Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(The Week UK)   Minister suggests raping schoolgirls is preferable to consensual gay relationships. Which minister? The Minister for Ethics and Integrity, of course   (theweek.co.uk) divider line 344
    More: Ironic, morals, interpersonal relationship, David Furnish, ministers  
•       •       •

12632 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Oct 2013 at 8:12 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



344 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-15 09:36:32 PM  

Richard C Stanford: Wait, by this logic a straight who is raped by a homo becomes homo. But that doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't getting raped by a homo make you desire women more? So, wait, the cure for the gay is for a homo to be raped by a homo so he or she becomes streight... Holy crap, I've discovered the cure for the gay! And I'm patenting this! I'm gonna make a fortune!


It depends on the combination of both sexual orientation and gender:

If a gay man has sex with a straight man, the straight man becomes gay.
If a lesbian has sex with a straight man, the lesbian becomes straight.

This is what the Ugandan minister actually believes.
 
2013-10-15 09:36:36 PM  
Huh, I was half-expecting it to be this minister:

www.islamophobiatoday.com
 
2013-10-15 09:37:35 PM  

brandent: Marcus Aurelius: jaytkay: grumpfuff: And people were just defending Uganda's laws as "not so bad or violent." Farking scum.

"An early draft of the [2012] Republican platform published by Politico accuses the Obama administration of "attempting to impose" on the "peoples of Africa...legalized abortion and the homosexual rights agenda." Since 2006, with the urging and influence of US conservative Christian groups, several African countries have considered or passed laws outlawing homosexuality. The most infamous of them, proposed in Uganda, would impose the death penalty for "aggravated homosexuality."

WOW
I was not aware of that.

History will be very harsh indeed.

That presumes policies which reflect your opinion and not theirs win.


Have you not noticed the trend? They're losing. Rapidly. shiatholes like Uganda are their last refuge. They are already an embarrassed minority in every first-world country. In the United States, too.
 
2013-10-15 09:38:18 PM  

anfrind: Richard C Stanford: Wait, by this logic a straight who is raped by a homo becomes homo. But that doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't getting raped by a homo make you desire women more? So, wait, the cure for the gay is for a homo to be raped by a homo so he or she becomes streight... Holy crap, I've discovered the cure for the gay! And I'm patenting this! I'm gonna make a fortune!

It depends on the combination of both sexual orientation and gender:

If a gay man has sex with a straight man, the straight man becomes gay.
If a lesbian has sex with a straight man, the lesbian becomes straight.

This is what the Ugandan minister actually believes.


Someone needs to look up this guy and see if he's the same moron as the "eat the poo poo" guy.
 
2013-10-15 09:38:44 PM  

Shadowtag: Sock Ruh Tease: I can't imagine why anyone would actually believe that having a man rape a lesbian would make the woman want future sexual contact with males.

So I tend to think "corrective rape" supporters just like raping people.

[s.mcstatic.com image 640x360]

Give anyone any amount of power and they will think their penis is magic.


The magic is not inherent; it's what I do with it, baby.

//ok, it's also inherent
 
2013-10-15 09:39:04 PM  

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: grumpfuff: J. Frank Parnell: I forget exactly where it is in the bible, but some guy has angels visiting him and everyone is crowding around and lusting after them because they're so beautiful, including guys, so he offers the crowd his young daughters to make them go away.

I suppose that could be taken to support what he's saying. It's clearer than most bible verses used to support things.

That's the story of Sodom, and the sin of Sodom was not being treating visitors with respect(they originally wanted to rape the angels). To read it as being in support of rape is blatantly wrong.

It's cool to mock religion, but please make sure you get your story right.

The Sodomites originally wanted to have sex with the angels, who were disguised in human form.

Lot did indeed say something like (not quoting, feel free to look it up yourself) "what you want is an abomination. Here: I have two virgin daughters. Do with them as you will, but leave these men alone, for they are my guests."

