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.

(WorldNetDaily)   Americans are right to be wary of Pope Francis. His religious philosophy is a result of KGB influence in Latin America   (wnd.com ) divider line
    More: Scary, Pope Francis, Latin American, KGB, Americans, KGB influence, Pope Pius XII, trickle-down economics, economic power  
•       •       •

2131 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Dec 2013 at 1:04 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



378 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-12-04 01:06:12 PM  
Holy shiat.
 
2013-12-04 01:06:24 PM  
wat
 
2013-12-04 01:06:31 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-12-04 01:06:47 PM  
I would run New Pope's Marxopapist Inquisition. Just saying.
 
2013-12-04 01:07:20 PM  
It's sad that it is scary when the Pope preaches the philosophy of Jesus.
 
2013-12-04 01:08:44 PM  
s15.postimg.org
 
2013-12-04 01:08:53 PM  

Obama's Reptiloid Master: I would run New Pope's Marxopapist Inquisition. Just saying.


Nobody expects the Marxopapist Inquisition!
 
2013-12-04 01:10:17 PM  
Did everyone else see their might-as-well-be-KKK race-baiting "deal of the day" book on the sidebar?

Holy shiat.  How can you get more racist than "White girl bleed a lot"?

With a subtitle transcribing loosely as "how black people are going to kill a bunch of white people any day now."  But don't you dare call them racist.
 
2013-12-04 01:11:10 PM  

Hagbardr: Obama's Reptiloid Master: I would run New Pope's Marxopapist Inquisition. Just saying.

Nobody expects the Marxopapist Inquisition!


Among our weapons are fear, surprise, and a fanatical devotion to Lenin and Stalin...I'll come in again.
 
2013-12-04 01:11:42 PM  
I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.
 
2013-12-04 01:12:50 PM  

Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.


Well, Jesus wouldn't have endorsed this "poor people are people too" thing.
 
2013-12-04 01:13:14 PM  
That's a bunch of horseshiat. From what I've read in transcripts he was complicit of acting in concert with the military junta of Argentina during the Dirty War.
 
2013-12-04 01:13:51 PM  
The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.
 
2013-12-04 01:14:21 PM  
Oh shait. Better bankroll and train some thugs to wage a terror war on the Vatican.
 
2013-12-04 01:14:41 PM  

Hagbardr: Obama's Reptiloid Master: I would run New Pope's Marxopapist Inquisition. Just saying.

Nobody expects the Marxopapist Inquisition!


Our three greatest weapons are class consciousness, dialectical materialism, the New Pope, and an almost fanatical devotion to the Frankfurt School!
 
2013-12-04 01:15:01 PM  
iam12andwhatisthis.jpg
 
2013-12-04 01:16:11 PM  
More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.
 
2013-12-04 01:16:49 PM  
Worldn...

img.fark.net
 
2013-12-04 01:17:28 PM  
he's not preaching prosperity gospel so he must hate merkins
 
2013-12-04 01:17:57 PM  

ikanreed: Did everyone else see their might-as-well-be-KKK race-baiting "deal of the day" book on the sidebar?

Holy shiat.  How can you get more racist than "White girl bleed a lot"?

With a subtitle transcribing loosely as "how black people are going to kill a bunch of white people any day now."  But don't you dare call them racist.


Oh, and of course it turns out WND is publishing that book themselves.  Damned racists.
 
2013-12-04 01:18:25 PM  

meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.


Christianity is the only major world religion to have it's collective panties in a bunch over contraception....even Islam is okay with it.  That should tell you where Christians are currently rating on the "civilization" scale.
 
2013-12-04 01:18:58 PM  

meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.


Today on my way to work I saw a message scrawled on the back of a pickup, written in shoe polish, excoriating the president for being a dictator and king and concluding with a Bible verse. I couldn't believe I was seeing paranoid schizophrenia in real time so I pulled alongside this patriot, only to discover the fattest man I have ever seen crammed into a Ford Ranger, wearing a USMC cap and camo balaclava.
 
2013-12-04 01:18:59 PM  

meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.


Yeah, that's the thing that strikes me here.  What Pope Francis is proposing here is not radical in any sense: he's just saying "Let's refocus our energy on what is important and vital in Christianity and not so much on gays and/or abortion."   It just shows how many people would rather just derp about the gays than actually have to do something that might require them to help out the poors.
 
2013-12-04 01:25:27 PM  
.... HAVE YOU farkS EVEN READ THE farkING BIBLE?!

WHAT THE fark.

IT SAYS, EXPLICITLY, NOT EVEN IN A FARKING PARABLE, THAT YOU CANNOT WORSHIP BOTH GOD AND MAMMON.

SINCE JESUS WAS TALKING *TO* JEWS WHEN HE SAID THIS, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR HE'S NOT TALKING ABOUT MAMMON THE farkING GOD.

Just. I. AAARRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
 
2013-12-04 01:26:20 PM  
Well, Jesus' whole "Love everyone & share everything" philosophy is rather pink tinged....
 
2013-12-04 01:26:21 PM  

Obama's Reptiloid Master: meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.

Today on my way to work I saw a message scrawled on the back of a pickup, written in shoe polish, excoriating the president for being a dictator and king and concluding with a Bible verse. I couldn't believe I was seeing paranoid schizophrenia in real time so I pulled alongside this patriot, only to discover the fattest man I have ever seen crammed into a Ford Ranger, wearing a USMC cap and camo balaclava.


Mmm... balaclava.
 
2013-12-04 01:26:49 PM  
OKay, I feel better now.
 
