn’t be a big supporter of free speech.
The initiative would make any homosexual sex a crime punishable by death:
The People of California wisely command, in the fear of God, that any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method.
The extreme nature of the “Sodomite Suppression Act” led many people to question its authenticity. While this piece of legislation is not the law in California, McLaughlin really did file the proposal (along with a $200 filing fee) and can now start collecting the 365,000 signatures required to get the measure on an upcoming ballot.
Even if McLaughlin succeeds in collecting the required signatures, and even if the intiative then passes at the polls, the proposal still will never become law. For one, a California judge declared in 2014 that the state death penalty law was unconstitutional. McLaughlin, however, argues that California should make an exception for homosexuals:
“This law is effective immediately and shall not be rendered ineffective or invalidated by any court, state or federal, until heard by a quorum of the Supreme Court of California consisting only of judges who are neither sodomites nor subject to disqualification hereunder.”
Anyone want to continue to insist that Christian fundamentalists are not as bad as Islamic fundamentalists or that they don’t pose a threat to our freedom?
Anyway, thankfully there’s very little chance something like this would pass In modern day America, in any state, but especially California, which is one of the most liberal states in the Union. Also even if it did pass, it would be so clearly unconstitutional that it would be immediately over turned, if anyone even tried to enforce it. However, the fact that anyone in America, in the twenty first century would think that this would be a good idea, is extremely disturbing.
HSkol just provided us with this link with some more information about McLaughlin. Its nice to know that his intolerance is not being tolerated.
This clip is primarily about a former Fox “News” host Eric Burns, who ironically hosted a media criticism show on the network until 2008, who identified it as a “cult,” and said that Keith Olbermann was mostly right in his accusations of lying against O’Reilly while he was a host on MSNBC. But the clip also features nuns from the order in which two of the nuns murdered in El Salvador in 1980 - which O’Reilly claimed to have witnessed in person - speaking out against him.
As for Olbermann, I had my troubles with him, and often found him to be difficult to take seriously at times, sometimes even unwatchable. But his takedowns of O’Reilly were epic, and important, because he was the only one doing it.
Back to Eric Burns, who also mentioned a report that O’Reilly’s ratings have increased as this controversy has unfolded, and his money quote:
I think the way to understand this is to make a distinction between the words “culture” and “cult…I’m saying that the people who watch Fox News are cultish. Because for many years conservatives have been extremely upset in this country because the only newscasts they had to watch were liberal - you people at CNN and how liberal you are, and NBC and ABC and CBS, and they never had - the extreme right - they never had their own television station. When they got one, their appreciation - their audience loyalty - and I know what the audience loyalty was like when I was there - their audience loyalty soared. And so O’Reilly as the head of the cult is not held to the same standards as Brian Williams, who was part of the media culture - the larger culture. Every time, it seems, Brian, that O’Reilly lies - and he’s lied so many times - Keith Olbermann used to be on opposite him with his show “Countdown,” he later wrote a book of all the segments in his show called “The Worst Person in the World…and every time he (O’Reilly) was named (Worst Person in the World), a charge was made by Olbermann about something O’Reilly had said or done that was a complete fabrication…and it was completely substantiated. I mean Olbermann had all the evidence possible.
…yet the cult…to the Fox News cult, this kind of thing doesn’t matter. It’s a lie from the liberal media, it’s…who cares what it is, the point is, it doesn’t matter.
Oh the supreme court forcing states to allow gay people to marry is so “tyrannical,” just like when they made them allow people of different “races” to marry. Oh to make it even worse, he thinks they’re going to take our guns! OMG the horror! Oh and off course Steve Deace claims he doesn’t advocate violence, even through he clearly says a violent revolution maybe necessary to stop the “evil” gays. Man, gun control and the near inevitable future of legalized same sex marriage is driving religious right wingnuts over the edge! Miranda Blue reports,
Richard Mack, the former sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, who now heads the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, told Steve Deace yesterday that although he is a “pacifist,” states and counties need to enforce their “sovereignty” in areas like marriage equality and gun control, or else “we will lose liberty in America, and we will not get it back unless there’s bloodshed.”
Mack, who argues that county sheriffs are not accountable to federal authority and so should not enforce laws that they believe violate the Constitution, told Deace that America has been losing liberty for a long time, but “it took a tyrant and communist in our own White House to wake a lot of people up.”
