If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Minneapolis Star Tribune)   If the Starbucks logo offends you, and causes you to call for a boycott, you just might be a Christian   (startribune.com) divider line 345
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

25614 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 May 2008 at 5:57 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



345 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-05-16 01:31:04 AM
 
2008-05-16 01:34:44 AM
Zamboro

The reason this hasn't happened yet, as you touched on in another thread, is that most moderated identify with other Christians regardless of their degree of fanaticism. The idea of working against the interests of people who more or less share their religious convictions makes them uncomfortable. Realize though that this phenomenon is why people conflate the two

Or, maybe it's because there's a huge segment of people that just sigh and roll their eyes and hope that people realize they're the loony fringe of the bunch.

fark the media. They're the ones that turn this bullshiat into a big deal. Most people who have their very modest beliefs are guess what? Too farking busy with their real lives to squash every nutjob and fanatic that gets media coverage.

The media's the goddamned problem, but hey, it's their job to make money and conflate nonsense. Can you blame them? But who has the time to fight them? They can make mountains out of molehills with pretty much anything. Take the elections in the US for example...

/agnostic
 
2008-05-16 01:40:07 AM
Corpus Delecti: ...and if you use an unattributed article that quotes a Blog article about "some guy" who claims to run a group that nobody has ever heard of outside of this article as an excuse to fuel your pinheaded hate-mongering towards Christians, you must be a Total Farker.

Seriously, I ask again: WHY are Atheists such complete douchebags?


I dunno, why don't you ask one when they knock on your front door and wake you up to spread the good word? ...no, wait! Why not when they accost you on the street corner when you're trying to enjoy a night out?...no wait...How about visiting one of their many tax exempt atheist clubs usually found on every corner?...no wait...how about calling the 1-800 number on all the television and radio stations that promote atheism and ask you to send money...no wait...hmmm...how about contacting your atheist congressman...they're the ones who won't let the name of the one true god, God©, on our money or in our pledge...no wait...well, ya got me! Good luck!
 
2008-05-16 02:00:28 AM
gorgor: Yup.
They're insane.

THE RESISTANCE MANIFESTO (new window)


and they support ron paul...
 
2008-05-16 02:20:58 AM
Zamboro: The reason this hasn't happened yet, as you touched on in another thread, is that most moderated identify with other Christians regardless of their degree of fanaticism. The idea of working against the interests of people who more or less share their religious convictions makes them uncomfortable.

In my case, it has nothing to do with religious loyalty. I didn't grow up with organized religion, and thus was free to come to my own conclusions without baggage. Unfortunately, this also means that I have trouble identifying with many people's shiatty experiences with religion.

I was baptised as an adult, so ostensibly I'm a Christian by choice, but truthfully I am an agnostic, and slightly uncomfortable with organized religion in a way that people who were brought up with it are not. So I would not be a good spokesperson of "moderate" Christianity.

I am fascinated by religion (both intellectually and emotionally), though, and drawn to Christianity on the whole, but all of that is a very personal thing.

You are one of the more reasonable critics of religion I've seen here, but in general, I like to argue on behalf of religion partly out of conviction (people take such stark ideological stances about these things, and that seems stupid to me -- religion is cultural force like literature, and not something you can simply apply a good/bad label to), and partly because it is amusing to see what assumptions people make about me -- which are inevitably completely wrong.

So maybe I'm doing my part after all.
 
2008-05-16 02:26:46 AM
Wow. I'm a grad student at SDSU, and if I'd seen that guy on campus I think I would haved kicked the crap out of him. If I had been that professor I would have called campus police and told them the guy had a gun. It's not so funny calling random strangers zombies for no reason when you're getting tazed.
 
2008-05-16 02:57:27 AM
I've noticed I tend to lend some intellectual credit to people who qualify their criticism of a given religion by specifying that extremist or insane or misguided members of it are their targets, e.g. "Right-wing ultraconservative rightwing nutjob Christians." This isn't usually a statement that all Christians are... well, all those things I don't want to keep typing. It's a specific subset of Christianity, and more than half of us have specified such a subset in our opinions here.

The overwhelming majority of negative references to anyone other than Christians in this thread not only fails to specify a narrow group, choosing instead to target "atheists" as a class -- they go one step further and apply that label to anyone who adheres to any religion other than their own. Nothing else turns off the attention span quite as fast.
 