2013-12-04 01:28:12 PM  

Wendy's Chili: Obama's Reptiloid Master: meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.

Today on my way to work I saw a message scrawled on the back of a pickup, written in shoe polish, excoriating the president for being a dictator and king and concluding with a Bible verse. I couldn't believe I was seeing paranoid schizophrenia in real time so I pulled alongside this patriot, only to discover the fattest man I have ever seen crammed into a Ford Ranger, wearing a USMC cap and camo balaclava.

Mmm... balaclava.


Either you've got one hell of a weird fetish, son, or you must be real fun at the shawarma cart.
 
2013-12-04 01:28:33 PM  
I've been hearing about this "Pope is a Marxist" thing, so I decided to make an exception to my no-WND click rule, just to catch up on exactly what they're saying.

Only got through a few paragraphs before everything went gray. Now my head hurts, my vision is blurred and I can't feel my feet. Please. Someone call a doctor.
 
2013-12-04 01:31:00 PM  
If the Pope is a Marxist and Obama is a Marxist, then OBAMA IS THE POPE

Mind. Blown.
 
2013-12-04 01:31:41 PM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: If the Pope is a Marxist and Obama is a Marxist, then OBAMA IS THE POPE

Mind. Blown.


Muslims can be pope now? The caliphate is upon us. Bi-lal kaifa!
 
2013-12-04 01:32:28 PM  

ikanreed: Well, Jesus wouldn't have endorsed this "poor people are people too" thing.


I've seen a disturbing number quoting Jesus as saying "The poor will always be with us." as evidence that we should end all social programs because none of them will ever help, or that Jesus was seriously insisting hat the poor will never take responsibility for themselves.

Was that a Glenn Beck quote I missed or something?

Because I don't know how you twist something that much without direction.
 
2013-12-04 01:32:34 PM  

Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.


 To quote my favorite The The song, "If the real Jesus Christ were to stand up today, he'd be gunned down cold by the C.I.A."
 
2013-12-04 01:34:41 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: ikanreed: Well, Jesus wouldn't have endorsed this "poor people are people too" thing.

I've seen a disturbing number quoting Jesus as saying "The poor will always be with us." as evidence that we should end all social programs because none of them will ever help, or that Jesus was seriously insisting hat the poor will never take responsibility for themselves.

Was that a Glenn Beck quote I missed or something?

Because I don't know how you twist something that much without direction.


Because they're brainwashed?  It's not hard to see that.  There's an active component to getting people to believe untrue things to help concentrate wealth at the top.
 
2013-12-04 01:35:20 PM  

Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.


Well, to the prosperity gospel types Francis is a very real threat to their ideology.
 
2013-12-04 01:36:05 PM  

jake_lex: meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.

Yeah, that's the thing that strikes me here.  What Pope Francis is proposing here is not radical in any sense: he's just saying "Let's refocus our energy on what is important and vital in Christianity and not so much on gays and/or abortion."   It just shows how many people would rather just derp about the gays than actually have to do something that might require them to help out the poors.


Personally I think its less of Pope Francis being a genuinely "good guy" and more of a schism between the loose coalition of catholics/christians here. Think about how for the last thirty years, catholic and christians have been rather united, especially looking back and seeing how there was a very real segment of protestants afraid of a catholic president (JFK). So all of these Mega-Church preachers/politicians realize that while they have operated with the unspoken consent of The Roman Catholic Church, for the first time there is actually friction between the two power bases and it has scared the shiat out of them. So how do they attempt to keep their power base (and more importantly money) flowing? Attempt to isolate the pope by using political rhetoric like calling him a liberal.
 
2013-12-04 01:36:06 PM  
I am looking forward to the Catholic Church for Real Americans to be announced any day now.
 
2013-12-04 01:37:57 PM  

MrBallou: I've been hearing about this "Pope is a Marxist" thing, so I decided to make an exception to my no-WND click rule, just to catch up on exactly what they're saying.

Only got through a few paragraphs before everything went gray. Now my head hurts, my vision is blurred and I can't feel my feet. Please. Someone call a doctor.


poptop12.files.wordpress.com

Alright, MrBallou, just listen. Everything is going to be fine. You're very over derped right now. You will probably be that way for about five more hours. Try taking some vitamin B complex, vitamin C complex.. if you have a beer, go ahead and drink it...

Just remember you're a living organism on this planet, and you're very safe. You've just taken a heavy derping. Relax, stay inside and listen to some music. Okay? Do you have any Allman Brothers?
 
2013-12-04 01:38:19 PM  
The New Pope is a strong advocate for "Social Justice".
Glenn Beck must be shiatting himself right now, that board has to be washed clean from his tears.

/The New Pope really is better than the Old Pope!
//Honest!
///We really mean it this time!
 
2013-12-04 01:38:44 PM  

Obama's Reptiloid Master: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: If the Pope is a Marxist and Obama is a Marxist, then OBAMA IS THE POPE

Mind. Blown.

Muslims can be pope now? The caliphate is upon us. Bi-lal kaifa!


That's the balaclaliphate to you. Maybe the baklavaphate?
 
2013-12-04 01:38:49 PM  
World Nut Daily:  one of the few websites that you don't have to click and posting the below is always apropos:

i78.photobucket.com
 
2013-12-04 01:39:06 PM  
They're actually scared of this guy, aren't they?
 
2013-12-04 01:40:50 PM  
The KGB? Really?
 
2013-12-04 01:41:06 PM  

Weaver95: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

Well, to the prosperity gospel types Francis is a very real threat to their ideology.


