LGF

-RetweetMitt Romney on 'Faith in America'

Thu, Dec 6, 2007 at 8:38:20 am PST

Here’s Mitt Romney’s “Faith in America” speech at Ustream: Ustream.tv - ‘Faith in America’.

And here’s an open thread for the lizard army to discuss the speech (it struck me as less than earth-shattering).

Advertisement

688 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 JamesTKirk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:39:00am
2 Carl in Jerusalem  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:39:57am

OT - US prevents launch of satellite to spy on Iran

Good Morning Charles!

Is there faith in America?

3 librum  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:41:42am

I thought it turned out pretty well, and seemed to resonate nicely with the audience.

4 chinesearithmetic  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:43:16am

It will reassure people who don't deserve to be reassured.

5 GregInSeattle  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:43:18am

Not an earth shattering speach, just a solid common sense and historical look at the role of faith in the national life of the United States. Something that seems to be becoming rare.

6 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:43:20am

Felt fake to me.

7 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:43:56am

You would think that JFK ended the line of questioning about religion more than 40 years ago. Guess not. Some folks are still stuck on religion.

I'm more concerned about their positions on terrorism, national security (including Iraq, Afghanistan and other related ops), border control, illegal aliens, and taxes (pretty much in that order).

8 gman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:44:11am

Here's the speech transcript

Good Morning Everyone!

9 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:45:14am

It was a fine speech, not earth-shattering, I agree...but fine. He needed to make it.

Still, I'll be voting for Rudy in the California primary.

If , in the end, Mitt becomes the Republican candidate, I'll vote for him in November.

10 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:46:03am

re: #4 chinesearithmetic

It will reassure people who don't deserve to be reassured.

What people are you referring to?

11 Kaitian868  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:46:17am

Lawhawk, I know where you're coming from but right now the Republican Party is still tainted with those who uses the religion test as part of their belief on how they vote for a nominee. In this case, Huckabee who I extremely despise, has popularity with the evangelicals. These people have totally corrupted the way the Republican Party should be today and I don't appreciate it. Romney has struck me as a man who will be a great Executive and has the knowledge to do so, mormon or not.

12 Dogg_Zilla  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:46:33am

Why, in 2007, should anyone have to make such a speech?

VW

13 tskier  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:46:43am

I don't care about religion. I do care if that religion favors the eventual overthrow of the U.S. Islam comes to mind.

14 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:47:11am

Grilling the man on his personal religious beliefs strikes me as decidedly un-American. I thought JFK put these issues to bed decades ago. But what I'd like to know is just who is making this necessary? Is it the born-agains and other "intolerant Christians" on the right (as we've been told), or is it really the leftist MSM trying to piss in our pot?

15 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:47:32am

OT - Muslim woman sues San Bernardino County
The suit alleges sheriff's deputies violated her rights by forcing her to remove her head covering when she was booked in 2005.

16 slickridley  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:47:37am

re: #8 gman

Here's the speech transcript

Good Morning Everyone!

thanks!
-reading-
ugh..somehow the speech doesn't not instill the Mitt faith in me :-/

17 Cap'n DOC  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:47:38am

Since I know what he believes (or says he believes), he didn't make a believer outa me. Just another 'prophet-based' religion.

18 JamesTKirk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:49:15am

Video won't play for me.

19 jcr  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:49:23am

I don't think the problem is the particular set of superstitions he subscribes to. The problem with Romney is that he's an entirely run-of-the-mill politician. All he's got going for him is the "but he has nice hair" vote, and he's neck and neck with Edwards on that.

-jcr

20 Dogg_Zilla  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:49:41am

re: #17 Cap'n DOC

Just another 'prophet-based' religion.

Versus a "profit-Based" one?

21 JammieWearingFool  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:49:42am

Tomorrow, Mrs. Clinton will give a speech detailing her faith.

Saturday, she'll give another detailing her new faith.

22 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:50:00am

Did the first two posts in this thread really need to be OT? Isn't that best saved for an open thread, or deep in the thread? Methinks there are some people who wait for a new thread to be opened just so they can make their own wannabe front-page blog posts.

23 NYexpat  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:50:04am

I just can't help but be skeptical about any "conservative" politicians coming out of the northeast.

24 TUGBOAT  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:50:24am

Not impressed. He is correct that there should not be a "faith test" to become President, I just didn't feel inspired or anything. I'm sure if it was RON PAUL(pbuh) I would have been quivering in feverish glee (not!) but at this point all I can say is that NONE of the candidates really enthrall me. Can we draft Ronald Reagan on an 8-yr loan from heaven?

25 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:50:25am

re: #21 JammieWearingFool

Tomorrow, Mrs. Clinton will give a speech detailing her faith.

Saturday, she'll give another detailing her new faith.

The religion of the finger in the wind?

26 tfc3rid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:51:24am

Eh, well, religion in America is sadly dwindling...

However, Mitt has to make a speech on this but this story caught my eye from yesterday from a now-fired Hillary staffer...
The outlandish e-mail claims, "The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!"

"Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim," goes the anonymous screed.

"THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED, 'ONE NATION UNDER GOD.' ALMIGHTY GOD, NOT THE GOD OF THE KORAN."

27 Eowyn2  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:51:28am

re: #2 Carl in Jerusalem
yes

28 JammieWearingFool  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:51:56am

re: #25 lawhawk

re: #21 JammieWearingFool

Tomorrow, Mrs. Clinton will give a speech detailing her faith.

Saturday, she'll give another detailing her new faith.

The religion of the finger in the wind?

Bingo!

29 marwan's daughter  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:52:06am

re: #14 Lizard by the Bay

Grilling the man on his personal religious beliefs strikes me as decidedly un-American. I thought JFK put these issues to bed decades ago. But what I'd like to know is just who is making this necessary? Is it the born-agains and other "intolerant Christians" on the right (as we've been told), or is it really the leftist MSM trying to piss in our pot?

We do the same with Keith Ellison.

30 FrogMarch  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:52:39am

Don't forget about the religious left.

Not all leftwingers in the US are as frankly religious as Hillary Clinton, and many don't even realise that the ideas that they champion have deep religious roots. But even for these people, being leftwing has itself become a sort of religion, with those who disagree viewed as sinister, almost demonic forces, rather than simply as individuals holding different views.

31 elBarto  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:53:43am

If the mormoms believed in teh violent overthrow of the consitution i would question that. islam is the joining of religion and politics.

32 TUGBOAT  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:53:57am

Lawhawk, I agree with you on the important issues, but I feel that border control is intimately tied into counterterrorism and homeland security. I also would sleep better at night if I could take it for granted that the next President will name someone competent to run DHS. Not another Chertoff. But figure the odds of that.

33 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:54:06am
34 EC Marm  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:54:10am
"I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life's blessings.


Mitt likes "the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims."

35 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:54:17am

OT:
The enemy within: Two Arab Israelis arrested on terror-charges.

36 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:54:53am

re: #29 marwan's daughter

We do the same with Keith Ellison.

I don't agree. It is not Ellison's personal faith that is the problem. It's the unsavory characters (who all happen to be members of that same faith) that he is funded by, surrounds himself with, and gives his true allegiance to that is the real problem. Islam would be a much nicer faith if it weren't for all the damned Muslims. :-)

37 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:55:04am

Don't need to watch te video.

/since this whole thing started, we've discussed things and for whatever reason, on LGF, Mitt Romney has never been a subject of conversation

38 jcm  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:55:09am

re: #25 lawhawk

re: #21 JammieWearingFool

Tomorrow, Mrs. Clinton will give a speech detailing her faith.

Saturday, she'll give another detailing her new faith.

The religion of the finger in the wind?

The religion of the pull my finger in the wind?

Much better.

39 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:55:41am

re: #14 Lizard by the Bay

It's both, I think. The MSM is playing it up, but there is no question in my mind, having read enough comments here by the more socially conservative lizards, that faith and its expression are enormously important to a section of the Republican party.

40 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:56:38am

I posted this in the dead thread, but it is relevant here:

#660 Honorary Yooper 12/06/07 8:16:30 am reply quote report 0

I have a really stupid sounding question (at least stupid for those in our media):

Why does Mitt Romney's religion matter? (Latter Day Saints)

How about Barak Hussein Obama's religion and his father's religion? (United Church of Christ / Islam)
How about Mike Huckabee's religion? (Southern Baptist)
Or, for that matter, Hillary Clinton's religion? (United Methodist)
What about John Edwards's religion? (United Methodist)
Or, Bill Richardson's religion? (Roman Catholic)
Or, Rudy Guiliani's religion? (Roman Catholic)
Dare I ask about Fred!'s religion? (Church of Christ)
Or, for the coup de gras, Ron Paul's religion? (Baptist)
(Gotta include Ron Paul in here or the Paulians will scream.)

Why does Romney get scrutiny when the others do not?
Do I sense bias in the MSM?

41 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:56:38am
42 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:56:58am

What's Ron Paul's religion?

Anyone know?

43 Nevergiveup  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:57:30am

re: #23 NYexpat

I just can't help but be skeptical about any "conservative" politicians coming out of the northeast.

The key word aught to be "statewide". I just can't help but to be skeptical about any " conservative" politicians coming out of the northeast in a STATEWIDE election. There are many fine conservative congressman but all to often in the northeast to be elected statewide they often compromise or invent their principals.

44 RickZ  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:57:31am

re: #15 Ringo the Gringo

OT - Muslim woman sues San Bernardino County

From the article:

Cindy Beavers, a spokeswoman for the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, said she could not comment.

"I can tell you that anybody who comes in wearing any type of head covering -- they would have to remove it at the time of booking and that would be for security purposes," Beavers said.

Just great. The ACLU is still going with muslims (they being more equal than the rest of us ignorant American plebes) against any type of security in this country. Even though it would be difficult, how can we sue the ACLU? Because really, it's about damn time the ACLU be made to answer some serious discovery questions.

45 Kenneth  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:58:04am

NY-effin-Times does it again, betrays a top secret US intelligence source:

American intelligence agencies reversed their view about the status of Iran’s nuclear weapons program after they obtained notes last summer from the deliberations of Iranian military officials involved in the weapons development program, senior intelligence and government officials said on Wednesday.

Hmmm. The US has a source who has access to the minutes of meetings by Iranian military officials "involved in the weapons development program". How many persons had this access? Thousands, hundreds? Or maybe a half dozen whose names are on an Iranian counterintelligence list now?

The notes included conversations and deliberations in which some of the military officials complained bitterly about what they termed a decision by their superiors in late 2003 to shut down a complex engineering effort to design nuclear weapons, including a warhead that could fit atop Iranian missiles. ...

Ultimately, the notes and deliberations were corroborated by other intelligence, the officials said, including intercepted conversations among Iranian officials, collected in recent months. It is not clear if those conversations involved the same officers and others whose deliberations were recounted in the notes, or if they included their superiors.

Hmmm ... So communications channels over which weapons engineering questions were discussed were vulnerable to interception. You guys in Teheran, please take note. Make sure you use these channels again.

46 Allah al Fubar  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:58:27am

re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

What's Ron Paul's religion?

Anyone know?

Episco-Paulian?

47 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:58:44am

re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

What's Ron Paul's religion?

Anyone know?

Baptist. Check my #40.

48 EC Marm  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:59:09am

re: #41 ploome hineni

I noticed that

maybe it was the most he could say

lol


That's a good question. What else could you say with a straight face that the ROP wouldn't take offense at?

The perseverance of the Muslim to keep his foot funkiness to a minimum?

49 RoP_RIP  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:59:14am

His multi-culti speech still falls flat if you substitute Scientology or Islam as his religion...

Maybe he should become a Jehovah's Witness or a Moonie. You know, something mainstream and not rejected by the wide majority of the world's Christians. Oh wait.

50 steveoh  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:59:37am

I was a slightly apalled as his attack on secularists in America. Although not dismissing reason altogether, I suggest a good reading of Sam Harris' the end of faith. It embraces reason over faith, and starts with a sucicide bomber blowing himself up on a bus in Israel. It is a complex issue, and I do respect the right of all Americans to practice their faith lawfully, and separate from the constitution, but as a secular humanist and strong zionist, I felt like I was watching something straight out of the sixties. The brights are awakening, don't underestimate the need for reason based decision making in combating Islamism.

51 tfc3rid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:59:46am

re: #45 Kenneth

Sounds like disinformation...

52 JammieWearingFool  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:59:47am

More drivel from HRW.

The United States incarcerates more people per capita than any other country in the world, Human Rights Watch said Wednesday, citing new US government figures.

At the end of 2006 more than 2.25 million persons were behind bars in US prisons and jails, an all-time high, the rights group said, citing figures from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), a branch of the US Department of Justice.

HRW said the 2006 increase was the largest one-year jump in the last six years.

The number represents an incarceration rate of 751 per 100,000 US residents -- "substantially higher than that of Libya (217 per 100,000), Iran (212), and China (119)," HRW said in a statement.

For comparison, France's incarceration rate is 85 per 100,000, while the rate in Britain's is 148 and Canada is 107, HRW said.

"These figures confirm an unenviable record: the United States is the world's leading prison nation," said David Fathi, director of the US program at Human Rights Watch.

"The US is even ahead of governments like China that use prisons as a political tool," he said.

We have more people in prison because we don't summarily execute them like in other countries.

Speaking of Iran, there was another public hanging Wednesday.

53 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:59:49am

OT

Bolton: The Flaws In the Iran Report

Rarely has a document from the supposedly hidden world of intelligence had such an impact as the National Intelligence Estimate released this week. Rarely has an administration been so unprepared for such an event. And rarely have vehement critics of the "intelligence community" on issues such as Iraq's weapons of mass destruction reversed themselves so quickly.

All this shows that we not only have a problem interpreting what the mullahs in Tehran are up to, but also a more fundamental problem: Too much of the intelligence community is engaging in policy formulation rather than "intelligence" analysis, and too many in Congress and the media are happy about it. President Bush may not be able to repair his Iran policy (which was not rigorous enough to begin with) in his last year, but he would leave a lasting legacy by returning the intelligence world to its proper function.

Consider these flaws in the NIE's "key judgments," which were made public even though approximately 140 pages of analysis, and reams of underlying intelligence, remain classified.

54 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:00:07am

re: #47 Honorary Yooper

Saw it right after I posted.

Thanks.

/...I also like the answer at #46

55 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:00:20am

re: #44 RickZ

Cindy Beavers, a spokeswoman for the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, said she could not comment.

I hope that's a married name, because otherwise her junior high school life was hell!

56 NYexpat  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:01:48am

re: #14 Lizard by the Bay

Grilling the man on his personal religious beliefs strikes me as decidedly un-American. I thought JFK put these issues to bed decades ago. But what I'd like to know is just who is making this necessary? Is it the born-agains and other "intolerant Christians" on the right (as we've been told), or is it really the leftist MSM trying to piss in our pot?

I tend to go with the MSM trying their best to make an issue out of nothing. As a Christian, I'm not really impressed by what the Book of Mormon says, or their founders. On the other hand I don't put that up as a litmus test for the presidency. There are other belief systems which I would argue automatically should rule a person out. Islam, for instance does not recognize national borders or national sovereignty. For this reason alone I do not think that any muslim should ever be allowed to hold public office.

57 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:02:04am

re: #21 JammieWearingFool

Tomorrow, Mrs. Clinton will give a speech detailing her faith.

Saturday, she'll give another detailing her new faith.

"Those are my principles! If you don't like them, I have others."

--G. Marx

58 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:02:05am

re: #40 Honorary Yooper

LDS is odd. Some Christians question whether it is actually a form of Christianity; some historians question pretty much everything about it; and Mark Twain had a great deal of fun at the expense of the Book of Mormon.

People wonder about it, and about its tenets.

That's why it's at least a bit of an issue.

59 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:02:17am

Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

60 Muadib  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:02:50am

re: #15 Ringo the Gringo

OT - Muslim woman sues San Bernardino County
The suit alleges sheriff's deputies violated her rights by forcing her to remove her head covering when she was booked in 2005.

That suit should be tossed out on it's head.

61 Golem Akbar  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:03:25am

Mitt's a good guy. His religion should not be a problem. I think his only problem is that Rudy has more support. I would love to see a Rudy/Mitt ticket.

62 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:03:25am

re: #59 storagemanager

Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

When Mormons start suicide bombing campaigns, you will actually have a point worth making. Until then...

63 Allah al Fubar  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:03:37am

re: #59 storagemanager

Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

And who gave Moses the Commandments?

64 RoP_RIP  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:03:52am

re: #36 Lizard by the Bay

re: #29 marwan's daughter

We do the same with Keith Ellison.

I don't agree. It is not Ellison's personal faith that is the problem. It's the unsavory characters (who all happen to be members of that same faith) that he is funded by, surrounds himself with, and gives his true allegiance to that is the real problem. Islam would be a much nicer faith if it weren't for all the damned Muslims. :-)

Actually, it's both for most of the electorate. Why are people hell bent on denying reality?

You think Ellison would has a snowball's chance in hell of being a serious Presidential candidate? American culture hasn't eroded that far yet.

65 Iron Fist[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:04:18am
66 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:04:59am

Whoa, you people are posting too fast.

/Mormons are human beings too, and they can sing

67 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:04am
The Book of Mormon is supposed to be the account of people who came from the Middle-East to the Americas. It covers the period of about 600 B.C. to 400 A.D. It tells of the Jaredites, people from the Tower of Babel who came to central America but perished because of their own immorality. It also describes some Jews who fled persecution in Jerusalem and came to America led by a man called Nephi. The Jews divided into two groups known as the Nephites and Lamanites who fought each other. The Nephites were defeated in 428 A.D.
The Lamanites continued and are known as the American Indians. The Book of Mormon is supposed to be the account of the Nephite leader who was called Mormon as he wrote concerning their culture, civilization, and appearance of Jesus to the Americas.
Joseph Smith said "that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book" (History of the Church, Vol. 4, page 461).
The Book of Mormon is not of God
68 hartabuna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:08am

OT

PA accuses Hamas of stealing fuel from hospitals


For three days, Hamas has been preventing Gaza fuel companies from receiving fuel allocations sent from Ramallah. According to a Palestine Press news agency report, Hamas was stealing fuel and medical supplies sent from the PA Health Ministry in Ramallah to Gaza hospitals.


Wow. Just Wow.

69 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:14am

re: #49 RoP_RIP

Do you know how to make your odd cult respectable? Acquire a major swath of territory (Utah for the Mormons, Loma Linda California for the 7th Day Adventists) or become immensely wealthy (Christian Science). The Jehovah's Witnesses haven't managed either; the Moonies...are working on it.

70 lostlakehiker  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:16am

re: #14 Lizard by the Bay

Grilling the man on his personal religious beliefs strikes me as decidedly un-American. I thought JFK put these issues to bed decades ago. But what I'd like to know is just who is making this necessary? Is it the born-agains and other "intolerant Christians" on the right (as we've been told), or is it really the leftist MSM trying to piss in our pot?

This one's our own fault. Like Dick Gregory, I have to say, Come On, People.

There are very few saints. Fewer prophets yet. And the ratio of prophet to false prophet ought to teach us not to even think about trying to elect a prophet.

We don't need a president to be Religiously Correct. We need him to be wise in the ways of the world, with enough moral courage to act on that wisdom, enough energy and brains to be effective in action, and enough moral decency to act not for his own advantage but on behalf of the nation.

By that test, Romney will do. So will Rudy. So would most of the Republican slate. (Sorry, RP). For that matter, so would Biden or Obama, (sorry, Hildemort) though their policy prescriptions would mess up the economy and fray our security. Mistakes we can work through. Ill will or folly is harder to ride out.

71 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:18am

re: #50 steveoh

I do respect the right of all Americans to practice their faith lawfully, and separate from the constitution...

"separate from the constitution" ?...What the heck is that supposed to mean?

And do you really refer to yourself as a "bright"?

72 Kirly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:19am

re: #33 ploome hineni


Romney was put into a humiliating position

and he has to get up and make a speech like this?

very humiliating and very disturbing

maybe it was humiliating. but, at least we know he won't blow anything up or chop any heads off. or inspire anyone else to do so.

73 NJDhockeyfan  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:22am

OT:

Hamas Militants Train for Attack on Israel


Armed members of Hamas are conducting practical drills for a possible attack on Israel.

FOX News had an exclusive look at the guerrillas as they trained with new Kalashnikovs in the Gaza Strip.

"The U.S. and Israel and other regional powers were generous enough to provide Fatah security with very good weapons, and now they are in our hands," one gunman told FOX News.

The Hamas militants say they are training for an Israeli military response to their persistent rocket and mortar fire aimed at Israeli towns. The gunman wouldn't say where they obtained the rocket-propelled grenades and roadside bombs.

"This training is part of the Hamas preparation to stop an Israeli offensive into the Gaza Strip," another gunman said. "We will hit them bad and many of them will be kidnapped."

74 FrogMarch  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:05:28am

re: #40 Honorary Yooper

hiya Yooper.
I think the answer is his Mormonism. Mormons are treated like dirt by the DNC/MSM. Because holy and precious all-knowing (yet entirely oblivious) DNC/MSMers control the media - we get heavy doses of left-wing religious bigotry. Mitt felt the need to answer. How sad. Notice also that Republicans are mocked for their religion - while democrats are hailed.
Biggest double standard going.

75 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:06:00am

re: #12 Dogg_Zilla

Because a lot of people are unfamiliar with Mormonism. A lot of people demonize Mormons. Many are just a little wary. I think it's an important issue. Although I have nothing against Mormonism (more than any other religion) I don't think a Mormon can win the presidency.

76 bulwrk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:06:21am

re: #15 Ringo the Gringo

IIRC she was actually booked on a probation violation after blowing off her community service obligation which was her original sentence.

77 Kenneth  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:06:37am

re: #51 tfc3rid


Disinformation? Maybe, but how can you tell?

One of the posters at the Belmont Club suggested the NIE was itself a disinformation operation designed to lull the Iranians inot a false sense of security, and therefore sloppiness. Then the US intelligence will find cold hard proof of their nuke program and the US military can bomb Iran.

That strikes me as more than a stretch.

78 FrogMarch  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:06:41am

re: #34 EC Marm

"I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life's blessings.


Mitt likes "the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims."

I don't have a problem with Muslim prayer 5 times a day. It's a lot of the other stuff they do that I find troubling. If all Muslims did was pray 5 times a day no one would care.

79 Nevergiveup  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:07:33am

re: #73 NJDhockeyfan

It really is not all that often that one gets to see their tax dollars at work up close and personal. Kinda gives you a warm feeling all over?

80 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:07:55am

Personally, I think Mitt could have used a few more flags.

Ten just wasn't enough for my taste.

81 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:08:07am
82 RickZ  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:08:11am

re: #62 Lizard by the Bay

re: #59 storagemanager


Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

When Mormons start suicide bombing campaigns, you will actually have a point worth making. Until then...

Well, Mormons still have some holdovers who practive polygamy. Also, the US fought a war against the Mormons in Utah. So there are legitimate similarities between the two. Wasn't there also a murder or two about some fake 'historical' Mormon letters/documents some years ago? Seems to also fit in as 'a point worth making', i.e., murder for dissing a 'religion'.

83 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:08:54am

re: #67 storagemanager

Quite aside from "of God" or not, it's truly dreadful, from an archaeological or historical standpoint.

84 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:09:55am
Brigham Young said. . .

"But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong." (Brigham Young, "Journal of Discourses," Vol. 2, page 171. - 1855)

John Taylor said . . .

"We talk about Christianity, but it is a perfect pack of nonsense...Myself and hundreds of the Elders around me have seen its pomp, parade, and glory; and what is it? It is a sounding brass and a tinkling symbol; it is as corrupt as hell; and the Devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century."( Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, page 167 - 1858)

"Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom." (J.D.", Vol. 10, page 127. - 1863

85 Allah al Fubar  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:01am

re: #80 Ringo the Gringo

LMAO. Reading my mind.

86 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:08am

re: #65 Iron Fist

re: #59 storagemanager,

The Mormons aren't out blowing up groups of schoolchildren to get great groupsex in Heaven. That's a pretty big difference between Mormons and Mohammedans.

And for some odd reason, I wouldn't feel nervous about boarding an airplane with a dozen male students from Brigham Young. I'd feel rather differently about the King Fahd Islamic Academy.

87 RoP_RIP  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:09am

re: #62 Lizard by the Bay

re: #59 storagemanager

Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

When Mormons start suicide bombing campaigns, you will actually have a point worth making. Until then...

One is a death cult, the other seems to keep coming up as a cult, over and over in public dialogs.

[Link: www.google.com...]

Strange, its almost as if millions of Americans believe Mormonism is some kind of bastardization of Christianity.

88 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:22am

re: #6 storagemanager

Felt fake to me.

You gotta be kidding me!

89 Kaitian868  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:24am

Ellison having a shot at the Presidency is when hell freezes over.

90 Golem Akbar  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:25am

re: #72 Kirly

re: #33 ploome hineni


Romney was put into a humiliating position

and he has to get up and make a speech like this?

very humiliating and very disturbing

maybe it was humiliating. but, at least we know he won't blow anything up or chop any heads off. or inspire anyone else to do so.

Look at it this way: Mitt had a great opportunity for media face-time. It's win-win if he uses this time wisely. I bet all the candidates would love an opportunity like this to explain themselves to the blood-thirsty MSM.

91 Kenneth  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:52am

re: #68 hartabuna

OT

PA accuses Hamas of stealing fuel from hospitals

Wow. Just Wow.

Those poor Hamas "militants", forced to steal fuel because of Zionist occupation...quick let's send some more Palis to Switzerland for training programs on how not to be thugs and criminals.

92 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:10:55am

re: #74 FrogMarch


I think the answer is his Mormonism. Mormons are treated like dirt by the DNC/MSM. Because holy and precious all-knowing (yet entirely oblivious) DNC/MSMers control the media - we get heavy doses of left-wing religious bigotry.


Evangelicals aren't terribly friendly to Mormons either: 'Vote for Romney is vote for Satan'

That's the word from Bill Keller, host of the Florida-based Live Prayer TV program as well as LivePrayer.com.

"If you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for Satan!" he writes in his daily devotional to be sent out to 2.4 million e-mail subscribers tomorrow.
...
Keller also comes out swinging against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as a cult.

"This message today is not about Mitt Romney," he writes. "Romney is an unashamed and proud member of the Mormon cult founded by a murdering polygamist pedophile named Joseph Smith nearly 200 years ago. The teachings of the Mormon cult are doctrinally and theologically in complete opposition to the Absolute Truth of God's Word. There is no common ground. If Mormonism is true, then the Christian faith is a complete lie. There has never been any question from the moment Smith's cult began that it was a work of Satan and those who follow their false teachings will die and spend eternity in hell."

93 Nevergiveup  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:11:30am

re: #89 Kaitian868

Ellison having a shot at the Presidency is when hell freezes over.

Thank g-d for global warming!

94 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:11:42am

re: #78 FrogMarch

I don't have a problem with Muslim prayer 5 times a day. It's a lot of the other stuff they do that I find troubling. If all Muslims did was pray 5 times a day no one would care.

Exactly. There are plenty of Muslims whose faith only extends to attending religious services and perhaps adhering to dietary laws (and often times not even that). Call them Jack-Muslims if you must. I went to school with plenty of them, and am still friends with a couple.

The real problem has been the Saudi-funded wahhabists who are trying to "purify" Islam worldwide, and who control the public face of Islam (like CAIR) and use intimidation to silence the voice of moderate, pro-American Islam (which, thanks to their efforts, shrinks more every day).

95 Shiplord Kirel  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:11:50am

The loathesome lawyer cult known as Westboro Baptist Church has produced its own music video!

Not only that, it is actually pretty good, a very funny send-up of the moonbat classic We are the World.
God Hates the World

96 tfc3rid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:11:53am

You know what... I'm a Roman Catholic... I know why we have divisions among Christianity and I try and understand them better but I don't disregard the beliefs of a certain person...

For someone who is faithful, their faith is important... Whatever faith they may believe in and celebrate... I don't care if Mitt is a Mormon... Does he lead by example? Is he a leader? Does he share the values that I do?

That's what I care about.

97 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:12:15am

does Mitt mention that according to Mormonism
he gets his own planet when he dies
and gets to summon not only his wife for the afterlife/afterparty
he also gets to summon other women as well

kinda sounds like the 72 virgins
except in Mormonism the number is limitless
not just 72

yeah Mitt, once the true Mormon stuff creeps out in the press
your campaign is cooked

98 jcr  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:12:16am

re: #82 RickZ

re: #62 Lizard by the Bay

re: #59 storagemanager


Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.


When Mormons start suicide bombing campaigns, you will actually have a point worth making. Until then...

Well, Mormons still have some holdovers who practive polygamy. Also, the US fought a war against the Mormons in Utah. So there are legitimate similarities between the two. Wasn't there also a murder or two about some fake 'historical' Mormon letters/documents some years ago? Seems to also fit in as 'a point worth making', i.e., murder for dissing a 'religion'.

The Mormon church made a deal to drop polygamy for Utah's statehood, and they've kept their word. The polygamists are splinter groups that don't recognize the main Mormon church as legitimate.

-jcr

99 tfc3rid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:12:39am

re: #77 Kenneth

You can't tell... But the NIE is a 180 from where we were a week ago and we need to find out why...

100 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:12:58am

re: #83 Dianna

re: #67 storagemanager

Quite aside from "of God" or not, it's truly dreadful, from an archaeological or historical standpoint.

The Bible isn't exactly peer-reviewed, 100% rock-solid research in those areas, either.

101 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:13:01am
The Doctrine and Covenants says . . .

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face" (Doctrine and Covenants, 112:23).

When the Mormon missionaries come to the door and do their "gospel" presentation, they mention an apostasy and the need for a prophet, their prophet, to restore the true Teachings of Jesus. Of course, these ‘restored' teachings are completely false.
Nevertheless, the Mormon church clearly condemns other religious systems. Those Mormons who complain about poor treatment should familiarize themselves with their teachers' words.

102 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:13:17am

I had the great pleasure of having Mitt Romney serve as my governor.
He was a breath of fresh air. He vetoed just about every spending bill that came across his desk. He left the state with a budget surplus. He fought against in-state tuition for illegals. He worked with ICE and instituted a program where state troopers were allowed to inquire as to a person's immigration status. This, of course, was immediately rescinded by our new Moonbat, criminal-loving governor the minute too took the oath of office. He led the fight for the people of Massachusetts to have their voices be heard on a referendum qestion concerning gay marriage. This, of course, was quashed by the dem controlled legislature. He was instrumental in getting the corrupt midget, Billy Bulger, to step down as president of UMASS after he repeatedly pleaded the 5th in front of congress when queried about his serial killer brother's escape from justice. He offered the services of state troopers to help curb the violence in the Dorchester, Roxbury and Mattapan neighborhoods of Boston. This offer, of course, was not accepted by Mumbles Menino because he didn't want to piss of the BPD union.

In the entire time that Mitt was in office, not once did I get the impression that his Mormon faith interfered with his decision making or governing. I think he would make an excellent president and he will have my vote on primary day.

103 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:13:57am

re: #87 RoP_RIP

If you're curious, you might read the Book of Mormon. I'd suggest trying to find one of the earliest editions, because they've been tossing things out as they go along.

104 RoP_RIP  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:14:41am

re: #81 ploome hineni

re: #64 RoP_RIP

You think Ellison would has a snowball's chance in hell of being a serious Presidential candidate? American culture hasn't eroded that far yet.

there are so many reasons Elson had no chance whatever of being POTUS

his religion is way down the list

Eliison is a liar and not qualified

[Link: www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com...]

NEVER STOPPED A DEMOCRAT. ;-)

105 Eowyn2  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:15:06am

re: #15 Ringo the Gringo

OT - Muslim woman sues San Bernardino County
The suit alleges sheriff's deputies violated her rights by forcing her to remove her head covering when she was booked in 2005.

BUT, if they let her keep her scarf and she hung herself with it, there would be all kinds of lawsuits and protests.

I hope the cops dont capitulate.

106 Kirly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:15:28am

re: #63 Allah al Fubar

re: #59 storagemanager


Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

And who gave Moses the Commandments?

G-D. On a mountain top.

107 Eowyn2  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:16:52am

re: #26 tfc3rid

Eh, well, religion in America is sadly dwindling...

However, Mitt has to make a speech on this but this story caught my eye from yesterday from a now-fired Hillary staffer...
The outlandish e-mail claims, "The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!"

"Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim," goes the anonymous screed.

"THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED, 'ONE NATION UNDER GOD.' ALMIGHTY GOD, NOT THE GOD OF THE KORAN."


Do you suppose that is the dirty dark secret that the Hill campaign is keeping under wraps.

108 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:16:54am

Is this thread necessary?

/before we start after another religion, and no, I don't agree with it

109 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:17:19am

I have a freind who lives in Vegas, he tells me that Mormons make the best Poker dealers.

Clear-headed, honest to a fault and serious.

110 Allah al Fubar  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:17:37am

re: #92 Killgore Trout

That's the same guy that did the Mohammed Pig video. Of course, I can no longer find it because You Toob censored it.. after all, "we mustn't rile them".

111 Eowyn2  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:17:38am

re: #106 Kirly

re: #63 Allah al Fubar


re: #59 storagemanager

Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

And who gave Moses the Commandments?

G-D. On a mountain top.

no caves involved.
what's with the caves?

112 tfc3rid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:17:53am

re: #107 Eowyn2

You never know...

I just found that to be VERY interesting... Obviously, the staffer was fired...

113 RickZ  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:17:58am

re: #98 jcr

re: #82 RickZ

The Mormon church made a deal to drop polygamy for Utah's statehood, and they've kept their word. The polygamists are splinter groups that don't recognize the main Mormon church as legitimate.

-jcr

Yes, I agree, the Mormons were forced to renounce polygamy. But it still exists, and Mormons were my first lesson on the concept of polygamy when I was a kid. No offense, but that 'not recognizing the main Mormon church as legitimate' sounds vaguely familiar. Something about the 9/11 terrorists not being 'true' muslims. Jus' sayin'.

114 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:18:00am

re: #100 Occasional Reader

The Bible, as you are very well aware, is a compendium of myth, folklore, law, poetry, and philosophy, with bits of actual chronicles thrown in.

The Book of Mormon is...not.