2008-05-16 03:52:23 AM
indylaw: ghostfire: I'm a christian and would not give this logo more than a little thought, but this is America. If these particular christians want to protest something from corporate America, then more power to them. Is there really an issue here? Please say that this article was posted for some other reason than that the protesters were christian. Something makes me doubt that it was. . .

Oh, and to answer your question, I think this was greenlighted primarily because it's patently absurd to get bent out of shape over mythical creature boobs on a coffee cup.

That such a concern comes from the camp of vocal family-values fundamentalists only makes sense.


Yes, free speech is for all. Ok, I just want a clear answer here from anyone who feels like answering. Is what these people have done offensive to you? And: why?

"Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress."-Mahatma Gandhi
 
2008-05-16 04:05:13 AM
WTFDYW: Stuff like this is why I haven't stepped foot inside a church since 1995.

What, a tiny fringe group of idiots who believe the illuminati control the world economy?

Do you also refuse to go to college because the Unibomber was a professor once? There are fringe groups of crazy people in every large population of anything. Get ye over your silly identity politics.
 
2008-05-16 04:38:01 AM
The Bible offends me.

And really, any sane adult who reads it-- really reads it cover to cover-- should be offended by it. God is really portrayed as the most vile, selfish, unreasonable, murderous, greedy, hateful, violent, childish, egotistical, villainous, bloodthirsty, perverted, bigoted, evil "protagonist" I've ever seen in a book. And the New Testament doesn't get any more pleasant; Jesus is portrayed as a selfish, hateful, spiteful, confused psychopath.

And all the supporting characters seem to be just as rotten.

If you count up all the deeds in the Bible that we now perceive as "evil" today, you'll find that God, Jesus, and all God's chosen ones rack up more "evil" points than the Devil or his followers in that book.

No kidding.

In fact, the Devil really doesn't do all that much that I'd consider truly evil. He barely does anything that would be considered illegal by today's standards in the United States of America. However, if you were to apply American laws to the Bible, you'd have enough felony charges against God and Jesus (and a lot of other people) to lock them away for life, or seek the death penalty.

If, as the Christians say, the Bible is the Truth™, then I propose we put God and Jesus on trial for their crimes. Seriously. Change their names. Call them "Defendant #1" and "Defendant #2" and hold a mock trial with an actual jury. Lay out the LOOOOOOOONG list of crimes they commit, starting with the multiple murders and working toward the more mundane stuff, and then argue the case.

At no point should the defense attorney be allowed to us "omnipotence" as a plea. The attorney would have to explain how these crimes are NOT the same as those committed by anyone else. What puts Defendant #1 and Defendant #2 above the law? And if they aren't above the law, and the crimes listed are 100% accurate and true, as their followers testify, then would that not make the Bible a confession? If it's the Word of God, then that makes it a SIGNED CONFESSION.

IF we were truly just, honest, and balanced about it, and tried the case in Texas, I figure God and Jesus would get the chair.

Meanwhile, the same trial as held for Satan would probably get him a few weeks of probation.

I went to Christian schools for much of my life, and I could never understand how anyone could read that vile book and walk away from it with ANY impression of it being full of "love" or "joy." What I read, from a purely pragmatic point of view, was horrific.

Ask anyone to list all the things they think of as "evil" and I can find a part of the Bible where God or Jesus are described doing it. . . All except for sodomy, that is, unless you consider God creating life all by himself to be a form of self-abuse.

God offends me. The Bible offends me. The people who blindly follow Christianity offend me. They offend me because so many of them profess a love for the Word of God, but haven't so much as gotten past the 12th page of their monogrammed leather Bible.
 
2008-05-16 05:36:19 AM
Cornwell

Overreacting people are often Christians, but not all Christians are overreacting people.

People going on killing sprees often play GTA and similar games, but not all GTA-players go on killing sprees.




Genocidal dictators often have mustaches. But not all the mustached are genocidal dictators.
 
2008-05-16 06:11:01 AM
GIS for "starbuck resistance"

www.adventuresgate.co.uk
 
2008-05-16 06:36:11 AM
I am a Christian... so if I laugh at all this does that mean I am going to hell?


// really hoping God has a sense of humor
 
2008-05-16 06:44:16 AM
Gonad the Ballbarian
*The opinions in this article are soley those of the speaker and in no-way reflect what San Diego, including it's its parent and/or affiliates, is about, who we are or what we teach our residents... dude


its is the pronoun you wanted. it's=it is.
the mistake was your's to make. and its true, i am a dickhead.