But the Sodomites didn't want that, so the angels struck them blind and Lot's family fled Sodom before Jehovah destroyed it.

Later on Lot's wife died mysteriously, and Lot and his two daughters holed up in a cave.

His daughters were apparently concerned that he had no male heir and no wife. So, instead of taking him to the next village to find a nice young widow to marry, his daughters SUPPOSEDLY decided to get him stoned drunk and have sex with him.

At this point, I realized what really happened:

On the way out of Sodom, Lot's wife must have been giving him grief about offering her two daughters to get raped to death by the Sodomites. Lot probably killed her.

Then he probably raped his daughters.

All in all, Lot in Sodom is a very nasty story and not one that portrays religion in a good light.


Is this the bit where Lot's wife turns around and looks back, and is transformed into a pillar of salt?

/I realize I could look it up myself, but conversation is so much more meaningful.
 
2013-10-15 09:41:13 PM  

menschenfresser: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: grumpfuff: J. Frank Parnell: I forget exactly where it is in the bible, but some guy has angels visiting him and everyone is crowding around and lusting after them because they're so beautiful, including guys, so he offers the crowd his young daughters to make them go away.

I suppose that could be taken to support what he's saying. It's clearer than most bible verses used to support things.

That's the story of Sodom, and the sin of Sodom was not being treating visitors with respect(they originally wanted to rape the angels). To read it as being in support of rape is blatantly wrong.

It's cool to mock religion, but please make sure you get your story right.

The Sodomites originally wanted to have sex with the angels, who were disguised in human form.

Lot did indeed say something like (not quoting, feel free to look it up yourself) "what you want is an abomination. Here: I have two virgin daughters. Do with them as you will, but leave these men alone, for they are my guests."

But the Sodomites didn't want that, so the angels struck them blind and Lot's family fled Sodom before Jehovah destroyed it.

Later on Lot's wife died mysteriously, and Lot and his two daughters holed up in a cave.

His daughters were apparently concerned that he had no male heir and no wife. So, instead of taking him to the next village to find a nice young widow to marry, his daughters SUPPOSEDLY decided to get him stoned drunk and have sex with him.

At this point, I realized what really happened:

On the way out of Sodom, Lot's wife must have been giving him grief about offering her two daughters to get raped to death by the Sodomites. Lot probably killed her.

Then he probably raped his daughters.

All in all, Lot in Sodom is a very nasty story and not one that portrays religion in a good light.

Is this the bit where Lot's wife turns around and looks back, and is transformed into a pillar of salt?

/I realize I could look it up myself, but conversation is so m ...


Yup.
 
2013-10-15 09:41:49 PM  

grumpfuff: anfrind: Richard C Stanford: Wait, by this logic a straight who is raped by a homo becomes homo. But that doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't getting raped by a homo make you desire women more? So, wait, the cure for the gay is for a homo to be raped by a homo so he or she becomes streight... Holy crap, I've discovered the cure for the gay! And I'm patenting this! I'm gonna make a fortune!

It depends on the combination of both sexual orientation and gender:

If a gay man has sex with a straight man, the straight man becomes gay.
If a lesbian has sex with a straight man, the lesbian becomes straight.

This is what the Ugandan minister actually believes.

Someone needs to look up this guy and see if he's the same moron as the "eat the poo poo" guy.


Ah, I love the "Eatta da poo-poo" guy.

And to anyone who thinks that that's just a gay thing, I have some very heterosexual Brazilian films to show you.
 
2013-10-15 09:42:21 PM  

menschenfresser: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: grumpfuff: J. Frank Parnell: I forget exactly where it is in the bible, but some guy has angels visiting him and everyone is crowding around and lusting after them because they're so beautiful, including guys, so he offers the crowd his young daughters to make them go away.

I suppose that could be taken to support what he's saying. It's clearer than most bible verses used to support things.

That's the story of Sodom, and the sin of Sodom was not being treating visitors with respect(they originally wanted to rape the angels). To read it as being in support of rape is blatantly wrong.