I will not go further than that, because there are many Mormons on this board, they are thoroughly decent people, and it's not fair to bash their faith.

115 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:18:08am

re: #82 RickZ

Well, Mormons still have some holdovers who practive polygamy. Also, the US fought a war against the Mormons in Utah. So there are legitimate similarities between the two. Wasn't there also a murder or two about some fake 'historical' Mormon letters/documents some years ago? Seems to also fit in as 'a point worth making', i.e., murder for dissing a 'religion'.

Ahhh, the standard, boiler-plate, "Mormons are polygamists" argument. You do know that polygamy has been outlawed by the Mormon church for over a century, don't you? The polygamists may call themselves "real Mormons". I could call myself half-Martian. Doesn't make it so.

As for claiming there is a "legitimate reason" for lumping Mormons in with radical jihadis, well, I guess that just makes you awfully fucking stupid, doesn't it? You know the old saying, right? "Better to be thought of as an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".

116 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:18:10am

I won't vote Mitt...sorry.

117 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:19:04am

re: #106 Kirly
He "borrowed" them for the Babylonians...
Did Moses steal the Ten Commandments?

118 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:19:05am

re: #109 Ringo the Gringo

I have a freind who lives in Vegas, he tells me that Mormons make the best Poker dealers.

Clear-headed, honest to a fault and serious.

Those sound like good qualities to look for in a presidential candidate to me.

119 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:19:38am

re: #92 Killgore Trout

re: #74 FrogMarch



I think the answer is his Mormonism. Mormons are treated like dirt by the DNC/MSM. Because holy and precious all-knowing (yet entirely oblivious) DNC/MSMers control the media - we get heavy doses of left-wing religious bigotry.

Evangelicals aren't terribly friendly to Mormons either: 'Vote for Romney is vote for Satan'

That's the word from Bill Keller, host of the Florida-based Live Prayer TV program as well as LivePrayer.com.

"If you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for Satan!" he writes in his daily devotional to be sent out to 2.4 million e-mail subscribers tomorrow.
...
Keller also comes out swinging against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as a cult.

"This message today is not about Mitt Romney," he writes. "Romney is an unashamed and proud member of the Mormon cult founded by a murdering polygamist pedophile named Joseph Smith nearly 200 years ago. The teachings of the Mormon cult are doctrinally and theologically in complete opposition to the Absolute Truth of God's Word. There is no common ground. If Mormonism is true, then the Christian faith is a complete lie. There has never been any question from the moment Smith's cult began that it was a work of Satan and those who follow their false teachings will die and spend eternity in hell."

To be quite honest, some of us who are Christians (Catholic and Orthodox) aren't particulary enthused with evangelicals either.

120 RoP_RIP  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:19:38am

re: #107 Eowyn2

No.

121 littleO  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:19:44am

Romney's speech was solid. In this compressed primary time line no other candidate will be able to counter.
On the demo side you have " Ego" " Arrogance" and " Vanity.
Ladies and Gentlemen I would like to introduce the next president of the United States, Mr. Mitt Romney.

122 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:19:54am

re: #67 storagemanager

The Book of Mormon is supposed to be the account of people who came from the Middle-East to the Americas. It covers the period of about 600 B.C. to 400 A.D. It tells of the Jaredites, people from the Tower of Babel who came to central America but perished because of their own immorality. It also describes some Jews who fled persecution in Jerusalem and came to America led by a man called Nephi. The Jews divided into two groups known as the Nephites and Lamanites who fought each other. The Nephites were defeated in 428 A.D.
The Lamanites continued and are known as the American Indians. The Book of Mormon is supposed to be the account of the Nephite leader who was called Mormon as he wrote concerning their culture, civilization, and appearance of Jesus to the Americas.
Joseph Smith said "that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book" (History of the Church, Vol. 4, page 461).
The Book of Mormon is not of God

John 21; 25: And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be awritten every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the bbooks that should be written. Amen.

Not of God?

123 I_Invented_Al_Gore  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:20:00am

#7 lawhawk

You would think that JFK ended the line of questioning about religion more than 40 years ago.

Exactly my thoughts when I heard clips on radio news this a.m. I was wondering when he was going to mention Kennedy.

Now that I see the video, I'm wondering: do you think Romney had enough flags?

124 Eowyn2  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:20:08am

re: #103 Dianna

re: #87 RoP_RIP

If you're curious, you might read the Book of Mormon. I'd suggest trying to find one of the earliest editions, because they've been tossing things out as they go along.

Well, other than the violence, the meteor and the whole burka burka thing, that is a major difference between islam and the LDS church. The LDS church revises itself on the little things (like bigamy.)

125 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:20:41am

re: #116 storagemanager

I won't vote Mitt...sorry.

/let's refrain from piling on

126 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:20:43am

re: #110 Allah al Fubar

Yeah, it's the same guy. I consider him another unsavory bigot climbing on the antiJihad bandwagon.

127 RickZ  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:21:45am

re: #115 Lizard by the Bay

As for claiming there is a "legitimate reason" for lumping Mormons in with radical jihadis, well, I guess that just makes you awfully fucking stupid, doesn't it? You know the old saying, right? "Better to be thought of as an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".

Thanks for that. You're too kind. But I guess that's your version of 'boiler-plate'.

128 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:22:04am

re: #51 tfc3rid

You know, when you examine what they finally let out regarding the Israeli incursion into Syria recently, and the fact that quite a few players who would normally be bitching up a storm were stone silent, I can believe we may be moving pieces on a chess board.

129 Eowyn2  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:22:59am

re: #112 tfc3rid

Fired? with full benefits?
Monica L was fired or quit as well. Then she had to join the other underpaid, overworked college kids. Wonder if this staffer is getting ready for her/his new position as legal assistant at the Clinton Library.

130 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:23:15am

Off to Staples.

BBL

131 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:23:48am

re: #119 Honorary Yooper

I have no problem with theological debates or differences in interpretation but once it degrades to vilification,name calling, and and bigotry it's gone too far.

132 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:23:49am

re: #122 Oh no...Sand People!
The book of Mormon claims to add to the Bible...Revelation 22
18I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

20He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon."
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

21The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God's people. Amen.

133 Allah al Fubar  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:23:57am

re: #67 storagemanager


All hail.

134 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:24:02am

Much like Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney can't win a traditional southern State in a general election.

/let's just leave it at that

135 littleO  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:24:41am

re: #87 RoP_RIP

Wasn't a letter found, some years ago, where Joseph Smith confided to a friend that the angel story was a lie. Isn't that the end of the story.

136 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:25:18am

re: #31 elBarto

If the mormoms believed in teh violent overthrow of the consitution i would question that. islam is the joining of religion and politics.

That's not true. If anything Islam is religious rule in the absence of politics.

137 Eowyn2  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:25:32am

re: #123 I_Invented_Al_Gore
he needed one more centralized

138 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:26:25am

re: #124 Eowyn2

It was the late 70's before they dumped the doctrinal passages that claimed that blacks were inferior. After poor Donny and Marie Osmond were subjected to a "gotcha" interview, as I recall, that drew attention to it.

It's interesting.

139 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:26:28am

re: #132 storagemanager

re: #122 Oh no...Sand People!
The book of Mormon claims to add to the Bible...Revelation 22
18I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

20He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon."
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

21The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God's people. Amen.

You are smarter than that...The Apocalypse of John was written before the GOSPEL OF JOHN...please look over commensense chronology. In an earlier thread I did err in saying that the Apolalypse of John was written before all 4 gospels, in that I was wrong it is St. John.

I know..let's go to Deuteronomy where Moses says the SAME THING...bye bye 3/4's of the Holy writ...oops.

140 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:26:31am

re: #134 Killian Bundy

Much like Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney can't win a traditional southern State in a general election.

What if Mitt was running against Hillary?...Somebody would have to win.

141 EvilDave3  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:26:42am

Mitt has two problems (on the Right and the Left).

On the Right you have evangelicals who view Mormons as heretics following the Devil. These people really dis-like and some even hate Mormonism. I know when I was growing up on the East Coast this was my only experience of Mormonism. I thought it was a bit over the top even as a kid, but I thought that about many of the things the more adamant people in my church believed.

On the Left, most of them hate Christ. I mean HATE! The Left is filled with people that believe Atheism should be the state religion and (I don't know how but they do) that the 1st Amendment dictates that Atheism should be the state religion. I have had discussions with these types where they tell me all the Founders were atheists. These are the type of people that cheer every time a kid is molested by a priest.

Neither of these people are going to vote for Mitt. The Left will vote against him. The Right will refuse to vote at all (because that is what pissed off people on The Right do, they foolishly withhold a vote, as if that isn't effectively voting for a Dem)

Nothing Mitt (or anyone else) can do will change these people's minds.

142 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:27:38am

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

The threshold for my vote.

143 Cap'n DOC  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:27:58am

re: #62 Lizard by the Bay

Storagemanager's observation is a fairly transparent one. Is there a problem with stating it the way he did, or is it the fact he stated it that rubs you the wrong way? Just askin'.

144 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:28:03am

re: #140 Ringo the Gringo

What if Mitt was running against Hillary?...Somebody would have to win.

Perhaps it's our chance to test the question, "What if an election was held and nobody came?"

145 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:28:42am

re: #139 Oh no...Sand People! I will post no more on this...but...I will not vote Mitt...again sorry.

146 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:28:44am

I'm trying to throttle my urge to make popcorn for this thread.

147 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:28:52am

re: #135 littleO

I think that was a forgery? I'm not sure of that, btw.

148 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:29:14am

re: #84 storagemanager

Brigham Young said. . . "But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong." (Brigham Young, "Journal of Discourses," Vol. 2, page 171. - 1855)

John Taylor said . . .

"We talk about Christianity, but it is a perfect pack of nonsense...Myself and hundreds of the Elders around me have seen its pomp, parade, and glory; and what is it? It is a sounding brass and a tinkling symbol; it is as corrupt as hell; and the Devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century."( Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, page 167 - 1858)

"Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom." (J.D.", Vol. 10, page 127. - 1863

Context would be nice. All quotes refer to how Christianity was practiced by the different sects and the need for a restoration of the complete gospel of Christ. (You don't have to like it, it just that we believe the true gospel and the priesthood authority was lost sometime after Christ's atonement).

We, I am LDS, believe in Christ as our Savior, our interlocutor with God, our teacher and our perfect example. We talk of Christ, teach his doctrines, read his word, attempt to follow his teachings... I could care less if you think I am Christian, I worry about what God thinks. We do not adhere to the Nicean creed's definition of God (God the Father Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as one), for that we are branded as non-Christian (false, but hey you will define who is Christian anyway you want) and polytheistic (true, but not in the Zeus, Mars, Hera type of way).

I don't want to engage in a huge discussion, but I can't let selective quoting go unanswered. If you doubt our Christianity, come to our church and here us talk of Christ, read our tracts, heck ask any dopey kid on a bike wearing a white shirt and name tag. You certainly do not have to agree or believe like us, but get it right.

149 jcr  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:29:31am

re: #113 RickZ


Yes, I agree, the Mormons were forced to renounce polygamy.

I wouldn't say "forced". They cut a deal.

-jcr

150 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:29:55am

re: #141 EvilDave3

Mitt has two problems (on the Right and the Left).

On the Right you have evangelicals who view Mormons as heretics following the Devil. These people really dis-like and some even hate Mormonism. I know when I was growing up on the East Coast this was my only experience of Mormonism. I thought it was a bit over the top even as a kid, but I thought that about many of the things the more adamant people in my church believed.

On the Left, most of them hate Christ. I mean HATE! The Left is filled with people that believe Atheism should be the state religion and (I don't know how but they do) that the 1st Amendment dictates that Atheism should be the state religion. I have had discussions with these types where they tell me all the Founders were atheists. These are the type of people that cheer every time a kid is molested by a priest.

Neither of these people are going to vote for Mitt. The Left will vote against him. The Right will refuse to vote at all (because that is what pissed off people on The Right do, they foolishly withhold a vote, as if that isn't effectively voting for a Dem)

Nothing Mitt (or anyone else) can do will change these people's minds.

We take away good paying customers...the money train hates that. If you could make up a business in where you got paid money for talking good rhetoric in appeasing people to make them feel good and be TAX EXEMPT...dang rights I would be a pastor. But I am Mormon, therefore, devote a lot of my time for FREE to what I believe...

151 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:30:47am

re: #140 Ringo the Gringo

What if Mitt was running against Hillary?...Somebody would have to win.

What if Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are the respective nominees?

/slightly less likely

152 tfc3rid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:30:48am

re: #132 storagemanager

For some who take Revelation literally, then yes, I can see it... but I see the Book of Revelation as one regarding those who were being Martyred for the beliefs and not necessarily regarding the end times...

153 Cap'n DOC  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:31:58am

re: #122 Oh no...Sand People!

You have to get a bit deeper into the LDS theology to understand why "Our Father who art in Heaven" is a stretch coming from them (albeit true to the words), but did you know that the father had a father? And he before him? Ad infinitum? Just sayin'.

154 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:32:13am

re: #146 Occasional Reader

Hey, I'm a pagan intellectual. I've read most scriptures and the material around them. I like theology. Can I share your bowl? I'll supply some butter.

155 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:32:54am
156 Arthur McGowan  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:33:32am

re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

Ron Paul is a Catholic.

157 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:33:45am

re: #82 RickZ

Wasn't there also a murder or two about
some fake 'historical' Mormon letters/documents some years ago? Seems
to also fit in as 'a point worth making', i.e., murder for dissing a
'religion'.

You're thinking of Mark Hoffman, a brilliant forger & a disaffected Mormon, whose greatest forgeries involved attempting to unfavorablly rewrite Mormon history. He murdered two people in an attempt to cver up his forgeries. The story would make a great movie.

158 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:34:11am

Sorry...I didn't mean to offend...I should have put more thought...before posting.

159 father_of_10  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:34:23am

re: #59 storagemanager

Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

Cite your sources. I think you're a bit . . . off.

160 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:34:53am

re: #143 Cap'n DOC

Storagemanager's observation is a fairly transparent one. Is there a problem with stating it the way he did, or is it the fact he stated it that rubs you the wrong way? Just askin'.

I was raised around Mormons. Had a Mormon best friend for much of my life. I even had Mormons in my family for a time (a divorce has made this not true now). There isn't one of them who I wouldn't trust because of their faith. They are good people, and while their beliefs may seem odd to some, there is nothing dangerous about them.

So yes, I will get pissed off when some intolerant troglodyte here tries to equate them with the enemy of all Judeo-Christian society. And yes, storagemanager and RickZ, I am talking about you.

161 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:36:29am

re: #160 Lizard by the Bay
Your a bit late...by the way...I didn't call anyone names.

162 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:36:35am

#102 loppyd:

instituted a program where state troopers were allowed to inquire as to a person's immigration status

Not sure what that accomplishes, actually... "are you here illegally?" No. "Ah... well, then, carry on."

#154 Dianna:

Can I share your bowl? I'll supply some butter.

EEEK! TRANS FATS! CRUCIFY HER! CRUCIFY HER!

163 RoP_RIP  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:36:44am

re: #135 littleO

re: #87 RoP_RIP

Wasn't a letter found, some years ago, where Joseph Smith confided to a friend that the angel story was a lie. Isn't that the end of the story.

I have no idea. I'm mostly commenting to offset the inane arguments put forth by some around here that Romney's faith isn't an issue for many voters. Or the proclamations that they are bigots for not accepting all beliefs for any reason, for any office in a position of power over our lives.

I'd love to hear those same masters of PC advocate "religion X" in their arguments for Romney.

Romney made the calculation that out of all the positions he will change if politically expedient, his church wasn't one that would be accepted by the public.

He referenced that decision in his speech? His underwear are showing.

164 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:36:49am

re: #145 storagemanager

re: #139 Oh no...Sand People! I will post no more on this...but...I will not vote Mitt...again sorry.

Don't get me wrong, vote how you want, no big deal, it's just so many talking points about Mormonism are so flawed it cracks me up. If people have the agency to make assertions about my faith, I have the agency to have a civilized discussion on why those assertions are valid or not.

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. We believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

You are all big boys and girls. If you really want to know what we believe go to the source and read the Book of Mormon and read your Bible, Old and New Testaments, or read your Bible, Old and New Testaments, and THEN the Book of Mormon...doesn't matter the order...they work together.

165 Kirly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:10am

re: #113 RickZ

re: #98 jcr


re: #82 RickZ

The Mormon church made a deal to drop polygamy for Utah's statehood, and they've kept their word. The polygamists are splinter groups that don't recognize the main Mormon church as legitimate.

-jcr


Yes, I agree, the Mormons were forced to renounce polygamy. But it still exists, and Mormons were my first lesson on the concept of polygamy when I was a kid. No offense, but that 'not recognizing the main Mormon church as legitimate' sounds vaguely familiar. Something about the 9/11 terrorists not being 'true' muslims. Jus' sayin'.

But, the converse is also true. The LDS does not recognize the FLDS - the splinter group that practices polygamy in southern Utah and northern AZ.

166 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:10am

Actually... #154 Dianna:

Hey, I'm a pagan intellectual.

What do you mean by "pagan"?

167 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:13am

re: #97 Adrenalyn

does Mitt mention that according to Mormonism
he gets his own planet when he dies
and gets to summon not only his wife for the afterlife/afterparty
he also gets to summon other women as well

kinda sounds like the 72 virgins
except in Mormonism the number is limitless
not just 72

yeah Mitt, once the true Mormon stuff creeps out in the press
your campaign is cooked

All the above is a complete distortion. Entrance into heaven of a woman is hers alone to gain or lose.

I have never heard anything remotely like 72 virgins taught in church.

You blithely call life after death for us an 'afterparty'. Where did that come from, it is inaccurate beyond belief.

I don't know if you consider yourself Christian, but lies and distortion do not generally fit into any Christian creed (even Mormonism!) BTW, if the planet thing is true, make mine filled with Tahiti's!

168 RickZ  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:27am

re: #160 Lizard by the Bay

So yes, I will get pissed off when some intolerant troglodyte here tries to equate them with the enemy of all Judeo-Christian society. And yes, storagemanager and RickZ, I am talking about you.

Go fuck yourself. That's my 'boiler-plate' for you.

169 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:29am

re: #159 father_of_10

Somebody was linking to an article the other day claiming that atheists and Islamists are ideological bedfellows. At some point to just have to shrug these things off.

170 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:29am

re: #158 storagemanager

Sorry...I didn't mean to offend...I should have put more thought...before posting.

/ Islam. Mormonism, what's the difference?

171 I_Invented_Al_Gore  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:46am

re: #141 EvilDave3

On the Right you have evangelicals who view Mormons as heretics following the Devil. These people really dis-like and some even hate Mormonism. I know when I was growing up on the East Coast this was my only experience of Mormonism. I thought it was a bit over the top even as a kid, but I thought that about many of the things the more adamant people in my church believed.

As an evangelical, I'd say there's a difference between thinking someone else's theology is wrong, and disliking those persons holding that theology. I do think there are significant differences between Mormonism and most kinds of Protestants--and Catholics, too, for that matter.

But there's got to be a difference between "I wouldn't go to his church" and "I wouldn't vote for him." As a voter, what I care about is where a candidate stands on the issues I care about. One of those issues is terrorism.

I have no issues with Romney, and am seriously considering him.

172 snowman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:55am

Candidates should not be rejected from running because of their faith, but that deesn't mean my personal decision process should not include concerns about how that colors his actions. My concern with Romney as a self-proclaimed devoted Mormon, is twofold.

1. If he understands and believes the historically false, illogical and cultish doctrine of Joe Smith, then I fault him for being deceptive, or not very smart. He doesn't strike me as stupid.

2. If he doesn't really know the history and teachings of his religion and is just a pew-warmer, then I fault him for being unwilling to dig into the roots of his belief system...Not really somebody I want for president.

Although I appreciate many of his positions, I just have a queasy feeling about him. Bottom line, if he gets the GOP nomination, he gets my vote. But I won't support him over Rudy or Huck.

173 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:37:58am

re: #148 coquimbojoe

Oh, dear!

We do not adhere to the Nicean creed's definition of God (God the Father Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as one), for that we are branded as non-Christian (false, but hey you will define who is Christian anyway you want) and polytheistic (true, but not in the Zeus, Mars, Hera type of way).

Your doctrine is vaguely Arian on the Trinity, but that's not enough to eject you from Christianity (though it is problematic for some of the stricter Trinitarians). The problem is this bit:

it just that we believe the true gospel and the priesthood authority was lost sometime after Christ's atonement

That's where the Christian churches are going to choke.

174 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:38:33am

A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith

I disagree. I would not want a muslim, an agnostic, an atheist, a satanist, or an environmentalist running the USA. Sorry. Just wouldn't.

I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs.

and yet they will not influence his decisions as President?

There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance.

Tolerance is good only if the thing being tolerated is good, or of no consequence. Some people, in their desire to promote "tolerance", would easily tolerate anything and everything. In my house, " tolerance" is a four letter word.

I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God.
Scary.

"We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong.

I totally agree.

And the rest of the speech after this was very good. I was hoping however, that he would share with us the Mormon plan for becoming a god, and some of the other interesting Mormon beliefs.

All my disagreements with him though, wouldn't keep me from voting for him if I had to do it to defeat a democrat.

But he convinced me more than before that I'd rather have Hunter, Thompson or Fred if I have the choice. If I don't...well, Mr. Romney will et my vote...I'll ask for forgivness later.

175 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:38:41am

re: #95 Shiplord Kirel

The loathesome lawyer cult known as Westboro Baptist Church has produced its own music video!

Not only that, it is actually pretty good, a very funny send-up of the moonbat classic We are the World.
God Hates the World

Can that please qualify as a hate crime?
Not that I believe in such a PC constructs such as hate crimes, but since they got on the books any way, this would be a perfect bunch of people to use it on.

176 Q-Burn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:39:26am

re: #123 I_Invented_Al_Gore


Now that I see the video, I'm wondering: do you think Romney had enough flags?

I was wondering the same thing... only 10? I'm thinking he's soft on patriotism...

Seriously, Romney's Mormonism does not bother me. He seems to have a good track record as a governor. He also seems excessively slick and chameleon-like. I need to know more. Like... what's up with the magic underwear?

177 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:39:40am

re: #156 Arthur McGowan

No, he's not. He's a Baptist.

I'm not sure of which convention, though.

178 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:39:41am

re: #100 Occasional Reader

re: #83 Dianna


re: #67 storagemanager

Quite aside from "of God" or not, it's truly dreadful, from an archaeological or historical standpoint.


The Bible isn't exactly peer-reviewed, 100% rock-solid research in those areas, either.

No, it's not. It wasn't meant to be historical or archaeological either. When the Church fathers got together at the various Church councils in the 4th Century, they chose which books they thought should be in the Bible, and which ones they thought should not. That's why we have the four Gospels we do, and we don't have the Gospel of Thomas.

Later on, the protestants removed some of the books called the Apocrypha. These books are stiil used by the Orthodox and the Catholics.

179 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:39:46am

re: #151 Killian Bundy

re: #140 Ringo the Gringo


What if Mitt was running against Hillary?...Somebody would have to win.

What if Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are the respective nominees?

/slightly less likely

It would never happen, but say it did...I guess I would vote for Ron Paul, at least with Paul I'd get a tax cut.

On the other hand, Romney vs Clinton is quite possible.

180 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:40:49am

re: #168 RickZ

Go fuck yourself. That's my 'boiler-plate' for you.

Oh no. Some intolerant fuck doesn't like me. Whatever will I do?

181 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:41:21am

re: #157 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

re: #82 RickZ

Wasn't there also a murder or two about
some fake 'historical' Mormon letters/documents some years ago? Seems
to also fit in as 'a point worth making', i.e., murder for dissing a
'religion'.

You're thinking of Mark Hoffman, a brilliant forger & a disaffected Mormon, whose greatest forgeries involved attempting to unfavorablly rewrite Mormon history. He murdered two people in an attempt to cver up his forgeries. The story would make a great movie.

Mark Hoffman was the bomber, he was also the forger. The Church bought the documents and made them public even though they were very difficult to square up with our teachings. The leaders of the Church got duped into buying a false document, but to their credit immediately made it available for historical study. There was no cover up from the Church.

182 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:41:46am

re: #170 Killian Bundy

re: #158 storagemanager

Sorry...I didn't mean to offend...I should have put more thought...before posting.

/ Islam. Mormonism, what's the difference?

Please. Huge freaking difference.

183 Cap'n DOC  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:42:06am

re: #160 Lizard by the Bay

My background is much akin to yours. I draw the line at criticizing religion (except for mohammedanism) because everyone is entitled to believe as they will. Their 'family values' are worthy of respect in a society that seems to be getting farther and farther away from that perspective.

184 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:42:26am

re: #166 Occasional Reader

In so far as I'm willing to discuss it, I'm a believer in the Roman gods as an intellectualized abstraction.

You can think of me, if you like, as a philosophical deist with anthropomorphic tendencies.

I do not worship fuzzy bunnies, or the earth, or any modern silliness, and I reject the notion of an immanent deity.

That's as much as I'm willing to say.

185 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:42:49am

re: #182 coquimbojoe

re: #170 Killian Bundy

re: #158 storagemanager

Sorry...I didn't mean to offend...I should have put more thought...before posting.

/ Islam. Mormonism, what's the difference?

Please. Huge freaking difference.

Not to some jerk-offs here.

186 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:43:06am

Play nice people.

187 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:43:14am

re: #156 Arthur McGowan

re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

Ron Paul is a Catholic.

Seriously? Or are you just baiting the Paulians lurking about?

188 Glackinspeil  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:44:42am

Update on my class final:
This past Tuesday, as some of you know, I presented my final project in the graduate philosophy course entitled, "Religion and Violence". Naturally, the syllabus was designed to focus of the evils of the West (crusades, manifest destiny, WWI, II, vietnam, iraq, civil war, slavery, etc.). I had a surprise, however. The thesis for my final presentation, "Fundamental Islam is a threat to American Way of Life". I actually refined my thesis dow from "Islam in Inherently Violent". I did not however, sugar-coat the contents. I in 35 minutes, I gave a brief overview of Mo's life, history of conquests, explanation of abrogation and it's significance in regards to violence. And reasons why everyone should be aware. Situation in europe, treatment of women, etc., etc. I finished with a video of Gaza Kindergarten Graduation. You could have heard the crickets chirping. My goal was to convince them to spend some time and research islam themselves. Hopefully there is at least one less potential dhimmi in that class.
I know I made an impact because another student (a Jewish girl who was going to prove that it was only a tiny minority of islamic extremists) declined to present and turned her project in in writing only. Said she did not feel well.
The professor was not extremely pleased, but he said my organization and presentation was excellent. Some things are more important that grades.

189 Brain-Washed Sheeple  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:45:34am

This thread makes me sad. Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it's a pity that people here choose to focus on his faith rather than his substance. I would've thought that, on LGF at least, we would be above the "I can't vote for a Mormon" meme. It really is sad to see a good candidate and a great faith trampled underfoot because some may not be as receptive to the message of a loving father or the idea of a man who holds good, decent Christian values in the White House. Apparently, religious bigotry isn't relegated to the left anymore, at least when a Mormon (gasp) is involved.

190 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:45:48am

re: #184 Dianna

I do not worship fuzzy bunnies

Why not? They're cute.

191 littleO  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:46:19am

re: #156 Arthur McGowan

re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

Ron Paul is a Catholic.

yeah, right there's a lot of so called catholics out there. There's alot of so called Catholic voters out there to. Neither spend much time in church.
Remember the argument in the media about whether communion should be given to politicians who support abortion or are divorced and remaried. Well, If these politicians were serious Catholics they wouldn't go to communion under those circumstances.

192 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:46:31am

re: #187 Dotcoman

re: #156 Arthur McGowan


re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

Ron Paul is a Catholic.


Seriously? Or are you just baiting the Paulians lurking about?

He's baiting. Check out my #40. Ron Paul is a Baptist.

193 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:46:54am

re: #114 Dianna

re: #100 Occasional Reader

The Bible, as you are very well aware, is a compendium of myth, folklore, law, poetry, and philosophy, with bits of actual chronicles thrown in.

The Book of Mormon is...not.

I will not go further than that, because there are many Mormons on this board, they are thoroughly decent people, and it's not fair to bash their faith.


But is IS fair for YOU to bash MINE?

huh. nice one.

194 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:47:07am

re: #179 Ringo the Gringo

It would never happen, but say it did...

And what if the Confederates had a B-52? They had kerosene but what about a flight crew?

/mark my words, Clinton will never oppose Romney in the 2008 general election

195 cygnus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:47:07am

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

196 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:47:16am

re: #184 Dianna

In so far as I'm willing to discuss it, I'm a believer in the Roman gods as an intellectualized abstraction.
...
That's as much as I'm willing to say.


That's unfortunate, I'd love to hear more. Which Roman era? Mithra or Zeus?

197 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:47:32am

re: #183 Cap'n DOC

Amen! And thank you for bringing up what it's really all about. One of my favorite South Park episodes is the one called "All About Mormons". Not because it appears to ridicule Mormonism by being literal about it, but for the ending.

The Mormon kid says, "Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up, but I have a great life. and a great family, and I have the Book of Mormon to thank for that. The truth is, I don't care if Joseph Smith made it all up, because what the church teaches now is loving your family, being nice and helping people. And even though people in this town might think that's stupid, I still choose to believe in it. All I ever did was try to be your friend, Stan, but you're so high and mighty you couldn't look past my religion and just be my friend back. You've got a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck my balls."

A beautiful ending, and it says everything about the Mormons better and more eloquently than I ever could.

198 maddogg  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:47:57am

I don't really give a rat's rump about Romney's religion; as long as it isn't Islam, and he doesn't have his thumb stuck out for the next passing comet, or Carry's Kool-aid around in his briefcase and starts building a compound in a South America jungle.

199 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:47:58am

re: #176 Q-Burn

re: #123 I_Invented_Al_Gore


Now that I see the video, I'm wondering: do you think Romney had enough flags?

I was wondering the same thing... only 10? I'm thinking he's soft on patriotism...

Seriously, Romney's Mormonism does not bother me. He seems to have a good track record as a governor. He also seems excessively slick and chameleon-like. I need to know more. Like... what's up with the magic underwear?

Great question about the flags, but do you always ask men about their underwear?

/ WE mormons who have been through the temple wear temple garment. They are a personal and private symbol to us of the covenants we have made with God at Baptism and in the temple. They serve as a personal reminder of this on a daily basis. Practically speaking they help enforce modesty. The underwear is hardly magic, it does produce some giant wedgies occasioinally. In our minds, it is not much different than the clerical collars or frocks worn by many priests and pastors, prayer shawls (?) by Hasidic Jews, or underwear by Sikhs. It is a personal reminder of our commitments. If it could make me look 30 pounds lighter, it would be 'magic'!

200 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:48:58am

re: #185 Lizard by the Bay

re: #182 coquimbojoe

re: #170 Killian Bundy

re: #158 storagemanager

Sorry...I didn't mean to offend...I should have put more thought...before posting.

/ Islam. Mormonism, what's the difference?

Please. Huge freaking difference.

Not to some jerk-offs here.

I like most of those 'jerk-offs', I just wish they were better informed...

201 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:49:36am

re: #189 Brain-Washed Sheeple

It shouldn't be a surprise to you but don't let it get you down. People denigrate atheism here all the time and I get along just fine.

202 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:49:40am

re: #182 coquimbojoe

Right.

/but the question wasn't directed at you

203 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:50:03am

Dianna:

Jupiter.

Fuzzy bunnies.

Which is cuter? It ain't even close. You're worshipping the wrong entities.

204 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:50:44am

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

FYI: These are not true. The rest, yes.

Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.

205 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:51:17am

re: #194 Killian Bundy

/mark my words, Clinton will never oppose Romney in the 2008 general election

Words marked.

206 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:51:30am

re: #190 Occasional Reader

So are kittens and puppies; in fact, I could use a puppy-cuddling fix right now. But they are not God, and I do not worship them.

207 EC Marm  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:51:52am

re: #156 Arthur McGowan

re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

Ron Paul is a Catholic.


According to WIKI Ron Paul is a Baptist.

208 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:52:24am

re: #202 Killian Bundy

re: #182 coquimbojoe

Right.

/but the question wasn't directed at you

Thanks for the clarification!

209 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:53:13am

re: #193 Owl

I'm not bashing your faith to note how the Bible was composed.

210 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:53:17am

re: #207 EC Marm

According to WIKI Ron Paul is a Baptist.


No surprise there.

211 Brain-Washed Sheeple  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:54:07am

re: #201 Killgore Trout

And you know what the best part of that is? One of the 13 main tenets of our faith is that we "claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

But WE'RE the intolerant ones. I have plenty of Atheist friends... the head of our College Republicans is even Atheist, but I hold nothing against him or them... if only we were afforded the same luxury.

212 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:54:15am

re: #207 EC Marm


According to WIKI Ron Paul is a Baptist.

Well he sure looks like a Catholic.

213 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:54:59am

re: #184 Dianna

re: #166 Occasional Reader

In so far as I'm willing to discuss it, I'm a believer in the Roman gods as an intellectualized abstraction.

You can think of me, if you like, as a philosophical deist with anthropomorphic tendencies.

I do not worship fuzzy bunnies, or the earth, or any modern silliness, and I reject the notion of an immanent deity.

That's as much as I'm willing to say.

So far I'm just thinking of you as a major jerk.

214 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:55:03am

re: #196 Killgore Trout

I'm sorry, but the subject is closed.

215 DistantThunder  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:55:16am

re: #40 Honorary Yooper

I posted this in the dead thread, but it is relevant here:

#660 Honorary Yooper 12/06/07 8:16:30 am reply quote report 0

I have a really stupid sounding question (at least stupid for those in our media):

Why does Mitt Romney's religion matter? (Latter Day Saints)

How about Barak Hussein Obama's religion and his father's religion? (United Church of Christ / Islam)
How about Mike Huckabee's religion? (Southern Baptist)
Or, for that matter, Hillary Clinton's religion? (United Methodist)
What about John Edwards's religion? (United Methodist)
Or, Bill Richardson's religion? (Roman Catholic)
Or, Rudy Guiliani's religion? (Roman Catholic)
Dare I ask about Fred!'s religion? (Church of Christ)
Or, for the coup de gras, Ron Paul's religion? (Baptist)
(Gotta include Ron Paul in here or the Paulians will scream.)