It's not like American evangelicals ever thought Catholics were anything but heretics and blasphemers in the first place. They've just had an uneasy truce because they both had a beef with women and gays. I do like that Francis has put social justice back on the scale, because it reminds Christians - not only Catholics - that Jesus had stuff on his mind other than restricting access to birth control. Ergo he's a Marxist or whatever.
 
2013-12-04 01:42:44 PM  
Surely, given that the Pope is a weak figure globally and red-baiting still has the strength it had at the height of the Cold War, this is a good strategy for the radical right to pursue. I encourage them to keep pushing on it.
 
2013-12-04 01:44:25 PM  
Pope Francis is a KGB plant?!

God dammit, those guys are hard to come by! NOW how are we going to scrounge up enough good people to fix the US government? If it takes a KGB plant to measure up, we might have to re-institute the Soviet Union to build supply.
 
2013-12-04 01:45:06 PM  
go fark yourself WND.

I have a man-crush on Pope Francis

/not even Catholic
 
2013-12-04 01:46:20 PM  

Rev. Skarekroe: They're actually scared of this guy, aren't they?


Which makes me scared for this guy...
 
2013-12-04 01:46:25 PM  
Because when one thinks of devout religious faith, one immediately thinks of the KGB. At least, until "Rocky IV" showed them they should pray to an entirely different icon closely associated with Italy.
 
2013-12-04 01:46:43 PM  

Rev. Skarekroe: They're actually scared of this guy, aren't they?


Yes, very much so. Pope Francis is someone the evangelicals are terrified of having to confront.
 
2013-12-04 01:47:02 PM  
Soo.. they are saying that Jesus was KGB?
 
2013-12-04 01:47:04 PM  

coyo: Obama's Reptiloid Master: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: If the Pope is a Marxist and Obama is a Marxist, then OBAMA IS THE POPE

Mind. Blown.

Muslims can be pope now? The caliphate is upon us. Bi-lal kaifa!

That's the balaclaliphate to you. Maybe the baklavaphate?


I support a system of government based off of phylo dough and honey.
 
2013-12-04 01:48:42 PM  
I really should have bought popcorn stock the moment he was announced as pope.
 
2013-12-04 01:49:07 PM  

Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.


It's going to be fun when the CINOs in the Congress have to rationalize their way around the new Pope.
 
2013-12-04 01:49:11 PM  

jake_lex: The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.


They really, really do actually. That's why they are backing the Catholic universities fighting against contraception coverage in the ACA. Catholics are pretty closely split between Republicans and Democrats so it's a not-impossible population for them to capture.

The problem is that straight Catholic doctrine is not ideologically pure enough for Republicans. The official doctrine opposes abortion and gay marriage, which they like, but it also supports unions, opposes the death penalty, advocates for the poor, and discourages warmongering.

Like most religious people Catholics usually pick and choose what parts of their faith they follow and what they pay attention to. Republicans would like Catholics to pay attention to the parts they like but the Pope is drawing focus to the parts they don't like. It will be interesting to see how they deal with it because there doesn't seem to be a good way to blow off the Pope without hurting the support they currently have with Catholics.
 
2013-12-04 01:49:30 PM  

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Weaver95: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

Well, to the prosperity gospel types Francis is a very real threat to their ideology.

It's not like American evangelicals ever thought Catholics were anything but heretics and blasphemers in the first place. They've just had an uneasy truce because they both had a beef with women and gays. I do like that Francis has put social justice back on the scale, because it reminds Christians - not only Catholics - that Jesus had stuff on his mind other than restricting access to birth control. Ergo he's a Marxist or whatever.


Looks like francis is also dialing back on the whole gay thing as well. He seems to want to focus on pro life and social justice causes. The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor. And I agree with you that francis is really rocking the boat by reminding Christians that Christ wasn't a fan of trickle down economics.
 
2013-12-04 01:50:32 PM  

simplicimus: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

It's going to be fun when the CINOs in the Congress have to rationalize their way around the new Pope.



Is the C in this case for Christian or Catholic?
 
2013-12-04 01:50:45 PM  
As an actual heretic, I have a modicum of respect for the current Pope. He seems like a guy who's honestly going on what the Bible says about living a good life through a somewhat modern lens. Helps that he's actually walking the walk with his plain stuff, old car, and the fact he doesn't look or act like a Dark Lord of the Sith.
 
2013-12-04 01:52:13 PM  

SilentStrider: simplicimus: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

It's going to be fun when the CINOs in the Congress have to rationalize their way around the new Pope.


Is the C in this case for Christian or Catholic?


Catholic.
 
2013-12-04 01:52:15 PM  

odinsposse: jake_lex: The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.

They really, really do actually. That's why they are backing the Catholic universities fighting against contraception coverage in the ACA. Catholics are pretty closely split between Republicans and Democrats so it's a not-impossible population for them to capture.

The problem is that straight Catholic doctrine is not ideologically pure enough for Republicans. The official doctrine opposes abortion and gay marriage, which they like, but it also supports unions, opposes the death penalty, advocates for the poor, and discourages warmongering.

Like most religious people Catholics usually pick and choose what parts of their faith they follow and what they pay attention to. Republicans would like Catholics to pay attention to the parts they like but the Pope is drawing focus to the parts they don't like. It will be interesting to see how they deal with it because there doesn't seem to be a good way to blow off the Pope without hurting the support they currently have with Catholics.


Not to mention the fact that GOP ideology doesn't allow for even minor dissent from the party line. So if a catholic takes Francis seriously and starts voting against trickle down economic polices the republicans have to purge them from the party. There is no grey area, no dissent is permitted. All or nothing, no exceptions.
 