It's cool to mock religion, but please make sure you get your story right.

The Sodomites originally wanted to have sex with the angels, who were disguised in human form.

Lot did indeed say something like (not quoting, feel free to look it up yourself) "what you want is an abomination. Here: I have two virgin daughters. Do with them as you will, but leave these men alone, for they are my guests."

But the Sodomites didn't want that, so the angels struck them blind and Lot's family fled Sodom before Jehovah destroyed it.

Later on Lot's wife died mysteriously, and Lot and his two daughters holed up in a cave.

His daughters were apparently concerned that he had no male heir and no wife. So, instead of taking him to the next village to find a nice young widow to marry, his daughters SUPPOSEDLY decided to get him stoned drunk and have sex with him.

At this point, I realized what really happened:

On the way out of Sodom, Lot's wife must have been giving him grief about offering her two daughters to get raped to death by the Sodomites. Lot probably killed her.

Then he probably raped his daughters.

All in all, Lot in Sodom is a very nasty story and not one that portrays religion in a good light.

Is this the bit where Lot's wife turns around and looks back, and is transformed into a pillar of salt?

/I realize I could look it up myself, but conversation is so much more meaningful.


Yeah, pillar of salt, that's what Lot wants you to believe.
 
2013-10-15 09:42:44 PM  

Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: That would be the story of Sodom, I forget who the guy was but anyway the story really isn't about gay sex it's about the hospitality rules from back then, that Sodom was known to break and distrusted and killed strangers coming to their city. The hospitality rules at the time were if strangers come to you door you must offer them protection, food and water, etc.

Though we've seen softer, fuzzier versions of Christianity reinterpret the idea of the cities' primary sin as being generally about treating neighbours poorly rather than having gay sex (a somewhat recent development, it would seem), that particular part of the story is nonetheless very specifically about gay sex. The argument there being that raping young girls isn't as bad as consensual gay sex, of course.


Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.
 
2013-10-15 09:44:32 PM  

menschenfresser: Is this the bit where Lot's wife turns around and looks back, and is transformed into a pillar of salt?


Yes, that's part of the same story.  And that part is a blatant ripoff of the Greek myth about the bard who made a deal where he could enter the underworld to bring back his dead lover, as long as he didn't look back.
 
2013-10-15 09:45:29 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: That would be the story of Sodom, I forget who the guy was but anyway the story really isn't about gay sex it's about the hospitality rules from back then, that Sodom was known to break and distrusted and killed strangers coming to their city. The hospitality rules at the time were if strangers come to you door you must offer them protection, food and water, etc.

Though we've seen softer, fuzzier versions of Christianity reinterpret the idea of the cities' primary sin as being generally about treating neighbours poorly rather than having gay sex (a somewhat recent development, it would seem), that particular part of the story is nonetheless very specifically about gay sex. The argument there being that raping young girls isn't as bad as consensual gay sex, of course.

Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.


Yeah, maggie. It's Judges 19-21, which is a sister story to the Sodom and Gomorrah story, and the Ezekiel verses which seal the deal on the hospitality interpretation. Hard to argue when the Bible interprets itself.
 
2013-10-15 09:45:42 PM  
oii.org.au
 
2013-10-15 09:47:19 PM  

anfrind: menschenfresser: Is this the bit where Lot's wife turns around and looks back, and is transformed into a pillar of salt?

Yes, that's part of the same story.  And that part is a blatant ripoff of the Greek myth about the bard who made a deal where he could enter the underworld to bring back his dead lover, as long as he didn't look back.


Orpheus.

/I read. A lot.
 
2013-10-15 09:47:48 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: That would be the story of Sodom, I forget who the guy was but anyway the story really isn't about gay sex it's about the hospitality rules from back then, that Sodom was known to break and distrusted and killed strangers coming to their city. The hospitality rules at the time were if strangers come to you door you must offer them protection, food and water, etc.