Why does Romney get scrutiny when the others do not?
Do I sense bias in the MSM?

It's not only bias in the MSM. With the growth of the LDS church, the evangelists became alarmed that they were losing members to the Mormons. And that matters a great deal, because every evangelical church is supported by it's congregation, whereas, there are no paid ministers in the LDS church - in every chapel, everyone is a volunteer, including the bishop (pastor). Therefore, it became a matter of survival for the evangelicals to inoculate their members against learning about or joining the LDS church.

216 Maine's Michael  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:55:22am

If I found a book buried in the dirt in Vermont, that told me I could have several wives . . .

217 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:55:23am

re: #189 Brain-Washed Sheeple

This thread makes me sad. Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it's a pity that people here choose to focus on his faith rather than his substance. I would've thought that, on LGF at least, we would be above the "I can't vote for a Mormon" meme. It really is sad to see a good candidate and a great faith trampled underfoot because some may not be as receptive to the message of a loving father or the idea of a man who holds good, decent Christian values in the White House. Apparently, religious bigotry isn't relegated to the left anymore, at least when a Mormon (gasp) is involved.

Not just Mormons. They do this crap to Catholics and Orthodox too. Hell, according to some, I'm not even a real Christian for being a Catholic.

218 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:55:35am

re: #153 Cap'n DOC

re: #122 Oh no...Sand People!

You have to get a bit deeper into the LDS theology to understand why "Our Father who art in Heaven" is a stretch coming from them (albeit true to the words), but did you know that the father had a father? And he before him? Ad infinitum? Just sayin'.

I don't and will not deny our belief. Here are some intracacies of our faith for those who care...if not...feel free to move along.

***CAUTION SOUL PROTECTION REQUIRED. Heh.***

1. We believe that we are Children of God. Spiritually, direct descendants. Physically, through the lineage of Adam and Eve.

2. Therefore we are all Spirit Brothers and Sisters, literally. Physically when we all trace our lineage back to Adam. (We do are best to treat everyone as such...but sometimes I can be a jerk...sorry all.)

3. There was a giant meeting where we all were before we came to Earth on how we could take the next step in our 'progression'. An Earth was to be formed and peopled. Therefore we could get a body. God the Father had a body, (we believe resurrected beings have perfected bodies..."Flesh and bone as ye see me have..." and we did not have bodies at the time, being Spirit Children. (But the BIBLE in GENESIS 1:1 SAYS 'IN THE BEGINNING!' Click here to check out the Mormon take on Genesis. Paragraph 16 for those who don't want to read the whole thing.)

4. Adam and Eve were put on the Earth to start to process of 'multiplying' for us to get our bodies. Here we are.

5. According to our theology, the same process we are going through to get a body, is the same one God the Father went through...hence, he has a Father, who has a Father...

Just something to chew on.

219 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:55:39am

re: #212 Ringo the Gringo

re: #207 EC Marm


According to WIKI Ron Paul is a Baptist.

Well he sure looks like a Catholic.


What do Catholic's look like?

220 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:56:06am

Out for a bit; I must pretend to work so they can pretend to pay me.

221 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:56:07am

I believe that Wiki used to refer to Bush as a born-again Evangelical for years, when in fact the man has been Methodist ever since his marriage to Laura. Don't trust Wiki. Or perhaps, Trust wiki, but verify.

222 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:56:07am

Me?...I'm a bad Catholic.

223 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:56:57am

re: #219 storagemanager

What do Catholic's look like?

Ron Paul.

224 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:57:20am
225 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:58:05am

re: #223 Ringo the Gringo

re: #219 storagemanager


What do Catholic's look like?

Ron Paul.


funny...my sister n' law doesn't look like Ron Paul.

226 EC Marm  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:58:12am

re: #221 Lizard by the Bay

[Link: pewforum.org...]
Second source - Baptist.

227 cygnus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:58:20am

re: #95 Shiplord Kirel

The loathesome lawyer cult known as Westboro Baptist Church has produced its own music video!

Not only that, it is actually pretty good, a very funny send-up of the moonbat classic We are the World.
God Hates the World

My reply to Phelps:
John 3:16
Romans 5:8
I John 5:11-12
Also, please go away somewhere where we will never hear from you again. You're an embarrassment to Americans in general and true believers in particular. And take your brainwashed, interbred 'church' with you.
Pretty good singing, by the way. What a total waste of talent!

228 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:58:24am

Religion is as Religion does.

/'nuff said

229 Maine's Michael  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:58:36am

re: #218 Oh no...Sand People!

I've heard that theory.

Isn't that what the movie "Mission to Mars" was all about?

Seriously.

230 Q-Burn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:58:44am

re: #199 coquimbojoe

Thanks! Always learning something new around here...

231 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:59:15am

re: #224 buzzsawmonkey

A bad Catholic, or a naughty Catholic?

Just bad...The naughty Catholics are really bad.

232 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:59:20am

Ron Paul looks a bit like Marshall Applewhite to me.

233 Boston Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:59:38am

Reason is man's means of survival. Faith is its antithesis. The Founding Fathers were Diests, not devout religionists, who invoked god's name only because mankind had not yet reached the philosophical sophistication to express axioms any differently.

The justification for freedom, liberty, private property and individual rights are found through reason, not through the notion that the universe is haunted.

234 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:59:58am

re: #224 buzzsawmonkey

A bad Catholic, or a naughty Catholic?

You maybe a naughty Catholic if:

-The priest has to interrupt your Confession in order to take a cold shower

235 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:00:20am

re: #225 storagemanager


funny...my sister n' law doesn't look like Ron Paul.

Have you seen her without makeup?

236 father_of_10  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:00:24am

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

I swear, you and RickZ, storagemanager and snowman must be cut from the same cloth. Are you sure your are on the right website? This is Little Green Footballs, not "I hate Mormons dot com". You need to take your lies and hate elsewhere.

Let me be a bit clearer: You are an IDIOT. You are STUPID. You are either a liar or a MORON.

Is that clear?

Now, to make things better for all of mankind, please go back to KOS and the liberals, you will do the world a favor by being there and not here.

237 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:00:41am

re: #235 Ringo the Gringo

re: #225 storagemanager



funny...my sister n' law doesn't look like Ron Paul.

Have you seen her without makeup?


lol

238 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:01:02am

re: #234 Occasional Reader

re: #224 buzzsawmonkey


A bad Catholic, or a naughty Catholic?

You maybe a naughty Catholic if:

-The priest has to interrupt your Confession in order to take a cold shower

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! LOL!

That must be some confession! :-)

239 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:01:27am
240 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:01:38am

So long people.

Play nice.

241 EC Marm  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:01:44am

re: #212 Ringo the Gringo

re: #207 EC Marm

According to WIKI Ron Paul is a Baptist.

Well he sure looks like a Catholic.


I don't agree. I can picture Ron Paul on the side of some Appalachian mountain, inside of a one room Church, eyes rolled back, serpent weaving up and down his arm as he speaks in tongues.

242 csdeven  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:02:32am

re: #59 storagemanager

Mohammad saw an angel in a cave... Joseph Smith saw an angel in a cave...The angel gave Mohammad the Koran...the angel gave Joseph Smith the book of Morman...Just saying.

Early Christians held that Jesus was born in a cave.

Just sayin'

243 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:02:33am

re: #189 Brain-Washed Sheeple

This thread makes me sad. Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it's a pity that people here choose to focus on his faith rather than his substance. I would've thought that, on LGF at least, we would be above the "I can't vote for a Mormon" meme. It really is sad to see a good candidate and a great faith trampled underfoot because some may not be as receptive to the message of a loving father or the idea of a man who holds good, decent Christian values in the White House. Apparently, religious bigotry isn't relegated to the left anymore, at least when a Mormon (gasp) is involved.


So, what? I'm supposed to just not say anything if I have objections? I don't know about everyone else, but if I can't point out why I don't like things, I might as well not have an opinion on anything. I guess I can't say that I believe that Mormons are wrong about alot of things? I can't say that I believe Mormonism is more cult-like than Christian-like? Why not? I'm not " bashing" anyone or anything - I'm expressing my beliefs and opinions( as others are) on Mormonism and it's relevance in a presidential race - and in life in general for that matter. But somenoe is always crying that there's all this " bashing" going on! Give me a break.

Dianna has the right to insult my beliefs, and I don't think it's bashing - I just think she or it or whatever is just a jerk for the tone of it. If I really posted what I thought about some "Christian" groups here, the thing would blow up into a mud-slinging frag fest.

Look, anyone wanting to know about the teachings of the Mormon faith can easily look it up online. use your head, verify from multiple sources( hopefully some from the church itself) and draw your own conclusions.

but saying that LGF is somehow bashing anything is absurd.

and again, tolerance as defined today is just another way to say " you better accept everything, even if you believe it's wrong".

I say: to heck with tolerance. I'm going to listen to my heart and my convictions when considering the facts.

244 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:02:37am

re: #241 EC Marm

re: #212 Ringo the Gringo


re: #207 EC Marm


According to WIKI Ron Paul is a Baptist.

Well he sure looks like a Catholic.

I don't agree. I can picture Ron Paul on the side of some Appalachian mountain, inside of a one room Church, eyes rolled back, serpent weaving up and down his arm as he speaks in tongues.


lol

245 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:03:37am

re: #233 Boston Patriot

Reason is man's means of survival. Faith is its antithesis.

/chalk up one totally non-mutual exclusivity

246 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:04:24am

re: #217 Honorary Yooper

re: #189 Brain-Washed Sheeple

This thread makes me sad. Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it's a pity that people here choose to focus on his faith rather than his substance. I would've thought that, on LGF at least, we would be above the "I can't vote for a Mormon" meme. It really is sad to see a good candidate and a great faith trampled underfoot because some may not be as receptive to the message of a loving father or the idea of a man who holds good, decent Christian values in the White House. Apparently, religious bigotry isn't relegated to the left anymore, at least when a Mormon (gasp) is involved.

Not just Mormons. They do this crap to Catholics and Orthodox too. Hell, according to some, I'm not even a real Christian for being a Catholic.

What I love about the Catholic Church is that it sticks to its doctrines and teachings in the face of political correctness.

247 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:04:28am

re: #233 Boston Patriot

Actually, most of the founding fathers worshiped regularly at Anglican (later Episcopal) churches. Perhaps philosophically some of them would refer to themselves as "deist", but for all outward appearances they were typical Protestants of the day.

248 DistantThunder  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:04:32am

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

For an accurate representation of LDS beliefs you can go to
The Encyclopedia of Mormonism by McMillian Publishing

249 littleO  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:04:55am

re: #178 Honorary Yooper

Church councils are just that, councils. They bring together council from allover the church. most often the Pope himself is not involved.
As for the book of Thomas, I saw a very, very, very, deceptive documentary on that book. The documentary slanted from the beginning by acting like the documents were newly found. The documentations never brought up that the early church ( fourth century), I think, debated the Thomas book evenly and did not find it to be divinely inspired.
Scoff if you want to. But, the Church actually contemplates and deliberates over challenges to the church doctrines, or different interpretations, sometimes for centuries.

250 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:05:18am

re: #243 Owl

Dianna has the right to insult my beliefs, and I don't think it's bashing

Actually:

a) She didn't "insult" your beliefs, and

b) You did call her post "bashing" (post #193).

251 skembo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:06:05am

re: #34 EC Marm


Mitt likes "the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims."

Is that all you were able to garner from that speech? Reading this particular thread I am starting to feel like a Lizard in an ice cave. As a member of the LDS church I think it is sad that people are focusing more on Mitt's religion than on his accomplishments and stances on the issues.

I don't know Mitt, but I do attend church with one of his direct relatives. From everything I've seen of their family they look like people I wouldn't mind my kids hanging out with, and to me that is the bottom line. If we really want a candidate that exudes the personal character and values that reflect ours then why would I want someone who has been married three times, and had a long term affair before ditching his wife. It smells Clintonesque to me.

252 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:06:18am

re: #2 Carl in Jerusalem

OT - US prevents launch of satellite to spy on Iran

Good Morning Charles!

Is there faith in America?

Faith in the almighty Petrol-Dollar apparently from reading the article you posted.

Are there Muslims running the State Department? This is insane!

I think the Communists are still leading our America loathing, Uncle Joe worshiping, Internationalists appeasement monkeys that infect our US State Dept. around by the nose ring. However, that Religion would not preclude them from helping an enemy of the United States, any enemy they can find to help, actually. Especially one that pays well.

We need to fire all of those devotes to the Religion of State. Good grief there are still devotees of Jimmy Carter hanging on over there. And no one's yet fired a Clintonista (of the true believers) or any of Madam Albright's sycophants.

I still think we should round up everyone directly below Condi and toss them into Gitmo, and then waterboard I mean aggressively interrogate the dog crap out of them, untill we discover the extents of their treason.

That or force the worst of the worst to accept duty in Iraq, and when they don't fire the lot of them.

253 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:06:45am

re: #243 Owl

I say: to heck with tolerance.

What a wonderful philosophy! Who's up for another Thirty Years War?

254 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:06:58am

The Thomas book is Gnostic...that is why it was refused.

255 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:08:03am

re: #14 Lizard by the Bay

But what I'd like to know is just who is making this necessary? Is it the born-agains and other "intolerant Christians" on the right (as we've been told), or is it really the leftist MSM trying to piss in our pot?

Sadly, a number of people on this thread have definitively answered my question for me. It wasn't the answer I was hoping for. I will move on from this thread now.

256 cygnus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:08:07am

re: #236 father_of_10

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

I swear, you and RickZ, storagemanager and snowman must be cut from the same cloth. Are you sure your are on the right website? This is Little Green Footballs, not "I hate Mormons dot com". You need to take your lies and hate elsewhere.

Let me be a bit clearer: You are an IDIOT. You are STUPID. You are either a liar or a MORON.

Is that clear?

Now, to make things better for all of mankind, please go back to KOS and the liberals, you will do the world a favor by being there and not here.

Oooh, somebody forgot to take his meds this morning. I don't hate anyone. Just pointing out a few beliefs. If you want hate, listen to Bob Larson. That guy is always bashing Mormons when he isn't shouting at demons.

257 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:08:24am

re: #241 EC Marm

He's also hardcore libertarian. It just doesn't make much sense that he would buy into the central authority of the Catholic Church.

258 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:08:24am

re: #204 coquimbojoe

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

FYI: These are not true. The rest, yes.

Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.

Just going to clarify a bit for you. I am just going to present as factually as possible.

(I wish I could see the looks on your faces after this one...This information comes from **Egyptian Papyri' that Joseph Smith translated.)

**We believe there is a STAR named Kolob, which is nearest to the Planet that God resides. I am speculating, but I would assume the Planet God lives on could be the one he was born on.

Adam is not God. Brigham Young's speech has been misunderstood and misconstrued.

There is speculation that Jesus was married. Not official LDS theology.
(Oh no...'s opinion: However, he is the true leader, he would require nothing of his followers that he himself hasn't done. Hence he was baptized. Hence if I am to be married, Jesus either is, or he will eventually be married. 3 wives? Not sure. Children? Not sure, but if he was married, why not have children?)

259 Cielolady  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:08:43am

I am not Mormon, but I do support Mitt Romney because of his values. He has also been a very effective, principled leader -- Olympics, Massachusetts. He also did not flinch from discussing run-away secularism in the U.S.A. that is trying to limit the rights of others. He discussed radical Islam. He is someone who stands up for his convictions. He is a man of character.

Morals, Values, Principles. More people need to SPEAK UP. Too many seem to think that if it feels good, they should do it...Folsom Street parade, S.F. How will our young grow up if "the best lack all conviction while worst are full of passionate intensity"?
I am raising 3 children in LIBERAL California.

I was and still am embarrassed by Bill Clinton's antics.

260 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:09:39am

Dianna, maybe bashing was too strong a word - or the wrong word altogether consdering how it's used here today.

I have no problem with you saying whatever you want. it was the tone of your post, which was obviously intended to be rude and cutting toward anyone who holds to the belief that the Bible is the Word of God.

You know, of course that every single word of it is true, and it is exactly as God would have us have it, right? I mean, anyone with any brains can figure out that, right?


angry much?
---
---
-
-
--
-
-
--

bwaahahahahaaa

261 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:09:54am

re: #229 Maine's Michael

re: #218 Oh no...Sand People!

I've heard that theory.

Isn't that what the movie "Mission to Mars" was all about?

Seriously.

I don't know. I haven't seen "Mission to Mars". I'll check it out one of these days.

262 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:10:22am

re: #249 littleO

Um, how did I say the councils did not make changes to doctrine? From the earliest (1st Council of Nicaea), they made changes and clairified doctrine.

I merely used the Gospel of Thomas as an example. I could've used the Gospel of Mary, or some of the letters that failed to make the cut. But, by rejecting some books and accepting others, they did put together the Bible we see today.

263 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:11:09am

re: #236 father_of_10

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

I swear, you and RickZ, storagemanager and snowman must be cut from the same cloth. Are you sure your are on the right website? This is Little Green Footballs, not "I hate Mormons dot com". You need to take your lies and hate elsewhere.

Let me be a bit clearer: You are an IDIOT. You are STUPID. You are either a liar or a MORON.

Is that clear?

Now, to make things better for all of mankind, please go back to KOS and the liberals, you will do the world a favor by being there and not here.

With a nic like father of 10, I can only suppose you to Ernest Wilkensen at his word. I generally like the postings of the above named disseminators of false teaching of my Church. I like the fact that they throw out the falsehoods, they are so easy to knock down, and they are great conversation starters.

264 littleO  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:11:10am

re: #205 Ringo the Gringo

re: #194 Killian Bundy


/mark my words, Clinton will never oppose Romney in the 2008 general election

Words marked.

In pencil

265 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:11:49am

re: #260 Owl

it was the tone of your post, which was obviously intended to be rude and cutting

You have got to me kidding me. Her tone was nothing like that.

angry much?

Look in the mirror and ask that question. Sheesh.

266 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:11:51am

re: #262 Honorary Yooper
Most of the books refused were Gnostic.

267 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:13:44am

Way up there...I posted...I was sorry...and I am intolerate...pile on...you nice people.

268 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:13:45am

re: #236 father_of_10

re: #195 cygnus


I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.


I swear, you and RickZ, storagemanager and snowman must be cut from the same cloth. Are you sure your are on the right website? This is Little Green Footballs, not "I hate Mormons dot com". You need to take your lies and hate elsewhere.

Let me be a bit clearer: You are an IDIOT. You are STUPID. You are either a liar or a MORON.

Is that clear?

Now, to make things better for all of mankind, please go back to KOS and the liberals, you will do the world a favor by being there and not here.


wow. i think you're a bit huffy for someone that doesn't post any facts. seems like the folks getting all worked up over a little discussion about Mormonism...aren't the bigots like me ( *roll eyes)...but the Mormons( geussing from your post?)

269 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:13:49am

Well, I'm hungry. Who else is hungry? Let's eat.

270 DistantThunder  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:14:26am

re: #236 father_of_10

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

I swear, you and RickZ, storagemanager and snowman must be cut from the same cloth. Are you sure your are on the right website? This is Little Green Footballs, not "I hate Mormons dot com". You need to take your lies and hate elsewhere.

Let me be a bit clearer: You are an IDIOT. You are STUPID. You are either a liar or a MORON.

Is that clear?

Now, to make things better for all of mankind, please go back to KOS and the liberals, you will do the world a favor by being there and not here.

Only trolls are not tolerated and there are very specific requirements for trolls. I have no problems with the previous posters' comments as they were respectful. Your comments on the other hand are inflammatory and hostile. As the LDS mother of 7, I have great doubt that you are the father of 10, because patience is the number one virtue developed when raising a large family. Also, most LDS people I have know in the last 30 years are not thin skinned, but take "hits" pretty well.

Here on LGF, we enjoy the exchange of information. Trolls are only here for one reason: to push buttons. Charles does an excellent job of weeding them out, so the rest of us can focus on discussions. Besides, trolls are fun to bat around like a cat toy - so lighten up.

271 Orde  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:14:45am

Great. As an undecided voter and a theologically conservative Evangelical ("fundamentalist" some would say) who only knew I couldn't vote for Ron Paul, Giulliani or Huckabee, I waited eagerly for this speech, and I was not disappointed. Very reassuring position about the relationship of religion and state without being pandering or compromising his own, and I like that he acknowledged that secular humanism seems to have religious characteristics as well. Most of the theologically conservative Evangelical voters I know are undecided, and when we've talked about what we wanted to hear, this was basically it. I think this speech was a real winner with my subculture group. (Myself, I still haven't ruled out McCain, but I'll be looking more at Romney now.)

272 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:15:03am

I will only vote for a member of a religion that doesn't have odd beliefs.

273 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:15:06am

Well, paraphrasing this majority of this LGf thread (read it), Mormans are bad.

/just like the people of Piedmont

274 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:15:47am

re: #266 storagemanager

re: #262 Honorary Yooper
Most of the books refused were Gnostic.

Yes, they were, but not all were. Even Revelation almost didn't make it.

275 Judith  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:15:47am

Okay, my opinion for whatever it is worth. I see a lot of parallels between the the founder of LDS and the founder of Islam. I think both are false prophets and their books are both fakes. HOWEVER, and this is a very big however, the LDS in its early days may well have been a threat to the USA and some of the lunatic fragment groups like the Bountiful Mormons are also still a threat BUT, and this is also a big but, mainstream LDS has undergone enough changes and enough moderation and movement towards the general principals the USA were founded on that I see no threat whatsoever from the kind of Mormonism as practiced by Romney. I am also disgusted by the nature of the questions and the fact that he had to explain all this. Honestly, as others have said, we should have been done with that a long long time ago. This is crap and nonsense and if he feels Joseph Smith is a prophet it really isn't anyone's business.

As for Islam, I would not want a Muslim to be the American president unless it was also a brand of Islam that had lived successfully in the USA and proven itself in the USA and shown that it is compatible with the American constitution for about a hundred years. I am unaware of such a version of Islam. I could be wrong, but I am unaware of any such version because, as I understand it, organized forms of Islam openly practiced have just not been in the USA that long. The movement to a form of religious observance that is compatible with American ideals is not one accomplished overnight. The various mainstream types of Judaism and the assorted branches of Christianity have been in the USA since the beginning and have a proven track record of no conflict with and support for American ideals and American style rule of law. The same can be said for the LDS. The same can not be said for a lot of highly visible forms of Islam right now, today.

Again I would like to emphasize I could be wrong about there being no version of Islam currently present in the USA that has been in the USA for a hundred years and proven its compatibility with the USA's constitution, rule of law, and ideology of individual liberty and separation of religion and state. I would not want to rule out any individual as President simply because he or she is a Muslim.

276 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:15:48am

re: #258 Oh no...Sand People!

re: #204 coquimbojoe

re: #195 cygnus

I have nothing against Mormons, but they do have some interesting beliefs:

God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

FYI: These are not true. The rest, yes.

Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.

Just going to clarify a bit for you. I am just going to present as factually as possible.

(I wish I could see the looks on your faces after this one...This information comes from **Egyptian Papyri' that Joseph Smith translated.)

**We believe there is a STAR named Kolob, which is nearest to the Planet that God resides. I am speculating, but I would assume the Planet God lives on could be the one he was born on.

Adam is not God. Brigham Young's speech has been misunderstood and misconstrued.

There is speculation that Jesus was married. Not official LDS theology.
(Oh no...'s opinion: However, he is the true leader, he would require nothing of his followers that he himself hasn't done. Hence he was baptized. Hence if I am to be married, Jesus either is, or he will eventually be married. 3 wives? Not sure. Children? Not sure, but if he was married, why not have children?)

Thanks for the clarifications. Are you LDS, or just well informed?

277 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:16:27am

re: #249 littleO

re: #178 Honorary Yooper

Church councils are just that, councils. They bring together council from allover the church. most often the Pope himself is not involved.
As for the book of Thomas, I saw a very, very, very, deceptive documentary on that book. The documentary slanted from the beginning by acting like the documents were newly found. The documentations never brought up that the early church ( fourth century), I think, debated the Thomas book evenly and did not find it to be divinely inspired.
Scoff if you want to. But, the Church actually contemplates and deliberates over challenges to the church doctrines, or different interpretations, sometimes for centuries.

Here is my take on things. We had 9-11 six years ago, and people are doing there best to revise history. We had the DOCUMENTED, LIVING PEOPLE STILL ALIVE telling us about it, HOLOCAUST that people deny and say didn't happen, even with our MODERN technology we have so much REVISIONS to history, just open up your local college history book to see it.

So the Bible is to be in perfect form? People who scribbled on scrolls and word of mouthed and the Bible is exactly the way it was? No data backups...no archives... No agendas? I love the Bible, but I will not toe the party line and say that it is EXACTLY the way it was originally.
Hence, why I believe it to be correct as far as it is translated as such.

278 FrogMarch  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:16:35am

re: #119 Honorary Yooper

indeed. And we all need to stop bickering about our differences and imperfections and come together. Sounds cliche - I know.

279 littleO  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:16:41am

re: #252 Dotcoman

And as we are lead down this garden path and the worst does happen. I want more than a impeachment trial. I want all these AH in jail

280 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:16:46am

re: #272 Ringo the Gringo

I will only vote for a member of a religion that doesn't have odd beliefs.

Now that's funny.

281 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:16:53am

re: #267 storagemanager

Way up there...I posted...I was sorry...and I am intolerate...pile on...you nice people.

LOL. You're fine, as long as you want to have a discussion rather than a fight.

282 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:17:44am

re: #250 Occasional Reader

re: #243 Owl


Dianna has the right to insult my beliefs, and I don't think it's bashing

Actually:

a) She didn't "insult" your beliefs, and

b) You did call her post "bashing" (post #193).

Actually, she did.
And actually, I did go back and say i shouldn't have used " bashing" since further down the page when discussing mormonism's doctrines some were crying about bashing.

I should have said " insulting, cutting, hate-filled, or disrespectful", and not "bashing." she was not bashing, she was insulting with a hateful tone, as far as I read it.

283 FrogMarch  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:18:48am

re: #94 Lizard by the Bay

Exactly!

284 CartoonKid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:19:14am

re: #49 RoP_RIP

Rop_RIP, I wish I didn't have to say this, but your religious intolerance is showing. Religious tolerance means tolerating ALL religions, not just the mainstream ones. All mainstream religions started out as non-mainstream. And they were ALL attacked. What no one should tolerate is evil, no matter what religion it comes from. But evil comes from individuals, not religions. All holy texts contain questionable passages, both in terms of violence and credibility, but it is the individual who commits evil acts based on these passages that is intolerable, not the religion as a whole. To the intolerant of the world I am a triple target--I am a Jew, a Republican and a Scientologist. I have seen much intolerance, and no matter where it comes from it is always caused by the same thing: ignorance.

285 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:19:56am

You can all question my faith, mormonism, how you want. I am more than happy to answer any questions you have. I can completely see how our doctrine can be spun easily into a negative light...I do it all the time.

286 Jimmah  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:21:11am

cant type : KeyBoard BroKe last nigHt. (cut and pasted tHis)

287 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:21:33am

re: #269 Occasional Reader

Well, I'm hungry. Who else is hungry? Let's eat.

/quesadilla or squirrel?

288 EC Marm  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:22:52am

re: #286 Jimmah

cant type : KeyBoard BroKe last nigHt. (cut and pasted tHis)


Obviously, there is a nut loose on your keyboard.

289 DistantThunder  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:23:01am

re: #251 skembo

re: #34 EC Marm


Mitt likes "the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims."

Is that all you were able to garner from that speech? Reading this particular thread I am starting to feel like a Lizard in an ice cave. As a member of the LDS church I think it is sad that people are focusing more on Mitt's religion than on his accomplishments and stances on the issues.

I don't know Mitt, but I do attend church with one of his direct relatives. From everything I've seen of their family they look like people I wouldn't mind my kids hanging out with, and to me that is the bottom line. If we really want a candidate that exudes the personal character and values that reflect ours then why would I want someone who has been married three times, and had a long term affair before ditching his wife. It smells Clintonesque to me.

As an LDS member of 30 years, I find no reason to be defensive. I actually commend Muslims for focusing on prayer, too. If I pray in the morning, and pray in the evening, then say a short 'grace' over my 3 meals - hey I'm up to 5 times a day too. Many Muslims choose to attend BYU because of the honor code that specifies, no drinking, no drugging, and a commitment of chastity before marriage. BYU also has a modest dress code that in essence eschews daisy duke shorts and tank tops.

Most people in the world want peace and lack of drama in their lives. I had a play group for my young daughter years ago, and her best friend was Muslim. The mother and I were both named the same -"Sue." My point is, there are aspects of Muslims that can make them good people and good neighbors.

Mitt's strength is his intelligence and his integrity. He would be formidable against Hillary. His opponent for governor was a woman, Shannon something, and in their debates, he took her apart, piece by piece without looking like a bully.

290 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:23:02am

re: #284 CartoonKid

re: #49 RoP_RIP

Rop_RIP, I wish I didn't have to say this, but your religious intolerance is showing. Religious tolerance means tolerating ALL religions, not just the mainstream ones. All mainstream religions started out as non-mainstream. And they were ALL attacked. What no one should tolerate is evil, no matter what religion it comes from. But evil comes from individuals, not religions. All holy texts contain questionable passages, both in terms of violence and credibility, but it is the individual who commits evil acts based on these passages that is intolerable, not the religion as a whole. To the intolerant of the world I am a triple target--I am a Jew, a Republican and a Scientologist. I have seen much intolerance, and no matter where it comes from it is always caused by the same thing: ignorance.

So you would be tolerant of an islamic radical lopping your head off in teh name of his religion?

Sorry, but total tolerance for anything and everything is absurd and unintelligent.

291 FrogMarch  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:23:22am

re: #92 Killgore Trout

Well that's just nuts.
I'm so sick of certain strains of the illogical absolutist ridiculous so called "religious right".

292 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:23:47am

re: #272 Ringo the Gringo

I will only vote for a member of a religion that doesn't have odd beliefs.

So, what are your thoughts on transubstantiation?

(yes, yes, I said I was going...)

293 CartoonKid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:24:31am

re: #290 Owl

You totally missed my point. I clearly said EVIL is intolerable! Lopping off heads is totally evil and totally intolerable. Please reread my post.

294 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:25:10am

re: #103 Dianna

re: #87 RoP_RIP

If you're curious, you might read the Book of Mormon. I'd suggest trying to find one of the earliest editions, because they've been tossing things out as they go along.

I have an 1863 edition you can borrow. The only revisions have been grammatical with commas and such, and a few "Black" to "Dark's" etc. The content is as accurate as the context.

Oh, but the NEW REViSED BIBLE. The Gideons Bible. The New International Modern Bible. The Klingon Revised Bible and the umteenth gazillion different translations to 'modernize' the Bible for the MTV crowd youth to understand and want to read it...nope...never been tampered with...

/ducks under desk...

295 cygnus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:25:11am

re: #270 DistantThunder

Thanks for your post. I intended no offense to anybody out there. Congrats on surviving 7 kids! :)

296 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:25:22am
297 Cielolady  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:25:43am

Secular humanism as religion. Read,

Prison We Choose To Live Inside

By Doris Lessing

298 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:25:56am

re: #275 Judith

I like your post. As a member of the LDS faith, I cringe at any comparison between Joseph Smith and Mohammed, but that being said make the comparison. The one real issue I have is the early LDS Church being a threat to the US. They might have been perceived as a threat, but their actions were to turn the other cheek and move when threatened and attacked. Their Odyssey took the from Kirtland Ohio to Nauvoo Illinois to Independence Missouri to Utah. The Mountain Meadows Massacre is a horrible aberration, with the only documentation available from the Church leaders telling the members in So. Utah to stand down and let the people pass. I would argue that the Church was not a threat to the US or anyone.

299 RickZ  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:26:01am

re: #180 Lizard by the Bay

re: #168 RickZ


Go fuck yourself. That's my 'boiler-plate' for you.

Oh no. Some intolerant fuck doesn't like me. Whatever will I do?

For starters, you can a dirt nap where you hold your breath forevah. An intolerant fuck calling me intolerant fuck. That's rich. But I guess being polite, and you disagreeing politely, is too much to ask of an intolerant fuck like yourself.

300 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:27:03am

re: #291 FrogMarch

re: #92 Killgore Trout

Well that's just nuts.
I'm so sick of certain strains of the illogical absolutist ridiculous so called "religious right".

Agreed.

301 father_of_10  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:27:43am

OK, I shouldn't have called the misguided, disrespectful, uninformed and somewhat dishonest people idiots, morons and stupid. I'm sorry that I miscategorized you guys. Did I miss my meds? No, just breakfast.

RickZ, storagemanager, snowman and cygnus, please accept my apology. I should not have called you names that didn't fit. Next time I will be more specific and accurate when I hurl out insults.

So how about you guys being a bit more accurate with your claims?

And yes, I do have 10 children . . . and am able to be kind and gentle with them, partly by venting frustrations on the uniluminated folks that occasionally cross my oaths OUTSIDE my home. You know, those folks that do not matter.

302 Jimmah  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:27:52am
303 Orde  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:28:45am

re: #34 EC Marm

Mitt likes "the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims."

Yeah, as a committed theologically conservative Evangelical I thought that was great! It's true that you can lift verses out of context from the Bible to make it seem that God only hears believers' (or even narrower, obedient believers') prayers, but upon thorough inspection one will see that the God of the Bible hears even "the ravens that cry" (and they're unclean birds), he heard Hagar (the concubine of Abraham and grandmother of the Arab peoples) or in the so-called New Testament, He heard Cornelious a devout deity-believer who just didn't have the whole scoop yet. Yeah, Muslims pray a lot, and I seriously believe some of them do it from the heart as well and I wouldn't doubt that God hears them.

(Speaking of Mitt and Muslims, I like his characterization of "radical extreme Islam" even better than "Islamic terrorism," since Mitt actually comes closer to naming the enemy: Islam (though his modifier reduces the accuracy a bit), whereas Giulliani in using "Islamic terrorism" just names the tactic. Also, whereas Giulliani sickeningly called Islam a "great religion," Romney accurately pointed to an aspect of Islam (prayerfulness) that is praiseworthy--much more honest. Don't know if Romney has Qatar or Saudi business ties like Giulliani, though, but I haven't heard of such appearances of conflicts of interest yet.)