2013-12-04 01:53:40 PM  
Many factors spawn violence such as religion, land, drugs, natural resources and power.

That Commie bastard!!!!! And wow, since I've been living not under a rock, but a stack of 200,000,000 progressively larger ones, I didn't know that the Vatican was immensely wealthy, how DARE he reveal that?
 
2013-12-04 01:53:43 PM  

Weaver95:
Not to mention the fact that GOP ideology doesn't allow for even minor dissent from the party line. So if a catholic takes Francis seriously and starts voting against trickle down economic polices the republicans have to purge them from the party. There is no grey area, no dissent is permitted. All or nothing, no exceptions.


Like I said, I should have bought stock in popcorn.
 
2013-12-04 01:54:43 PM  

simplicimus: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

It's going to be fun when the CINOs in the Congress have to rationalize their way around the new Pope.


I just spent a few minutes trying to find reactions from Paul Ryan and some other Republican Catholics to Francis, but all I'm finding are crickets.
 
2013-12-04 01:54:56 PM  

simplicimus: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

It's going to be fun when the CINOs in the Congress have to rationalize their way around the new Pope.


Oh that's no problem for the GOP insiders. The echo chamber is totes cool with blatant religious hypocracy. The problem will be with moderates and independent voters who tend to take a dim view of lying scumbags who pretend they're Christian to gain a couple few votes in a tight election race.
 
2013-12-04 01:56:01 PM  
Hasn't it been pretty much proven that the only real influence in the central/south America during the post Cuban Missile Crisis era was the USA going down there because commies?

Do these farktards not realize that the biggest enemy to democracy in the modern world has more often than not been the US and not the Communist USSR?

I give up, fark these guys. You don't want to listen to history, whether it pertains to what you hold so dear or to your own goddamn faith, fark it. I don't care. You WND asshats are off the deep end. Hit the restart button on your brain, you're suffering a Blue Brain of Derp error message.

...farking retards....

jake_lex: The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.


It's not like Catholics make up a majority of the vote in a region that the GOP hasn't won consistently on a national level since the 1920s...what? really? You don't say? Well fark, okay guys. Have fun with your circle jerk. Jesus and the rest of us will be over here, just chillin'

/hey Buddha, can you get the KFC?
 
2013-12-04 01:56:28 PM  
I'm not giving WND my click, but does this basically boil down to 'concerns' that the new Pontiff is an adherent of the Catholic 'Social Justice' movement, which has long been affiliated (sometimes wrongly, sometimes rightly) with communist and socialist thinking?
 
2013-12-04 01:57:03 PM  
I'm really glad the new pope came along,

For a long time, people have been saying  "if Jesus DID come back, Conservative Christians would be the first ones in line to crucify him again."

The pope has been the best evidence thus far that i's 100% true. He's not Jesus, but he's the first major leader in a very long time to -REALLY- preach Jesus' message, and they are ready to set his ass on fire and dump the ashes into the middle of the farking ocean.

He basically stood up and said "once and for all, who's your savior? Jesus Christ or Rush Limbaugh?" and they have made their choice very farking clear.
 
2013-12-04 01:57:08 PM  

jake_lex: The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.


Acceptable losses in the battle for ideological purity.
 
2013-12-04 01:57:28 PM  
Serious question, what does Bill Donohue of the catholic League have to say about these attacks on the Pope?  He's usually right out front everytime anyone publically says anything even the slightest bit derogatory about Catholicism, but he's also a hard core right wing shiathead, so I imagine he's laying pretty low right now.
 
2013-12-04 01:57:39 PM  

www.wearysloth.com


R.I.P. FRANCIS

 
2013-12-04 01:57:49 PM  

somedude210: Do these farktards not realize that the biggest enemy to democracy in the modern world has more often than not been the US and not the Communist USSR?


Of course not. AMERICA AND CAPITALISM = FREEDOM, LIBTARD.
 
2013-12-04 01:58:48 PM  
Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...
 
2013-12-04 02:00:12 PM  
According to Lt. Gen. Ion Pacepa, the Soviet communist-led idea of "social justice" was infiltrated successfully by the KGB into Latin America's Catholic Church as a religious movement called "liberation theology." The goal was to "incite Latin America's poor to rebel against the 'institutionalized violence of poverty' generated by the United States." (Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, "Disinformation," WND Books, 2013)

Look, the reference they cite is one of their OWN books...
 
2013-12-04 02:00:26 PM  

Mikey1969: Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...


I think he means poor Americans are better off than poor people anywhere else. Which is patently absurd and also ignores the fact that that poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.
 
2013-12-04 02:03:49 PM  

bmongar: It's sad that it is scary when the Pope preaches the philosophy of Jesus.


If you're a Prosperity Gospel heretic, damn right you should be scared.
 
2013-12-04 02:04:04 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Of course not. AMERICA AND CAPITALISM = FREEDOM, LIBTARD.


I just don't understand it. Did they not live through the last 40 years? Do they not remember Reagan and Bush systematically taking out democratically elected governments because they wanted to rule their own countries the way they wanted?

I mean come farking on! How farking dense do you have to be to completely eclipse that bit of history..

Mikey1969: According to Lt. Gen. Ion Pacepa, the Soviet communist-led idea of "social justice" was infiltrated successfully by the KGB into Latin America's Catholic Church as a religious movement called "liberation theology." The goal was to "incite Latin America's poor to rebel against the 'institutionalized violence of poverty' generated by the United States." (Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, "Disinformation," WND Books, 2013)

Look, the reference they cite is one of their OWN books...