/ducks
 
2008-05-16 06:53:54 AM
ghostfire: indylaw: ghostfire: I'm a christian and would not give this logo more than a little thought, but this is America. If these particular christians want to protest something from corporate America, then more power to them. Is there really an issue here? Please say that this article was posted for some other reason than that the protesters were christian. Something makes me doubt that it was. . .

Oh, and to answer your question, I think this was greenlighted primarily because it's patently absurd to get bent out of shape over mythical creature boobs on a coffee cup.

That such a concern comes from the camp of vocal family-values fundamentalists only makes sense.

Yes, free speech is for all. Ok, I just want a clear answer here from anyone who feels like answering. Is what these people have done offensive to you? And: why?

"Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress."-Mahatma Gandhi


Yes, the proposed boycott is offensive to me. The reactions of those who are calling for a boycott speak to this bizarre American set of priorities:

You can show violence on TV. You can show people on reality shows who are "entertaining" because they are sarcastic, cruel, verbally abusive, prone to apoplectic rage. You can depict alcoholism as a joke. But the moment someone sees a nipple on a female breast, there is always this contingent that falls to pieces and pisses and moans that seeing bare-chested women on the TV is going to turn their little darlings into psychotic sex addicts.

It's this "culture war" we find ourselves in. So much has changed so fast in the last 50 years, and many churches are starting to lose their grip on cultural importance. The reaction has been to try to legislate a narrow morality, not because legislation is essential to the well-being of its proponents, but because it tries to impose its proponents rules on everyone else, enforcing a cultural relevance from the top down.

That is the logic, and these are the people, by and large, who demand that we have opening prayer in school; that any measure allowing gay couples any of the rights that exist in marriage be blocked; that other people can't gamble, or buy booze on Sundays, or go to a strip club. 50 years ago, many of them would have been the ones condemning interracial marriage, popular music, and integrated seating on the bus.

Those who are entrenched in an older culture find themselves becoming obselete as their children begin to build a new culture where race, sex, religion are not the powerful tools of social stratification and control that they used to be. And rather than let us have our own culture, our elders see fit to go to their grave knowing that they've done all they can to undermine the new cultural trends that scare them.

The "culture war" is just a reaction to radical change. The resurgence of fundamentalist, prudish Christianity is also such a reaction. But it is offensive to see those people try force their own antiquated culture onto everyone else.

People have a right to say things that offend me in this country, but that doesn't mean I'm under an obligation to stay quiet about it.

That's not as articulate as I would have liked, but not bad considering I haven't had my coffee yet.
 
2008-05-16 07:15:57 AM
indylaw: chesterburnette: them own dang selves

You can swear. It's OK; God doesn't read FARK, except for Caturday threads.

Besides, if it's really naughty, the filter will turn it into something less naughty.


I think we can get away with some of the ones that, as David Baddiel pointed out in The Mary Whitehouse Experience, are swearing on such a high frequency that, like dog whistles, uptight people cannot hear the sweariness in them and thus ignore them.

Words like "felching" or "sootikin", for instance.

WARNING. If you do not know what "sootikin" means, be VERY careful about your curiosity. Wait at least 30 minutes after eating to look it up. DO NOT attempt to learn its meaning while eating, or just before. It will stain your soul, and churn your intestines. Guaranteed.

I do not give warnings lightly.
 
2008-05-16 07:35:50 AM
Gordon Bennett: indylaw: chesterburnette: them own dang selves

You can swear. It's OK; God doesn't read FARK, except for Caturday threads.

Besides, if it's really naughty, the filter will turn it into something less naughty.

I think we can get away with some of the ones that, as David Baddiel pointed out in The Mary Whitehouse Experience, are swearing on such a high frequency that, like dog whistles, uptight people cannot hear the sweariness in them and thus ignore them.

Words like "felching" or "sootikin", for instance.

WARNING. If you do not know what "sootikin" means, be VERY careful about your curiosity. Wait at least 30 minutes after eating to look it up. DO NOT attempt to learn its meaning while eating, or just before. It will stain your soul, and churn your intestines. Guaranteed.

I do not give warnings lightly.


Mung.
 
2008-05-16 07:40:54 AM
Barakku: Sammy Jenkins: What the fark is wrong with Christians?

FTFA: "3,000 members nationwide"
That's like...at least a majority of Christians in the US, right?


One could only hope.
 
2008-05-16 07:48:10 AM
Well boycotts are preferable to screaming mobs and suicide bombers.
 