Though we've seen softer, fuzzier versions of Christianity reinterpret the idea of the cities' primary sin as being generally about treating neighbours poorly rather than having gay sex (a somewhat recent development, it would seem), that particular part of the story is nonetheless very specifically about gay sex. The argument there being that raping young girls isn't as bad as consensual gay sex, of course.

Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study memorise the stuff.


FTFY
 
2013-10-15 09:47:51 PM  

scottydoesntknow: But do the eat da poo poo?


Lol, classic ToshO episode!

tosh.mtvnimages.com
 
2013-10-15 09:48:21 PM  

grumpfuff: anfrind: Richard C Stanford: Wait, by this logic a straight who is raped by a homo becomes homo. But that doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't getting raped by a homo make you desire women more? So, wait, the cure for the gay is for a homo to be raped by a homo so he or she becomes streight... Holy crap, I've discovered the cure for the gay! And I'm patenting this! I'm gonna make a fortune!

It depends on the combination of both sexual orientation and gender:

If a gay man has sex with a straight man, the straight man becomes gay.
If a lesbian has sex with a straight man, the lesbian becomes straight.

This is what the Ugandan minister actually believes.

Someone needs to look up this guy and see if he's the same moron as the "eat the poo poo" guy.


Eat the poo poo guy - Martin Sempa.
Asshole FTA - Simon Lokodo

So apparently not.
 
2013-10-15 09:48:49 PM  

jaytkay: KAMPALA, Uganda - Last March, three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about "curing" homosexuals have been widely discredited in the United States, arrived here in Uganda's capital to give a series of talks...
 ...For three days, according to participants and audio recordings, thousands of Ugandans, including police officers, teachers and national politicians, listened raptly to the Americans, who were presented as experts on homosexuality. The visitors discussed how to make gay people straight


Thanks for the links and for pointing this out. Disgusting excuses for humans. Slime of the earth. 'I can't hurt people in my own country, so I'm going to go live out my fantasies where no one will question me. They might even let me kill a bunch of people! This is gonna be awesome!'
 
2013-10-15 09:49:40 PM  

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: Yeah, pillar of salt, that's what Lot wants you to believe.


There you go again, assuming Lot actually existed.

Remember what I said about interpreting a story to fit your narrative?
 
2013-10-15 09:50:20 PM  

Peki: Yeah, maggie. It's Judges 19-21, which is a sister story to the Sodom and Gomorrah story, and the Ezekiel verses which seal the deal on the hospitality interpretation. Hard to argue when the Bible interprets itself.


One more reason I love you : )
 
2013-10-15 09:50:54 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Peki: Yeah, maggie. It's Judges 19-21, which is a sister story to the Sodom and Gomorrah story, and the Ezekiel verses which seal the deal on the hospitality interpretation. Hard to argue when the Bible interprets itself.

One more reason I love you : )


Aw shucks. *blush, kicks dirt*
 
2013-10-15 09:51:13 PM  

anfrind: aagrajag: Rambino: aagrajag:

This doesn't even begin to make sense.

Even *if* one truly believed that homosexuality is so evil and terrible that forced heterosexual sexual intercourse is necessary to correct it, how could one reasonably believe that its violent application would result in a new-found love of the D? I don't like cauliflower; I'm reasonably certain that I will like it even less if someone were to hold me down and literally cram it down my throat.

I think you are missing the point of corrective rape.  You are overthinking it--a lot.

That's my point: no one with an IQ greater than that of an bruised eggplant could actually claim to truly believe that violent rape would effect an attraction to the rapist's gender.

I don't think anyone who engages in "corrective rape" actually cares if it works.  They just want to punish a perceived deviant.


B-i-n-g-o
 
2013-10-15 09:52:18 PM  

anfrind: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: anfrind: Chinchillazilla: tinfoil-hat maggie: J. Frank Parnell: I forget exactly where it is in the bible, but some guy has angels visiting him and everyone is crowding around and lusting after them because they're so beautiful, including guys, so he offers the crowd his young daughters to make them go away.