304 Cielolady  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:28:54am

Prisons

305 Dr. Shalit  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:30:35am

OK Everyone -

MITT DID OK - That is All.

-S-

306 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:30:59am

re: #302 Jimmah

south parK Mormons

That episode always cracks me up.

307 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:32:31am

re: #306 Oh no...Sand People!

re: #302 Jimmah

south parK Mormons

That episode always cracks me up.

I love it too. Mormons know we are a peculiar people. It affords us the ability to have a sense of humor about ourselves, unlike, ahem, others...

308 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:33:10am

re: #306 Oh no...Sand People!

"Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb DUMB!" Yes, it makes me giggle thinking about it, too. Did you happen to see my post at #197?

309 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:34:05am

re: #260 Owl

Dianna, maybe bashing was too strong a word - or the wrong word altogether consdering how it's used here today.

I have no problem with you saying whatever you want. it was the tone of your post, which was obviously intended to be rude and cutting toward anyone who holds to the belief that the Bible is the Word of God.

You know, of course that every single word of it is true, and it is exactly as God would have us have it, right? I mean, anyone with any brains can figure out that, right?

bwaahahahahaaa

Noting the composition of the Bible is not bashing; I do not, and will not, address its truth or validity as a guide to faith and practice. In case you hadn't noticed, I was responding to OR's comment about how the Bible was not rigorously fact-checked for scientific accuracy.

I'm not the angry one.

310 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:34:13am
God (Elohim) was born on a planet called Kolob.
He had several spirit children, including Jesus and Lucifer.
Elohim came to Earth and became Adam ('As man is, God once was; as
God is, man may become').Later Adam-Elohim had sex with Mary and Jesus was born.
Jesus had 3 wives and children.
There are 3 levels of heaven: terrestial, telestial, and celestial.
In the afterlife, we can be gods, too, with spouses and spirit children.
And others too numerous to be mentioned here.

That's all fine and good (reminds me of the Superman story), it's the part about not drinking booze that I don't understand.

311 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:35:27am

re: #308 Lizard by the Bay

re: #306 Oh no...Sand People!

"Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb DUMB!" Yes, it makes me giggle thinking about it, too. Did you happen to see my post at #197?

Heh.

312 maddogg  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:37:53am

re: #287 Killian Bundy

re: #269 Occasional Reader


Well, I'm hungry. Who else is hungry? Let's eat.

/quesadilla or squirrel?

Dang! I'm in love!

313 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:38:04am

re: #197 Lizard by the Bay

re: #183 Cap'n DOC

Amen! And thank you for bringing up what it's really all about. One of my favorite South Park episodes is the one called "All About Mormons". Not because it appears to ridicule Mormonism by being literal about it, but for the ending.

The Mormon kid says, "Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up, but I have a great life. and a great family, and I have the Book of Mormon to thank for that. The truth is, I don't care if Joseph Smith made it all up, because what the church teaches now is loving your family, being nice and helping people. And even though people in this town might think that's stupid, I still choose to believe in it. All I ever did was try to be your friend, Stan, but you're so high and mighty you couldn't look past my religion and just be my friend back. You've got a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck my balls."

A beautiful ending, and it says everything about the Mormons better and more eloquently than I ever could.

And for all of South Park's nuanced spin...they even know the truth.

314 blackelkspeaks  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:38:50am

I really don't care how Romney speaks. I worry about what he'll do if he's elected. Bush has given a number of good speeches, too; particularly during the year after 911 happened. But his performance and policies since then has snake-bit me on ever voting again for anyone who I cannot determine with absolute certainty is not a deep-down, dyed-in-the-wool constitutionalist. Romney is just another RINO, like Bush, who is being foisted on the conservative base by the cadre of "professional" Republican shysters and their shills in the Republican punditry. I have supported Republicans for over thirty years, but I'm still waiting on them to deliver the goods on reducing government and restoring the traditions of liberty that were once hallmarks of this Republic. Romney is a northeastern liberal with a track record of advancing the socialist state. His statist agenda belies his flowery rhetoric about religious liberty. I've said this before and I'll say it again. If the only candidates that can win the nomination in this country today are those who advocate socialism (leftist Republicans) or communism (leftist Democrats) then I simply won't vote. And the rest of the 300 million people in this country can take the blame for what transpires. In any case, we'll all have to live with the outcome of the idiocy of our community-at-large, Democrats and Republicans alike.

315 Shiplord Kirel  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:39:56am

re: #155 buzzsawmonkey

re: #95 Shiplord Kirel

Shiplord: That's a parody video, parodying not only We Are the World, but the Phelps cult also.

The Westboro cult claims it on their site, the participants are recognizably Phelpers (including Fred himself and media spokes-sow Shirley Phelps-Roper), and it appears on their music video page.

316 FrogMarch  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:39:57am
“Liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government.”


--Mitt Romney

I like.
(a little swipe at socialist neo-Marxist fascist/worshipers of the state--perhaps?)

317 littleO  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:41:46am

Can I go back to what a bat sounds like when a solid hit is made. I swear, thats what I heard after Romneys speech.

318 Orde  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:42:10am

re: #189 Brain-Washed Sheeple

This thread makes me sad. Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it's a pity that people here choose to focus on his faith rather than his substance. I would've thought that, on LGF at least, we would be above the "I can't vote for a Mormon" meme. It really is sad to see a good candidate and a great faith trampled underfoot because some may not be as receptive to the message of a loving father or the idea of a man who holds good, decent Christian values in the White House. Apparently, religious bigotry isn't relegated to the left anymore, at least when a Mormon (gasp) is involved.

Perhaps this article by a Christian evangelical blogger will help explain the validity of questioning a candidate's worldview (including religion). (Btw, I found Mitt's speech good, though the blogger, Dan Phillips wasn't as impressed, seeing as how his newer post is called Mitt Romney thinks (or hopes) we're all stupid.)

And one more article, posted on the respected Pulpit Magazine blog: A Post on Politics.

319 storagemanager  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:42:15am

re: #301 father_of_10

I guess you my post...way up there.

320 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:42:55am

re: #316 FrogMarch

“Liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government.”


--Mitt Romney

I like.
(a little swipe at socialist neo-Marxist fascist/worshipers of the state--perhaps?)

You might appreciate this. This man should be the one running for president.

I did.

321 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:42:59am
322 Orde  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:44:04am

re: #131 Killgore Trout

re: #119 Honorary Yooper

I have no problem with theological debates or differences in interpretation but once it degrades to vilification,name calling, and and bigotry it's gone too far.

yeah, that would be "stupid"

323 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:44:55am

re: #162 Occasional Reader


They were then allowed to detain them and contact ICE.

324 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:45:16am
325 Jimmah  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:48:25am

re: #308 Lizard by the Bay

re: #306 Oh no...Sand People!

"Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb DUMB!" Yes, it makes me giggle thinking about it, too. Did you happen to see my post at #197?

No! SeetHe! i demand it!:)

326 madmom  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:48:28am

re: #58 Dianna

And getting in front of people and speaking in tongues is not?

327 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:49:22am

re: #316 FrogMarch

Yeah, he went to the George Mason well for that one.

328 TUGBOAT  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:51:15am

re: #284 CartoonKid

re: #49 RoP_RIP

Rop_RIP, I wish I didn't have to say this, but your religious intolerance is showing. Religious tolerance means tolerating ALL religions, not just the mainstream ones.

CK, you are way off. Religious tolerance does NOT include tolerating a creed whose explicit purpose is to convert me or kill me. I am fine with pretty much every creed that doesn't convert by force as a matter of doctrine and current practice. Islam as currently practiced allows other religions to be ground under the heel of it's adherents, and mainstream theology gives it's blessing to attacks on what most sane individuals would consider innocents.

329 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:51:50am

let me try to summarize why I am against a mormon
such as Mitt

they started out like the moo slum cult
with marriage to children and plural marriages
and rock worship
in the mormon's case
they all get their own planet (space rock) when they die
and all the virgins they want
moo slums...72 virgins
but more than you need
and they worship the rock in the here-and-now

the fact may be that most mormons don't marry children anymore means nothing
it's as if the Nazi party came back and renounced hatred of jews and non whites
I would not be part of it, nor would any of you readers I hope
ditto the Balams Velang's (spelling) folks trying to portray themselves as not racist (any more)

or if David Duke suddenly renounced the KKK
and then showed up at your press conference as your best friend Mitt

plus, I am related to current and former mormons
and they are IMHO, the biggest hypocrits in terms of Christian values that I know of - selfish and uncaring
unless you are worthy wearers of white

330 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:52:20am

re: #293 CartoonKid

re: #290 Owl

You totally missed my point. I clearly said EVIL is intolerable! Lopping off heads is totally evil and totally intolerable. Please reread my post.

You said: Religious tolerance means tolerating ALL religions, not just the mainstream ones.

Satanism, environmentalism, and islam(including the racidal element) are part of the term " all religions" are they not? If you'd be tolerant of a Satanic President, then I don't know what to say to ya. good luck, maybe?

331 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:52:22am

re: #325 Jimmah

re: #308 Lizard by the Bay

re: #306 Oh no...Sand People!

"Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb DUMB!" Yes, it makes me giggle thinking about it, too. Did you happen to see my post at #197?

No! SeetHe! i demand it!:)

Oh yeah!
/YOU VILE PEOPLE! I am forming CAMR (Council of American Mormon Relations...hope it doesn't exist...) I am SUEING YOU ALL! (kick puppy, break dishes...)

332 johnlocke  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:52:52am

Hilarious video:

Door To Door Atheists Bother Mormons - The guy with the broom takes the cake.

Another interesting video:

Christian Guy Totally Owns Mormons - to paraphrase, "Christians believe in Jesus Christ. Mormons believe in Joseph Smith." Straight to the heart of the matter.

333 madmom  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:52:54am

re: #329 Adrenalyn

so Mormons are like Nazi's?

334 steveoh  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:53:08am

Re: #71 Ringo the gringo

Separation between church and state. So tell me how old is the earth? How literally do you interperet the scripture? I love when a religious fundamentalist attacks those who don't buy into their cult. You are all following a cult of one kind or another, invented over the ages to control the masses for a variety of reasons, most economic. Wake up!

335 Killian Bundy  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:53:34am

Well damn, just how long can I stay awake waiting for a $20 UPS delivery?

/this is going to disrupt my sleep patterns and eventually put me back on a day schedule

336 madmom  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:53:48am

re: #332 johnlocke

Mormons don't believe in Jesus Christ?

337 Orde  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:54:33am

re: #136 Dotcoman

This belief of yours (in case you're not being sarcastic) that "Islam is religious rule in the absence of politics," is completely wrong and poses a threat to our national security and the world--there's some top notch material about this over at NewEnglishReview, and I especially recommend the articles and posts by Hugh Fitzgerald and Mary Jackson, which can be found clicking their names in the bottom right.

338 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:54:42am

re: #167 coquimbojoe

in brief, I am an atheist
I believe in the here and now
and doing good for the sake of doing good
and being good as a matter of course

339 Lizard by the Bay  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:55:22am

re: #336 madmom

Mormons don't believe in Jesus Christ?

Well, some Christians believe they have a corner on that market.

340 realwest  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:56:04am

Hey Y'all - haven't had the chance to read the whole thread, but I think Iron Fist's post at #65 pretty well sums up my position with the addition that I don't see why Romney even had to make this speech.
Did he have to get into this whole Church of Latter Day Saints when he ran for govenor?

341 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:56:31am

re: #333 madmom

re: #329 Adrenalyn

so Mormons are like Nazi's?

did Nazi's marry children ?
did Mormon's kill MILLIONS ?

342 Judith  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:56:31am

re: #298 coquimbojoe

Fair enough. I accept that correction.

343 CartoonKid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:56:35am

re: #324 ploome hineni

If you teach evil that IS evil.

And you can be of ANY religion and still be a Scientologist.

Oy vey back at you!

344 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:56:57am

re: #219 storagemanager

re: #212 Ringo the Gringo

re: #207 EC Marm


According to WIKI Ron Paul is a Baptist.


Well he sure looks like a Catholic.


What do Catholic's look like?


Like this
Or this
Or this! (just for you, OR!)

345 Pantera  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:57:56am

I don't like Romney cause he seems like he would be a Bill Clinton who would flip-flop at the drop of a hat.
And that shiny black hair. He's like the only Republican with any hair left. What does that say?

346 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:58:27am

There are things I like about Romney, and his Mormon faith doesn't bother me (the "South Park" quote somewhere above expresses my sentiment really well").

That being said, I take exception to a few parts of his speech, some of which are downright deceitful and self-contradictory.

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom." Huh? religion and freedom are like oil & water - that's why the Founders came up with separation of church and state.

"... no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people." This is the popular (but completely wrong) notion that morality can only have supernatural origins.

"We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong."

This is the dishonest part, and a classic talking point of the Religious Right. They use the phrase "public domain" and "public life" (usually it's "public square" to suggest that one cannot be religious out in public, when the cases that have been challenged all specifically relate to government-sponsored endorsements of religion. The only real purpose of religious displays at City Hall are for your religion to lay claim to the government - there is no added religious value in having it there vs. in front of the local church (that is sitting on the very same "public square"). You never hear about churches on the public square being sued for religious displays - because it never happens.

"Our currency", "our Pledge", "the teaching of our history", and the management of "public places" (he means City Hall, and public Parks and libraries) are all government functions, not private activity that happens to be occurring on "the public square".

The reference to "there will be no established church" is the classic dishonest misreading of the actual 1st Amendment, which refers to "respecting an establishment of religion" (which means favoritism toward any church), not "establishing a religion".

He pretends to support separation of church and state when it serves his needs (due to his being of a minority faith), but when it comes down to the big picture, he's really against it (while claiming he's for it). Bill Clinton couldn't have worked it better.

347 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:58:49am

When talking about his electability, has anyone taken into consideration that Mitt Romney won by a landslide in Massachusetts of all places? You would think in such an anti-Christian state such as mine that he never would have had a prayer. Yet he crushed his opponent, Shannon O'Brien...who is a mini-me version of Hillary Clinton.

348 madmom  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:59:37am

re: #341 Adrenalyn

You are the one that compared?
the fact may be that most mormons don't marry children anymore means nothing
it's as if the Nazi party came back and renounced hatred of jews and non whites

I am pretty sure polygamy was practiced in the Old Testament so since Christianity is derived out of the teachings of the Old Testament are all Christians held to the same standard?

349 CartoonKid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:59:38am

re: #330 Owl

Tolerate the religion, NOT the actions! Let them be if all they're doing is studying and practicing rituals in their home. But if they commit evil acts on others then by all means DON'T tolerate that. Personally, I consider Satanism pretty darned foolish, but if they don't harm me I'll leave them be. Once you start attacking ANY religion you open the door to broader intolerance.

350 Shiplord Kirel  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:59:42am

re: #321 buzzsawmonkey

re: #315 Shiplord Kirel

That's astounding; the thing had all the hallmarks of a really excellent parody, including the singers breaking up with laughter a little bit towards the end.

If that really is a serious Phelps video, they are even more whacked out than I thought.

It really is a parody, but only of one degree (the song) rather than of two (the song and the cult). Their renditions of "God Hates Ireland" (to the melody of Garryowen) and "This is Fag Land" are similarly demented.
To take it even farther through the looking glass, they even have a rap video featuring some of the underage Phelper spawn.

351 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:59:54am

re: #334 steveoh

Re: #71 Ringo the gringo

Separation between church and state. So tell me how old is the earth? How literally do you interperet the scripture? I love when a religious fundamentalist attacks those who don't buy into their cult. You are all following a cult of one kind or another, invented over the ages to control the masses for a variety of reasons, most economic. Wake up!

How old is the Earth?...I think the going estimate is 4-5 billion years.

How old are you?..You sound as if you're about 15.

352 Boston Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:59:57am

Wow, this is getting heated!

I want a President who totally upholds the separation of church and state, but this is a disturbing quote from his speech:
"If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve...no one cause and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States."

"Serve no one cause and no one interest"?!?!? How about the cause of liberty and the interest of the individual to the right to his own life, Mitt?

"A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States." That statement reeks of collectivism and the myth that we're a Democracy (a.k.a. mob rule) while in fact this country is a Constitutional Republic.

This is typical of religionists in that without mysticism they believe there can be no absolutes. So, if they're honest enough to acknowledge that America has a clear separation of church and state, they immediately resort to subjectivism- "common cause," "no one interest," "the voice of the people," etc, etc.

Practical politics is a cesspool. No politican out there understands what freedom is. On the Left or Right.

There are objective absolutes, among them reality and man's right to his own life. I wish there was a candidate who would uphold it.

353 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:00:30am

re: #345 Pantera

I don't like Romney cause he seems like he would be a Bill Clinton who would flip-flop at the drop of a hat.
And that shiny black hair. He's like the only Republican with any hair left. What does that say?

by the way
Mormons don't believe oral sex is sex either

ask a mormon girl about satisfying a boys needs before he leaves for his mission

354 Viva Veritas  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:01:16am

Just finding it odd that a nation built on a Judeo-Christian foundation now believes it can progress beyond all that, chuck those basic values and still retain any semblance of freedom and liberty. There's no other world ideology that could give us the country we once had.

Oh well, move progress along...

355 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:01:25am

re: #347 loppyd

When talking about his electability, has anyone taken into consideration that Mitt Romney won by a landslide in Massachusetts of all places?
You would think in such an anti-Christian state such as mine that he
never would have had a prayer.

Which proves that Mormons aren't really Christians!
/I kid, I kid

356 Orde  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:01:36am

re: #316 FrogMarch

“Liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government.”


--Mitt Romney

I like.
(a little swipe at socialist neo-Marxist fascist/worshipers of the state--perhaps?)

Or a swipe at the indulgence-issuing Roman Catholic Church? At best this was a careless use of a word that in a religious context is extremely ambiguous. (btw, I would have liked to have provided a more accurate website when it comes to "indulgences" but restrained myself out of respect for Charles' rules, since such websites could be perceived as proselytizing, so only for this reason chose the more neutral wikipedia)

357 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:02:28am

re: #353 Adrenalyn


ask a mormon girl about satisfying a boys needs before he leaves for his mission

Do you really think I should?

358 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:03:29am

re: #348 madmom

re: #341 Adrenalyn

You are the one that compared?
the fact may be that most mormons don't marry children anymore means nothing
it's as if the Nazi party came back and renounced hatred of jews and non whites

I am pretty sure polygamy was practiced in the Old Testament so since Christianity is derived out of the teachings of the Old Testament are all Christians held to the same standard?

well, since I am an atheist, the answer I give may not suit most readers here and I don't wish to insult people as a matter of general principle
I accept that people have different beliefs
some though, are a little hard to swallow (sorry girls, pun intended since Mormons don't believe oral sex is sex)
and I din't necessarily believe the old testament any more than the new one or the book of mormon, koran, etc...

359 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:04:09am

re: #357 Ringo the Gringo

re: #353 Adrenalyn


ask a mormon girl about satisfying a boys needs before he leaves for his mission

Do you really think I should?


in a word
YES
they are very proud of their abilities

360 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:05:40am

re: #355 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

re: #347 loppyd

When talking about his electability, has anyone taken into consideration that Mitt Romney won by a landslide in Massachusetts of all places?
You would think in such an anti-Christian state such as mine that he
never would have had a prayer.

Which proves that Mormons aren't really Christians!
/I kid, I kid


:~)

He kicked his ass in the debates. She was shrill (sound familiar?) and tried to play the poor female card (sound familiar?). He called her statements and actions "unbecoming" and she played the male chauvenist card (sound familiar?). It all backfired.

I'd like to think he would give a repeat performance if running against The Pantsuit.

361 TMK  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:06:52am

re: #148 coquimbojoe

If you doubt our Christianity, come to our church and here us talk of Christ, read our tracts, heck ask any dopey kid on a bike wearing a white shirt and name tag. You certainly do not have to agree or believe like us, but get it right.

Okay, I'll bite:

"For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you; if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination." Titus 1:5-6

How do you justify appointing "any dopey kid on a bike wearing a white shirt and name tag" who lacks a wife and faithful children (not to mention "old age") as an elder and still claim to honor the Scripture?

"And notwithstanding we believe in Christ, we keep the law of Moses, and look forward with steadfastness unto Christ, until the law shall be fulfilled; for this end was the law given; Wherefore, the law hath become dead unto us, and we are made alive in Christ, because of our faith; Yet we keep the law because of the commandments..." 2 Nep 11:45-47

"Previously saying, 'Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them" (which are offered according to the law), then He said, 'Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.' He takes away the first that He may establish the second." Heb 10:8-9

"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.' But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for 'the just shall live by faith.' Yet the law is not of faith, but 'the man who does them shall live by them.' Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree')" Gal 3:10-13

"My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality... For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. For He who said, 'Do not commit adultery,' also said, 'Do not murder.' Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty." James 2:1,10-12

How could this tribe practice the mutually exclusive Law of Moses (without Levitie priests) and Christianity at the same time? Furthermore, why did the official BoM website remove this contradictory passage from their book?

362 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:07:21am

I'm upset Mitt didn't address the Liberal Democrat Party's new State Religion: Global Warmism.,

And all this Christian God talk and one one mention of Earth Mother Goddess Gaia and her one true prophet algore. Who has become defacto pope of the new State Religion.

You sure as hell don't see a senate select committee on Christianity or a house committee on Catholicism, Mormanism, Islam, etc. But the Church of algore has committees making detramental policy decisions all over the place. The Congress even scheduled a vote this week to address the religion's fears and act on it's beliefs and tenants.

When was the last time the US Congress had a vote like that for another religion?

The democrat party is always going on about the seperation of church and state, that is until it's their religion.

363 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:07:28am

re: #353 Adrenalyn

Neither do Catholics. So what? Try to contribute some constructive please.

364 madmom  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:07:30am

This conversation is getting disgusting. So called Mormon girls I know have high standards and I'm sorry you have met some that don't.

365 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:09:16am

re: #358 Adrenalyn

Enough with the blowjob talk please. It serves no purpose.

366 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:10:05am

There is an awful lot of generalization on this thread that I don't think would be appreciated by a lot of folks if the topic were their religion.

And no, I am not a Mormon, I am a WASP who left the UCC for a variety of reasons. While I will never go back to a UCC church unless it is for a wedding or a funeral, I would not NOT vote for someone who is a UCC member.

367 Q-Burn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:11:17am

re: #365 Killgore Trout

But... I was just considering converting...

368 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:11:42am

re: #46 Allah al Fubar

re: #42 Ringo the Gringo

What's Ron Paul's religion?

Anyone know?

Episco-Paulian?

Maybe it's "Congregation of the Un-a-Pauling"

369 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:12:44am
370 Nexus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:13:01am

re: #111 Eowyn2

Caves are symbols of isolation. It's the same deal with Moses on the mountain top. Profits don't get their marching orders in crowds.

371 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:13:27am

re: #367 Q-Burn

HA! Ok, carry on then.

372 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:14:26am

re: #365 Killgore Trout

re: #358 Adrenalyn

Enough with the blowjob talk please. It serves no purpose.

sorry to offend you gentle poster (seiously, I don't mind polite disagreements)
but the sex practices of mormons, I feel, is germain to the debate
your thoughts ?

373 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:14:31am

re: #338 Adrenalyn


what do you base your definition of " good" on?

just curious...

374 Nexus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:15:17am

re: #368 Le_Patriot

Protestant.

375 Owl  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:15:55am

re: #366 loppyd

There is an awful lot of generalization on this thread that I don't think would be appreciated by a lot of folks if the topic were their religion.

And no, I am not a Mormon, I am a WASP who left the UCC for a variety of reasons. While I will never go back to a UCC church unless it is for a wedding or a funeral, I would not NOT vote for someone who is a UCC member.

bigot! racist!(duuuh) intolerant!


/liberal off

I'd vote for mitt. Mormons aren't evil. I just think they are wrong.

376 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:16:01am

re: #326 madmom

Glossalalia is fascinating. What I think of it, and what people who experience it think of it, are different. To them, it's an expression of faith, a sign of a gift from God. I don't share their belief. I'm interested in it as a phenomenon.

377 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:17:57am

So if Mitt does the late-night TV shows, how will he answer the boxers or briefs question?

378 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:18:12am

re: #337 Orde

re: #136 Dotcoman

This belief of yours (in case you're not being sarcastic) that "Islam is religious rule in the absence of politics," is completely wrong and poses a threat to our national security and the world--there's some top notch material about this over at NewEnglishReview, and I especially recommend the articles and posts by Hugh Fitzgerald and Mary Jackson, which can be found clicking their names in the bottom right.


I'm not wrong.
Islam is nothing but pure religious Fascism. In Islam there is no debate, which is a requirement for there to be any sort of politics. In Islam's Shira Law, and like the religion it's self there can be no debate after; submit or die. If you object to the law you object to the Religion, and you get killed for that sort of dissent.

Or do you view homicide bombers as a legitimate tool of political debate? Car bombings, stonings, and beheadings? Sort of hard to hold a civil political discourse with that "religion of peace " crap advocating all of that and more in the name of Islam Governance.

379 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:18:25am

re: #375 Owl


I may need to clarify. I said I would not not vote for a UCC member meaning that someone being a UCC member would not prevent me from voting for them.

380 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:19:33am

re: #377 Ringo the Gringo

So if Mitt does the late-night TV shows, how will he answer the boxers or briefs question?

As long as nobody asks Hillary if she wears granny panties or a thong.

381 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:20:01am

re: #372 Adrenalyn

It has nothing to do with Mitt's ability to serve as president. I'm an atheist too and I'd love to see more atheists post here. It gets lonely at times. Trust me, I infuriate people here all the time but I try to do it by bringing up a relevant point instead of mindless "shock-jock" stuff to insult people with. It's not clever.

382 TMK  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:20:37am

re: #370 Nexus

Caves are symbols of isolation. It's the same deal with Moses on the mountain top. Profits don't get their marching orders in crowds.

"When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language." - Acts 2:1-6

Some do.

383 Nexus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:21:17am

re: #380 loppyd

Hildog in a thong...NOT a visual I need.

384 realwest  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:21:21am

re: #347 loppyd Um, y'all could easily say the same about Rudy - winning two terms in the most liberal and large
(8 million people) city in the Nation.

385 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:24:11am

#381 Kilgore,

As a former atheist myself, I can sympathize.

Dennis Prager always says that you should't judge a person by their theology but rather by their actions...and I agree with him.

386 steveoh  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:24:55am

re: ringo the gringo

Insults will get you as far as your idiotic blind faith. I am 40 years old with a masters degree in Economics, and a minor in Religious, where I came to the conclusions that I did. Do you pick and choose the bits of the good book that are truth? Sounds like you may actually believe in science over the good book on questions of the earth. Where do you stand on evolution you a**hole

387 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:25:17am

re: #380 loppyd

re: #377 Ringo the Gringo


So if Mitt does the late-night TV shows, how will he answer the boxers or briefs question?

As long as nobody asks Hillary if she wears granny panties or a thong.

I think she wears boxers.

388 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:25:29am

re: #279 littleO

re: #252 Dotcoman

And as we are lead down this garden path and the worst does happen. I want more than a impeachment trial. I want all these AH in jail

Which bunch of AH's are you talking about?

389 Boston Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:29:02am

Killgore,

I suspect there's more atheists on this site than you suspect. It's a complete myth that atheist=leftist/marxist/socialist/etc.

I'm living proof and I know I'm not alone.

390 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:29:30am

re: #192 Honorary Yooper

re: #187 Dotcoman

re: #156 Arthur McGowan


re: #42 Ringo the GringoRon Paul is a Catholic.


Seriously? Or are you just baiting the Paulians lurking about?

He's baiting. Check out my #40. Ron Paul is a Baptist.

Oh darn!

I saw your previous post, thanks.
I was so hoping for the Catholic angle in order to give a certain Paulian I know a really hard time. Not to offend Catholics mind you, just him.
Ratts!

391 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:30:00am

re: #386 steveoh

re: ringo the gringo

Insults will get you as far as your idiotic blind faith... Where do you stand on evolution you a**hole

I believe in evolution.

Where did you get the impression that I'm a "fundamentalist" or that my faith is blind?

392 Nexus  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:30:08am

re: #382 TMK

Correction noted.
Profits USUALLY don't get their marching orders in crowds.

393 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:31:53am

re: #381 Killgore Trout

perhaps you don't have the experience with mormons I have

394 MiB  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:33:55am

This is why I am not, nor will I ever be, a Republican.

The fact that this sort of grandstanding to please religious nuts has to go on is absurd.

395 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:34:44am

re: #386 steveoh

Considering that the "good book" is not the authority on questions of the earth, but is the authority on questions of God and heaven, your arugument is nonsense.

396 BabbaZee  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:34:59am

Have not read the thread just the last few posts

and I cant stay to follow up on this at the moment BUT

re: #386 steveoh


nsults will get you as far as your idiotic blind faith. I am 40 years old with a masters degree in Economics, and a minor in Religious, where I came to

I am older than dirt and I have a masters degree in Trollonomics. Bite me.
Who TF are you, and why TF do you think you can or should speak to Ringo like that in here?

You want to ask him something,
ask him
but don't you dare speak to him like he is some kind of troll and you are some sort of established authority around here.

Just the opposite.
Ask again, please.
Nicely.

Later.

397 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:35:33am

re: #390 Dotcoman

LOL! It's always good to give a Paulian a hard time. ;-)

398 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:36:05am

re: #389 Boston Patriot

Killgore,

I suspect there's more atheists on this site than you suspect. It's a complete myth that atheist=leftist/marxist/socialist/etc.

I'm living proof and I know I'm not alone.

Thats because if you're any sort of Socialist in good standing, be it Leftist/Marxist/Commie or Fascist denomination; you already have a religion and can't really be an Atheist anymore. Oh?!

It might be a myth but it sure helps, everyone eventually believes in something. And these days even Atheism is a religion

399 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:36:08am

re: #389 Boston Patriot

I suspect there's more atheists on this site than you suspect.


I suspect a lot of them don't speak up more often because atheists are easy socially acceptable targets. People like Adrenalyn who try to pull off Hitchens' schtick without the required cleverness don't help the common perception that we're all offensive loudmouths.

400 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:36:09am

re: #114 Dianna


The Bible, as you are very well aware, is a compendium of myth, folklore, law, poetry, and philosophy, with bits of actual chronicles thrown in.


___
. . . . Have you read 2nd Timothy 3:16 ?

401 Jimmah  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:36:38am

Mormons tried to BriBe me into Their religion with a plaStic ocarina when i waS a Kid. i TooK the ocarina and Then reported Them aS they were Holding mormon claSSeS in our BacKdoor. Just thougHt id meNtion...

402 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:36:56am

re: #384 realwest

re: #347 loppyd Um, y'all could easily say the same about Rudy - winning two terms in the most liberal and large
(8 million people) city in the Nation.

I was basing my assertion on the fact that Mitt is a Morman and didn't seem to deter the MA voters.

I agree that it was quite an accomplishment for Rudy to be elected in NYC.

403 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:37:50am

re: #389 Boston Patriot

Killgore,

I suspect there's more atheists on this site than you suspect. It's a complete myth that atheist=leftist/marxist/socialist/etc.

I'm living proof and I know I'm not alone.

It is a myth. I knew an atheist in college who was a libertarian/rightist.

404 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:39:07am

re: #396 BabbaZee


BABBA ZEE!

405 drk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:39:38am

I'd loved to have watched it - but somehow this streamed badly to Cadizfornia - instead I will have to rely on the report by Al-Guardian.

"have visited many of the magnificent cathedrals in Europe. They are so inspired ... so grand ... so empty," he said. "So many of the cathedrals now stand as the postcard backdrop to societies just too busy or too 'enlightened' to venture inside and kneel in prayer."

So inspired and so EXPENSIVE ... most "cathedrals" in Europe are now tourist attractions that you can only pay to get into - or are only open for tourists in the daytime (that souvenir booth does a lot of business) - and "high days and holidays" (but when they are rammed and jammed - just you try getting in that day - all sold out! tickets in advance! only the high and mighty - and their friends on the guest list - may enter ... along with the cameras for the media of course) ...

Small wonder nobody goes to these "so grand - so empty" cathedrals anymore - they are too busy down the local Evangelical shop-front, recycled, ex-warehouse church which is ... of course .. always rammed and jammed and open to anyone and everyone ..

406 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:41:40am

re: #402 loppyd

re: #384 realwest

re: #347 loppyd Um, y'all could easily say the same about Rudy - winning two terms in the most liberal and large
(8 million people) city in the Nation.

I was basing my assertion on the fact that Mitt is a Morman and didn't seem to deter the MA voters.

I agree that it was quite an accomplishment for Rudy to be elected in NYC.


You're forgetting how f'd up NYC was before Rudy was elected. They hit rock bottom & finally decided to make a change & stop voting fro the same party over & over again. I can see my home of Philly starting down the road that NY was taking 20 years ago - escalating crime, anyone who can is fleeing for the suburbs - but we haven't hit rock bottom yet, so it will be a while before a Republican will ever be elected Mayor here.

407 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:41:42am

re: #394 MiB

This is why I am not, nor will I ever be, a Republican.

The fact that this sort of grandstanding to please religious nuts has to go on is absurd.

Oh? And you don't think that Liberalism isn't worse?
You have to prove your faith in that religion by murdering a baby or at least vocally supporting it.

You gotta profess a belief in and defend a whole raft of isms in order to be a good Democrat Party member these days. You can't just hope to squeak by with a firm believe that the Federal Government is the be all and end all to all of your personal problems these days.

408 loppyd  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:43:02am

re: #406 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

You're forgetting how f'd up NYC was before Rudy was elected. They hit rock bottom & finally decided to make a change & stop voting fro the same party over & over again. I can see my home of Philly starting down the road that NY was taking 20 years ago - escalating crime, anyone who can is fleeing for the suburbs - but we haven't hit rock bottom yet, so it will be a while before a Republican will ever be elected Mayor here.

How do we explain the midget mayor of NYC now?

I hope Philly sees the light soon. Very sad what is happening there.