“And I will tell you this, if we do not, if the counties and cities and states do not exercise their proper constitutional authority, known as state sovereignty and the 10th Amendment, if they do not enforce their own state sovereignty and secure their state sovereignty, then America will die,” he said. “If we do not exercise the 10th Amendment and state sovereignty, we will lose liberty in America, and we will not get it back unless there’s bloodshed.”
Wingnuts are going to scream with glee - end zone dance glee - at the fact that apparently Craig Hicks is a LEFTIST!!!. But what’s striking to me is that he is incredibly hostile to religion of all sorts.
Hours after it was reported that a man killed three Muslim students Tuesday near the University of North Carolina, Twitter users pointed to the suspect’s social media posts as evidence that the crime may have been religiously motivated.
Chapel Hill police suggested that Craig Stephen Hicks, 46, may have been involved in a long-running dispute over parking with the victims but did not offer a clear motive for the shooting.
A Facebook page that appeared to belong to Hicks, however, revealed a strong anti-religion bias and a love of guns. Here are some other insights into Hicks’ politics gleaned from his social media profile.
The lead photo on Hick’s Facebook page professed his belief in “anti-theism” and stated that he wants “religion to go away.”
“I don’t deny you your right to believe whatever you’d like; but I have the right to point out it’s ignorant and dangerous for as long as your baseless superstitions keep killing people,” the text in the photo read.
Religious scholar Reza Aslan explored a new wave of “anti-theism” among atheists in a piece for Salon published in November. He argued that anti-theists like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris respond “to religion with the same venomous ire with which religious fundamentalists respond to atheism.” Aslan also cited a poll showing that about 85 percent of atheists do not subscribe to anti-theism.
Hicks quoted Dawkins at length on losing respect for “Abrahamic religions” after the 9/11 terror attacks in a 2012 post.
“My respect for the Abrahamic religions went up in the smoke and choking dust of September 11th,” the post read. “The last vestige of respect for the taboo disappeared as I watched the ‘Day of Prayer’ in Washington Cathedral, where people of mutually incompatible faiths united in homage to the very force that caused the problem in the first place: religion. It is time for people of intellect, as opposed to people of faith, to stand up and say ‘Enough!’ Let our tribute to the dead be a new resolve: to respect people for what they individually think, rather than respect groups for what they were collectively brought up to believe.”
It’s possible that Hicks recently gravitated to anti-theism. A 2011 post showing what Hicks said was an award he received at work which described him as an “ordained deistic minister.”
Here we go again.
These people are not only not well, they are brainwashed. There is no other way to account for such dangerously brazen stupidity, and hatred.
And I will rise again to my soapbox to say that when sensible people (Democrats or otherwise), stay home during midterms, nutcases like Brian Kurcaba get elected across the country, as happened in 1994, 2010, and 2014.
The Republican Party may be irrelevant as a national party, in terms of their ability to win the White House, but as long as they continue to dominate state and local elections, as they did this last time, they are no less troubling.
The West Virginia House of Delegates began moving a bill Thursday to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill is very similar to one that was passed last year, only to be vetoed by Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin.
The bill is one of 11 introduced so far this legislative session that seek to restrict women’s access to abortion.
A similar bill passed both houses of the Legislature last year with overwhelming bipartisan support but was vetoed by Tomblin, who said he had been advised that it was unconstitutional.
The House Health Committee held a public hearing on the bill before discussing it and ultimately passing it 20-5.
The public hearing had 25 speakers against the bill and 8 speaking in favor, although neither side seemed likely to change the other’s mind.
This year’s bill (HB2568) would ban abortions that occur more than 22 weeks after the woman’s last menstrual period. While that is a change in language from last year’s bill, it does not seem to be a change in practice, as the bill defines that time as “generally consistent with the time that is twenty weeks after fertilization.”
The bill contains some exceptions for medical emergencies or non-viable fetuses.
In medical emergencies the bill says, somewhat quizzically, that “an abortion …shall terminate the pregnancy in the manner which, in reasonable medical judgment, provides the best opportunity for the fetus to survive.”
An amendment from three Democratic delegates that would have added an exception for cases of rape or incest failed, largely along party lines.
“Obviously rape is awful …” said Delegate Brian Kurcaba, R-Monongalia. “What is beautiful is the child that could come from this.”
In all seriousness, who the fuck SAYS THIS KIND OF SHIT???
Hat tip: Think Progress
More: The Charleston Gazette