COME ON! THEY'RE FARKING STATING THE US WAS BEHIND THIS SHIAT IN THEIR OWN DAMN SOURCES!

AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGHHHH!!! *headdesk*
 
2013-12-04 02:04:15 PM  

Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.


Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.

I can't personally stand most of the evengelicals, but they do quite a bit of charity work. (Not as much as the catholic church, mind you, but then, who does?)

I understand that you may not like them, but it's disingenuous to say they hate helping the poor.
 
2013-12-04 02:05:03 PM  

Arkanaut: jake_lex: The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.

Acceptable losses in the battle for ideological purity.


Besides, most of all those brown people who they'd love to kick out of the country except for that would lose
all their gardeners, cooks and nannies are Caholic.
 
2013-12-04 02:06:43 PM  
This author is a one trick pony. I got to the part where she stated that trickle down economics brings about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world before I felt a little short of breath and realized she was actively trying to kill my brain cells.
 
2013-12-04 02:06:55 PM  

Mikey1969: Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...


It's a telephonic mis-recounting of a popular saw in Republican circles - that the poor in America are better off than the poor in any other nation.

Which is still incorrect, but at least closer to the truth. The poor in America have it better than the poor in just about any other country, but we have more of them than the developed ones, and do less. Also, THEY'RE STILL FARKING POOR.
 
2013-12-04 02:07:08 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.


yeah, how terrible
 
2013-12-04 02:07:12 PM  
I have been wondering when the GOP and their friends of the John Birch Society would get around to the Catholics again. The gay and women targets have been getting pretty stale.
 
2013-12-04 02:08:13 PM  

Great_Milenko: Serious question, what does Bill Donohue of the catholic League have to say about these attacks on the Pope?  He's usually right out front everytime anyone publically says anything even the slightest bit derogatory about Catholicism, but he's also a hard core right wing shiathead, so I imagine he's laying pretty low right now.


All the CINOs are apparently laying low. Nobody expected a Jesuit Pope.
 
2013-12-04 02:08:40 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.

Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.

I can't personally stand most of the evengelicals, but they do quite a bit of charity work. (Not as much as the catholic church, mind you, but then, who does?)

I understand that you may not like them, but it's disingenuous to say they hate helping the poor.


Okay, they hate helping the poor in ways in which they can't put personal strings on it.

blog.nikhilkrishnaswamy.com
 
2013-12-04 02:10:01 PM  

Headso: yeah, how terrible


Not advocating. Just stating that they have a different worldview. And it's as valid as your or mine, whether we agree with it or not.
Did you miss the part where I said I'm no fan of evangelicals?
 
2013-12-04 02:10:18 PM  
Catholics, you are useless to the Right if you do not toe their Christian Evangelical fundamentalist line.
 
2013-12-04 02:10:50 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.

Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.

I can't personally stand most of the evengelicals, but they do quite a bit of charity work. (Not as much as the catholic church, mind you, but then, who does?)

I understand that you may not like them, but it's disingenuous to say they hate helping the poor.


You know, I have worked in charity and social justice work across this country for a farking decade, and I have never met any evangelical Christians in it at all. I've met lots of left-wing Christians. Met lots of Catholics. Lots of atheists and Buddhists and even the occasional Muslim. I've only ever run into evangelical Christians in cases where they were proselytizing to disadvantaged people by offering weak "aid" with strings attached and our groups had to step in and provide real help to their victims.
 
2013-12-04 02:10:59 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.

Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.


Why is it that the ONE time evangelicals don't want law taken direct from the Bible is when it comes to charity?

Gays? BAN EM.
Abortions? BAN EM.
Subservience of women? MANDATORY.
Slavish devotion to Israel? MANDATORY.
Belief in god? MANDATORY.
Charity? Ehhhh...
 
2013-12-04 02:11:13 PM  

technicolor-misfit: Okay, they hate helping the poor in ways in which they can't put personal strings on it.


True. FSM knows there are no strings whatsoever when the government helps the poor.
 
2013-12-04 02:12:49 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Headso: yeah, how terrible

Not advocating. Just stating that they have a different worldview. And it's as valid as your or mine, whether we agree with it or not.
Did you miss the part where I said I'm no fan of evangelicals?


I didn't mean to come off like I was personally attacking you, breh.
 
2013-12-04 02:13:12 PM  
So he lives large while the duped massed slave away in service to the God-state? Actually that makes sense
 
2013-12-04 02:13:32 PM  
FTA:  "Trickle-down" theories do promote economic growth when encouraged by a free market with less government regulations, and do bring about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world.

ct.fra.bz
 
2013-12-04 02:15:32 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.

Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.

I can't personally stand most of the evengelicals, but they do quite a bit of charity work. (Not as much as the catholic church, mind you, but then, who does?)

I understand that you may not like them, but it's disingenuous to say they hate helping the poor.


Private charities, while certainly better than nothing, cannot solve the structural causes of poverty. It takes societal initiative to attack the problem at the roots. The point of anything related to helping human beings should be the elimination of specific social ills. The question to be asked is "How do we end starvation?", not "How do we keep the poor alive? ". Private charity is a good thing, but by and large it's a solution to the latter question. Governments can answer the former.

As far as I'm concerned, if the religious right is not willing to accept structural anti-poverty initiatives, they are more concerned about making themselves feel good than with providing any real help.
 
2013-12-04 02:15:52 PM  

skullkrusher: So he lives large while the duped massed slave away in service to the God-state? Actually that makes sense


What are you a commie, talking that marxist stuff?
 
2013-12-04 02:16:38 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.

Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.

I can't personally stand most of the evengelicals, but they do quite a bit of charity work. (Not as much as the catholic church, mind you, but then, who does?)