2008-05-16 08:20:52 AM
ZeroCorpse: The Bible offends me.

And really, any sane adult who reads it-- really reads it cover to cover-- should be offended by it. God is really portrayed as the most vile, selfish, unreasonable, murderous, greedy, hateful, violent, childish, egotistical, villainous, bloodthirsty, perverted, bigoted, evil "protagonist" I've ever seen in a book. And the New Testament doesn't get any more pleasant; Jesus is portrayed as a selfish, hateful, spiteful, confused psychopath.

And all the supporting characters seem to be just as rotten.

If you count up all the deeds in the Bible that we now perceive as "evil" today, you'll find that God, Jesus, and all God's chosen ones rack up more "evil" points than the Devil or his followers in that book.

No kidding.

In fact, the Devil really doesn't do all that much that I'd consider truly evil. He barely does anything that would be considered illegal by today's standards in the United States of America. However, if you were to apply American laws to the Bible, you'd have enough felony charges against God and Jesus (and a lot of other people) to lock them away for life, or seek the death penalty.

If, as the Christians say, the Bible is the Truth™, then I propose we put God and Jesus on trial for their crimes. Seriously. Change their names. Call them "Defendant #1" and "Defendant #2" and hold a mock trial with an actual jury. Lay out the LOOOOOOOONG list of crimes they commit, starting with the multiple murders and working toward the more mundane stuff, and then argue the case.

At no point should the defense attorney be allowed to us "omnipotence" as a plea. The attorney would have to explain how these crimes are NOT the same as those committed by anyone else. What puts Defendant #1 and Defendant #2 above the law? And if they aren't above the law, and the crimes listed are 100% accurate and true, as their followers testify, then would that not make the Bible a confession? If it's the Word of God, then that makes it a SIGNED CONFESSION.

IF we were truly just, honest, and balanced about it, and tried the case in Texas, I figure God and Jesus would get the chair.

Meanwhile, the same trial as held for Satan would probably get him a few weeks of probation.

I went to Christian schools for much of my life, and I could never understand how anyone could read that vile book and walk away from it with ANY impression of it being full of "love" or "joy." What I read, from a purely pragmatic point of view, was horrific.

Ask anyone to list all the things they think of as "evil" and I can find a part of the Bible where God or Jesus are described doing it. . . All except for sodomy, that is, unless you consider God creating life all by himself to be a form of self-abuse.

God offends me. The Bible offends me. The people who blindly follow Christianity offend me. They offend me because so many of them profess a love for the Word of God, but haven't so much as gotten past the 12th page of their monogrammed leather Bible.




I just came.
 
2008-05-16 08:21:20 AM
Pester64: Well boycotts are preferable to screaming mobs and suicide bombers.

And mature, rational discourse, combined with minding your own business and keeping your silly superstitions to yourself trumps both.
 
2008-05-16 08:22:20 AM
emnar: "It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves Slutbucks."

Methinks Starbucks isn't the one with the dirty mind.


I myself would have gone with Starf*cks, but to each his own.
 
2008-05-16 09:06:34 AM
http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/

Their Website.... wow.
 
2008-05-16 09:12:11 AM
The lord knows I only make fun of christians because it's so bloody easy. It's a lot harder to make fun of black people without getting hit with a spear.

\i r lynched?
 
2008-05-16 09:31:22 AM
-is Christian
-Thinks they're stupid
-not going to anti protest the protestors... if we all did that we would be forever anti protesting idiots everywhere.
 
2008-05-16 09:32:57 AM
pounddawg: Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist/Extremist/Crazy Christian*...

^C, *new document*, ^V

Thanks for posting this - it's great!
 
2008-05-16 09:47:05 AM
Why do people (some) on Fark just have to equate dislike of anything that might be risque with Christians? Oh, if something might be considered inappropriate, it's those awful, idiotic, judgmental Christians who are opposed to it. No one else could possibly have an issue with it.

Personally, I'd rather not have some poor drawing of a fat mermaid with nipply tits where kids can see it. But, aside from that, it's just an ugly logo and the "new" one is better and more pleasing on the eyes. It has nothing to do with my personal faith.
 
2008-05-16 10:01:31 AM
tanager2: Why do people (some) on Fark just have to equate dislike of anything that might be risque with Christians? Oh, if something might be considered inappropriate, it's those awful, idiotic, judgmental Christians who are opposed to it. No one else could possibly have an issue with it"

Did you read the article? Do you check Fark daily? Do you see the frequency of similar stories? Are you capable of recognizing patterns of behavior?