409 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:43:36am

re: #401 Jimmah

Mormons tried to BriBe me into Their religion with a plaStic ocarina when i waS a Kid. i TooK the ocarina and Then reported Them aS they were Holding mormon claSSeS in our BacKdoor. Just thougHt id meNtion...

We now give away playstations and toaster ovens...

/

410 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:44:19am

re: #394 MiB

This is why I am not, nor will I ever be, a Republican.

The fact that this sort of grandstanding to please religious nuts has to go on is absurd.

You know, if an atheist were to ever run for the presidency he would probably have to make a similar speech.

411 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:44:31am

re: #353 Adrenalyn

re: #345 Pantera

I don't like Romney cause he seems like he would be a Bill Clinton who would flip-flop at the drop of a hat.
And that shiny black hair. He's like the only Republican with any hair left. What does that say?

by the way
Mormons don't believe oral sex is sex either

ask a mormon girl about satisfying a boys needs before he leaves for his mission

I don't believe in sex before marriage. As for oral sex? Who are you to tell me what goes on in my bedroom?

You need some better talking points.

412 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:46:08am

re: #386 steveoh

Steveoh,

Your post in #334 swept anyone who might have a faith in a "higher power" into a cult.

Mind you, within any circle, good, bad, or indifferent can be ascribed to the practice, belief, or actions of adherents, nonetheless, I would be hard-pressed to think you would say civilization as we know it was not born out of a judeo-christian principle.

Lust of material possession, power, and wealth is not cornered by folks who you feel to be duped by an over-zealous religious state anymore than those who are overly-zealous in their aspiration to eliminate the religious order, employ their own creed, and assure utopia lies just beyond their architecture.

Whether you care or not, your post in#334, and subsequent post elaborating educational prowess speak volumes without saying much in actual text.

413 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:46:42am

re: #399 Killgore Trout

re: #389 Boston Patriot

I suspect there's more atheists on this site than you suspect.


I suspect a lot of them don't speak up more often because atheists are easy socially acceptable targets. People like Adrenalyn who try to pull off Hitchens' schtick without the required cleverness don't help the common perception that we're all offensive loudmouths.

Sad commentary. Atheists bring a lot to the discussion. I find some to be as pompous and arragant as many religious types, but skepticism is always healthy. (If anyone missed it, I am LDS)

414 Highrise  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:47:21am

Wow he used the F word...fascism. It's refreshing that any of the candidates know that word hehe.

For some reason it will only play half of the clip for me but I glanced through the transcript for the rest of it. Before viewing this, my opinion was that I really wish people would have stopped obsessing on the religious questions and I would have advised against this type of speech to further pigeonhole a candidate if I were the campaign manager. After viewing it, I think it was a good move. The speech makes the leftists look bad because we know that they question him and huckabee like crazy about religious affiliations (and they tout themselves as the *tolerant and all embracing* party) but did they allow ANY questions about ellison? If anything, they called down people who even tried to especially when ellison chose another book to swear upon...that book that so hates the west. /boggle The speech also makes the conservatives that proclaim they will NOT under any circumstances vote for Romney to crap or get off the pot. Either open up the mind a little on this guy's actions in regards to his religion or you look like a nut to think he'll do harm with his religion. Of course his political decisions are completely fair game to criticize him on, which I have not followed closely I will admit.

I personally do not agree with the mormon faith's doctrine and my experiences haven't been favorable with them in the past. However, there are some things to note about Romney in regards to his faith:

*His family appears to be solid
*He understands that family is the backbone of the USA and that encouraging good families is what will help fix America.
*It doesn't appear that his religion has influenced wrongly his political decisions that might alarm those not of his faith
*His religion doesn't have a script that calls for my head to be lopped off so I don't have to be concerned about him going all taqiyya on me later
*He seems to be a sincere speaker especially on this subject
*He isn't running for my church office

Primaries, I like Hunter but will vote for anyone but mccain (likes compromising with liberals and working with kennedy a little too much..plus mccain/feingold and shamnesty...NOPE!) or ron paul (nutterbutter) in the final run (neither will get the nomination so not worried :P ) .

415 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:49:36am

re: #411 Oh no...Sand People!

re: #353 Adrenalyn

re: #345 Pantera

I don't like Romney cause he seems like he would be a Bill Clinton who would flip-flop at the drop of a hat.
And that shiny black hair. He's like the only Republican with any hair left. What does that say?

by the way
Mormons don't believe oral sex is sex either

ask a mormon girl about satisfying a boys needs before he leaves for his mission

I don't believe in sex before marriage. As for oral sex? Who are you to tell me what goes on in my bedroom?

You need some better talking points.

Exactly. My church leaders don't say anything more about our sex lives (with in marriage) than be sure not to degrade your partner. The rest is up to you two to decide...gotta go whip cracking... ;)

416 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:50:06am

re: #406 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

I hope your right BDVM, but you would think after Street waiting in line to get the toy, saner heads would prevail.

417 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:50:07am

re: #411 Oh no...Sand People!

re: #353 Adrenalyn

re: #345 Pantera

I don't like Romney cause he seems like he would be a Bill Clinton who would flip-flop at the drop of a hat.
And that shiny black hair. He's like the only Republican with any hair left. What does that say?

by the way
Mormons don't believe oral sex is sex either

ask a mormon girl about satisfying a boys needs before he leaves for his mission

I don't believe in sex before marriage. As for oral sex? Who are you to tell me what goes on in my bedroom?

You need some better talking points.

And what's wrong with Mitt's hair? Reagan had a glorious head of shiny black hair, too!

418 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:50:27am

re: #394 MiB

This is why I am not, nor will I ever be, a Republican.

The fact that this sort of grandstanding to please religious nuts has to go on is absurd.

Oh and I left out, this speech Mitt just gave was not so much for the sake of Republicans, or even Christians or Conservatives; as it was a vain attempt to appease the Godless huns of Liberal Socialist MSM.

419 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:50:46am

Kilgore,

Have you read this?

What the New Atheists Don’t See
by Theodore Dalrymple

BTW - Theodore Dalrymple is an atheist.

420 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:51:56am

re: #397 Honorary Yooper

re: #390 Dotcoman

LOL! It's always good to give a Paulian a hard time. ;-)

Yep, yep.

But they are a sensitive lot though.
And that makes it so much fun.

421 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:52:00am

re: #416 formercorpsman

re: #406 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

I hope your right BDVM, but you would think after Street waiting in line to get the toy, saner heads would prevail.

You should hope I'm wrong, because I'm saying that Philly is going to have to get as bad as NYC was in the 80s before things get better. I sorely hope not, but I'm afraid that is the road we're heading down.

422 Jimmah  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:52:01am

gotta go...cut and paSte Too hard and maKeS poStS looK liKe worK of unaBomBer...laterS...

423 madmom  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:52:06am

re: #402 loppyd

Rudy is a liberal.

424 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:52:59am

re: #400 Le_Patriot

Yes.

It does not matter if you believe the Bible to be divinely inspired - the history and selection of the documents are all I am addressing. I will not engage in arguments of faith, and I'm certainly not going to start thrashing out which letters are Paul's and which psuedo-Paulian.

425 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:53:15am

re: #420 Dotcoman

re: #397 Honorary Yooper

re: #390 Dotcoman

LOL! It's always good to give a Paulian a hard time. ;-)

Yep, yep.

But they are a sensitive lot though.
And that makes it so much fun.

It's almost like a religion for them.

"There is no Ron Paul but Ron Paul and Ron Paul is his prophet."

426 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:53:46am

re: #372 Adrenalyn

re: #365 Killgore Trout

re: #358 Adrenalyn

Enough with the blowjob talk please. It serves no purpose.

sorry to offend you gentle poster (seiously, I don't mind polite disagreements)
but the sex practices of mormons, I feel, is germain to the debate
your thoughts ?

My thoughts are that you are an idiot. Who cares what is done behind closed doors between consenting adults. My church doesn't care if you are a married couple, why should you? Your hang up, not ours.

427 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:56:53am

re: #424 Dianna

re: #400 Le_Patriot

Yes.

It
does not matter if you believe the Bible to be divinely inspired - the
history and selection of the documents are all I am addressing. I will
not engage in arguments of faith, and I'm certainly not going to start
thrashing out which letters are Paul's and which psuedo-Paulian.

Or psuedo-Ron Paulian.

428 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:57:52am

re: #421 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Brother, going underneath the L, and following it down to CC?

I don't know how worse it can get than that.

But I am with you, I think it will get much worse.

It is a true shame, to think the same streets where Franklin walked, or where Ross made the flag.

429 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:58:03am

re: #352 Boston Patriot

Wow, this is getting heated!

I want a President who totally upholds the separation of church and state, but this is a disturbing quote from his speech:
"If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve...no one cause and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States."

"Serve no one cause and no one interest"?!?!? How about the cause of liberty and the interest of the individual to the right to his own life, Mitt?

"A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States." That statement reeks of collectivism and the myth that we're a Democracy (a.k.a. mob rule) while in fact this country is a Constitutional Republic.

This is typical of religionists in that without mysticism they believe there can be no absolutes. So, if they're honest enough to acknowledge that America has a clear separation of church and state, they immediately resort to subjectivism- "common cause," "no one interest," "the voice of the people," etc, etc.

Practical politics is a cesspool. No politican out there understands what freedom is. On the Left or Right.

There are objective absolutes, among them reality and man's right to his own life. I wish there was a candidate who would uphold it.

That was a silly post. 'Common cause of the people of the United States' hardly smacks of collectivism. You are stretching a little here.

430 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:58:26am

re: #419 Ringo the Gringo

I did read that and I agree. Although I like Hitchens as a lovable drunken mudslinging character I don't agree with the Evangelical Athiest's goal of eliminating religion. I think Dalrymple is spot on with that article.

431 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:59:15am

re: #425 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

re: #420 Dotcoman

re: #397 Honorary Yooper

re: #390 Dotcoman

LOL! It's always good to give a Paulian a hard time. ;-)

Yep, yep.

But they are a sensitive lot though.
And that makes it so much fun.

It's almost like a religion for them.

"There is no Ron Paul but Ron Paul and Ron Paul is his prophet."

So Say We All!

432 Ringo the Gringo  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:03:05pm

re: #430 Killgore Trout

I like Hitchens as a lovable drunken mudslinging character...

Me too.

I'm out of here for a while.

Take care.

433 steveoh  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:04:52pm

Re: #412

I was wound up by another post, I respect those who show a reverence to humanist principles, regardless of how they get there or whether or not they believe in a higher power. My first post which brought on a personal attack by Ringo the Gringo, merely stated I was slightly appalled at Romney's assault of secularism. His speech was at times an assualt on Secular America.

For the record I believe in a higher power, but have serious problems with the institutions of organized religion.

434 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:06:36pm

re: #429 coquimbojoe

re: #352 Boston Patriot

Wow, this is getting heated!

I want a President who totally upholds the separation of church and state, but this is a disturbing quote from his speech:
"If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve...no one cause and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States."

"Serve no one cause and no one interest"?!?!? How about the cause of liberty and the interest of the individual to the right to his own life, Mitt?

"A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States." That statement reeks of collectivism and the myth that we're a Democracy (a.k.a. mob rule) while in fact this country is a Constitutional Republic.

This is typical of religionists in that without mysticism they believe there can be no absolutes. So, if they're honest enough to acknowledge that America has a clear separation of church and state, they immediately resort to subjectivism- "common cause," "no one interest," "the voice of the people," etc, etc.

Practical politics is a cesspool. No politican out there understands what freedom is. On the Left or Right.

There are objective absolutes, among them reality and man's right to his own life. I wish there was a candidate who would uphold it.

That was a silly post. 'Common cause of the people of the United States' hardly smacks of collectivism. You are stretching a little here.

I gotta agree with you there coquimbojoe.

Oh and Boston Patriot where is that Separation of Church and State Amendment again? I can't find it in the Constitution. Must be some whee near the Muslim Racist ACLU RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED ammendment. Michael Newdow could sure use the help looking for those to ammendments too.

435 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:10:49pm

re: #434 Dotcoman

"Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion" has come to mean separation of church and state. In the current era, it's an acceptable shorthand, in my opinion, since we're not in a court of law, or an academic environment.

436 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:16:18pm

Romney panders to the religious right for the nomination, and it's the only thing he's got. However, he has no chance of winning in the general election. The Left has demonized W as an apocalypse-seeking knuckle-dragging religious nut, and this characterization has been layered on so heavily that it has second-handedly stuck with a lot of people who are on the margin, or otherwise uninterested/uninformed about politics.

Romney's social conservativeness would be ridiculed pretty brutally if he got the nomination. The press is pumping Hukabee up like crazy, and you know why? Because they want a bigotted corrupt social conservative to win the nomination, knowing that he'd be blown away that much easier in the general election.

Romney is not nearly as bad as Huckabee, but he doesn't have much going for him either. The worst of both worlds: socially conservative and fiscally liberal.

Only someone like Giuliani has a chance to win the presidency for Republicans. Someone they can't make fun of for being anti-abortion, anti gay-unions, etc. The liberals are scared of him. I hope the backward religious sect of the GOP does not prevail in deciding on this nomination, otherwise the general election will be a forgone conclusion.

437 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:18:04pm

re: #14 Lizard by the Bay

Is it the born-agains and other "intolerant Christians" on the right (as we've been told), or is it really the leftist MSM trying to piss in our pot?

I would say probably both ... plus the Rudyites - though I think the Bible Belt is coming around to being more comfortable with Mitt.

438 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:21:11pm

re: #436 medaura18586

I hope the backward religious sect of the GOP does not prevail in deciding on this nomination,

I am decidedly non-religious, but I have not found believers to be backwards, even when I disagree with them.

439 snowman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:22:08pm

re: #301 father_of_10

OK, I shouldn't have called the misguided, disrespectful, uninformed and somewhat dishonest people idiots, morons and stupid...


deci-dad, you shouldn't get so hot about facts or other's opinions. You might offer a rebuttal or a reasoned argument rather than ad hominum comments.

440 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:24:28pm

re: #426 coquimbojoe

re: #372 Adrenalyn



My church doesn't care if you are a married couple, why should you? Your hang up, not ours.

so sex outside of marriage is ok in the moron church then ?
cool, sign me up for it

441 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:25:53pm

re: #435 Dianna

re: #434 Dotcoman

"Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion"
. . or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . .
has come to mean separation of church and state.

I always like to see both parts presented (establishment OR prohibiting) when the church/state issue is discussed.

442 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:27:32pm

re: #441 Le_Patriot

You're right; I was using shorthand to lead into a discussion of shorthand.

That doesn't work very well, does it?

443 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:29:29pm

re: #440 Adrenalyn

re: #426 coquimbojoe

re: #372 Adrenalyn



My church doesn't care if you are a married couple, why should you? Your hang up, not ours.so sex outside of marriage is ok in the moron church then ?
cool, sign me up for it

The tenants of Mormon theology are to abstain from premarital sex and fooling around in all of its forms before marriage. Once you are married, if it is consensual, I don't know nor care what you do behind closed doors. What if someone breaks these tenants and has sex before marriage? Well, once you recognize what you did was wrong, you correct your life. There you go. It's called repentance. We believe people can make changes in their lives whether for the better or worse...

444 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:29:32pm
445 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:30:50pm

re: #444 song_and_dance_man

What one believes is essential for any to be elected as President, and Romney justifies himself as it relates to his faith unduly. Like or or not all too many view Mormanism as a cult just as they view Islam as such.

Lizards, would you vote for a Muslim as the POTUS?

Pastors have to keep paychecks coming somehow...

446 snowman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:31:39pm

re: #444 song_and_dance_man

Lizards, would you vote for a Muslim as the POTUS?

NOPE

447 Oh no...Sand People!  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:32:34pm

Later lizards...food. Must eat.

448 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:33:43pm

re: #436 medaura18586

Romney panders to the religious right for the nomination, and it's the only thing he's got. However, he has no chance of winning in the general election. The Left has demonized W as an apocalypse-seeking knuckle-dragging religious nut, and this characterization has been layered on so heavily that it has second-handedly stuck with a lot of people who are on the margin, or otherwise uninterested/uninformed about politics.

Romney's social conservativeness would be ridiculed pretty brutally if he got the nomination. The press is pumping Hukabee up like crazy, and you know why? Because they want a bigotted corrupt social conservative to win the nomination, knowing that he'd be blown away that much easier in the general election.

Romney is not nearly as bad as Huckabee, but he doesn't have much going for him either. The worst of both worlds: socially conservative and fiscally liberal.

Only someone like Giuliani has a chance to win the presidency for Republicans. Someone they can't make fun of for being anti-abortion, anti gay-unions, etc. The liberals are scared of him. I hope the backward religious sect of the GOP does not prevail in deciding on this nomination, otherwise the general election will be a forgone conclusion.

Umm, Romney was hardly pandering. He has always been a religious conservative. What Hillary does in a church is pandering, when the Gore-bot pretends to be a preacher that was pandering. Romney has lead large congregations for years, served as a missionary. Expressing his religious faith and philosophy is hardly pandering.

Honey, you chose Canada over the US. Now you want in. Your initial judgment is fairly poor.

449 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:33:50pm

re: #433 steveoh

Understood, but I think the ultimate denigration of your argument was to broadly stroke;

You are all following a cult of one kind or another, invented over the ages to control the masses for a variety of reasons, most economic. Wake up!

Ironically, those whom invested full faith in the bully pulpits of Mao, Stalin, Castro, Pol Pot, etc, have come up on a much shorter end of the stick if we are talking pure numbers, whether population, economic, or material wealth.

450 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:33:59pm

re: #438 Dianna

According to polls, the #1 issue of GOP caucus voters is Immigration. Not National Security, not SPENDING! not the economy, but immigration. I've lived in the mid-west for a year of my life, and I have SEEN backwardness.

I can't stand these farm-subsidy-dependent, RACIST self-righteous pigs setting the momentum for the GOP. They are a minority, but religious segments are always very powerful because they vote in a block. They are brainwashed into the tenets of their cults, and can be controlled, so they carry a large impact vote-wise. That's unlike individualistic open-minded non-lockstep-voting average American, who is harder to represent and harder to please through specific handouts.

It's not a clear-cut one-to-one correspondence but the religious right, according to the law of large numbers, is friggin backwards in so many ways.

451 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:37:43pm

re: #440 Adrenalyn

re: #426 coquimbojoe

re: #372 Adrenalyn



My church doesn't care if you are a married couple, why should you? Your hang up, not ours.so sex outside of marriage is ok in the moron church then ?
cool, sign me up for it

Wow, stupidity on parade. I think I specified 'married', umm, let me check, oh yeah, its right there in the first sentence, spelled correctly and everything. Dumbass (In response to your cute use of 'moron').

452 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:37:52pm
453 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:38:20pm

I do not know too many Mormons personally, but the handful that I do know are very honest, clean-living, polite, and very industrious - good qualities in a neighbor and a fellow American. I could be quite comfortable having a Mormon President.

454 Occasional Reader  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:38:56pm

re: #323 loppyd

re: #162 Occasional Reader


They were then allowed to detain them and contact ICE.

I don't know if you're still here, loppy, but...

Detain them based on what? My wife has a foreign accent. At any given moment, walking around or driving down the road, she doesn't necessarily have papers on her person proving she is in this country legally (nor is she required by law to carry such papers on her). So under Romney's plan, could a state trooper throw her in the clink based on her accent?

455 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:39:05pm

re: #436 medaura18586

So what do you think about Ronald Reagan?

456 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:41:27pm

re: #448 coquimbojoe

re: #436 medaura18586

Romney panders to the religious right for the nomination, and it's the only thing he's got. However, he has no chance of winning in the general election. The Left has demonized W as an apocalypse-seeking knuckle-dragging religious nut, and this characterization has been layered on so heavily that it has second-handedly stuck with a lot of people who are on the margin, or otherwise uninterested/uninformed about politics.

Romney's social conservativeness would be ridiculed pretty brutally if he got the nomination. The press is pumping Hukabee up like crazy, and you know why? Because they want a bigotted corrupt social conservative to win the nomination, knowing that he'd be blown away that much easier in the general election.

Romney is not nearly as bad as Huckabee, but he doesn't have much going for him either. The worst of both worlds: socially conservative and fiscally liberal.

Only someone like Giuliani has a chance to win the presidency for Republicans. Someone they can't make fun of for being anti-abortion, anti gay-unions, etc. The liberals are scared of him. I hope the backward religious sect of the GOP does not prevail in deciding on this nomination, otherwise the general election will be a forgone conclusion.

Umm, Romney was hardly pandering. He has always been a religious conservative. What Hillary does in a church is pandering, when the Gore-bot pretends to be a preacher that was pandering. Romney has lead large congregations for years, served as a missionary. Expressing his religious faith and philosophy is hardly pandering.

Honey, you chose Canada over the US. Now you want in. Your initial judgment is fairly poor.

He has turned around about abortion, for one thing, and that's a huge pet issue for most voters. I can give you the list of what he has flip-flopped over but it's too long for the scope of this post.

My initial judgment was poor? I don't see what your point is. I was a 17-year-old high-school graduate who was rightfully terrified by the way I was treated in Nebraska. And I have defined my political identity only throughout my college years. How enlightened were you during highschool?

I don't feel embarrassed at all about having changed my mind, sane people are capable of accepting their mistakes. I see what Canada stands for (it actually stands for nothing, it just tries to invent its identity as standing against the US because they don't know what they are for) But you didn't even make a point.

Yes, I want in, and I am getting in this summer, legally. The US is a membership club. You seem to have forgotten your club's own rules, and I don't have to appease the Bible-belt to convince them of my worthiness to "get in". Forget it!

457 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:45:02pm

re: #456 medaura18586

You write for Romney

He has turned around about abortion, for one thing, and that's a huge pet issue for most voters. I can give you the list of what he has flip-flopped over but it's too long for the scope of this post.

And then for yourself:

I don't feel embarrassed at all about having changed my mind, sane people are capable of accepting their mistakes.

Double standard much?

458 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:46:46pm

re: #454 Occasional Reader

re: #323 loppyd

re: #162 Occasional Reader


They were then allowed to detain them and contact ICE.

I don't know if you're still here, loppy, but...

Detain them based on what? My wife has a foreign accent. At
any given moment, walking around or driving down the road, she doesn't
necessarily have papers on her person proving she is in this country
legally (nor is she required by law to carry such papers on her). So
under Romney's plan, could a state trooper throw her in the clink based
on her accent?


Bostonians are hardly ones to bring up funny accents
/runs for cover of a different thread

459 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:48:07pm

re: #451 coquimbojoe

re: #440 Adrenalyn


re: #426 coquimbojoe

re: #372 Adrenalyn



My church doesn't care if you are a married couple, why should you? Your hang up, not ours.so sex outside of marriage is ok in the moron church then ?
cool, sign me up for it

Wow, stupidity on parade. I think I specified 'married', umm, let me check, oh yeah, its right there in the first sentence, spelled correctly and everything. Dumbass (In response to your cute use of 'moron').


Oooops ... I think I see the source of a misunderstanding between you folks. Let's add a clause and try it again:
My church doesn't care if as long as you are a married couple, why should you?

I think that is what was meant.

460 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:49:09pm

re: #456 medaura18586

More silliness:

Yes, I want in, and I am getting in this summer, legally. The US is a membership club. You seem to have forgotten your club's own rules, and I don't have to appease the Bible-belt to convince them of my worthiness to "get in". Forget it!

Thank you for coming legally, welcome, we are glad to have you. As for it being a club? Possibly then, the least exclusive club in the world. And rules? Which ones are the ones I forgot? Finally, who in their right mind even puts 'appease the bible belt' in a sentence except for the ignorant. The Bible belt's opinion of you has never been a factor for entrance.

461 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:50:43pm

re: #459 Guy_Philly

re: #451 coquimbojoe

re: #440 Adrenalyn


re: #426 coquimbojoe


re: #372 Adrenalyn



My church doesn't care if you are a married couple, why should you? Your hang up, not ours.so sex outside of marriage is ok in the moron church then ?
cool, sign me up for it


Wow, stupidity on parade. I think I specified 'married', umm, let me check, oh yeah, its right there in the first sentence, spelled correctly and everything. Dumbass (In response to your cute use of 'moron').


Oooops ... I think I see the source of a misunderstanding between you folks. Let's add a clause and try it again:
My church doesn't care if as long as you are a married couple, why should you?

I think that is what was meant.

Thanks but the context was clear way up there. Adrenalyn is being purposefully provacative, or just obtuse.

462 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:51:18pm

re: #455 formercorpsman

I am socially liberal, fiscally conservative. I am personally very socially conservative, ironically, well I am an atheist and I tend to be very vulgar, but other than that, I don't drink, I've never ever smoked a cigar or a joint in my life, and have only been with one man: my my finance. (urgg, maybe that's too much information, but it's something I'm not ashamed of and I suppose am comfortable with the cyberspace knowing).

The thing is, because I live such a normal life, I am unlikely to be affected by the bigotry of social conservatives: I am unlikely to have an abortion, I am straight so gay-discrimination doesn't affect me personally, and so on and so forth. However it makes me sick that if I were in that position, I'd have the religious nuts to worry about, legistlating important aspects of my behavior.

What's important is that I can usually choose my behavior, so I can protect myself. Taxes, on the other hand, or spending, I can't get around through personal choices.

That's why usually, fiscal conservativeness is to me paramount. And I bite the bullet and cheer for Republicans (as opposed to Libertarians, who are getting moon-batty recently with their anti-war sentiment anfd have no chance in hell to win).

So I liked Reagan. Yes his social views were iffy, but what was more imporant were economic issues, spending, welfare, taxes, etc.

I liked Thatcher 100 times more than Reagan because she was the best of both worlds: pure classical liberal. But overall Reagan was very good.

Thing is, lately the GOP has not even been fiscally responsible, so what's there for me to like?

463 nikis-knight  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:51:53pm

re: #215 DistantThunder

re: #40 Honorary Yooper


I posted this in the dead thread, but it is relevant here:

#660 Honorary Yooper 12/06/07 8:16:30 am reply quote report 0

I have a really stupid sounding question (at least stupid for those in our media):

Why does Mitt Romney's religion matter? (Latter Day Saints)

How about Barak Hussein Obama's religion and his father's religion? (United Church of Christ / Islam)
How about Mike Huckabee's religion? (Southern Baptist)
Or, for that matter, Hillary Clinton's religion? (United Methodist)
What about John Edwards's religion? (United Methodist)
Or, Bill Richardson's religion? (Roman Catholic)
Or, Rudy Guiliani's religion? (Roman Catholic)
Dare I ask about Fred!'s religion? (Church of Christ)
Or, for the coup de gras, Ron Paul's religion? (Baptist)
(Gotta include Ron Paul in here or the Paulians will scream.)

Why does Romney get scrutiny when the others do not?
Do I sense bias in the MSM?


It's not only bias in the MSM. With the growth of the LDS church, the evangelists became alarmed that they were losing members to the Mormons. And that matters a great deal, because every evangelical church is supported by it's congregation, whereas, there are no paid ministers in the LDS church - in every chapel, everyone is a volunteer, including the bishop (pastor). Therefore, it became a matter of survival for the evangelicals to inoculate their members against learning about or joining the LDS church.


If you want the benefit of the doubt in regards to your beliefs, at least assume sincerity on behalf of others. Saying it's all about the money is rather silly and verging on Marxism.

464 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:53:35pm

OT: nobody has responded to anything that I have typed in here in over a week. I am starting to think that Chuck used that new-found blog trick on me. Someone say something and help save my belief in Charles.

Maybe I just have nothing useful to comment on?

465 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:56:25pm

re: #463 nikis-knight

Unfortunately I can't cite the pastors that have said the same, but it has been said. But being the only reason for others disagreeing with LDS teachings, no, it most certainly is not.

466 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:57:20pm

re: #464 Guy_Philly

OT: nobody has responded to anything that I have typed in here in over a week. I am starting to think that Chuck used that new-found blog trick on me. Someone say something and help save my belief in Charles.

Maybe I just have nothing useful to comment on?

Charles is good and all knowing. Hail Charles, giver of all that is lizardly.

467 snowman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:58:20pm

re: #464 Guy_Philly

OT: nobody has responded to anything that I have typed in here in over a week. I am starting to think that Chuck used that new-found blog trick on me. Someone say something and help save my belief in Charles.

Maybe I just have nothing useful to comment on?

Somebody name a teddy bear after him.

/snicker

468 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:59:12pm

re: #466 coquimbojoe

re: #464 Guy_Philly


OT: nobody has responded to anything that I have typed in here in over a week. I am starting to think that Chuck used that new-found blog trick on me. Someone say something and help save my belief in Charles.

Maybe I just have nothing useful to comment on?


Charles is good and all knowing. Hail Charles, giver of all that is lizardly.


... in other words, my comments were not reply-worthy ... hmmm. I gotta work on that.

469 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 12:59:33pm
470 Uriah_lost  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:04:59pm

My take, in short, this is his "don't tase me, bro" act.

471 snowman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:05:35pm

father_of_10 fire up your engines, you're not gonna like this:

Now, in the best of all worlds, I don't think religion should have a much to do, if anything, with whether a person is qualified to be POTUS. That said, my thought process and decision making path is going to include all attributes of a person. It is only logical to use any information we have to make a good decision.

Romney made the speach today to help voters feel more comfortable with his avowed religion.

My earlier post on this subject noted my discomfort with someone in such a powerful position who was either deceptive about or ignorant of the historically false, theologically unsound and profoundly anti Christian faith he espouses.

For example, from the speach we see this quote

"I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and the savior of mankind," he said. While conceding Mormons have different beliefs about the earthly presence of Jesus Christ, "each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. ... Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree."


This is typical Mormon double-speak. The Jesus Christ they believe in is an exaulted man made so by his own effort. The same is true of his father, God...Mormons believe he is a man who achieved god-hood by good works.

"While conceding Mormons have different beliefs about the earthly presence of Jesus Christ.." Good grief! There certainly is a difference, like between a rock and a daisy!

"each religion has its own unique doctrines and history" . That's evidently supposed to make us feel OK, since we all believe in the same thing but just have some little niggly differences in doctrine.

Little differences like the pre-existent nature of God, the concept of the Trinity, the inerrancy of the Bible, salvation by faith not works, and other trivial matters.

So why can't we just be clear about this stuff? I don't care if you worship a watermelon, just don't pretend that because you call it Jesus, then you believe the same things I do. I also reserve the right to consider you a crackpot, but treat you fairly in non-theological areas.

Bottom line, if Mitt gets the GOP nomination he will get my vote...because he will be far better than ANY candidate the democrats have.

472 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:05:49pm

re: #457 coquimbojoe

re: #456 medaura18586

You write for Romney

He has turned around about abortion, for one thing, and that's a huge pet issue for most voters. I can give you the list of what he has flip-flopped over but it's too long for the scope of this post.

And then for yourself:

I don't feel embarrassed at all about having changed my mind, sane people are capable of accepting their mistakes.

Double standard much?

I don't have time for this right now, so I'll answer very briefly:

I have no vested interests in my decision-making. I think for myself and bear the consequences myself. I also am not in a position (or seeking one) to make decisions for an entire country. I also changed around pretty early in life. Romney, on the other hand, is under external pressure. So it's not a double standard: I have every reason to question how genuine Romney's turnarounds have been on major issues, since they were perfectly timed for the GOP race and uhm, rather late in life to make such life-changing turnarounds?

Romney had to win over Massachusetts as a governor, so he had to be socially liberal because it's how New England rolls. He has historically gone with the drift and adapted himself like a chameleon (not to be confused with a lizard, pun intended). Why should I trust his moral consistency going forward? I'd have to put too much faith in him, as it seems you are putting in his faith, and I'm not big into faith.

Call me an ignorant all you want. Since the early part of the 20th century, America turned around and closed its doors. People got shitless from the Great Depression and allowed the nanny state to take over. Protectionism became the motto. Social conservatives have been a big regressive force in keeping immigrants out, preserving this bullshit notion of the "Judeo-Christian" white heritage. It's masqueraded bigotry. And even today, the greatest concern for the religious right is immigration, that tells you something. Immigrants "stealing American jobs" and preserving this illusion of a "Judeo-Christian" heritage, that's what's ignorant. Not me calling that into question.

What rules of the club am I talking about? That all of the above is Anti-American. Tariffs are Anti-American. Keeping out people who vow to never receive handouts, and who only want to work and be productive, is Anti-American. Meddling with the separation of church and state is Anti-American. Your most distinguished founding fathers were agnostic and had good reasons of setting up the constitution that way.

No, it's not an amendment. It never needed to be amended. The constitution is more than a list of the amendments. Read the fine print. It's your club's handbook.

473 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:08:16pm

re: #469 song_and_dance_man


Hahahaha ... good one!

474 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:08:18pm

...My take on the Romney speech is that he hit a home run. This is what America needs to hear more of. (Family values, religious freedom, reminders of our founding fathers and the Constitution, etc.).
...I was previously on the fence with Rudy, Fred, Huckabee, and Romney. . . .but had been leaning Rudy. I am now clearly leaning Romney.
...I will be voting for a President, not my church pastor.
I am not a Mormon, but would vote for a Mormon (or other protestant, or Catholic, or Jew), if I felt their social and political leanings were as conservative as mine.
...Mormon doctrine does not call for beheadings, or a Mormon Caliph-like dictatorship. Debating the Book of Mormon vs the Bible is therefore of no interest to me for the issue at hand. Such debates belongs on a theology thread. This is America. As long as someone's religious doctrine not a potential threat to me, I don't care much what faith they are.

475 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:11:01pm

re: #462 medaura18586

From much of what you describe, you posses a large humanist core. I am not slandering you, just my opinion.

The one inconsistency I have always seen with the socially liberal / fiscally conservative caveat is that the two have much potential to cancel each other out.

As much as you tarnished a particular class of folks living in the United States, (rednecks/religious right) you fail to recognize, or at least acknowledge, both parties are at the yoke of interest groups.

Whether you validate this or not, many people who are against abortion can recite opposition with articulate conviction. Folks who see issues such as gay marriage sanctioned by the state can site more than just religious refutation for the reasons not.

I have taken the time to read your blog.

It strikes me that you are still quite young, and while that is nothing to hold against you, many people with more years under their belt have come to realize, the perception of religious heaven on earth, or secular humanism's paradise by design are not within reach.