I suppose that could be taken to support what he's saying. It's clearer than most bible verses used to support things.

That would be the story of Sodom, I forget who the guy was but anyway the story really isn't about gay sex it's about the hospitality rules from back then, that Sodom was known to break and distrusted and killed strangers coming to their city. The hospitality rules at the time were if strangers come to you door you must offer them protection, food and water, etc.

It was Lot. Later his daughters got him drunk and raped him so they could get pregnant, so I guess it balanced out.

If I remember correctly, neither of the two daughters had ever traveled outside of Sodom or had any contact with people from other cities, so as far as they knew the three of them were the last humans on Earth.  Which makes their actions more understandable, albeit no less icky.

Ya and Sodom never saw any visitors and their dad never disabused them of this idea.

Riiiight.

Well, women weren't exactly thought of as people during that time period, so it's not inconceivable that they might have grown up with little or no knowledge of life outside Lot's home, even with the occasional visitor.

In any case, it's a weird story no matter how you look at it.


I had never though of that story that way before.  But the daughter's actions, as depicted by the Bible, don't even begin to make sense.

The sisters see their city smote, mom turned into a pillar of salt, and are left alone with pops.  At this point they figure they must have been the only people left in the world, because apparently they've never heard of other cities, or even of people who weren't from Sodom.  Except that just a few days earlier they met two guys from out-of-town, who they would probably remember quite clearly seeing as how their dad tried to save the strangers from rape by offering up their hymens to a bloodthirsty mob.
 
2013-10-15 09:52:45 PM  

aagrajag: Have you not noticed the trend? They're losing. Rapidly. shiatholes like Uganda are their last refuge. They are already an embarrassed minority in every first-world country. In the United States, too.


I read fark, and farkers tell me that this type of thing is just around the corner if we don't hold the party line.

They wouldn't lie to me.
 
2013-10-15 09:53:40 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.


You know what else was Lot's to send out? His own body. But he doesn't even try to say "Take me instead" - he just offers up his daughters to be raped instead, and it's obvious why that happened. The whole thing was basically nothing more than a sting operation to get these people to solicit gay sex, and then use that as an excuse to commit genocide.

I'll give modern liberal theologians some credit; they've tried extremely hard to try and spin the story into something slightly less reprehensible than its standard interpretation, but it just doesn't hold up very well against the actual texts.
 
2013-10-15 09:54:58 PM  

TheMysticS: anfrind: aagrajag: Rambino: aagrajag:

This doesn't even begin to make sense.

Even *if* one truly believed that homosexuality is so evil and terrible that forced heterosexual sexual intercourse is necessary to correct it, how could one reasonably believe that its violent application would result in a new-found love of the D? I don't like cauliflower; I'm reasonably certain that I will like it even less if someone were to hold me down and literally cram it down my throat.

I think you are missing the point of corrective rape.  You are overthinking it--a lot.

That's my point: no one with an IQ greater than that of an bruised eggplant could actually claim to truly believe that violent rape would effect an attraction to the rapist's gender.

I don't think anyone who engages in "corrective rape" actually cares if it works.  They just want to punish a perceived deviant.

B-i-n-g-o


Why is it that I make the first such observation in this thread, yet everyone replies to him?

I should rape the lot of you; then you'll respect me!
 
2013-10-15 09:56:53 PM  

Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.

You know what else was Lot's to send out? His own body. But he doesn't even try to say "Take me instead" - he just offers up his daughters to be raped instead, and it's obvious why that happened. The whole thing was basically nothing more than a sting operation to get these people to solicit gay sex, and then use that as an excuse to commit genocide.

I'll give modern liberal theologians some credit; they've tried extremely hard to try and spin the story into something slightly less reprehensible than its standard interpretation, but it just doesn't hold up very well against the actual texts.


And, of course, the angels are perfectly capable of protecting themselves. I guess they just wanted to see them some rape.

//I only said rape once
///aw, crap...
 
2013-10-15 10:00:10 PM  

Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.