You're offended because you're a Christian. Doesn't mean the observation isn't correct on the whole.
 
2008-05-16 10:19:10 AM
So, some attention whoring group that calls itself "Christian" put out a press release about some faux outrage about a logo.

And some other people get their panties in a wad over this group of dummies getting their panties in a wad.

How interesting.
 
2008-05-16 10:20:29 AM
This poor closeted man. Check out his website. I'll be he's got a "Real Men Love Jesus" bumper sticker on his car.

I agree, it may not be the most appropriate image for kids, but I think his real opposition is that there are boobies at all.
 
2008-05-16 10:43:24 AM
batgirl30: // really hoping God has a sense of humor

let me rid you of any anxiety:
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2008-05-16 10:54:08 AM
Crude: "So, some attention whoring group that calls itself "Christian" put out a press release about some faux outrage about a logo."

You're right, it was a group of undercover heathens pretending to be Christians in order to give the One True Faith a bad name. It's the same deal whenever any individual 'Christian' or 'Christian' organization does anything embarrassing; clearly not actual Christians, just godless impostors, saboteurs. True Christianity(tm) is beyond fault, and results in utopia when properly implemented and observed. There may be detrimental effects stemming from faith-based thinking, but that applies only to the non-Christian religions, i.e. the false ones. Am I right or am I right?
 
2008-05-16 11:06:21 AM
Bag of Hammers: How about the Christians who aren't offended get together and tell the ones who are to STFU, instead of biatching that they are being unfairly being lumped together with the ones who are professionally and constantly offended? Tired of being held accountable for the actions of a stupid minority who claims to speak for you too, call bullshiat on them, not me.

Yeah, it's like they're Muslim or something.

/ Lots of worthwhile Christians in this thread making clear that the whack-jobs don't speak for them. Good show, folks.
 
2008-05-16 11:23:17 AM
ZeroCorpse: The Bible offends me.

You're lonely, and angry. When did your kindness leave you? It left you when you were in your youth, and you haven't got over it yet, true?
 
2008-05-16 12:55:36 PM
pounddawg: Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist/Extremist/Crazy Christian*


*Not all Christians are insane.


#10 - No, I don't feel outraged when others don't acknowledge "my God", religious frauds do, but those who know God don't. God is a person, you walk with him as you would a friend, you talk with him as you would a brother; religious frauds make God look to be far off.
#9 - Wrong, believers never feel dehumanized by anything; this body will die, but the lives on, and you should know there is a mountain range of evidence of life beyond the grave - check it out. As for the body, scientists have shown that outside of water, our bodies are made up of the same elements found in common dirt. What's easier to believe: you evolved from a protein strand sparked to life by a lightning bolt in the mud, or that every diverse specie was uniquely created by a master designer? One only needs to the look at the "form follows function" design of all the living kingdoms to see the obvious - where you have design, you have a designer. Go ask your engineer friend what goes into the preparations for design, you might wake up.
#8 - A human, it is said by many, is body-soul-spirit, yet we look at ourselves as "one". If we are created in God's "image", could we not also be "triune"? If you saw your body in half and survived, you are not two, are you? And when someone dies, they leave behind their "tent", but their spirit lives on. Your mind and heart are not the same, are they? Do they always get along, agree? No. Granted, being "one" is not a visible thing, but evidence is there, if you have an open mind and would look for it.
#7 - You lack discernment and take things out of context. If you read the scriptures as you've claimed, you would have also read that God commanded Moses to tell Isreal it is not because they were more righteous that were going to take the land God promised and destroy those nations completely; it was because of God's judgment against their evil deeds. If you were as compassionate as you claim to be, you would have been crying out, "God, why are you waiting so long to destroy them?!". You need to do some research on what these nations were doing. You also don't understand that nations are used to judge other nations.
#6 - Nope, not true. We do indeed bare God's image, are God-like, and can be a child of God by His Spirit, but we are not God Himself. What happened to Mary is true, and also is a picture of what happens to a believer: they become pregnant with God, on the inside, and this life is the life of the Son of God, Jesus Christ. It is and was a sign, as the scriptures foretold. If you can see it, this was for your benefit to see how a person comes to life, from within, that is where God can dwell, but like Mary, you must say, "Be it unto me as you have spoken" and receive it. There is no "working for it", it is as simple as a child asking for a cup of water from their Daddy and receiving it.
#5 - So you're saying that your scientific community has never changed the dates and ages of things? Now you're reaching for it, yes? There is fossilized remains or marine life found atop every major mountain range in the world, how did they ALL get there, in EVERY part of the world? Why is "Adam" much "younger" to scientists, than the scientific "Eve"? Do you even know what I'm referring to? Here's your answer: "The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan .) These were the three sons of Noah, and from them came the people who were scattered over the earth."