Never will be.

Looking at the past, will tell you where you need to be for the future.

Insomuch as you feel the religious right to be a burden on the party of the Republicans, this is only by design. In a better world, the Democrats would experience the same uncomfortable position of scrutiny by their sins of omission for the socially liberal excess of a Folsom Street Fair, or Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, but we know as long as Jerry Falwell homosexuality is sinful, he will draw the ire of shaped public opinion, not the adult who brings their child in the presence of a gay man on display shoving a dildo up his ass for folly, just to see how far it could go.

If there might be one thing we can agree on, I think we say much of the world is in a pickle right about now.

476 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:11:37pm

re: #464 Guy_Philly

We love you.

What part of Philly?

477 snowman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:11:45pm

re: #472 medaura18586

I don't see eye to eye with you, but damn I like your straight shooting, clear presentation. Thanks for your posting. Maybe you could give some cyber-lessons to father_of_10?

478 Abu Bin Squid  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:12:26pm

re: #22 Lizard by the Bay

Did the first two posts in this thread really need to be OT? Isn't that best saved for an open thread, or deep in the thread? Methinks there are some people who wait for a new thread to be opened just so they can make their own wannabe front-page blog posts.


Amen! Start your own blog if you crave attention. As for Carl at post #2, he linked to his blog, but I believe he should have waited 30 minutes out of respect for Charles who sets the agenda here. This is every bit as annoying as announcing "first!".
My 2 cents.

479 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:13:09pm

re: #474 Le_Patriot

...My take on the Romney speech is that he hit a home run. This is what America needs to hear more of. (Family values, religious freedom, reminders of our founding fathers and the Constitution, etc.).
...I was previously on the fence with Rudy, Fred, Huckabee, and Romney. . . .but had been leaning Rudy. I am now clearly leaning Romney.
...I will be voting for a President, not my church pastor.
I am not a Mormon, but would vote for a Mormon (or other protestant, or Catholic, or Jew), if I felt their social and political leanings were as conservative as mine.
...Mormon doctrine does not call for beheadings, or a Mormon Caliph-like dictatorship. Debating the Book of Mormon vs the Bible is therefore of no interest to me for the issue at hand. Such debates belongs on a theology thread. This is America. As long as someone's religious doctrine not a potential threat to me, I don't care much what faith they are.

You are clearly leaning Romney now because of one speech? Speech-writers come and go for these candidates. While the speech was good, remember it's rhetoric. It's the political record that tells the true story

480 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:14:55pm

re: #464 Guy_Philly

OT: nobody has responded to anything that I have typed in here in over a week. I am starting to think that Chuck used that new-found blog trick on me. Someone say something and help save my belief in Charles.

Maybe I just have nothing useful to comment on?

Hey, I thought my #346 would have made a few of our posters heads explode, and at least brought up some worthy points, but no takers. Heck - I even drew a parallel between Mitt & Big Bill, himself! Maybe a few paragraphs was too long to be bothered with, or everybody just wants to obsess about the Mormon thing and ignore infringements on core American values. Oh, well. All hail Charles, anyway!

482 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:17:32pm

re: #479 medaura18586

re: #474 Le_Patriot

...My take on the Romney speech is that he hit a home run. This is what America needs to hear more of. (Family values, religious freedom, reminders of our founding fathers and the Constitution, etc.).
...I was previously on the fence with Rudy, Fred, Huckabee, and Romney. . . .but had been leaning Rudy. I am now clearly leaning Romney.
...I will be voting for a President, not my church pastor.
I am not a Mormon, but would vote for a Mormon (or other protestant, or Catholic, or Jew), if I felt their social and political leanings were as conservative as mine.
...Mormon doctrine does not call for beheadings, or a Mormon Caliph-like dictatorship. Debating the Book of Mormon vs the Bible is therefore of no interest to me for the issue at hand. Such debates belongs on a theology thread. This is America. As long as someone's religious doctrine not a potential threat to me, I don't care much what faith they are.

You are clearly leaning Romney now because of one speech? Speech-writers come and go for these candidates. While the speech was good, remember it's rhetoric. It's the political record that tells the true story

He wrote it himself.

483 The Scurvy Eye  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:19:13pm

This thread is getting progressivly worse.

484 mike42  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:21:51pm

I personally like this:

"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

This is the 11th article of our faith. It would be a lot kinder, gentler world if everyone managed to adhere to it's precepts.

Of course, all those who insist that others believe the same as they do, can't go along with this. The 'Everyone must conform! mantra" can be found everywhere.

Pity.

485 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:22:38pm

Charles has never spoken to me directly, so I am not positive he really exists ... I think he does, but I am not sure. I think I have just not cracked the inner lizard sanctum ... I haven't been "made." What does one have to do in here to become "made?" Maybe I have to scoop the MSM and provide previously unknown poop on a presidential candidate. OK, if that is what it takes, that is what I will strive to do! Wish me luck, I am on a mission!

486 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:24:28pm

re: #472 medaura18586

You're never short. You probably talk too much. I don't think I called you ignorant. Didn't think I needed to. I did call you on your double standard on changing your mind though, and I guess you tried to address it... Fortunately or unfortunately, politicians are allowed to change their minds and evolve too.

487 coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:27:25pm

re: #471 snowman

That was actually pretty good. We, as Mormons, like to call our cantaloupes...

/Oh, nevermind

488 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:27:32pm

re: #479 medaura18586

re: #479 medaura18586

re: #474 Le_Patriot

...My take on the Romney speech is that he hit a home run. This is what America needs to hear more of. (Family values, religious freedom, reminders of our founding fathers and the Constitution, etc.).
...I was previously on the fence with Rudy, Fred, Huckabee, and Romney. . . .but had been leaning Rudy. I am now clearly leaning Romney.
...I will be voting for a President, not my church pastor.
I am not a Mormon, but would vote for a Mormon (or other protestant, or Catholic, or Jew), if I felt their social and political leanings were as conservative as mine.
...Mormon doctrine does not call for beheadings, or a Mormon Caliph-like dictatorship. Debating the Book of Mormon vs the Bible is therefore of no interest to me for the issue at hand. Such debates belongs on a theology thread. This is America. As long as someone's religious doctrine not a potential threat to me, I don't care much what faith they are.

You are clearly leaning Romney now because of one speech? Speech-writers come and go for these candidates. While the speech was good, remember it's rhetoric. It's the political record that tells the true story


___-
Did you watch and listen to the whole speech?
(By the way, I am fully aware of speech-writers, politics, and rhetoric, and spin.)

489 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:28:22pm
490 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:31:47pm

re: #489 song_and_dance_man

Charles lives in Emerald City. Just follow the yellow brick road.

491 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:32:36pm

re: #485 Guy_Philly

Hey, you asked for attention.

Are you from Philly?

492 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:34:57pm

re: #461 coquimbojoe

re: #459 Guy_Philly


re: #451 coquimbojoe

re: #440 Adrenalyn

re: #426 coquimbojoe

re: #372 Adrenalyn



My church doesn't care if you are a married couple, why should you? Your hang up, not ours.so sex outside of marriage is ok in the moron church then ?
cool, sign me up for it

Wow, stupidity on parade. I think I specified 'married', umm, let me check, oh yeah, its right there in the first sentence, spelled correctly and everything. Dumbass (In response to your cute use of 'moron').

Oooops ... I think I see the source of a misunderstanding between you folks. Let's add a clause and try it again:
My church doesn't care if as long as you are a married couple, why should you?

I think that is what was meant.


Thanks but the context was clear way up there. Adrenalyn is being purposefully provacative, or just obtuse.


I'll go with obtuse.
I don't intend to be provactive or at least insulting. Only rarely do I respond to those types of replies in kind, though everyone has their limits.
I just have feelings from personal experience about mormons that I wanted to share. Have plenty more but will leave it at that.

493 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:35:31pm

re: #435 Dianna

re: #434 Dotcoman

"Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion" has come to mean separation of church and state. In the current era, it's an acceptable shorthand, in my opinion, since we're not in a court of law, or an academic environment.

Oh so you're one of those Living document types then, huh? The Founders words of meaning and intent can change on a whim or with the popular sentiment of the times, then?

You are right the Constitution does say; "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion" however it says nothing of that Separation of Church from State. It means just what it says no short hand or creative popular interpretation required. Congress shall make no law.

It says nothing about spanking little kids and calling the cops, if a Liberal teacher happens to cach said tot praying over their lunch in the chow hall; like all parishiners of the Church of Social Liberalism doggedly believe to be an indisputable article of the faith.

So if Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of a religion, then it doesn't really matter if a President choses to speak of God, let alone his personal faith or lack there of, or that the Decalogue is posted in a court of law, or that little Johny bows his head, folds his hands and gives silent offering over his govnm't slop.

However that Amendment is still is in no way a Separation of Church and State, it just means that the Congress is not going to be getting into the habit of regulating religious freedoms.

That clause is actually a guarantee by the founding fathers to you that you have the Freedom of Religion , it is most assuredly not a guarantee of a freedom from all religion as all Liberal Socialists and most academics these days would have you believe.

494 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:35:43pm

re: #475 formercorpsman

I am young and furious, and perhaps I will be more tepid and realistic in my later years.

I have many more ideas than time to put them up in my blog, especially the more nuanced ones do not lend themselves well to essay form or blog post. So there is a lot about me you don't see from my writings.

I see some very important problems with the core of a humanistic secular society. I think for practical reasons, that's how the US is politically shaped, and the Declaration of Independence is an impressive humanistic manifesto, but there's much more that's needed.

Religion has a very important advantage: the delineation of Free Will (God made humans with the capacity of free will, unlike angles). Humanistic values are based on free will: that's how we define our humanity, and that's what makes us accountable for our actions. But without religion, free will cannot be explained. Reductionist scientific analysis breaks us down into molecules and atoms bound by deterministic principles. So secular morality cannot explain its own core.

That's a major problem! I have to put faith in the postulate of free will, that I in fact am responsible for my actions and I choose how to act. That's my religion, it's a dogma, something I have no proof of, but without the acceptance of which, I would be lost and I would be an impotent moral agent. That's all I need to accept and it keeps me moral without God.

I know of a lot of atheists who feel so superior for having come out of the mind-trap of organized religion, and they are so condescending, but they themselves fall into new traps, because living without God is hard: reinventing the wheel all by oneself is a daunting task. Most secularists fall into the trap of Leftism, which is a disease of the soul. Not only do I hate spending, taxes, the infringements of freedoms and such, for practical reasons, but they are also morally repugnant.

The Left's image of Man is that of an impotent creature, never responsible for his life and actions (society, upbringing, the collective is responsible), incapable of providing for himself and making his own destiny in a free world (Capitalism holds people down, freedom enslaves people and makes them eligible for handouts, according to the Left) and our minds are weak and fickle: marketing ploys, the "corporations" control our lives, so let's outlaw certain effective advertising or whatever.

This kills the soul of Man. Without free will, without FAITH in our ability to control ourselves, and deserve what we get out of life, and be responsible for our actions, we turn into regressive spoiled children, and then eventually into drones.

I think the Left is more dangerous, morally, than the religious right. And more than that, I am afraid the religious right is impotent in sucessfully stopping the doctrinaire Left in the arena of ideas.

Truth is that the Western world is becoming less and less religious, and many apostates of Christianity/Judaism fall right into the trap of the Left. I think a lot of people turn to the Left as a solution because they are disenchanted by organized religion. Also, many people turn to the religious Right because they are scared of the moral void of the Left, and religion becomes their way of holding on to sanity in a world that's slipping toward cultural relativism and irrationality.

So it's a two-way street.

However, I am not pessimistic about the future of Secular Humanism. My own life is a sucess story for me, and brings me hope for the future.

Until serious advances are made though, although I already am sure than I know better, I will align myself with the social conservatives (though part of me will feel sick about it). That's because I know the weaknesses and the stupiditiy and the limited dangers of socially conservative rule. Wheras the precipice of the Left has been largely untested, and I am afraid is much deeper and much more dangerous and suicidal than that of the religious Right.

495 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:37:57pm

re: #489 song_and_dance_man

re: #485 Guy_Philly


Charles has never spoken to me directly, so I am not positive he really exists ... I think he does, but I am not sure. I think I have just not cracked the inner lizard sanctum ... I haven't been "made." What does one have to do in here to become "made?" Maybe I have to scoop the MSM and provide previously unknown poop on a presidential candidate. OK, if that is what it takes, that is what I will strive to do! Wish me luck, I am on a mission!

Take the issue at hand and analyze it with an insight that hasn't been considered yet. When I first got here I stepped in with both feet and have been at it ever since. We were talking (?) the other night about when the older lizards first arrived and I searched my first comments. I posted quite a bit before any responded so I say keep at it and it will happen.

I see what you mean ... you were in here a whole month before I started (October 2004)! It is just recently that folks have not responded to my comments. Well, at least people are responding now... thanks!

496 Dotcoman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:39:19pm

re: #441 Le_Patriot

re: #435 Dianna

re: #434 Dotcoman

"Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion"
. . or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . .
has come to mean separation of church and state.

I always like to see both parts presented (establishment OR prohibiting) when the church/state issue is discussed.

Thank you. And solid point there.

497 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:40:39pm

re: #486 coquimbojoe

re: #472 medaura18586

You're never short. You probably talk too much. I don't think I called you ignorant. Didn't think I needed to. I did call you on your double standard on changing your mind though, and I guess you tried to address it... Fortunately or unfortunately, politicians are allowed to change their minds and evolve too.

You're bitter. And you did call me ignorant, and I was being short to you. Because you don't know how to properly reply to my points, anything I say is too much, I'm sure you'd rather not have people whose ideas you can't handle not speak at all. If you think I talk too much, you don't have to compulsively address all my posts, even comment on replies I send to other people.

If that's your tone of discussion, I will do you a favor and not talk too much or at all actually... TO YOU

498 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:40:51pm

re: #484 mike42

I personally like this:

"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

This is the 11th article of our faith. It would be a lot kinder, gentler world if everyone managed to adhere to it's precepts.

Of course, all those who insist that others believe the same as they do, can't go along with this. The 'Everyone must conform! mantra" can be found everywhere.

Pity.

It's fine, as far as it goes. But notice that it excludes the possibility of polytheism ("God", not plural) or atheism (there's no "if" next to the "how, where, or what"). Beyond that, in other parts he effectively states that he has no trouble with government endorsement of one or more religions (obviously, he has a certain sub-set in mind) - and that completely undermines this very concept (which is why the Founders came up with Separation of Church and State in the first place).

Again, he's in favor of church and state being separate as long as the state endorses his class of religions (which means, they're really not separate, of course). Maybe the better comparison is with Kerry, who often managed to contradict himself within the same sentence.

499 salt1907  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:42:27pm

Whatever one thinks of Mitt Romney or Mormonism, this is just another opportunity for the MSM to use PC politics to imply that America is full of bigoted rednecks who fear and "hate" different religions.

500 formercorpsman  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:42:35pm

re: #494 medaura18586

I think you'll do fine here.

I commend you on your response.

Like another poster intimated, we may not agree, but I like your style.

Now that you have piqued my curiosity, do you catch hell in school for your positions?

If I don't respond right away, it is due to my hour long ride home.

Catch you on the filp-side.

501 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:45:07pm

re: #492 Adrenalyn


I just have feelings from personal experience about mormons that I wanted to share. Have plenty more but will leave it at that.


___
I've had a number of Mormon employees working for me over the years. They were hard workers and to the best of my knowledge all were of good moral character. I thought highly of them. I guess each religion has it's exceptions (Actually, I don't like Harry Reid or BathroomStall Craig).

/It does seem kind of bigoted to paint a whole religion membership with one brush, just because you knew a couple of ne'r do wells.

502 Mike42  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:49:57pm

re: #498 Optimizer

I think you are missing the point. Or trying to split hairs.

Anyway, the point is to allow others to worship according to their beliefs.

Not force a set of beliefs on anyone.

- Going home now. Cya later.

503 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:50:35pm
#436 medaura18586

I hope the backward religious sect of the GOP does not prevail in deciding on this nomination,

that would be me ...

I'm a churchified barbarian.

504 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:51:00pm
505 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:51:20pm

re: #500 formercorpsman

re: #494 medaura18586

I think you'll do fine here.

I commend you on your response.

Like another poster intimated, we may not agree, but I like your style.

Now that you have piqued my curiosity, do you catch hell in school for your positions?

If I don't respond right away, it is due to my hour long ride home.

Catch you on the filp-side.

Thank you. Agreeing is not paramount to me. I know I am wrong on at least some counts all the time since I never agree with anyone: what are the chances of me being always right while everyone else is wrong at least on their point of disagreement with me? So I am humble, but I don't let people give me unwarranted shit either.

The worst hell I get in school is indifference. Politics is a fad in University. People regurgitate Leftists causes because it's cool... Save Darfur, save Darfur... but no one cares to do the homework and find out who is doing the genocide: i.e the Islamofascists, whom they are not eager to denounce in a multi-culti Canadian university.

The saddest thing is that most students don't care enough to even engage me. They don't care enough about their convictions to engage THEMSELVES! They get everything handed to them, even the money to come to university (through state loans) so it's all a low-commitment easy ride to them. They take their freedoms for granted (whatever little freedoms they have in Canada) and don't care to invest the time to scrutinize the incremental changes that are happening in their society which is going to shit.

The worst hell I get is from my Professors. I am a financial economics student and most of my profs are either soft Marxists or welfare statist Keynsians, and they can't stand the questions I ask in class. My average has been punished over this.

506 Highrise  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:51:23pm

re: #501 Le_Patriot

BathroomStall Craig

Hilarious!

507 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:52:23pm

re: #504 song_and_dance_man

re: #495 Guy_Philly

Yeah, but look at your number of posts. 400 of yours compared to 18,000 of mine. I post quite a bit and don't get response on but a few.

That's true. I never respond to you.

:)

508 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:53:23pm

re: #505 medaura18586

I am a financial economics student and most of my profs are either soft Marxists or welfare statist Keynsians, and they can't stand the questions I ask in class. My average has been punished over this.

Stick to your guns. You will be the better scholar for it.

509 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:55:41pm

re: #493 Dotcoman

re: #435 Dianna


re: #434 Dotcoman

"Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion" has come to mean separation of church and state. In the current era, it's an acceptable shorthand, in my opinion, since we're not in a court of law, or an academic environment.


Oh so you're one of those Living document types then, huh? The Founders words of meaning and intent can change on a whim or with the popular sentiment of the times, then?

You are right the Constitution does say; "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion" however it says nothing of that Separation of Church from State. It means just what it says no short hand or creative popular interpretation required. Congress shall make no law.

For crying out loud, it's "Congress shall make no law RESPECTING an establishment of religion..." Look it up!

And trying to claim that separation of church and state isn't in the Constitution because the exact phrase isn't used is like claiming that it doesn't have "checks and balances" because that phase isn't in there either. It's a phony argument.

The term was coined by Thomas Jefferson (a Founder), who was referring to the First Amendment, and who had pushed through his own religious freedom legislation in Virginia upon which the Amendment was based. The Amendment was written by Madison "father of the Constitution", who later offered his own very unambiguous interpretation, which was equivalent to Jefferson's. In fact, they made it pretty clear that they had guys like you in mind.

So you're the one trying to "reinterpret", pal.

510 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:56:37pm
511 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:57:13pm

re: #507 mama winger

re: #504 song_and_dance_man

re: #495 Guy_Philly

Yeah, but look at your number of posts. 400 of yours compared to 18,000 of mine. I post quite a bit and don't get response on but a few.

That's true. I never respond to you.

:)

___
Mama: the question is, when does song_and_dance_man find time to eat? 18,000 + posts ... I am in lizardly awe.

512 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:59:00pm
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
513 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:59:01pm
514 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:59:20pm
515 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:59:42pm
516 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 1:59:55pm

re: #511 Le_Patriot

Hey - I got him beat by 1500 posts! Click my football! LOL

517 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:00:12pm
518 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:00:13pm

re: #502 Mike42

re: #498 Optimizer

I think you are missing the point. Or trying to split hairs.

Anyway, the point is to allow others to worship according to their beliefs.

Not force a set of beliefs on anyone.

- Going home now. Cya later.

Actually, my point is that you should look past the fluff at the beginning of what he says (which isn't too bad, even though it shows a bias), and observe how what he follows up with inconsistent with that. The fluff agrees with what you say the point is, but the follow up DOESN'T if you look at it closely. And that's what these guys count on. The LLL that wrote the recent NIE pull the same trick.

519 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:00:43pm

re: #513 ploome hineni

re: #511 Le_Patriot

I have more

Hey ploome! I'm catching up with you - talk faster, girl.

520 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:01:07pm
521 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:01:13pm

re: #508 mama winger

re: #505 medaura18586

I am a financial economics student and most of my profs are either soft Marxists or welfare statist Keynsians, and they can't stand the questions I ask in class. My average has been punished over this.

Stick to your guns. You will be the better scholar for it.

I am graduating at the end of the summer, and while I've cared more and more about my grades as my undergrad career has progressed (I was not a real shit giver as a frosh), I am also caring more and more about my ideas, and taking them seriously.

Universities are largely indoctrination camps. If I'd have known then what I know now, I'd have just paid myself to not work for 4 years, and read in the comfort of my apartment or library, to my heart's content. I would have gotten a much better education through reading the Classics at my own pace, rather than going through this stupid drill.

522 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:01:36pm

re: #517 ploome hineni

hiya winger

waiting for a new topic

these are so over

How are your knees today? I prayed for you last night. Did it do any good?

523 melkor  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:01:40pm

re: #508 mama winger

re: #505 medaura18586

I am a financial economics student and most of my profs are either soft Marxists or welfare statist Keynsians, and they can't stand the questions I ask in class. My average has been punished over this.

Stick to your guns. You will be the better scholar for it.

Self respect beats the hell out of good grades.

524 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:01:54pm

re: #501 Le_Patriot

re: #492 Adrenalyn



I just have feelings from personal experience about mormons that I wanted to share. Have plenty more but will leave it at that.


___
I've had a number of Mormon employees working for me over the years. They were hard workers and to the best of my knowledge all were of good moral character. I thought highly of them. I guess each religion has it's exceptions (Actually, I don't like Harry Reid or BathroomStall Craig).

/It does seem kind of bigoted to paint a whole religion membership with one brush, just because you knew a couple of ne'r do wells.

Larry Craig is not a Mormon! Harry Reid, is.

525 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:02:19pm
526 Malakai  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:03:29pm

This speech made me uncomfortable. I would have preferred the JFK style speech ( here ). Mitt's faith, if truly a private matter, should have remained so. As an atheist republican, I'm used to ignoring a lot of scary rhetoric from colleagues, however the Mitt factor seems too much to ignore.

I believe you can look at someone's religion and gain insight into the persons mind based on the religion they practice and believe in. No doubt, someone having never met me, but knowing I'm an atheist may have a preconceived notion about me. And likely they are right.

While most religions can be written off as some form of mythology because the accounts are so old, LDS/Mormons missed that boat by a few hundred years. Any religion where the major 'acts of wonder' occurred after the printing press border on cult status.

It's one thing to use a story about animals getting on to a boat and being saved from a flood, that was passed down generation to generation for thousands of years. It's another to say a treasure hunter named John Smith found some 'treasure' in his back yard (upstate new york) that proves Native Americans were not the indigenous race in North America.

Oh, and it proved that 'the god' wanted him to build 'the right' church, because previous attempts by 'the god' to build 'the right' church failed and now it's up to John Smith. He needs some money of course to do this. You'll all be rewarded later though...

If you mind is so malleable to this kind of mysticism (read: you gladly take faith over logic/science) I _don't_ want you making decisions for the free world.

527 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:03:36pm

re: #521 medaura18586

Universities are largely indoctrination camps. If I'd have known then what I know now, I'd have just paid myself to not work for 4 years, and read in the comfort of my apartment or library, to my heart's content. I would have gotten a much better education through reading the Classics at my own pace, rather than going through this stupid drill.

You got that right. Both my two kids had the same experience. although my daughter had it much worse because she went to the ultra-liberal University of Wisconsin - Madison. She had to fight an uphill battle there - but she made it. You will too. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

528 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:04:57pm
529 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:05:06pm

ploome hineni
song_and_dance_man
mama winger

Congratulations... you must all have the coveted Burma Shave
trophies by now, eh?
: )

530 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:06:30pm

I won't be voting for Mitt Romney. There are a lot of reasons , only one of them being his Mormonism. It's my right to vote or not vote for anyone I choose, just as it is anyone else's right to practice their faith in the way they so choose. It's a free country last time I checked.

531 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:06:57pm

re: #497 medaura18586

re: #486 coquimbojoe

re: #472 medaura18586

You're never short. You probably talk too much. I don't think I called you ignorant. Didn't think I needed to. I did call you on your double standard on changing your mind though, and I guess you tried to address it... Fortunately or unfortunately, politicians are allowed to change their minds and evolve too.

You're bitter. And you did call me ignorant, and I was being short to you. Because you don't know how to properly reply to my points, anything I say is too much, I'm sure you'd rather not have people whose ideas you can't handle not speak at all. If you think I talk too much, you don't have to compulsively address all my posts, even comment on replies I send to other people.

If that's your tone of discussion, I will do you a favor and not talk too much or at all actually... TO YOU

Not even remotely bitter. Your points were hypocritical, allowing only yourself to grow and change positions. Your were the most verbose short person here.

Fine don't talk to me. There are 23,000 other people I can engage here.

532 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:07:22pm

As an agnostic, there are only 2 religions that I would currently elimate from consideration for President...those would be the religions of Atheism and Islam. Mostly because the practioners are too rabid.

533 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:07:43pm

Whoa! over 18,000?! Some people in here need intervention!

534 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:08:19pm

re: #528 ploome hineni

getting a new brace

[Link: [Link: www.kneeshop.com...]...]

That looks deadly serious. BEAT those knees into submission! LOL!

535 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:08:54pm

re: #524 Coquimbojoe

I got the Craig/Mormon connection recently from a press release somewhere...Craig was also part of Romney's election committee, and Romney fired him upon the bathroom escapades news.
/don't shoot the messenger taze me bro

536 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:09:32pm

re: #533 Guy_Philly

Whoa! over 18,000?! Some people in here need intervention!

I have a lot of time on my hands since I gave up rocket science.

537 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:10:02pm

re: #496 Dotcoman

re: #441 Le_Patriot


re: #435 Dianna

re: #434 Dotcoman

"Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion"
. . or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . .
has come to mean separation of church and state.


I always like to see both parts presented (establishment OR prohibiting) when the church/state issue is discussed.

Thank you. And solid point there.

Yes, but the Establishment Clause is the part the Religious Right is in denial of these days. They even go so far as to claim that not allowing the government to endorse their religion is denying their "Free Exercise" rights, or that having a secular government is "creating a secular religion" (both of which are nonsense). As soon as somebody gets harassed for practicing their faith in their private life (the kid in the cafeteria rightly won her lawsuit - you're giving a bad example) you can talk about a "Free Exercise" problem, and the instances where that happens are extremely rare.

538 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:10:08pm

re: #533 Guy_Philly

Whoa! over 18,000?! Some people in here need intervention!

# 1 [Link: www...] eater is SPAM
# 2 is Lizards

539 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:10:40pm

re: #531 Coquimbojoe

Fine don't talk to me. There are 23,000 other people I can engage here.

Hi coquie! :)

540 Guy_Philly  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:10:52pm

re: #536 mama winger


... and the rest of us are glad you do spend as much time in here as you do!

541 Geepers  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:10:54pm

ploome (#513),

I have more

I'll say. ;-)

542 Malakai  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:11:43pm

re: #532 Stuck-in-CA

Atheist lack that 'god part of the brain'. You know, the part that compels (and rewards them with endorphins) to do illogical acts in the name of their god.

Crazy rabid atheist. I'm so sick and tired of them blowing themselves up for no god.

Damn you no-god, damn you to no-hell!

543 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:12:13pm

re: #537 Optimizer

the instances where that happens are extremely rare.

Then you just haven't been paying attention.

544 Boston Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:12:24pm

DotComMan,

I’m a Laissez Faire Capitalist and ardent enemy of socialism, fascism, and every other form of totalitarianism.

Atheism isn’t a belief IN something, it is the rejection of the claim of something which has not been proven to exist (by the means of reason and logic, with the data provided by man’s senses, conceptually integrated into non-contractictory conclusions). The burden of proof lies with those who claim something exists. I don’t claim god exists, religionists DO. It is up to them to provide proof. How does that make me a religionist?!? If you claim that unicorns, or poltergeists, or people who can rise from the grave have existed, it is up to YOU to prove it, not me. The lack of a belief is not A BELIEF. i.e. it is NOT a religion- i.e. it is not a positive epistemological position. It is the rejection of a declaration which has no proof. Can you see the distinction?

545 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:12:26pm

re: #531 Coquimbojoe

re: #497 medaura18586

re: #486 coquimbojoe

re: #472 medaura18586

You're never short. You probably talk too much. I don't think I called you ignorant. Didn't think I needed to. I did call you on your double standard on changing your mind though, and I guess you tried to address it... Fortunately or unfortunately, politicians are allowed to change their minds and evolve too.

You're bitter. And you did call me ignorant, and I was being short to you. Because you don't know how to properly reply to my points, anything I say is too much, I'm sure you'd rather not have people whose ideas you can't handle not speak at all. If you think I talk too much, you don't have to compulsively address all my posts, even comment on replies I send to other people.

If that's your tone of discussion, I will do you a favor and not talk too much or at all actually... TO YOU

Not even remotely bitter. Your points were hypocritical, allowing only yourself to grow and change positions. Your were the most verbose short person here.

Fine don't talk to me. There are 23,000 other people I can engage here.

Then why are you still talking back? Jeezum! Go knock yourself out with the other 23,000 non-hypocrites who can't wait for you to engage them! I don't feel a need to respond to your other accusations.

546 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:13:16pm

re: #540 Guy_Philly

:)

that was nice

547 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:13:24pm

re: #535 Le_Patriot

re: #524 Coquimbojoe

I got the Craig/Mormon connection recently from a press release somewhere...Craig was also part of Romney's election committee, and Romney fired him upon the bathroom escapades news.
/don't shoot the messenger taze me bro

Idaho has a large Mormon population. I googled and Wiki'd him immediately, but he is a Methodist.

/I'll taze you and you will like it!

548 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:13:57pm

re: #539 mama winger

re: #531 Coquimbojoe

Fine don't talk to me. There are 23,000 other people I can engage here.

Hi coquie! :)

Hiya Mama! Hows the weather?

549 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:15:08pm

re: #545 medaura18586

re: #531 Coquimbojoe

re: #497 medaura18586

re: #486 coquimbojoe

re: #472 medaura18586

You're never short. You probably talk too much. I don't think I called you ignorant. Didn't think I needed to. I did call you on your double standard on changing your mind though, and I guess you tried to address it... Fortunately or unfortunately, politicians are allowed to change their minds and evolve too.

You're bitter. And you did call me ignorant, and I was being short to you. Because you don't know how to properly reply to my points, anything I say is too much, I'm sure you'd rather not have people whose ideas you can't handle not speak at all. If you think I talk too much, you don't have to compulsively address all my posts, even comment on replies I send to other people.

If that's your tone of discussion, I will do you a favor and not talk too much or at all actually... TO YOU

Not even remotely bitter. Your points were hypocritical, allowing only yourself to grow and change positions. Your were the most verbose short person here.

Fine don't talk to me. There are 23,000 other people I can engage here.

Then why are you still talking back? Jeezum! Go knock yourself out with the other 23,000 non-hypocrites who can't wait for you to engage them! I don't feel a need to respond to your other accusations.

Umm, LOL. You go first and stop talking to me. You said you would!

550 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:15:19pm
551 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:15:59pm
552 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:17:17pm

re: #550 ploome hineni

re: #534 mama winger

oy

Ploomie, I am still waiting, I showed you mine months ago...

553 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:17:21pm

re: #544 Boston Patriot

The burden of proof lies with those who claim something exists. I don’t claim god exists, religionists DO. It is up to them to provide proof

Why?

Seriously. Why?

I here atheists all the time challenging people of faith 'to prove it'! Using their outside voices, too.

Why do we need to prove anything to you? You want to not believe in God - so don't ! Who's stopping you?

I swear, I have come to the conclusion that when an atheist demands that I 'prove' the existence of God to him, I hear it as a cry for help . "Please tell me that my life is not without meaning. Help me, help me."

Otherwise, why all the constant requests for evidence? I say it is because you long for it.

554 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:17:56pm
555 Malakai  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:17:59pm

re: #544 Boston Patriot

I always chuckle (in a snooty I'm smarter than you way, I'll admit it) when people ask me if I really believe there is no god.

After all, I do not believe that there is no god, I simply see no proof that there is.

556 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:18:31pm

re: #537 Optimizer

Yes, but the Establishment Clause is the part the Religious Right is in denial of these days. They even go so far as to claim that not allowing the government to endorse their religion is denying their "Free Exercise" rights, or that having a secular government is "creating a secular religion" (both of which are nonsense).


___--
That's news to me. I am also of the belief that the term "Religious Right", (which seems to be primarily LLL and/or "atheist-speak" in most usages I've seen) means many different things to different people, depending on their own religious standing, or lack thereof. I believe that when someone says "Religious Right" it means different things to different people. (Although it does seem that the major use of the term most often applies to Dobson, Falwell, and Robertson)

557 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:18:32pm

re: #548 Coquimbojoe

The weather? Hmmm.

crappy.

We are supposed to get another winter storm tonight I think. I am ready for spring already and it isn't even Christmas yet. :0

558 Geepers  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:18:53pm

ploome (#551),

Hey ploome.

Nor bad except it's damn cold. I was scraping ice off the inside of my windshield this morning.

559 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:19:31pm
560 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:20:30pm
561 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:20:44pm

re: #559 ploome hineni

You asked who I was ages ago. Nevermind.. but have you been away lately? I haven't seen many posts from you...

562 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:21:21pm

re: #547 Coquimbojoe

Another MSM error.
Whatta surprise.
/
: )

563 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:22:02pm

re: #561 Coquimbojoe

re: #559 ploome hineni

have you been away lately? I haven't seen many posts from you...


her knees have been engaged in a revolution against her body. Ploome has been fighting battles of the limbs.