I understand that you may not like them, but it's disingenuous to say they hate helping the poor.



Oh, and... they hate the most effective way of helping the poor...

And... they hate helping the poor in ways that might help those poors that they personally find unsavory.

ronetlcnaptown.files.wordpress.com

They prefer helping the poor on "mission trips" to exotic locations with sweet farking beaches.


"Hi, would you like to donate to help us go on mission trip to Haiti to serve the Lord?"
elevatedestinations.com
 
2013-12-04 02:17:04 PM  

Weaver95: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

Well, to the prosperity gospel types Francis is a very real threat to their ideology.


John Hagee's MegaChurch is only about 10 miles from here.

I'd really like to go in there, say "This is supposed to be a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of commerce", and see what happens.
 
2013-12-04 02:18:07 PM  

offmymeds: FTA:  "Trickle-down" theories do promote economic growth when encouraged by a free market with less government regulations, and do bring about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world.

[ct.fra.bz image 770x976]


i457.photobucket.com

The pic is new, but the quote is quite old, I think 1890s
 
2013-12-04 02:18:55 PM  

Dr Dreidel: It's a telephonic mis-recounting of a popular saw in Republican circles - that the poor in America are better off than the poor in any other nation.


Yeah, I was really just pointing to the major flaw that statement, but I guess that's really just going for the low hanging fruit when I think about it. Too easy...
 
2013-12-04 02:19:41 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.

Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.

I can't personally stand most of the evengelicals, but they do quite a bit of charity work. (Not as much as the catholic church, mind you, but then, who does?)

I understand that you may not like them, but it's disingenuous to say they hate helping the poor.


If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.
 
2013-12-04 02:19:47 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Mikey1969: Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...

It's a telephonic mis-recounting of a popular saw in Republican circles - that the poor in America are better off than the poor in any other nation.

Which is still incorrect, but at least closer to the truth. The poor in America have it better than the poor in just about any other country, but we have more of them than the developed ones, and do less. Also, THEY'RE STILL FARKING POOR.


But refrigerators!
 
2013-12-04 02:19:52 PM  
Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards
 
2013-12-04 02:20:07 PM  

Rev. Skarekroe: They're actually scared of this guy, aren't they?


In all fairness they'd also be terrified if they really thought Jesus was real and speaking the truth...
 
2013-12-04 02:21:36 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: Okay, they hate helping the poor in ways in which they can't put personal strings on it.

True. FSM knows there are no strings whatsoever when the government helps the poor.



What are they?

Show your income, prove you're trying to find a job or improve your situation?

What are the strings when the government helps the poor?
 
2013-12-04 02:21:56 PM  

Serious Black: BojanglesPaladin: Weaver95: The evangelicals are cool with the pro life thing but they really hate the thought of helping the poor.

Through the government. They really hate the thought of government help for the poor.

I can't personally stand most of the evengelicals, but they do quite a bit of charity work. (Not as much as the catholic church, mind you, but then, who does?)

I understand that you may not like them, but it's disingenuous to say they hate helping the poor.

If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.


The religious right's Calvinism is astonishing. I can't imagine how smug and self-satisfied these people must be. It's disgusting.
 
2013-12-04 02:22:25 PM  

simplicimus: skullkrusher: So he lives large while the duped massed slave away in service to the God-state? Actually that makes sense

What are you a commie, talking that marxist stuff?


If the fur hat fits...
 
2013-12-04 02:22:29 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: You know, I have worked in charity and social justice work across this country for a farking decade, and I have never met any evangelical Christians in it at all. I've met lots of left-wing Christians. Met lots of Catholics. Lots of atheists and Buddhists and even the occasional Muslim. I've only ever run into evangelical Christians in cases where they were proselytizing to disadvantaged people by offering weak "aid" with strings attached and our groups had to step in and provide real help to their victims.


I can't speak to your experience, but I notice you simultaneously say you've never found them in charity work where you were at the same time you say you have found them doing charity work in a way you don't like.

FWIW, they tend to be exclusionary in their charity work - meaning Baptist charity groups usuallyy only want fellow Baptists and it is often done through a specific congregation, so unless you were already part of the group, you would be unlikely to be working side by side. (wasn't there an article a few weeks ago about a soup kitchen that told atheists they were "not needed'?). Catholics and most other groups don't concern themselves with that kind of thing, because the GOAL is the helping. I have helped an evangelical charity, but only because I was invited along by a cousin (and presumably because I left my FSM t-shirt at home that day).

ALL I am saying is that it is disingenuous to say they "hate helping the poor". Quite the opposite. They just don't do it in a way we might like.

And not to get too persnickety, but all of you who are yelling that Jesus told Christians to help the poor should also remember that he very specifically ALSO told them to spread the word of Christ.

I may find them to be pompous and obnoxious in the way they go about it, but proselytizing when helping the poor is not "un-Christian".
 
2013-12-04 02:26:02 PM  

Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.


I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)

Tripp Johnston Private Eye: Private charities, while certainly better than nothing, cannot solve the structural causes of poverty.


Nor, clearly, can government.
 
2013-12-04 02:26:05 PM  

SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards


Mixed economies do not equal socialism.

The goal of socialism is communism.


Sincerely,

A Socialist
 
2013-12-04 02:27:10 PM  

Rev. Skarekroe: They're actually scared of this guy, aren't they?


Modern American conservatives have essentially tied efforts to increase income inequality to their religious beliefs.  So yeah, Pope Francis ruins a lot of their moral ideas regarding wealth and poverty when he suggests that being poor *might just not* be because God is punishing them for being bad people.