Genesis 9:18-19


When evolution became mainstream science by the middle of the twentieth century, it was widely assumed that humans descended from a single evolutionary lineage: not that we are the result of multiple human evolutions. The consensus is that lower life forms evolved to become man, and one stream of decent flowed forward from that point. Paleo-anthropologists and geneticists speak of "Mother Eve." More accurately scientists should speak of "Mother Eve" and "Father Adam" because obviously you need a male and female to have descendents.[7] It is worth noting that this concept of a common male and female ancestor for all human beings is entirely consistent with the Genesis account of Adam and Eve.[8]

But it is even more complicated. As explained earlier,[9] by analyzing the DNA of people from all around the world we can learn about their genetic differences and through statistical analysis of the differences between their DNA, trace back their ancestors. Numerous studies[10] have been done since the end of the 1980s, and these lead to three conclusions:

Genetically all humans are much more alike than one would expect from Darwinian theory, which suggests a young age of the species.
Tracing mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) through females, one learns that all women descend from one female ancestor ("biological Eve") who lived an estimated 100,000 years ago.
Tracing the Y-chromosome, studies show that all men descend from one male ancestor ("biological Adam") who lived between 37,000 and 49,000 years ago.
Various studies reach different conclusions as to the exact age of "biological Eve" and "biological Adam," but they all agree: the common male ancestor is significantly younger than the common female ancestor. How can this difference in age between "biological Adam" and "biological Eve" be explained? How can "Eve" be 50,000 years older than "Adam"? Evolutionary science does not seem to have an answer to this well documented conundrum. Likely most believe that more study and research will ultimately reveal an answer.

However, there is a good explanation for this, which actually confirms facts about Biblical Noah. The genetic observation that the common male ancestor of modern man is much younger than the common female ancestor is perfectly explained by the flood account of Noah. Genesis 9:18-19 teaches there were only eight flood survivors who repopulated the earth: Noah, his three sons, his wife and his three daughters-in-law. Noah and his sons were the only surviving males, all related and shared the Y-chromosome DNA. So if genetics traces back the male Y-chromosome DNA, the found common ancestor for all males would be Noah. This situation is different for the four surviving females. They were not related to each other, thus, their common ancestor mtDNA will not be found at the flood, but much earlier. It is very likely to assume that their common ancestor (female) mtDNA would go back all the way to the first woman, "biological Eve." So, "biological Eve" is the same as "Genesis' Eve", but Genesis would point to Noah as "biological Adam."

Once again modern scientific observations cannot be explained by evolutionary models, but confirms the Biblical accounts of creation, the flood, and Noah and the Ark story.

#4 - Hell is real and there are many testimonies from people who came back to life and experienced/saw it, however, it was NOT a place made for people, according to scripture, it was created for rebellious spirits. HOWEVER..."the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life though Jesus Christ." You do not understand who God is - He is perfect. He is love - he gave all He had in His Son, for your sake and mine. His treasure, He poured out, there's nothing more He could give. If you reject His Son, you're rejecting life, you're rejecting God - this means you don't want to be with God, and He is giving you what you want - distance and judgment. You're complaining about God, but you don't see what He did for you already. It requires a surrender, the last thing a sinful man is ready to do; but, if you humble yourself, you will see what you did not see before, and become what you did not know was possible.
#3 - No, a "holy roller" is last thing a believer would look to for anything, let alone proof. What you don't understand is similar to becoming a parent and trying to explain it someone who has not had a child. When it happens, you change, you're different, everything changes - attitudes, priorities, etc. A believer is a changed person, from the inside, by Jesus Christ. The sciences you listed ALL point to God; Google Intelligent Design, there's more than enough challenges to status quo thinking, and MANY atheisic/agnostic scientists acknowledge now, there HAS to be a "Super Genius" behind all that is. Are you smarter than they are in their fields of expertise?
#2 - Not sure who you're referring to. I've had so many prayers answered, it's amazing. People who don't "believe" have had "prayers" answered. You're just not open to it - yet.
#1 - To your credit, I was down in Georgia not long ago and had "Christians" yelling at folks, telling them they're going to hell, etc., and I'll give you this: there are MANY that call themselves Christians and are not, and MANY and would not know what to call themselves, but ARE. I raise my eyebrow when I hear someone yelling, "I'm a Christian! bla bla bla..." and so should everyone. Even so, reserve judgment as you would like to have judgment reserved for you. As a true believer once said, "Preach the Good News of Jesus always, and if necessary, use words."
 