564 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:22:04pm

re: #543 mama winger

re: #537 Optimizer


the instances where that happens are extremely rare.

Then you just haven't been paying attention.

Most Church/State cases that come up are blatant (if subconscious) attempts by Christians to lay claim to the government. But occasionally, some school official (etc) gets overly paranoid, and screws up (due to not really understanding the issue). If some kid wants to pray with her pals in the cafeteria, that's hardly a government endorsement of her faith, and that was upheld in the courts. When some zealot govt official posts a copy of the 10 Commandments on the courthouse wall, the intended message is "this government is Christian" - don't kid yourself (or me). That's not only unconstitutional, but just plain wrong, besides.

BTW, it's hilarious how the 10Cs are claimed to be the basis of our govt, when none of them are in the Constitution (actually, the First Amendment is even inconsistent with one or two), and only two or three have any basis in law. Do you guys even know what they say?

565 Malakai  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:22:17pm

re: #553 mama winger

Only time I request proof is when I'm in a argument/debate with someone on a topic that ends with some sort of faith-based defense.

In other words, they say I wouldn't understand their point, and therefore why they are right, unless I had 'faith' in something.

It's at these times an atheist either gives up the debate (there's no assaulting faith. It's illogical by definition) or they hope enough logic centers of the theist's brains are still functional that a proof can override their 'faith based mandate'.

566 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:22:38pm

re: #557 mama winger

re: #548 Coquimbojoe

The weather? Hmmm.

crappy.

We are supposed to get another winter storm tonight I think. I am ready for spring already and it isn't even Christmas yet. :0

Yep, another 2-4 inches down this way, south of you. It's supposed to come from the west this time, and work its way east across Chicagoland, starting at 4pm, getting heavier by 6pm. Hopefully rush hour is done by then. Otherwise, this could really suck.

567 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:22:47pm

re: #562 Le_Patriot

I would be interested to hear Harry Reid's response to Mitt this am. He would probably be contrarian just because...

568 Boston Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:23:17pm

Mama Winger,

Than why should people provide justification (i.e. proof) for anything?

I have a right your earnings. I have a right seize your car when I choose to drive to Florida. I have a right to enslave your family.

Why do I need proof that anything is justified?

Mama...out lives depend on truth. It's the most important question out there:

What is True?

569 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:23:26pm

re: #563 mama winger

re: #561 Coquimbojoe

re: #559 ploome hineni

have you been away lately? I haven't seen many posts from you...


her knees have been engaged in a revolution against her body. Ploome has been fighting battles of the limbs.

Ah, very sorry to hear that.

570 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:23:48pm
571 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:25:14pm

re: #564 Optimizer

Do you guys even know what they say?

Oh please.

572 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:27:14pm

re: #568 Boston Patriot

You were making the case that people who believe in God must prove to you that God exists. I asked you why? No one is forcing you to believe anything you don't want to believe. What does this have to do with driving my car to Florida?

573 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:28:24pm

re: #556 Le_Patriot

re: #537 Optimizer


Yes, but the Establishment Clause is the part the Religious Right is in denial of these days. They even go so far as to claim that not allowing the government to endorse their religion is denying their "Free Exercise" rights, or that having a secular government is "creating a secular religion" (both of which are nonsense).


___--
That's news to me. I am also of the belief that the term "Religious Right", (which seems to be primarily LLL and/or "atheist-speak" in most usages I've seen) means many different things to different people, depending on their own religious standing, or lack thereof. I believe that when someone says "Religious Right" it means different things to different people. (Although it does seem that the major use of the term most often applies to Dobson, Falwell, and Robertson)

Well, I guess you heard it here first, I guess. Actually, one need look no further than some of the posts on this thread (although I'm not sure I would call all the authors 100% RR). If you can name somebody who would reasonably be considered part of the RR, who does not have the attitude I have claimed then you can debate the semantics of the term. Otherwise it just sounds like you're trying to change the subject.

574 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:28:29pm

re: #566 Honorary Yooper

starting at 4pm, getting heavier by 6pm. Hopefully rush hour is done by then. Otherwise, this could really suck.

Shoot. I was planning on getting a ride from a friend tonight to take me shopping. Oh well...

575 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:29:36pm
576 mama winger  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:29:37pm

re: #573 Optimizer

If you can name somebody who would reasonably be considered part of the RR, who does not have the attitude I have claimed then you can debate the semantics of the term.

Raises hand.

What do you want to debate ? Be specific.

577 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:29:40pm

re: #542 Malakai

Crazy rabid atheist. I'm so sick and tired of them blowing themselves up for no god.

Damn you no-god, damn you to no-hell!


I'm sure Stalin would agree about the pacifism of atheists. Frankly I have no problem with atheists...I just wouldn't vote for one. Not because I care what they believe, but because so many of them are so offended by what 85% of the rest of the nation believes. I would fear they would try to further remove all religion from the public square. As an agnostic, that attitude even offends ME.

578 melkor  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:30:34pm

Mitt is not the right nominee for the GOP. I would support him over any Dem in the race, but Mitt at the top of the ticket is not a winning proposition.

IMHO, the 2 biggest factors for 2008 are:
1) Getting results on the federal issues that matter -- National security (including secure borders), economic policy and judicial appointments.
2) Electability. You gotta win to take care of #1.

Mitt is a proven executive and would probably do OK results-wise. I just don't think he can win a national race. There are some on the religious right that think he belongs to a freakish devil cult and will never vote for him. Some pro-lifers don't trust his recent conversion and will not vote for him. Others think he's a used car salesman that would say anything (Edwards?) to get the nod. He's not the best guy to get Reagan Democrats or other disaffected middle left types to cross over.

This means he's not going to get all of the base, and very few from the opposing camp. In a tight race that translates into a donkey (ass) in the White House in January 2009.

So, who can win? Rudy with his baggage? Fred with his real/perceived charisma shortage? Huck with his faux populism? McCain with campaign finance reform and immigration deadweight?

I am mildly pessimistic, but take heart when I see the 'quality' of the opposition. The primaries should make for some good political theater. Let's hope, for the sake of the republic, that the audience knows when to cheer for the real hero.

579 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:31:15pm

re: #567 Coquimbojoe

re: #562 Le_Patriot

I would be interested to hear Harry Reid's response to Mitt this am. He would probably be contrarian just because...

___
Heh. "The speech isn't working"
/Harry

580 Coquimbojoe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:32:54pm

re: #579 Le_Patriot

re: #567 Coquimbojoe

re: #562 Le_Patriot

I would be interested to hear Harry Reid's response to Mitt this am. He would probably be contrarian just because...

___
Heh. "The speech isn't working"
/Harry

LOL. Perfect. BTW, I know one of his sons well. One of the nicest most sincere people ever. It boggles the mind that his father is who he is.

581 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:35:42pm

re: #572 mama winger

re: #568 Boston Patriot

You were making the case that people who believe in God must prove to you that God exists. I asked you why? No one is forcing you to believe anything you don't want to believe. What does this have to do with driving my car to Florida?

The God issue has been made into a special case by so many who feel strongly about it. It shouldn't be: it falls nice and neatly into the category of negative rights: It's irrelevant whether the existence or non-existence of God can be proved or disproved.

So long as it doesn't affect me, and I don't have to pay taxes to support your beliefs, y'all can worship gummy bears for all I care.

That's how the phrase fits together so consitently: "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion"
. . or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . .

So anyone can practice whatever, and freely express it, so long as they are not imposing it on others. There is more than one way of imposing religion onto others though:

One is the Islamic way: convert or off with your head. The other is judging everyone by state laws that are based on religious doctrine, and that why congress should pass no law establishing a religion: so if you make sodomy illegal because the Bible says it's repellent, that's in fact imposing religious beliefs onto the population at large through the legal system.

It's simple, so long as you're not hurting anyone, do whatever

582 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:36:40pm

re: #571 mama winger

re: #564 Optimizer


Do you guys even know what they say?

Oh please.

If you happen to be one of the folks who opine about America and American government being based on the 10Cs, I challenge you to show how any of them have much to do with America's core founding principles, and how any of them are even hinted at in the Constitution (the next time you make that faith-based claim).

If you don't happen to be part of that crowd, maybe it because you really do know what the 10Cs say, and I would certainly leave you alone.

583 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:37:51pm
584 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:41:13pm

re: #572 mama winger

re: #568 Boston Patriot

You were making the case that people who believe in God must prove to you that God exists. I asked you why? No one is forcing you to believe anything you don't want to believe. What does this have to do with driving my car to Florida?

This is so disingenuous. You know full well that this usually only comes up in response to when the faithful get defensive.

585 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:42:47pm

re: #573 Optimizer

. If you can name somebody who would reasonably be considered part of the RR, who does not have the attitude I have claimed then you can debate the semantics of the term. Otherwise it just sounds like you're trying to change the subject.


___
I can't. Billy Graham would be considered by some, to be RR, merely because he is evangelical. Likewise, many would not consider Graham to be Religious Right. (I don't). Again, the RR definition is often in the mind of the definer, based on their own perceptions and values.
Some people consider RR to be those that try to make a convert out of another. Others consider RR to be the more publicly outspoken (Falwell) types.
My original response was due to my interpretation of your using the word "endorse", which, now that I reconsider it in context, was probably not meant the way I initially interpreted it (ie "endorse" =request for State sponsered religion).

586 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:46:21pm

re: #581 medaura18586

What you're not explicitly saying is that government religious endorsements are implicitly coercive. Yes? (Sorry if that sounds too Rumsfeld-esque).

And it's "RESPECTING", not "regarding"! How long will that error be propagated? There's a difference!

587 Highrise  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:51:20pm

re: #483 The Scurvy Eye

This thread is getting progressivly worse.

Actually, this is mild.

And the discussion here can't even take place on some blogs because it's all out blood war. Makes LGF different imo.

588 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:51:58pm

re: #576 mama winger

re: #573 Optimizer


If you can name somebody who would reasonably be considered part of the RR, who does not have the attitude I have claimed then you can debate the semantics of the term.

Raises hand.

What do you want to debate ? Be specific.

I thought I was being clear that I was trying to AVOID a debate regarding my use of the term "Religious Right" - mostly because it seemed like an evasive tactic.

589 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:54:23pm

re: #586 Optimizer

re: #581 medaura18586

What you're not explicitly saying is that government religious endorsements are implicitly coercive. Yes? (Sorry if that sounds too Rumsfeld-esque).

And it's "RESPECTING", not "regarding"! How long will that error be propagated? There's a difference!

Yes, it's what I mean. "Endorsments"... are about not having other substantial reasons for upholding certain positions for their own sake, but justifying them in Religion. And that's my cut-off point when it comes to the definition of RR. I know of many religious libertarians. It's not a question about who's right, what sect, if any... But it's anyone's right to have something wrong in their head, to hold crazy beliefs, so long as they don't impose them on others or lobby the government to judge all of us by their own metrics. So a religious libertarian might believe in God and the Bible, but above all, he/she believes that while ON EARTH, living THIS life, no one can interfere with anybody.

The RR tries to obfuscate religious endorsement with the vague and mystical claim of cherishing/preserving this "Judeo-Christian" heritage. And because it's so vague, it just leaves room for abuse, which is why the state should have no business being involved in it to begin with.

You get Michael Savage now, screeching about how much more Conservative he is than Limbaugh, Drudge, etc, and he reinvents the notion every time, to suit his mood. And now you get these GOP candidates each ridiculously competing over who's the biggest Conservative... whatever that means.

It's just obfuscation of the general intention to endorse some sort of religious sect,.. then the RR will canibalize itself over which sect should prevail. Are Mormons true Christians or not, as if the Bible is so much more reasonable than the Book of Mormons.

It's retarded, and government should have no business meddling

590 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:55:35pm

re: #585 Le_Patriot

My original response was due to my interpretation of your using the word "endorse", which, now that I reconsider it in context, was probably not meant the way I initially interpreted it (ie "endorse" =request for State sponsered religion).

I'm not 100% sure what you're saying, but as long as you're not trying to imply that I'm a LLL type (which would be a mistake), I think I'm OK with it (for what it's worth).

Anyway, I gotta run soon.

591 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:56:53pm

re: #493 Dotcoman

Oh, dear.

Don't be ridiculous; you're imputing views to me that I have not stated that I hold.

There is no way around the evolution of certain concepts; 250 years ago, the issue of establishment of religion was a very serious matter, one that many people viewed (correctly!) as a dangerous imposition. We've dealt with it so well that we're now quibbling around the edges, and coming very close to a different dangerous imposition. I do not like the idea of a "living document", because words have meanings, and pretending that they don't is a very short road to linguistic and societal damnation; that is very different from knowing and understanding that concepts evolve.

Where the line gets drawn is the important point. I firmly oppose the establishment of religion; I equally firmly oppose the ridiculous and offensive behavior of groups attempting to entirely drive religious expression (at least Christian or Jewish religious expression) underground.

Clear?

592 theheat  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 2:58:48pm

re: #82 RickZ

The murders you mention about documents are probably related to forged documents, but the bombings weren't done according to the wishes of the Mormon church, or its teachings. The bombings were actually to cover up the crime of the forgeries themselves by the forger.

Fortunately, polygamists have not been recognized by the LDS church for many years. While these sects call themselves the Fundamentalist Church of JC of LDS, you won't find any/many practicing Mormons that will acknowledge them as true Mormons. In fact, they really give today's modern LDS churches a bad name. And, yes, the [not really] Mormon polygamists are sickening; it's really no more than sanctified pedophilia and rape, and in that respect it does mirror many of the aspects of Islam. Now, if the modern LDS church suddenly had one of those revelations they're so famous for and decided to re-institute polygamy, I would lump them together with any other dangerous cult, and think even less of them as Klukkers.

All that aside, I really am not liking Romney, and it isn't even the Mormon angle. At first I could tolerate him, and was even semi-interested. But his hair, his stiff posture, his religious pandering in his speech - he's beginning to remind me of a cross between Jesse Jackson and John Edwards (it's the hair). This whole White Man's Rainbow Coalition thing he has about religion was so predictably disingenuous it made my skin crawl (that was his Jesse Jackson moment). Don't like him and don't trust him. There's no reason I would vote for him, particularly after the last GOP debate.

593 Boston Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:00:32pm

Mama,

Ideas have consequences. Irrational ideas (i.e. those which cannot be proven by reason and logic) cause negative consequences. If you want to see how religion effects civilization, take a look at the Dark Ages and the Islamic today. I know you're going taking offence to this, but it's the same principle. When Christianity was taken seriously the Dark Ages were the result.

And...no one is forcing me? What about the religious right and their prevention of the use of stem cells to cure disease? I find this repugnant. What about GWB's no child left behind and prescription drug bill? These policies were based on "the meek will inheret," "Mother Theresa was a Saint" type views.

When religion is taken seriously (not diluted by the Enlightenment like Christianity has been), you see suicide bombers and the Dark Ages.

594 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:00:38pm

re: #586 Optimizer

re: #581 medaura18586

And it's "RESPECTING", not "regarding"! How long will that error be propagated? There's a difference!


___
Yes, they are spelled differently.
I would advise you to consult a thesaurus...respect and regard are interchangeable synonyms.
(Are you a Troll?)

595 Lynn B.  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:01:52pm

I've been lurking on this thread on and off most of the day and, despite the heat, it's actually a really interesting discussion. I'm surprised that the issue of baptism of the dead hasn't come up (and I deliberately picked an LDS-friendly site for that link), particularly with respect to the baptism of Jewish Holocaust victims. I have to say, I find this more than a bit disturbing:

When asked by NEWSWEEK if he has done baptisms for the dead—in which Mormons find the names of dead people of all faiths and baptize them, as an LDS spokesperson says, to "open the door" to the highest heaven—he looked slightly startled and answered, "I have in my life, but I haven't recently." The awareness of how odd this will sound to many Americans is what makes Romney hesitant to elaborate on the Mormon question.

596 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:03:02pm

re: #591 Dianna

Where the line gets drawn is the important point. I firmly oppose the establishment of religion; I equally firmly oppose the ridiculous and offensive behavior of groups attempting to entirely drive religious expression (at least Christian or Jewish religious expression) underground.

Clear?

AMEN, Dianna (no pun intended)

597 Rudemeister  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:04:12pm

I just think that Mormonism is a good way of targeting somebody to be a kook. You have to admit (if you know anything about the doctrine) that there are some pretty goofy ideas in Mormonism.

Now aside from that though, I don't think Romney would be a good strategic bet against Hillary. I myself am probably to the right of Rush Limbaugh. If I had my guy run, it would have probably been Newt Gingrich. But, I also know that he just wasn't electable against the Clinton machine either.

Rudemeister

598 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:04:13pm

re: #589 medaura18586

re: #586 Optimizer

...

The RR tries to obfuscate religious endorsement with the vague and mystical claim of cherishing/preserving this "Judeo-Christian" heritage. And because it's so vague, it just leaves room for abuse, which is why the state should have no business being involved in it to begin with.

...

It's just obfuscation of the general intention to endorse some sort of religious sect,.. then the RR will canibalize itself over which sect should prevail. Are Mormons true Christians or not, as if the Bible is so much more reasonable than the Book of Mormons.

It's retarded, and government should have no business meddling

The first paragraph is what I was touching on in other posts regarding the 10Cs. It's not only vague, but it doesn't even stand up to the smallest scrutiny.

As to the second paragraph, they think they can avoid problems between sects by implicitly declaring "Christianity" our official religion, and claiming that it's been that way all along. They're kidding themselves.

As to the third, "Amen". ;-)

599 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:08:22pm

re: #593 Boston Patriot

your simplistic assessment of religion through the ages is so full of holes a 2 yr old could drive a truck through them. The contributions to civilizations in the name of God are endless and varied. Not only in moral precepts, but not least of which God was the inspiration for the best music and finest of art through the ages.

600 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:09:09pm

re: #597 Rudemeister

I just think that Mormonism is a good way of targeting somebody to be a kook. You have to admit (if you know anything about the doctrine) that there are some pretty goofy ideas in Mormonism.

Now aside from that though, I don't think Romney would be a good strategic bet against Hillary. I myself am probably to the right of Rush Limbaugh. If I had my guy run, it would have probably been Newt Gingrich. But, I also know that he just wasn't electable against the Clinton machine either.

Rudemeister

who do you think is the most electable GOPer? I'm going with Rudy this far, for strategic reasons.

601 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:10:25pm

re: #594 Le_Patriot

re: #586 Optimizer


re: #581 medaura18586

And it's "RESPECTING", not "regarding"! How long will that error be propagated? There's a difference!


___
Yes, they are spelled differently.
I would advise you to consult a thesaurus...respect and regard are interchangeable synonyms.
(Are you a Troll?)

Try again, and spare me the ad hominems. "Regarding" means "having to do with". "Respecting", in this context, means "endorsing", and properly belongs in any direct quote because that is the exact word used. Anyway, there's a big difference between having to do with something, and endorsing it - especially in this context.

602 pyrodoctor  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:12:55pm

I grew up in Utah as a non-Mormon. I eventually escaped by getting a job in North Carolina. Here are my observations:

-- I have some very good friends that are Mormon. They are good people. Only when you get a mob of them politically running the show, like you have in Utah, do their more insane tendencies surface. Rosanne Barr described it well -- calling them Amish Nazis. Utah politics is a thinly veiled theocracy where LDS church elders are consulted by the legislators prior to voting on any law that might be the least bit in contradiction with Mormon doctrine. It is like South Park portrayed them -- they are so nice that it is sinister. I have a laundry list of examples such as: large grocery store chains that won't sell beer; the church getting the Salt Lake City to sell a couple blocks of main street to them and then setting a dress code; loosening the liquor laws for the Olympics so open containers of alcohol could be carried around downtown, and then staging a mock riot on the last day by closing the biergartens a couple hours early and having the disgruntled bar patrons leave the area into the waiting arms of SWAT who smacked them down, thus justifying the revokation of the liberalized liquor laws. And so on.

-- People who claim that the Mormons are not a cult did not see the Utah public school system where Mormon doctrine was taught. They skirt the church/state separation by having their seminary be adjacent to the school.

-- People who claim that the Mormons are not a cult did not see the mind control tactics used on non-Mormon children in the schools where they first shun the poor kid, then when they are ready to crack up they start reeling them in by inviting them first to inocuous church activities (e.g., baseball), then sunday school, then conversion. It happened to one of my best friends.

-- Life in Utah is like a little piece of life under Sharia -- except they smother you with kindness instead of whacking your head off.

603 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:13:21pm

re: #601 Optimizer

How are you qualified to determine the "context"?
Do you have a law degree?

604 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:14:28pm

re: #601 Optimizer

re: #594 Le_Patriot

re: #586 Optimizer


re: #581 medaura18586And it's "RESPECTING", not "regarding"! How long will that error be propagated? There's a difference!


___
Yes, they are spelled differently.
I would advise you to consult a thesaurus...respect and regard are interchangeable synonyms.
(Are you a Troll?)

Try again, and spare me the ad hominems. "Regarding" means "having to do with". "Respecting", in this context, means "endorsing", and properly belongs in any direct quote because that is the exact word used. Anyway, there's a big difference between having to do with something, and endorsing it - especially in this context.

I agree. There's a pretty clear semantic difference over "with respect to" and "respecting (something)". If the context were not clear (which I think it is from the wording), the motivations can be traced back to the letters and publications of Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin.

605 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:16:19pm

re: #501 Le_Patriot

re: #492 Adrenalyn



I just have feelings from personal experience about mormons that I wanted to share. Have plenty more but will leave it at that.

___
I've had a number of Mormon employees working for me over the years. They were hard workers and to the best of my knowledge all were of good moral character. I thought highly of them. I guess each religion has it's exceptions (Actually, I don't like Harry Reid or BathroomStall Craig).

/It does seem kind of bigoted to paint a whole religion membership with one brush, just because you knew a couple of ne'r do wells.

First, thanks for the politeness of the response.
But, I have known many Mormons and don't think highly in general not because of the few, because of the many.

606 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:17:17pm

re: #603 Le_Patriot

re: #601 Optimizer

How are you qualified to determine the "context"?
Do you have a law degree?

Now you're really getting desperate. Spare me. You're embarrassing yourself.

607 Le_Patriot  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:20:03pm

Optimizer":

I call "Troll"
I reviewed your posts
You continued to bring up "religious right",
Then you told mama winger you were trying to AVOID a
debate on religious right. Very trollish.

You seem to simply want to argue and nitpick.
At least you weren't too obnoxious like some are.
Good day!

/Leaving thread, walk the dog, supper, etc.
Bye

608 Dianna  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:21:01pm

re: #593 Boston Patriot

Forgive my intrusion, but you wrote:

If you want to see how religion effects civilization, take a look at the Dark Ages and the Islamic today. I know you're going taking offence to this, but it's the same principle. When Christianity was taken seriously the Dark Ages were the result.

I must protest. The "Dark Ages" were, frankly, no such thing. Prior to 625 AD, when papyrus shipments to Europe ceased, there was a lively and literate culture. There was little political unity, and some really fascinating and bloody intra-dynastic infighting, but the culture - a rough and heady blend of barbarian and Roman law, custom and art - was not the brutish, dangerous, ignorant thing you imagine.

With the rise of Islam, the blockage of trade, a rise in population movements, a concurrent rise in piracy and brigandage, you arrive at the situation of Charlemagne's time, when literacy and culture were limited and nearly dead.

The history of the middle ages is the slow climb back.

609 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:25:20pm

re: #604 medaura18586


I agree. There's a pretty clear semantic difference over "with respect to" and "respecting (something)". If the context were not clear (which I think it is from the wording), the motivations can be traced back to the letters and publications of Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin.

And - more importantly - James Madison, who drafted it and co-chaired the committee.

"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together. " - James Madison

610 nikis-knight  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:25:42pm

re: #585 Le_Patriot

re: #573 Optimizer

. If you can name somebody who would reasonably be considered part of the RR, who does not have the attitude I have claimed then you can debate the semantics of the term. Otherwise it just sounds like you're trying to change the subject.


___
I can't. Billy Graham would be considered by some, to be RR, merely because he is evangelical. Likewise, many would not consider Graham to be Religious Right. (I don't). Again, the RR definition is often in the mind of the definer, based on their own perceptions and values.
Some people consider RR to be those that try to make a convert out of another. Others consider RR to be the more publicly outspoken (Falwell) types.
My original response was due to my interpretation of your using the word "endorse", which, now that I reconsider it in context, was probably not meant the way I initially interpreted it (ie "endorse" =request for State sponsered religion).

*Raises hand*

611 madmom  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:27:21pm

re: #436 medaura18586

Because he is a liberal!

612 The Scurvy Eye  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:28:40pm

re: #587 Highrise

Yeah, you're right. The fact that it hasn't gotten near as bad as I've seen it before is a testament to LGF.

613 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:29:22pm

re: #607 Le_Patriot

Optimizer":

I call "Troll"
I reviewed your posts
You continued to bring up "religious right",
Then you told mama winger you were trying to AVOID a
debate on religious right. Very trollish.

You seem to simply want to argue and nitpick.
At least you weren't too obnoxious like some are.
Good day!

/Leaving thread, walk the dog, supper, etc.
Bye

If you want to keep clinging to the RR thing like some kind of Teddy Bear, then all I can say is, "have a nice nap". My focus has clearly been the defense of Separation of Church and State. If you have a better name for its blatant enemies, suggest one.

614 Q-Burn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:29:41pm

re: #602 pyrodoctor

An interesting post. I work with a music group that has a lot of fans in SLC, their management will not book them there anymore due to issues related to the social climate you describe.

615 Lynn B.  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:33:39pm

re: #601 Optimizer

"Regarding" means "having to do with". "Respecting", in this context, means "endorsing", ...

Uh, no. Sorry. In this context "respecting" means "with regard to," not "endorsing." Honest. It does. (And yes, I am a lawyer.)

616 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:33:39pm

re: #611 madmom

I do think he is a liberal too, dressed in shallow conservative clothing. Just like Huckabee, who raised taxes and spending more than Bill Clinton did in his state.

And he has no strong moral convictions. Some brute here, coquimbojoe, got all upset when I questioned the motives of Romney's many recent conversions. If anything, I don't even think he has grown and learned, going from pro-abortion to anti-abortion is regressive in my books. But I would rather he was either one or the other, with conviction, and I knew where he stood. But I don't know where he will drift tomorrow, or whenever the shit hits the fan. I don't see a moral spine in him.

Fiscally, he has definitely been on the liberal side. He wants universal health care for Massachusetts for Christ's sake!

617 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:36:56pm

re: #615 Lynn B.

re: #601 Optimizer

"Regarding" means "having to do with". "Respecting", in this context, means "endorsing", ...

Uh, no. Sorry. In this context "respecting" means "with regard to," not "endorsing." Honest. It does. (And yes, I am a lawyer.)

I might believe your sincerity in truly believing that's what it means, but I don't believe you being a lawyer gives you an upper hand "with respect to" that interpretation. Obama, Hillary, Bill, who else, have gone to law school. The supreme court judges who upheld eminent domain, and who, ridiculously fudged the Commerce Clause (what do you think commerce means in that case?) all went to law school.

Means nothing. You can read the words of the founding fathers, they provide plenty of explanations on what they meant by that, and it's not what the RR wants to hear

618 Lynn B.  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:44:00pm

re: #617 medaura18586

Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with you and Optimizer on the point you're making, just not on the specific interpretation of the word "respecting." The result is the same. No law that addresses, promotes or endorses an establishment of religion, period. You don't need to twist the meaning of the word to get there. It's clear.

619 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:46:12pm

re: #615 Lynn B.

re: #601 Optimizer


"Regarding" means "having to do with". "Respecting", in this context, means "endorsing", ...

Uh, no. Sorry. In this context "respecting" means "with regard to," not "endorsing." Honest. It does. (And yes, I am a lawyer.)

I, also, can respect your opinion, but not accept it as some kind of ultimate authority on the matter. "Congress shall make no law with regard to an establishment..."? Would that mean that churches can't even be mentioned in federal laws? I doesn't make any sense. Regardless, the Founders writings are clear on what they meant by it and they really do carry the authority.

620 Optimizer  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:47:34pm

re: #618 Lynn B.

re: #617 medaura18586

Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with you and Optimizer on the point you're making, just not on the specific interpretation of the word "respecting." The result is the same. No law that addresses, promotes or endorses an establishment of religion, period. You don't need to twist the meaning of the word to get there. It's clear.

Sorry, cross-post.

621 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:49:57pm

re: #618 Lynn B.

I suppose that's right. Since the end result is the same, I can assume the interpretation of "respecting" to be vacuously correct either way. The issue is that the English language was somewhat different in the 1700s too, and a lot of linguistic nuances have evolved over time.

It's the issue at the core of the debate over the Commerce Clause. Apparently "commerce" meant something else those days. So bitching over specific words can be trivial, but sometimes necessary.

In this case it's not though, the meaning is pretty clear.

622 nikis-knight  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:51:59pm

Athiests here sometimes have said that they don't "Not believe in God" they just see no evidence for one.
I find this disingenuous.

The existance of the universe and people who can percieve it is evidence of something. It is not conclusive evidence of a God or anything else in particular, but it is evidence of some cause to the physical existence which must be explained (well, you can choose not to, but that doesn't negate the question.) Drawing an inference of a God from existence is exactly equally logical, all other things aside, as any other explanation. So don't pretend to have the monopoly on reason because your first cause is an equally un-evidence multitude of realities, or such.

623 Lynn B.  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:55:32pm

re: #619 Optimizer

Would that mean that churches can't even be mentioned in federal laws? I doesn't make any sense. Regardless, the Founders writings are clear on what they meant by it and they really do carry the authority.

Nope, you're right. It wouldn't make any sense and that's not what it says. I think you may be misinterpreting yet another word. "Establishment" does not mean "institution/organization/outfit" in that clause. It means "an act of establishing." The establishment clause explicitly prohibits Congress from making any law that would have the effect of establishing or promoting or encouraging a national religion or, some would argue (and I would agree) religion in general.

624 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 3:59:12pm

What's a troll?

...seems people here consider it the most offensive epithet

625 itsjustme  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 4:02:28pm

For a guy who described himself in 1994 as an "independent" during the Reagan-Bush years, I noticed he didn't mind having the first President Bush introduce him today.

The elder Bush has always shown tremendous grace towards those who have been openly critical of him.

626 Lynn B.  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 4:07:32pm

re: #624 medaura18586

This is a pretty good definition:

A depraved individual who sits in front of a computer all day and posts flames of an idiotic or pseudo-intellectual nature on public forums and private websites. Many of these people actually become emotional about what is said on the afore-said mediums and feel it is their duty to punish those who disagree with them.

627 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 4:11:15pm

re: #626 Lynn B.

re: #624 medaura18586

This is a pretty good definition:

A depraved individual who sits in front of a computer all day and posts flames of an idiotic or pseudo-intellectual nature on public forums and private websites. Many of these people actually become emotional about what is said on the afore-said mediums and feel it is their duty to punish those who disagree with them.

Pretty hilarious definition, but kinda loosy goosy. So I take it that at LGF, it's mostly interchangeable with 'friggin annoying'?

628 Lynn B.  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 4:20:21pm

re: #627 medaura18586

No, there are certain people who "troll" here (and elsewhere) deliberately trying to get a rise out of people. Intent to annoy is part of the definition.

See also LGF FAQ here.

Oh, well. It appears this thread is officially dead.

629 medaura18586  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 4:33:39pm

re: #628 Lynn B.

yup, it's dead, all the zealots seem to have left

630 Highrise  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 5:00:53pm

re: #602 pyrodoctor


Thanks for your post.

631 Highrise  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 5:07:26pm

re: #612 The Scurvy Eye

re: #587 Highrise

The fact that it hasn't gotten near as bad as I've seen it before is a testament to LGF.

I remember one time that we had one thread on abortion that Charles put up just to see how people would do. I was surprised that it actually went well...until the very very end when a few trolls showed up then Charles had to lock it. But the regular LGFers deserved an applause for such a heated topic. Those trolls troll other threads and are mysteriously always in conflict hehe.

When I do get time which is rare, I stop over at hot air because I generally like the moderators take on things but I make sure to skip any religious bent thread, the posters imo get nasty...and it's hard on the eyes.

632 Highrise  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 5:15:35pm

re: #628 Lynn B.

re: #627 medaura18586

No, there are certain people who "troll" here (and elsewhere) deliberately trying to get a rise out of people. Intent to annoy is part of the definition.

See also LGF FAQ here.

That be it! It's the intention behind it. Some trolls are easier to spot than others. Then there are moby's...oy!

633 Pacificlady  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 5:17:14pm

Personally, I would perfer an agnostic (at least he/she is honest enough to state they don't know the whether there is a god or not) as president, or maybe a JFK Catholic (he didn't seem to take his religion too seriously, at least that part about being faithful to your spouse). So I guess it's Rudy so far.

Religion by its nature is something you have to take with a leap of faith. Catholic, Jew, Mormon, Baptist, Scientologist, Moslem, each has its own fairy tales. Whatever gets you through the darkest night (as long as you don't bug me).

634 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 5:51:45pm

re: #633 Pacificlady


Religion by its nature is something you have to take with a leap of faith. Catholic, Jew, Mormon, Baptist, Scientologist, Moslem, each has its own fairy tales. Whatever gets you through the darkest night (as long as you don't bug me).

They may be fairytales, they may not be. Like you said, it's a matter of faith. And I don't begrudge anyone their beliefs, because anyone honest has to admit that it's unknowable. One thing is for sure...the idea that we are going to die and become nothing more than wormfood doesn't inspire me or allow me to sleep any better. I am just HOPING that those who find that leap of faith easier than I do, are right. Because the alternative is too depressing for words. Believers comfort me.

635 rikzilla  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 5:56:30pm

One wonders if Mitt was wearing his special magic mormon undies while speechifying? (cue Cuba Gooding-- "Mike, I'm wearing your underwear...that you...gave me...to wear...")

Mormonism may be "Christian"...but how many Christians believe that when you die you get to go to a special planet where you get to be God?

Seems a little...well...blasphemous...doncha think?


All thing being equal though, I'd vote for Mitt long before I'd vote for a Dhimmiecrat.