You know what else was Lot's to send out? His own body. But he doesn't even try to say "Take me instead" - he just offers up his daughters to be raped instead, and it's obvious why that happened. The whole thing was basically nothing more than a sting operation to get these people to solicit gay sex, and then use that as an excuse to commit genocide.

I'll give modern liberal theologians some credit; they've tried extremely hard to try and spin the story into something slightly less reprehensible than its standard interpretation, but it just doesn't hold up very well against the actual texts.


Wow. That's just wow. There is no spin to change the interpretation of the story. The interpretation of the sin of Sodom as hospitality goes back a long time, to the first Jewish interpretations. There is even a  verse in the Bible(Ezekial, i believe) that specifically says the sin of Sodom was a lack of hospitality.

But yea, keep blaming "modern liberal theologians."
 
2013-10-15 10:00:43 PM  

Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.

You know what else was Lot's to send out? His own body. But he doesn't even try to say "Take me instead" - he just offers up his daughters to be raped instead, and it's obvious why that happened. The whole thing was basically nothing more than a sting operation to get these people to solicit gay sex, and then use that as an excuse to commit genocide.

I'll give modern liberal theologians some credit; they've tried extremely hard to try and spin the story into something slightly less reprehensible than its standard interpretation, but it just doesn't hold up very well against the actual texts.


Wow, I had you tagged as pro-reason but I guess I was wrong. You've definitely gone of into cray-cray land.
 
2013-10-15 10:03:50 PM  
Here ya go, for the curious.

Ezekial 49-50(NIV)

49"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.
 
2013-10-15 10:04:46 PM  

Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.

You know what else was Lot's to send out? His own body. But he doesn't even try to say "Take me instead" - he just offers up his daughters to be raped instead, and it's obvious why that happened. The whole thing was basically nothing more than a sting operation to get these people to solicit gay sex, and then use that as an excuse to commit genocide.

I'll give modern liberal theologians some credit; they've tried extremely hard to try and spin the story into something slightly less reprehensible than its standard interpretation, but it just doesn't hold up very well against the actual texts.


Have you bothered reading any part of the Bible other than what your pastor does? Judges 19-21 is very clearly  not about homosexuality, and yet it's damn near the exact same story.
 
2013-10-15 10:06:11 PM  

Biological Ali: tinfoil-hat maggie: Except it can't be the 2 persons were angels everyone says they don't actually have a sex. The crime was hospitality, Lot's daughters were his to send out, the two visitors he had to protect. I've been told this by religious people that study the stuff.

You know what else was Lot's to send out? His own body. But he doesn't even try to say "Take me instead" - he just offers up his daughters to be raped instead, and it's obvious why that happened. The whole thing was basically nothing more than a sting operation to get these people to solicit gay sex, and then use that as an excuse to commit genocide.

I'll give modern liberal theologians some credit; they've tried extremely hard to try and spin the story into something slightly less reprehensible than its standard interpretation, but it just doesn't hold up very well against the actual texts.


This reads like someone else is using your login.
 
2013-10-15 10:06:51 PM  
Just like a catholic pedo-priest at a kindergarten festival: FABULOUS!
 
2013-10-15 10:07:22 PM  

grumpfuff: Here ya go, for the curious.

Ezekial 49-50(NIV)

49"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.


Bad people=genocide the city.

That we are all here is the surest sign the Christian god is jacking himself off somewhere.
 
2013-10-15 10:08:56 PM  

grumpfuff: Here ya go, for the curious.

Ezekial 49-50(NIV)

49"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.


okay, little note about quoting Bible passages. If you see "Judges 19", it means Judges chapter 19. You're quoting verses, but that's almost useless without the chapter.

I quit being lazy: Ezekial 16:49-50.
 
2013-10-15 10:09:57 PM  
And Ezekiel. I swear I changed that before I posted.
 
2013-10-15 10:10:09 PM  
 
2013-10-15 10:11:14 PM  

aagrajag: grumpfuff: Here ya go, for the curious.