Republicans have allowed themselves to believe that the poor deserve to be poor as a result of some moral failings, and Francis is a direct threat to that tradition.
 
2013-12-04 02:28:07 PM  

Great_Milenko: Serious question, what does Bill Donohue of the catholic League have to say about these attacks on the Pope?  He's usually right out front everytime anyone publically says anything even the slightest bit derogatory about Catholicism, but he's also a hard core right wing shiathead, so I imagine he's laying pretty low right now.


I was curious so I went looking. It turns out Donohue wrote an article for Newsmax on that speech that is driving conservative crazy and is, in fact, wholly supportive. He basically focuses on stuff he likes and brushes off stuff he doesn't. So he's happy the Pope is anti-abortion and doesn't like secularization. He works a little to infer that gay marriage is wrong. He translates "trickle-down sucks" into "well, try not to be greedy." He decides that the Pope's advice to look after the poor is naive because of the "cultural" problem of poverty (which I assume means people must be poor because of laziness and not institutional problems).

So he had to do some twisting but he's managed to accept the Pope's message, more or less.
 
2013-12-04 02:28:51 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)



You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?

ARe you living under a rock?

/Hint: It god makes you rich because you are faithful/good, that kind of implies that if you're poor, you're just not being faithful/good enough.
 
2013-12-04 02:29:32 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I can't speak to your experience, but I notice you simultaneously say you've never found them in charity work where you were at the same time you say you have found them doing charity work in a way you don't like.


No, I'm saying targeting marginalized people for conversion using carrot-and-stick coercion in no way qualifies as charity let alone real help.
 
2013-12-04 02:30:23 PM  

NateAsbestos: Rev. Skarekroe: They're actually scared of this guy, aren't they?

In all fairness they'd also be terrified if they really thought Jesus was real and speaking the truth...


Yes, indeed.

Conrad Hilton used to wake up in sweat-drenched terror at the dreams he had about being sent to hell.

He tried to leave 99% of his estate to several orders of nuns, but Barron Hilton (Paris' grandfather) made sure that shiat didn't happen. They fought that shiat out in court for YEARS.
 
2013-12-04 02:31:17 PM  

simplicimus: Great_Milenko: Serious question, what does Bill Donohue of the catholic League have to say about these attacks on the Pope?  He's usually right out front everytime anyone publically says anything even the slightest bit derogatory about Catholicism, but he's also a hard core right wing shiathead, so I imagine he's laying pretty low right now.

All the CINOs are apparently laying low. Nobody expected a Jesuit Pope.


gretachristina.typepad.com

/hot
 
2013-12-04 02:32:25 PM  

Felgraf: BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)


You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?

ARe you living under a rock?

/Hint: It god makes you rich because you are faithful/good, that kind of implies that if you're poor, you're just not being faithful/good enough.


I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either; it stems logically from Calvin's ideas and is a non-fringe idea in mainstream Protestantism.
 
2013-12-04 02:33:55 PM  
I, for one, am fully looking forward to more violence between christians.  Evangelicals vs Catholics this time?  Awesome.  My support goes to the papists.  As much as I hate organized religion (congregationalist growing up), I  really hate the dominionist windbag evengelical throat stuffers.
 
2013-12-04 02:34:00 PM  

Great_Milenko: Serious question, what does Bill Donohue of the catholic League have to say about these attacks on the Pope?  He's usually right out front everytime anyone publically says anything even the slightest bit derogatory about Catholicism, but he's also a hard core right wing shiathead, so I imagine he's laying pretty low right now.


Don't know about him in particular but I have to imagine a lot of prominent right-wing Catholics are stressing out over how to navigate this. Has Pat Buchanan had a stroke yet?

 

Mikey1969: According to Lt. Gen. Ion Pacepa, the Soviet communist-led idea of "social justice" was infiltrated successfully by the KGB into Latin America's Catholic Church as a religious movement called "liberation theology." The goal was to "incite Latin America's poor to rebel against the 'institutionalized violence of poverty' generated by the United States." (Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, "Disinformation," WND Books, 2013)

Look, the reference they cite is one of their OWN books...


I reckon that sounds like a pretty good plan.
 
2013-12-04 02:34:19 PM  
Wow.


Just.......just WOW.
 
2013-12-04 02:35:55 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)


A number of the biggest Christian churches today preach that those who keep their faith in God will be financially rewarded. The flip side of that is that those who do not keep their faith in God will be financially punished.
 
2013-12-04 02:36:55 PM  

Tripp Johnston Private Eye: Felgraf: BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)


You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?

ARe you living under a rock?

/Hint: It god makes you rich because you are faithful/good, that kind of implies that if you're poor, you're just not being faithful/good enough.

I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either; it stems logically from Calvin's ideas and is a non-fringe idea in mainstream Protestantism.


It also makes me frothingly *angry*. I'm not really sure I even count as a Christian anymore (I'm... not really sure WHAT I count as. Pratchettist?), but the prosperity gospel is such a perversion of the original work and message it just... really, really makes me angry. I think it in part has to do with the *willful* ignorance that must be part and parcel of it, since the bible rather explicitly states, repeatedly, *THAT IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY*.
 
2013-12-04 02:36:55 PM  

Mikey1969: According to Lt. Gen. Ion Pacepa, the Soviet communist-led idea of "social justice" was infiltrated successfully by the KGB into Latin America's Catholic Church as a religious movement called "liberation theology." The goal was to "incite Latin America's poor to rebel against the 'institutionalized violence of poverty' generated by the United States." (Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, "Disinformation," WND Books, 2013)

Look, the reference they cite is one of their OWN books...