2008-05-16 01:05:00 PM
Forfarkonly: " (pure, concentrated insanity) "

i63.photobucket.com
 
2008-05-16 01:23:52 PM
strathmeyer: What's the word for when you hate both parties involved in a dispute?

Smug?
 
2008-05-16 01:56:38 PM
Zamboro: Forfarkonly: " (pure, concentrated insanity) "

That's it? A pic? And a comment, said of others that knew or experienced what the rest of the world didn't? "The Church" didn't believe the world was round, and called those that didn't agree insane. I'm in good company. You can't comment, and there is a reason why.
 
2008-05-16 02:04:24 PM
I'm Offended
 
2008-05-16 02:46:13 PM
hecticthe13th: i'm really not even sure what to say about the whole "legs spread" thing here, there's just too damn many jokes. But i guess, i mean, it would certainly be pretty tempting, those spread scaly mermaid-tentacle-thingies...if you regularly farked fish. Is there something you'd like to tell us, Mr. Dice?

Ia, ia, Cthulhu f'taghn!
 
2008-05-16 03:34:06 PM
This is all over the news, and it is a bullshiat "story"

Here is Mark Dice

This is a scam by a wacko attention whore, and an excuse for folks on MSNBC to say "Slutbucks" over and over.
 
2008-05-16 11:34:02 PM
forfarkonly - you should be grateful to Zamboro for showing you the shorthand version of your post: "(pure, concentrated insanity)".
 
2008-05-17 01:47:10 AM
forfarkonly: ZeroCorpse: "The Bible offends me."
- -
You're lonely, and angry. When did your kindness leave you? It left you when you were in your youth, and you haven't got over it yet, true?


I'm actually one of the nicest guys most people ever have the rare opportunity to meet. I win awards for customer service, I'm so farking nice. People call my employers and tell them to thank me for being such a warm, friendly mothertfarker. I ooze friendliness and I'm very slow to boil.

I'm also not lonely. I've been married longer than some of the new Farkers have had pubes. I might miss hanging out with the guys (marriage does end that, eventually), but I'm far from alone. So you're wrong on that count, too.

Basically, you believe that someone must be lonely and angry if they don't have God on the brain, right? I mean, I'm one of those vile atheists who can actually be kind to people, not commit crimes, not kick puppies, and not rape clowns without requiring the threat of eternal damnation to deter me from such activities.

I bet it chafes your bum to think that someone could actually see all the vile things about your religion and call them out, and yet still manages to be an upstanding citizen who doesn't even know what getting drunk feels like, because he does almost nothing to excess.

I'm all about balance, and someone on the far end of the teeter-totter just can't understand that. You're out there on one end, stuck on the ground like the proverbial fat kid, while the other side is riding high (but stuck there) thanks to your heavy load, hating me because I can say you're both nucking futs and step off the teeter-totter without suffering a painful drop, or an embarrassing fling into the air.

I'm not angry, and if you read my posts as angry, it's just what you bring to them that makes them so.

God under any other name would be a criminal. You hate that I'm right, and that if prosecuted anonymously based on his stated deeds, God would be judged as no better than someone like Charles Manson.

`Just as nuts, too.
 
2008-05-17 03:31:27 AM
This is precisely why Adderall is my go-to pick me up and I don't believe in god(s)
 
2008-05-17 03:21:30 PM
I've emailed this guy back and forth a few times since I read his article...here is our correspondence. Instead of answering my questions, he told me all about "Dark Forces." I think he's been "Farked" in the head for years. Don't blame him for that.

My Email:
Umm...did you know that there is a war going on that has American
soldiers being killed on a daily basis? I think it's over in Iraq. Have you heard of that little conflict? Please try to remember that while you are complaining about...Starbucks. In a world where everyone is complaining about something, at least make your gripes something that is worth a Christian, like myself, getting riled up about. You are diluting my right to complain about things with this frivolous garbage. And besides that, you are making Christians seem like psychos. Not a good look for us when we are trying to bring people TO our religion...as opposed to making them hate us even more. Ponder that, find a way to justify your craziness and let me know what you think.