Ezekial 49-50(NIV)

49"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.

Bad people=genocide the city.

That we are all here is the surest sign the Christian god is jacking himself off somewhere.


No argument here. He probably decided to take a break, else he'd genocide the world again.

Peki: okay, little note about quoting Bible passages. If you see "Judges 19", it means Judges chapter 19. You're quoting verses, but that's almost useless without the chapter.


I'm a terrible person and should feel bad. I have a degree in comparative religion, I should know better.

/goes to the shame corner
 
2013-10-15 10:12:13 PM  

Peki: And Ezekiel. I swear I changed that before I posted.


Blame the fark gnomes.

Did you see my last reply to you? I would have figured you would have found the link interesting.
 
2013-10-15 10:13:47 PM  

aagrajag: brandent: Marcus Aurelius: jaytkay: grumpfuff: And people were just defending Uganda's laws as "not so bad or violent." Farking scum.

"An early draft of the [2012] Republican platform published by Politico accuses the Obama administration of "attempting to impose" on the "peoples of Africa...legalized abortion and the homosexual rights agenda." Since 2006, with the urging and influence of US conservative Christian groups, several African countries have considered or passed laws outlawing homosexuality. The most infamous of them, proposed in Uganda, would impose the death penalty for "aggravated homosexuality."

WOW
I was not aware of that.

History will be very harsh indeed.

That presumes policies which reflect your opinion and not theirs win.

Have you not noticed the trend? They're losing. Rapidly. shiatholes like Uganda are their last refuge. They are already an embarrassed minority in every first-world country. In the United States, too.


You underestimate evangelicals in the US
 
2013-10-15 10:14:10 PM  
Apparently Stephen Fry attempted suicide while filming this program.

Fry revealed yesterday that during the making of this film last year he took an overdose of pills of and alcohol while alone in a hotel room.

The TV personality, actor and author was saved when his producer on the film found him unconscious and got him appropriate medical help.

Fry, who said he broke four ribs and was unconscious after convulsions related to the overdose incident, said: "It was a close-run thing. And, fortunately, the producer I was filming with at the time came into the hotel room and I was found in a sort of unconscious state and taken back to England and looked after."


I'm glad he didn't succeed, I really like that guy. I don't think this was his first attempt; I know he struggles with bipolar disorder.
 
2013-10-15 10:14:16 PM  

aagrajag: grumpfuff: Here ya go, for the curious.

Ezekial 49-50(NIV)

49"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.

Bad people=genocide the city.

That we are all here is the surest sign the Christian god is jacking himself off somewhere.


Bonus: God destroyed Sodom after Abraham had "negotiated" to save the city if ten good people could be found. Abraham found the good people, God said, fark it, destroy the city anyway! God of the OT definitely had a GOP sense of negotiating.

Also, the story of Sodom is nestled in the middle of the story where Sarah sends Hagar away for having Abraham's son Ishmael--at SARAH'S insistence. There is a more modern interpretation that suggests the placement of the story of Sodom is a subtle criticism at Abraham's treatment of Hagar. To get here you have to know a bit more about the authors, historical record, and literary traditions of the Jewish culture of the time.
 
2013-10-15 10:15:10 PM  

mgshamster: This reads like someone else is using your login.


I know right it's weird, maybe he has gone of the farm or reservation, whatever and decided to troll but it's weird .
 
2013-10-15 10:15:36 PM  

grumpfuff: Wow. That's just wow. There is no spin to change the interpretation of the story. The interpretation of the sin of Sodom as hospitality goes back a long time, to the first Jewish interpretations. There is even a verse in the Bible(Ezekial, i believe) that specifically says the sin of Sodom was a lack of hospitality.

But yea, keep blaming "modern liberal theologians."


One of the main reasons the cities had been marked for destruction was because of their sexual immorality. I mean, this stuff is in the Bible - I thought this would be common knowledge. Even if you grant that the "hospitality" thing was in fact a thing, you have to strain really, really hard to see the bit with the angels as having been about a lack of hospitality rather than sexual immorality. Which is probably why the former is a minority viewpoint within Christianity.
 