-z

636 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 6:06:45pm

re: #635 rikzilla

One wonders if Mitt was wearing his special magic mormon undies while speechifying? (cue Cuba Gooding-- "Mike, I'm wearing your underwear...that you...gave me...to wear...")

Mormonism may be "Christian"...but how many Christians believe that when you die you get to go to a special planet where you get to be God?

Seems a little...well...blasphemous...doncha think?


All thing being equal though, I'd vote for Mitt long before I'd vote for a Dhimmiecrat.

-z

Mormon beliefs any sillier than some of other religions. They all have their idiosyncracies.

637 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 6:07:16pm

pimf-

...AREN"T any sillier...

638 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 6:08:10pm

re: #635 rikzilla

One wonders if Mitt was wearing his special magic mormon undies while speechifying? (cue Cuba Gooding-- "Mike, I'm wearing your underwear...that you...gave me...to wear...")

Mormonism may be "Christian"...but how many Christians believe that when you die you get to go to a special planet where you get to be God?

Seems a little...well...blasphemous...doncha think?


All thing being equal though, I'd vote for Mitt long before I'd vote for a Dhimmiecrat.

-z

I thought I was the only person who would actually dare speak about the stupid planet "thing".
Man did I get flamed for that.

I have no problem with people believing.
I have no problem with people smoking.

Both disgust me
but some of my best friends are smokers and flat earthers and we just don't talk about it much.
But none of them want to run for POTUS either.

639 Stuck-in-CA  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 6:21:52pm

re:
but some of my best friends are smokers and flat earthers and we just don't talk about it much.
But none of them want to run for POTUS either.

I don't know much about Mormonism. I have 3 friends that I like alot who are Mormon. We don't talk about religion. But they are really good and decent people, and good citizens. If they believe they are going to fly off to another planet instead of to heaven (and there is no universal definition of that either) I don't know or care. But Mitt Romney ran the state of Massachusetts and seems to have done it without any influence from his religion. So I expect he intends to do the same for the nation.

He's not my candidate of choice, but that isn't because he's Mormon. It's because he was too soft on illegal immigration.

640 Kolbe  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 6:33:18pm

I've been lurking here since right after Sept. 11, 2001. I just managed to register last month. I'm 55 years old and was a committed liberal, feminist, democrat until about 10 years ago. If you are seeking the "Truth" try reading C.S. Lewis (Mere Christianity) and just ask God to reveal himself if he is there. Guarantee you will get a response if you are open to it. I'm now a devout Roman Catholic. If you look for truth with an open mind and study the early Church Fathers you will find it.

641 Rollcast  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 6:37:40pm

A mediocre speech, a string of platitudes. The event seemed contrived.
Just why was he giving this speech?

642 Q-Burn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 6:42:51pm

Adrenalyn knows some Mormon girls that could suck the chrome off a trailer hitch...

643 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:08:55pm

re: #639 Stuck-in-CA

re:

He's not my candidate of choice, but that isn't because he's Mormon. It's because he was too soft on illegal immigration.

I agree. I'd sooner cut off my fingers than see a Nazicrat as POTUS again.

644 silversmith  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:09:03pm

Speaking as the non pious and the non-religious person I am, this guy sounds like a god-worshipper running for President.

645 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:11:40pm

re: #642 Q-Burn

Adrenalyn knows some Mormon girls that could suck the chrome off a trailer hitch...

I think we all know some. Whether we know it or not.
It's mainstream in the cult for girls to know how to keep boys happy without having "sex" outside marriage.
Girls will tell you they actually teach it.
Though not being female, I can't say if it's true or just girls talking.

646 silversmith  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:15:20pm

re: #645 Adrenalynsounds just like a cultural slur to me

Pick any group and say the same thing (sucking chrome off of anything) and what do you have but a bunch of people congratulating themselves that their women can't suck chrome for didly squat.

647 silversmith  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:16:35pm

every morman I ever met was a good responsible person

648 Q-Burn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:21:10pm

re: #645 Adrenalyn

Well wait a minute. If the girls aren't telling you or sucking you how would you know? I call B.S.

649 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:31:58pm

re: #648 Q-Burn

re: #645 Adrenalyn

Well wait a minute. If the girls aren't telling you or sucking you how would you know? I call B.S.

Call b.s. ?
Did I not say the girls were telling me.
I said I was not a girl and was not subject to the teaching they get/got.
So I can't say from first hand knowledge if the teaching really happens but you know, I have faith that it does.

650 Q-Burn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:35:48pm

re: #649 Adrenalyn


Keep the faith. Someday it could happen to you.

651 Unnatural Man  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 7:50:49pm

Mitt seems to have tread the minefield pretty well. Good speech.

652 rturley  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:24:20pm

I think its bull that he has to have a speech like this. Mitt should be able to talk about the issues (not his religious views) just like every other candidate gets too. If Hillary had to say what she thought about Jesus should probably blurt out something like "Jesus? you mean the guy who trims my lawn? Or is his name Jesús, I don't know."

653 iagofest a.k.a. abu fly killa  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 8:53:14pm

re: #645 Adrenalyn

You are full of it. Having been an LDS young woman growing up in Utah and now teaching sunday school for LDS young women here in Texas, I can assure you that sexual techniques are not taught or even mentioned. What we emphasized is chastity before marriage and faithfulness after marriage. And stuff like petting and necking is discouraged.

What exactly is your issue with LDS girls? Did you get dumped by one or something? And any missionary that did have oral sex before he left would not be allowed to go (if he came clean about it). Standards are even higher for missionaries now.

654 MamaWolf  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:01:30pm

re: #101 storagemanager


Nevertheless, the Mormon church clearly condemns other religious systems. Those Mormons who complain about poor treatment should familiarize themselves with their teachers' words.


The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormons), do not condemn other faiths. There may be some people within the church who do, but the church does NOT. The eleventh Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints states: "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and to allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

You obviously have a hatred for Mormons and the religion. That does not mean you should spout your lies and hate to others.

655 MamaWolf  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:06:24pm

re: #103 Dianna

re: #87 RoP_RIP

If you're curious, you might read the Book of Mormon. I'd suggest trying to find one of the earliest editions, because they've been tossing things out as they go along.

If you are reading a copy of the Book of Mormon that has had excerpts or parts thrown out, then you are reading a copy used by one of the spin-offs of the church who have decided to take out anything that they did not agree with or did not want to live by. The copy of the Book of Mormon that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints uses, is the same as it has always been.

656 sffilk  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:09:45pm

re: #654 MamaWolf

re: #101 storagemanager

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormons), do not condemn other faiths. There may be some people within the church who do, but the church does NOT. The eleventh Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints states: "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and to allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

You obviously have a hatred for Mormons and the religion. That does not mean you should spout your lies and hate to others.


Actually, they do. The Roman Catholic church is known as the "great and abominable satan." As a Jew, I've been told that I cannot get into heaven unless I apostacize and become a mormon. That being said, how can you say that the mormons do not condemn other faiths?

One more thing: their 11th Article of Faith says that everyone should have the right to worship as they please. If that's true, then why does the cult send out unpaid missionaries to tell people that the only way they can get into heaven is by becoming mormon? And let me remind you: this has been told to me by missionaries, so I know it's true.

657 iagofest a.k.a. abu fly killa  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:26:23pm

re: #656 sffilk
Actually, I think you mean "great and abominable church" and no, that passage of scripture does not specify any particular church. It is interpreted generally to mean any institution that fights against God's laws. Some LDS might believe that it refers to the Catholic church, but that is not LDS doctrine, just their own prejudice.

Most Christian churches teach that baptism is a requirement for entrance into heaven. The LDS believe that baptism by someone holding the priesthood as given to John the Baptist is a requirement for entrance into the highest (3rd) level of heaven. So LDS is really not that different in that respect. Most churches think that their doctrine is the most correct, and if they don't then they come off pretty wishy-washy. I wouldn't take it personally. If you are right, and they are wrong, so what?

And having the right to worship as you please doesn't mean you have the right to go to heaven. God will ulitmately decide that no matter what your religion is. Some people would rather not go to heaven anyway and they are free to choose that path.

658 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:31:24pm

re: #653 iagofest a.k.a. abu fly killa

re: #645 Adrenalyn

You are full of it. Having been an LDS young woman growing up in Utah and now teaching sunday school for LDS young women here in Texas, I can assure you that sexual techniques are not taught or even mentioned. What we emphasized is chastity before marriage and faithfulness after marriage. And stuff like petting and necking is discouraged.

What exactly is your issue with LDS girls? Did you get dumped by one or something? And any missionary that did have oral sex before he left would not be allowed to go (if he came clean about it). Standards are even higher for missionaries now.

Sorry but I can't say that I have the feelings about your cult that I do.
From first-hand family experience. From friends, neighbors and associates. Perhaps in TX they don't teach oral-sex (aka, meeting their special needs) but they do in other places.
They also teach, or it least seems VERY pervasvive in the cult - to not associate with people that are not part of the cult. Even in the same family, members are not allowed to go in the church for a wedding of an immediate family member, if said member is not mormon, not to mention a worthy-wearer-of-white-undies who ascrives to have his own planet and harem in the afterlife.

Then there is that whole, sex with kids thing about the basic founding of the cult I can't get over. Like I said in my initial post in this thread - it's like Nazi's trying to convince the Joos that they come in peace, like the aliens in the movie "Mars Attacks"...ack, ack, ack

659 Adrenalyn  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:33:38pm

re: #650 Q-Burn

re: #649 Adrenalyn


Keep the faith. Someday it could happen to you.

ok, good night to you and yours

660 GeekInGoodyear  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 9:47:33pm

While I agree with most of what Mitt had to say, the appeal to the common ground with traditional Judeo-Christian values won't save him from attack about Mormonism not being in-line with the fundamentals of orthodox Christianity. The Dems and MSM won't give up a weapon that will cause fundamentalist to stay at home. All they really need to do is stir up some of most rabid fundamentalist to play the role of political hatchet men and they won't even have to do the dirty work. Of course they will condemn the attacks and the attackers, linking Republicans to religious fanatics who will in turn help persuade moderates to move left. In the end Mitt can't win on Mormonism because the spin will be that the Republicans are now divided and the MSM is just reporting on the fracture within the party.

Huckabee, on the other hand, is a very different problem. The Dems and MSM can't attack him too directly on religion without a real risk of it back firing. I think this is why you already see an attempt to paint him as a liberal. With Mike they fear the religion card because they know that Evangelicals will turn out like never before. And though they may paint Mike as left leaning they know that compared to any of the Dems he will still look quite conservative. For this reason I think you will see the MSM make Mike look as much like a Dem as they can during the primaries and only attack on the religion with guilt by association. They have to beat him now or they're in trouble against him in the general election.

As for Rudy and religion, there's really only the abortion issue for Dems to use, but that's been effectively countered by the Pat Robertson endorsement. Though the most radical fundamentalist may stay home, most will probably trust in Pat and go with Rudy given the alternative of voting for any of the Dems. Rudy has other challenges for the Dems since he could draw a lot of moderates his way, but I would guess the Dems and MSM have a good idea how they will handle him.

Overall, my view is that the Dems are very happy with Mitt's speech today. It keeps the religion weapon in play. For the primary, Huckabee will be gently linked to those attacking Mitt for his Mormonsim. They'll find the most rabid anti-Mormon attacks from "Baptists" (which won't be hard because there's a wide range of "Baptists" out there), and then they will make sure everyone knows Mike is a "Baptist". I can here the MSM questions now, "Govenor Huckabee, as a fellow Baptist what do think of the by Pastor Joe from ." This will scare people away from Huckabee and toward the poor Mitt. With any luck the Dems will get their first choice Mitt Romney and the chance to kick the weapon of religion into full gear in the General election, dividing the religious right away from the party.

661 DWalla  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 10:24:17pm

wow... I'm LDS as well and was surprised to see just how much inaccurate information about Mormon's has been brought forward here. Not only brought forward, but when clarified or dismissed as false by other Mormons in the thread, they still pushed the idea.

I checked my calendar to make sure it was 2007 not 1855. The intense anti-Mormon comments in here which, I must state, are either blatantly false, misconstrued or use information taken out of context... well... is simply astounding.

I find it strange that a person would have real serious issues with the idea that God could talk to man... yet at the same time believe in a book (which I also believe in) that makes it clear God spoke with Abraham and Moses.

On top of this the comparison of Mormonism to Islam is downright offensive to my core. This only illustrates the ignorance of the persons making such claims.

I'm not here to throw down a gauntlet and start a brawl... but crikey people!... really!

So am I a threat to humanity because I'm Mormon? By some of the comments in here you would think I was part of the Trilateral Commission or some other secret world/mind/people controlling group. Seriously, I thought you people were educated.

Let me make it perfectly clear... I WOULD NOT VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY SIMPLY BECAUSE HE IS MORMON... NOR ANY OTHER MORMON FOR THAT MATTER. Nor do I know anyone else that would vote for him simply because he shares my faith. Religious affiliation is not a shoe-in with Mormons. Period. At this point I'm still undecided as to which candidate I'd vote for... there are four that I'm seriously considering... Huckabee, Romney, Thompson and Giullianni. That's where I sit.

One last thing... I lived in Vegas for 10 years. During that timeframe I actively worked to get Harry Reid out of office. I didn't know a single Mormon that supported the guy. Everyone I know is thoroughly disgusted with the man. Yet at the same time every single Mormon I knew personally supported John Ensign... a self-proclaimed Christian... and, in my opinion, a very good and honest man. Harry Reid sold-out like others who have claimed to be religious have done in the past. And as others will do in the future.

662 DWalla  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:46:55pm

RickZ said:
Well, Mormons still have some holdovers who practive polygamy.

Actually, anyone who is claims to be Mormon and is practicing polygamy is not Mormon. That would result in excommunication. There are splinter groups that broke off a century ago that practice polygamy... but they DO NOT recognize the LDS church as their church nor do they have any affiliation whatsoever with the church. That would be like saying Lutherans are Catholics.

Also, the US fought a war against the Mormons in Utah.

Really?... which war was that? You may have forgotten that the Mormons sent a full battalion to the aid of the US military and were nicknamed "The Mormon Battalion."

So there are legitimate similarities between the two.

Nope. Not at all... I'm not sure who made the comment about Joseph Smith seeing an angel in a cave... but not sure where they got that historical inaccuracy.

Wasn't there also a murder or two about some fake 'historical' Mormon letters/documents some years ago? Seems to also fit in as 'a point worth making', i.e., murder for dissing a 'religion'.

Yes... murders DID occur. But you didn't get all the facts. The guy forged documents and tried to blackmail the church with them. When it looked like his little scam was going to be unmasked, he started pipe-bombing people he saw as a threat. Let's not try to imply that the church was out murdering people... that's just plain ridiculous.

Storagemanager wrote:
Brigham Young said. . .
"But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong." (Brigham Young, "Journal of Discourses," Vol. 2, page 171. - 1855)

John Taylor said . . .

"We talk about Christianity, but it is a perfect pack of nonsense...Myself and hundreds of the Elders around me have seen its pomp, parade, and glory; and what is it? It is a sounding brass and a tinkling symbol; it is as corrupt as hell; and the Devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century."( Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, page 167 - 1858)

"Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom." (J.D.", Vol. 10, page 127. - 1863

This is not an endightment on Christianity... it was commentary on the state of Christianity. Those comments are taken way out of context. There are lots of examples of those using religion as a way to control, manipulate and extract money from their followers. In the nineteenth century there was a fair amount of that going on. He was referring to the disingenuous, and in some cases, corrupt leadership in some of the churches. There are people who have made themselves very wealthy in the name of Christ... using his name for personal gain.

The last statement is a based upon our beliefs. We believe that the original Church of Christ fell away and the priesthood authority, bestowed by the laying on of hands by Christ on his Apostles, was lost. It is merely a statement based on our beliefs that the priesthood was restored via the resurrected Peter, James and John to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. We believe the priesthood to not be a process of schooling, but a literal bestowal of power by God upon his followers. But they must receive it in the same manner in which the original Apostles received such authority... by one who has the authority and are authorized to pass this authority to other worthy followers.

663 DWalla  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:48:30pm

By the way... the Mormon church has a 100% lay ministry. The leadership in the church isn't buying up mansions and Ferrari's.

664 DWalla  Thu, Dec 6, 2007 11:57:55pm

Adrenalyn... I had to laugh at your comments... teaching oral sex?... hahahahahahahahah... oh man!... when I read that I was laughing so hard I was crying. I about blew my soda out of my nose!

Whew!.. thanks for the great laugh.

665 DWalla  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 12:03:51am

Killgore... I know a number of atheists who are very nice people and respect other's views. I also know one atheist who is like Adrenalyn and drops bombs on people for shock value.

Oh.. just to clarify... Mormon girls are NOT taught oral sex, etc. That has to be one of the funniest falsehoods I've ever heard about our church. And it's the first time I'd ever heard that one! Trust me Adrenalyn, if someone was teaching that they would be excommunicated so fast their head would spin.

666 DWalla  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 12:11:59am

Hey Killgore Trout... just curious if you consider yourself a true atheist... or an agnostic. I mean, isn't atheism based on absolute certainty? It's just my opinion of course, but I can't see how someone could actually be an atheist because there is no way to disprove God. I've found that most people who claim to be atheist are actually agnostic... and, in some cases, are gnostics without set beliefs.

667 DWalla  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 12:21:21am

re: #162 Occasional Reader

Actually... butter doesn't have transfats...

but I digress..

:D

668 DWalla  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 12:52:01am

Snowman:
This is typical Mormon double-speak. The Jesus Christ they believe in is an exaulted man made so by his own effort. The same is true of his father, God...Mormons believe he is a man who achieved god-hood by good works.

Actually that is not true. We believe that Christ was the literal son of God. That they are two separate entities who are one in mind and purpose. One of our scriptures reads: "This is my work and my glory, to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man." So Christ and the Father have the same goal of the salvation of mankind. We don't believe that Christ was a man who achieved God-hood by his own good works. We believe that he was and is a divine individual from birth, that he was who he was from the very beginning. It's easy to prove that he was tested and tempted, and that he never fell prey to those temptations. Had he fallen to those temptations then the entire plan of salvation would have been moot... leaving the world devoid of a person that could carry the sins of the people because such a task required a perfect God. Part of the reason why his trial in the Garden of Gethsemane was so brutal is for two reasons: 1) He had never felt the burden of sin prior to his taking on the sins of the world, and 2) He felt the weight of ALL of the sins of the world, from creation to ending. Only a divine individual could do such a thing. It's my personal belief that an ordinary man, regardless of how good or righteous they might be, would have died under such a burden.

669 sffilk  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 6:14:50am

re: #657 iagofest a.k.a. abu fly killa

re: #656 sffilk
Actually, I think you mean "great and abominable church" and no, that passage of scripture does not specify any particular church. It is interpreted generally to mean any institution that fights against God's laws. Some LDS might believe that it refers to the Catholic church, but that is not LDS doctrine, just their own prejudice.

Most Christian churches teach that baptism is a requirement for entrance into heaven. The LDS believe that baptism by someone holding the priesthood as given to John the Baptist is a requirement for entrance into the highest (3rd) level of heaven. So LDS is really not that different in that respect. Most churches think that their doctrine is the most correct, and if they don't then they come off pretty wishy-washy. I wouldn't take it personally. If you are right, and they are wrong, so what?

And having the right to worship as you please doesn't mean you have the right to go to heaven. God will ulitmately decide that no matter what your religion is. Some people would rather not go to heaven anyway and they are free to choose that path.

Actually, I've heard people call the Catholic church the "great and abominable satan," and have had that confirmed by former mormons. That's my source on that.

As a Jew, having people tell me that my faith is wrong is, to put it simply, wrong. My philosophy is that it's not how you believe, but that you believe. Mormons say the same thing, but don't practice it.

670 sffilk  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 6:21:07am

re: #662 DWalla

RickZ said:
Well, Mormons still have some holdovers who practive polygamy.

Actually, anyone who is claims to be Mormon and is practicing polygamy is not Mormon. That would result in excommunication. There are splinter groups that broke off a century ago that practice polygamy... but they DO NOT recognize the LDS church as their church nor do they have any affiliation whatsoever with the church. That would be like saying Lutherans are Catholics.

Then when did D&C 132 get rescinded? You know, the one that says words to the effect that you need to have something like 3 wives in order to get into heaven?


Yes... murders DID occur. But you didn't get all the facts. The guy forged documents and tried to blackmail the church with them. When it looked like his little scam was going to be unmasked, he started pipe-bombing people he saw as a threat. Let's not try to imply that the church was out murdering people... that's just plain ridiculous.

Actually, the hierarchy in SLC tried to buy the documents, not knowing that they were fake. When everything came to a head, Mark Hoffman did the nefarious deeds he did.

Oh, and allow me to remind you of something from the Bible, the original one - Ps. 145:18:

The L-rd comes close to those who call upon Him, to those who call upon Him IN TRUTH.


(emphasis added)

671 DWalla  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 7:41:00am

OK RickZ... show me proof of Mormon's who are practicing polygamy... not people who are splinter groups, but actual Mormons. Guess what? You will not find any. Polygamy hasn't been in the LDS church for a century... and let's not pretend that a large percentage of Mormon's practiced polygamy because it isn't true. The percentage of LDS that practiced polygamy in it's time is in the single digits.

672 Pacificlady  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 9:12:11am

For all Jews out there:
Get over it, almost all ( and maybe all) Christians require belief in Jesus to get a ticket into heaven; therefore, if you are Jewish, you are out of luck according to Christians. As I explain to those who are sincerely worried about my soul, my ancestor Abraham had a convenant with G-d that covers me. I will be fine. Thanks but no thanks for your good news.

673 Adrenalyn  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 9:19:52am

re: #664 DWalla

Adrenalyn... I had to laugh at your comments... teaching oral sex?... hahahahahahahahah... oh man!... when I read that I was laughing so hard I was crying. I about blew my soda out of my nose!

Whew!.. thanks for the great laugh.

Well, I guess you must be a dentist and are fond of nitrous then.
I have heard about the oral sex thing from people who were taught it first hand.
As for the planet thing and multiple wives thing
wow, how can you justify belonging to such a cult.
Then there is the whole exclusion of blood relatives thing too, for those who are not worthy-wearers-of-white.
Forgive me but my honest opinion is that mormons are a cult.
I don't feel the same way about catholics though. Even though, yeah, yeah, yeah, all that dark ages crap. That was so long ago as to be not worth consideration, IMHO. Ditto for the Jews.
But mormons and moo slums are just too far into their own selves and don't seem to have a grasp on reality.

674 GeekInGoodyear  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 10:20:37am

It always seems odd to me that Mormons are so insistent on wanting to claim they are just another group of Christians as though they really don't believe things that are different from orthodox Christianity. The fact is that their prophets and leaders have always taught and held to doctrines that are radically different. As a Protestant, I certainly don't agree with their teaching, but I think they are free to believe whatever they like. It seems like Mormons either don’t understand what Christianity has traditionally taught, or they want the advantage of being perceived as simply a branch of Christianity so that they don’t have to really acknowledge how different they are.

The truth is that on fundamentals about God and Jesus they are entirely different. While I realize they honestly believe their doctrines are correct and have restored true Christianity, they should at least be honest enough to admit that this is the case and that it does differ radically from traditional Christian orthodoxy. But they won’t, and this is why the issue will live on as a weapon for Democrats if Mitt gets the nomination. I can probably demonstrate this here by simply quoting a few controversial things from Brigham Young regarding who God is:

"When our father Adam came into the Garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body... He helped to make and organize this world... He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do." Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, page 50.

"You believe Adam was made of the dust of this earth. This I do not believe, though it is supposed that it is so written in the Bible; but it is not to my understanding. You can write that information to the States, if you please—that I have publicly declared that I do not believe that portion of the Bible as the Christian world do. I never did, and I never want to. What is the reason I do not? Because I have come to understanding, and banished from my mind all the baby stories my mother taught me when I was a child." Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses vol. 2 page 6.

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I reveled to them, and which God revealed to me—namely that Adam is our Father and God." Brigham Young sermon recorded in Deseret News, June 14, 1873.

I’m not bringing this up to debate LDS vs. orthodox Christianity, rather I’m just giving one of many examples of the type things you can expect to see used against Mitt and Mormonism during the general election. This is only a small sample of what will come from the far religious right. The Democrats will welcome this fight and they will privately stoke the fire while publically denouncing the attackers. The reality is that Mormons want to be seen as just another branch of Christianity, Fundamentalist want to expose them as a cult, and the Democrats won't miss a prime opportunity to pit them against each other. In the end Mormons will come out looking somewhat dishonest for trying to say they are just another branch of Christianity, Fundamentalist Evangelicals will be further demonized by the MSM, and Hillary Clinton will be in power.

675 bosforus  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 10:50:17am

I know I'm a little late on this but...as an active Mormon I can't with a clear conscience read these comments without saying that there's plenty of distortions of truth and just flat out lies about who we are and what we believe. The lie that bothers me the most is Adrenalyn's "experience" that oral sex is somehow allowed before marriage. Not sure where that info's coming from but when it comes to sexual acts like oral sex, normal sex, or any other kind of sexual contact they all fall under the Law of Chastity which is quite explicit and direct especially when being taught to the youth of our church. A little handout is given to all youth of the church called "For the Strength of the Youth" which says..."Physical intimacy between husband and wife is beautiful
and sacred. It is ordained of God for the creation of
children and for the expression of love between husband
and wife. God has commanded that sexual intimacy be
reserved for marriage." Go to lds.org or this link [Link: www.lds.org...] to look at the entire "For the Strength of the Youth" pamphlet or just go to page 26 to read our beliefs on sexual purity.

676 Adrenalyn  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 10:57:43am

re: #675 bosforus

I know I'm a little late on this but...as an active Mormon I can't with a clear conscience read these comments without saying that there's plenty of distortions of truth and just flat out lies about who we are and what we believe. The lie that bothers me the most is Adrenalyn's "experience" that oral sex is somehow allowed before marriage. Not sure where that info's coming from but when it comes to sexual acts like oral sex, normal sex, or any other kind of sexual contact they all fall under the Law of Chastity which is quite explicit and direct especially when being taught to the youth of our church. A little handout is given to all youth of the church called "For the Strength of the Youth" which says..."Physical intimacy between husband and wife is beautiful
and sacred. It is ordained of God for the creation of
children and for the expression of love between husband
and wife. God has commanded that sexual intimacy be
reserved for marriage." Go to lds.org or this link [Link: www.lds.org...] to look at the entire "For the Strength of the Youth" pamphlet or just go to page 26 to read our beliefs on sexual purity.

So let me see if I have this clear
you believe that 2000 years ago "jesus" performed miracles
and that "god" exists and is great, kind, good, yeah, yeah yeah
despite all the pain and suffering over the ages and today
yet you don't believe my first hand accounts of how cultish the mormons are and how they behave like a cult (re-read my posts for specific examples)
call it faith then
I have faith that mormons are a weird cult
thankfully, not a dangerous one like moo slums
but a cult indeed

677 bosforus  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 11:04:58am

re: #676 Adrenalyn

Honestly, Adrenalyn, I don't really feel any malice in your comments so I can't see your comments as anything more than an interpretation of your experiences and I can't defend my religion's side of your experiences so I have to respect it, which I do. We Mormons are used to being called a lot of things. If mainstream Christians don't want to call us Christians for whatever reason then I guess we're not Christians. If you want to call us a cult for whatever reason then I guess we're a cult.

678 DWalla  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 11:16:26am

I don't think us Mormons are claiming that are religion differs, in many respects, from what you call traditional Christianity. We believe that God the Father, his Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are completely separate entities who are one in purpose.

679 Pacificlady  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 11:37:55am

Maybe all religions are cults. I'm sure when Abraham tolds his friends and neighbors that he had spoke with God and God told him to no longer worship idols, his neighbors called him a cult leader. Maybe the Zoroastarians have the only true religion and everything after is a cult. Apparently for some people the real difference between a religion and cult is how long it has been around. Give me a break. If you want to worship a rock, I don't care. Followers of LDS are like everyone else, some good, some bad. As far as I can tell, their religion teaches good values; however, I think they were very insensitive when they were baptisizing Jews that had died in the Halocaust.

680 sandrine  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 1:18:20pm

OK, I will try and refrain from using Stupids or other derogatory terms that vent my frustration.

For those of you for Rudy: WAKE UP The Republican big wigs have annointed Mitt...you do recall he spoke at George hw bush presidential library in texas, don't you? Of course, Romney took the opposite course of JFK. He stated there would not be an absolute barrier between religion and the state. In fact, only believers were relevant as he ranted against the Bill O'Reilly coined and reviled secularists. This by the way, is bad for a free society, not good.

This is dangerous as anyone with common sense should see. It is also propaganda for a Republican campaign that will end with disaster for Israel and the U.S.. Romney has one of the lowest marks vis a vis his support for Israel. He will follow the Baker policies. He is worth hundreds of millions and the fact he spoke in Texas at the Bush library suggests to me he has been meeting with oil interests there. He is an authoritarian and a panderer and no friend of Israel. He talks about his belief in J.C but doesn't want to be questioned further.

He alone determines what he will explain about himself and what he won't...actually I found his merging of religion and the state frightening and too much like Islam. He kept intoning that we are founded on principles of Christianity and that Christian morality is what we all have in common. What about Mormon precepts? Do we take his word for it? Do you think his Mormon precepts align with Baptist fundamentalists who want to safeguard Israel? Not if the Mormons don't follow the same beliefs.


This is dangerous. Wake up and start protesting before you are roped in to the noise machine. But if you care about Israel...imagine that cold, hard, Romney with globs of money, telling Israel to do what he says or else.

681 GeekInGoodyear  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 2:39:37pm

re: #678 DWalla

Your statement is prime example of what I was talking about. From your comment, it seems like you don't understand that the orthodox Christian view has long held to the triune nature of God as One Being and not three separate entities. This difference is widely recognized as placing Mormonism outside the traditional boundaries of the Christian faith. Wikipedia notes this point in its article on the Trinity and discusses the non-Trinitarian position of Mormonism. They have a decent summary of the orthodox Christian view and from what I can tell the link to the LDS Godhead position is also representative of what Mormons believe.

I have no problem with Mormons believing something different. They are free to reject the Christian view, and even attempt to redefine what the true "Christian" view is. However, out of respect for the orthodox definition of Christianity, it would be nice if Mormons did not insist that everyone except their redefinition of the term “Christian” when they should know that most people understand the term to describe a faith that is fundamentally different from Mormonism.

While I can appreciate the Mormon desire to have “Christ” as part of the word they use to refer to themselves, the reality is that non-Mormons have ruined the term "Christian" for Mormons and it in no way reflects what they truly believe. I would suggest Mormons would be better off to respect traditional Christians (no matter how wrong they think we are) and use a different term. Perhaps they could combine the name “Mormon” and “Christian” along with the belief that they are the true church (e.g. More Christian then everyone else) and call themselves “Morchristians”. Sorry, couldn't resist. I'm just kidding about the name... However, it would be nice if Mormons were not so intent on high-jacking the term “Christian”, and would understand why others view them as not being Christians.

682 DWalla  Fri, Dec 7, 2007 3:03:11pm

I just re-read my comment and realized I mistyped... I meant to say that Mormon's fully realize that their religion deviates from the traditional Christian view. We certainly aren't taking the "me too!" stance. With that being said us, like traditional Christianity, fully believe that only by and through Christ can a person be saved. Christ is the pillar of our religious beliefs... he's not a secondary figure or a person we find interesting... or even believe that he was a man that became perfect, etc. We believe him to be the literal Son of God with all the powers thereof.

683 pesca  Sat, Dec 8, 2007 5:05:25pm

re: #41 ploome hineni

I agree with the absurd "frequent prayer" observation. He was really reaching. Would have been better to have left that out.

On the other hand you may well ask what islam's position on religious freedom is ...

Another poster said it right, that islam is a confusion of politics and religion.

Not sure what Romney was trying to do - innoculate himself against the charge of being an extremist or to open an election issue on the role of religion in the defence of liberty against the violence of fundamentalism, perhaps?

Overall, a competent but not memorable or compelling speech.

684 craginm  Sat, Dec 8, 2007 6:04:16pm

re: #14 Lizard by the Bay

Grilling the man on his personal religious beliefs strikes me as decidedly un-American. I thought JFK put these issues to bed decades ago. But what I'd like to know is just who is making this necessary? Is it the born-agains and other "intolerant Christians" on the right (as we've been told), or is it really the leftist MSM trying to piss in our pot?

As one of those "intolerant" Evangelical Christians, I doubt very seriously that it is we who are making this speech necessary. I am happy to know that he believes that Jesus is the Savior of Mankind, but since we are talking about the political campaign for the office of the President of the United States, I am even happier to know that he has such a deep, profound understanding of the nature of founding of our country.

I would personally have a problem supporting a candidate not within the Judeo-Christian tradition for reasons that are or should be blindingly obvious in these dangerous times. I would not be assured that someone outside this tradition would appropriately cherish and safely care for our democratic republic.

685 swamprat  Sat, Dec 8, 2007 7:12:45pm

rat test

686 swamprat  Sat, Dec 8, 2007 7:15:51pm

rat

687 swamprat  Sat, Dec 8, 2007 7:18:39pm

rats!

688 ohiosupermom  Sun, Dec 9, 2007 9:35:28am

There is no fear in faith. Love is All in All. Perfect knowing we are all God's perfect children.


This entry has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

log in
Name:
Pass:

Register Forgot Your Password? My Account Re-send Confirmation (To log in, cookies must be enabled in your browser!)

► LGF Headlines

  • Loading...

► Top 10 Comments

  • Loading...

► Bottom Comments

  • Loading...

► Recent Comments

  • Loading...

► Tools/Info

► LGF Hits

► Slideshows

► Resources

► Never Forget

► Statistics

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published in our weblog, unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form

► News/Opinion

  • Loading...

More Partners

Compare Electricity Prices in your area. Texas Electricity is deregulated; you have the right to choose Texas Electric Rates from among many Texas Electric Companies.

It's not a bug, it's a filter.

Follow Lizardoid on Twitter

Tikatok Gift Cards - Capture your child's imagination . . . in a book!

 Frank says:

We'll get back to the wimp, and his low-budget conception of personal freedom, in just a moment -- Thing-Fish.

Save $5 off $50 at Kmart with code KMART5OFF50