Mark's Response:
I've been getting a lot of emails from Christians and people who hate Christians telling me that there are more important issues than the Starbucks logo being a topless mermaid, and can't believe that I have made international news by announcing a boycott of "Slutbucks."

These people must not have even read a single word from my website, because if they spent more than 10 seconds to find the email link, then they would have noticed that the main issues we focus on is the fact that the 9/11 attacks were aided by elements within the U.S. Government and that a secret society known as the Illuminati, pulls the strings of world events.

People call us "liberals" and "anti-American" when they first hear such a thing, which only shows how narrow mined they are. We love America, and we are conservatives. I urge everyone to go to Google Video and watch the films: Terror Storm by Alex Jones and Loose Change: Final Cut.

The Resistance is fighting for everyone's freedoms, even those who verbally attack us and can't see what we're doing. I hope all who heard of the Starbucks boycott will see the bigger picture her.

You mention the fact world leaders are going to the Bohemian Grove and worshiping Moloch by having human sacrifices in effigies, and nobody listens. You say Operation Northwoods exists which outlined plans for America to commit terrorist attacks on own citizens and blame it on another country, and nobody reports on it. You say Starbucks logo looks slutty, and all of a sudden, its all over the news. It's very odd.

I hope that this controversy will cause many to find the love and wisdom of Jesus Christ, and become aware of the true meaning and purpose of life.

So instead of wasting your time sending me hate mail, why don't you look into the issues at hand. Thank you very much.


My Response:
Uh..I never said any of that. Was this just a form letter that you had prepared to quell the onslaught of emails you knew you would get? All I am imploring you to do is not waste time on issues that inconsequential to most Americans. Most retired folks are worried about having enough money to last them through the month. Gas prices are changing the way in which we live. There is a war going on that is hurting everyone. THESE are issues. Not a logo on a coffee cup. I'm just asking you to look at the big picture. Once all those other IMPORTANT issues are solved, we can then take the time to focus on your conspiracy theories and coffee logo disputes. But for right now, your argument amounts to small potatoes on the minds of most. Tell a family whose son just took a bullet in Iraq about your noble fight you are engaged in with a coffee company and I'm sure they'd have a few words for you to put into perspective how silly you are being. In your mind, you are fighting a tremendous cause. To us, well, we're happy that you've found your niche.

Another question...how do your theories on 9/11 relate to bringing people to Christianity? I don't necessarily see the connection. It really doesn't bother me what people believe to be the truth about 9/11 but it seems like your arguments are all over the map. Instead of getting upset when people email you about this stuff, you should welcome the conversation. I am at least one more person in the country who knows who you are now. You should consider that a victory in and of itself! But a boycott on a coffee company? Now you are just trying to attract attention to yourself and I hope people see this as a method you are using to elaborate on your other beliefs regarding 9/11 and other stuff.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond even to people like me.

Mark's Response:
The truth shall set you free. Not only about sins, but other things as well. Know the truth about 9/11 and the new world order, and you are free from being an ignorant slave, going with the flow and sent to the slaughterhouse. Hang out on my site for a while and see that I cover the biggest issues of all. Dark forces are at work in the world. Jesus is the light that will free you from those forces.

My Final Response:
Ahhh...Mark, I thought you were better than that. It is typical of people in your position to fall back on religious rhetoric when you are backed into a corner. I believe everything you just said about sin and truth...But can you defend your arguments without taking the easy route and spitting out lines from the bible? You wrote a paragraph and didn't touch on a single thing I asked of you. Do most people feel like you've addressed their concerns after a nonsense paragraph like that? I feel unfulfilled by your response to say the least. Tell me specifics! Don't just tell me about truth, sin, dark forces, ect. Did you even read what I wrote you? It sounds like you have sent me two form letters in a row...and in the process made yourself sound like even more of a nut. I'm rooting for you to put together even just a few sentences to answer my questions. Compare the weight of the paragraph you just sent me (it was VERY heavy, philosophical, and deep) to your hatred of a coffee company. A COFFEE COMPANY! Doesn't seem to balance out much. WWJD? Probably would just choose to not drink the coffee, and then would protest the war or something important...once all was right with the world in terms of death and slaughter, he would come back and focus on the coffee cup.
 
Displayed 45 of 345 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report