2013-10-15 10:18:11 PM  
Farkers really like talking about sodomy.
 
2013-10-15 10:18:42 PM  

grumpfuff: aagrajag: grumpfuff: Here ya go, for the curious.

Ezekial 49-50(NIV)

49"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.

Bad people=genocide the city.

That we are all here is the surest sign the Christian god is jacking himself off somewhere.

No argument here. He probably decided to take a break, else he'd genocide the world again.

Peki: okay, little note about quoting Bible passages. If you see "Judges 19", it means Judges chapter 19. You're quoting verses, but that's almost useless without the chapter.

I'm a terrible person and should feel bad. I have a degree in comparative religion, I should know better.

/goes to the shame corner


Okay, I really didn't think you didn't know better, and felt bad typing that. Lol.

And mghamster, I scrolled back through about half the thread but didn't see a link, sorry!

/also, I'm from the chat room generation. We learned quick not to click links. :)
 
2013-10-15 10:19:50 PM  

Biological Ali: grumpfuff: Wow. That's just wow. There is no spin to change the interpretation of the story. The interpretation of the sin of Sodom as hospitality goes back a long time, to the first Jewish interpretations. There is even a verse in the Bible(Ezekial, i believe) that specifically says the sin of Sodom was a lack of hospitality.

But yea, keep blaming "modern liberal theologians."

One of the main reasons the cities had been marked for destruction was because of their sexual immorality. I mean, this stuff is in the Bible - I thought this would be common knowledge. Even if you grant that the "hospitality" thing was in fact a thing, you have to strain really, really hard to see the bit with the angels as having been about a lack of hospitality rather than sexual immorality. Which is probably why the former is a minority viewpoint within Christianity.


Except no mater how much you wanna say it's about sexual indecency it's not. It's in the bible.
 
2013-10-15 10:21:29 PM  

Biological Ali: grumpfuff: Wow. That's just wow. There is no spin to change the interpretation of the story. The interpretation of the sin of Sodom as hospitality goes back a long time, to the first Jewish interpretations. There is even a verse in the Bible(Ezekial, i believe) that specifically says the sin of Sodom was a lack of hospitality.

But yea, keep blaming "modern liberal theologians."

One of the main reasons the cities had been marked for destruction was because of their sexual immorality. I mean, this stuff is in the Bible - I thought this would be common knowledge. Even if you grant that the "hospitality" thing was in fact a thing, you have to strain really, really hard to see the bit with the angels as having been about a lack of hospitality rather than sexual immorality. Which is probably why the former is a minority viewpoint within Christianity.


Might want to read the rest of the thread after that post of mine you quoted. Here's a hint. Ezekiel 16:49-50.

C'mon dude, like people have been saying in the thread. You're smarter than this.
 
2013-10-15 10:23:26 PM  
i33.tinypic.com
/without comment
 
2013-10-15 10:23:53 PM  

Peki: grumpfuff: aagrajag: grumpfuff: Here ya go, for the curious.

Ezekial 49-50(NIV)

49"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.

Bad people=genocide the city.

That we are all here is the surest sign the Christian god is jacking himself off somewhere.

No argument here. He probably decided to take a break, else he'd genocide the world again.

Peki: okay, little note about quoting Bible passages. If you see "Judges 19", it means Judges chapter 19. You're quoting verses, but that's almost useless without the chapter.

I'm a terrible person and should feel bad. I have a degree in comparative religion, I should know better.

/goes to the shame corner

Okay, I really didn't think you didn't know better, and felt bad typing that. Lol.

And mghamster, I scrolled back through about half the thread but didn't see a link, sorry!

/also, I'm from the chat room generation. We learned quick not to click links. :)


It was a link to a Neil Gaiman article about defending the indefensable when it comes to free speech, writing, and art.
 
Displayed 50 of 344 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report