And end the article with links to purchase it. Get the bundle deal for only $29.95!

Personally I love that social justice is a KGB invention, despite the phrase originating in the 1840's from a Jesuit named Luigi Taparelli. Clearly the long game, seeing as he must have been discussing the idea with Karl Marx himself before the publication of the Communist Manifesto.

Ironically there is a grain of truth here: Pope Francis has expressed much more sympathy for liberation theology than Benedict did. However, Francis has been clear that he disagrees with it on that it is used as a basis of excusing or justifying violent acts.
 
2013-12-04 02:37:12 PM  

odinsposse: So he had to do some twisting but he's managed to accept the Pope's message, more or less.


So the head of his Church is naive? Guess Francis just isn't as smart as he is.
 
2013-12-04 02:40:01 PM  

FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards

Mixed economies do not equal socialism.

The goal of socialism is communism.

Sincerely,

A Socialist


Our healthcare system/employment insurance/maternity leave/subsidized everything is going to turn us into a Communist State?
 
2013-12-04 02:40:17 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Soo.. they are saying that Jesus was KGB?


THIS GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP, PEOPLE
 
2013-12-04 02:40:36 PM  

Felgraf: Tripp Johnston Private Eye: Felgraf: BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)


You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?

ARe you living under a rock?

/Hint: It god makes you rich because you are faithful/good, that kind of implies that if you're poor, you're just not being faithful/good enough.

I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either; it stems logically from Calvin's ideas and is a non-fringe idea in mainstream Protestantism.

It also makes me frothingly *angry*. I'm not really sure I even count as a Christian anymore (I'm... not really sure WHAT I count as. Pratchettist?), but the prosperity gospel is such a perversion of the original work and message it just... really, really makes me angry. I think it in part has to do with the *willful* ignorance that must be part and parcel of it, since the bible rather explicitly states, repeatedly, *THAT IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY*.


I'm convinced some sort of Lovecraftian monstrosity from the darkest portion of the cosmos is manipulating the minds of American Christians into worshipping it while they still believe they are worshipping Christ.
 
2013-12-04 02:40:37 PM  

skullkrusher: So he lives large while the duped massed slave away in service to the God-state? Actually that makes sense


Actually he lives in a small apartment; he declined to live in the traditional papal residence.
 
2013-12-04 02:41:56 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: Republicans have allowed themselves to believe that the poor deserve to be poor as a result of some moral failings, and Francis is a direct threat to that tradition.


It's true that some people are poor because of their moral failings.  It's true that some people are poor due to the fault of no one.  But it is also true that some people are poor because of the moral failings of the wealthy.  How we deal with the poor, the weak, and the sick shows us what kind of people we are.

Not very pretty, is it?

/ reluctant republican
// hate both parties
/// Calvinist.
 
2013-12-04 02:42:58 PM  

SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism



Social programs are not equal to Socialism, Communism, Marxism, or <insert any "-ism" that wing-nuts use incorrectly>.
 
2013-12-04 02:43:04 PM  

SovietCanuckistan: Our healthcare system/employment insurance/maternity leave/subsidized everything is going to turn us into a Communist State?


No. A mixed economy is still a capitalist economy.  What you have there are concessions made to the working class.  They can (and probably will be) scaled back at some point.  Happens all the time.
 
2013-12-04 02:43:15 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)

Tripp Johnston Private Eye: Private charities, while certainly better than nothing, cannot solve the structural causes of poverty.

Nor, clearly, can government.


You should read The Protestant Work Ethic. It explains the concept quite clearly and how this idea has shaped the formation of modern American-style capitalism.
 
2013-12-04 02:43:23 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)


One would be forgiven for questioning the honesty with which you pursued this investigation.
 
2013-12-04 02:43:33 PM  

Felgraf: You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?


Which denomination is that again?
 
2013-12-04 02:43:46 PM  

Tripp Johnston Private Eye: I'm convinced some sort of Lovecraftian monstrosity from the darkest portion of the cosmos is manipulating the minds of American Christians into worshipping it while they still believe they are worshipping Christ.


I think that's part of the job description for the antichrist.
 
2013-12-04 02:44:47 PM  

SovietCanuckistan: FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards

Mixed economies do not equal socialism.

The goal of socialism is communism.

Sincerely,

A Socialist

Our healthcare system/employment insurance/maternity leave/subsidized everything is going to turn us into a Communist State?


No but it also doesn't make you a socialist country
 
2013-12-04 02:45:53 PM  

FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Our healthcare system/employment insurance/maternity leave/subsidized everything is going to turn us into a Communist State?

No. A mixed economy is still a capitalist economy.  What you have there are concessions made to the working class.  They can (and probably will be) scaled back at some point.  Happens all the time.


One can only hope!
 
2013-12-04 02:48:22 PM  

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Our healthcare system/employment insurance/maternity leave/subsidized everything is going to turn us into a Communist State?

No. A mixed economy is still a capitalist economy.  What you have there are concessions made to the working class.  They can (and probably will be) scaled back at some point.  Happens all the time.

One can only hope!


I just asked for a raise at work. Hopefully I will be rich enough to start hating the poor and not caring!
 
2013-12-04 02:48:30 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Felgraf: You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?

Which denomination is that again?


"The Neo-Pentecostal movement has been characterized in part by an emphasis on prosperity theology, which gained greater acceptance within charismatic Christianity during the late 1990s. By 2006, three of the four largest congregations in the United States were teaching prosperity theology, and Joel Osteen has been credited with spreading it outside of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movement through his books, which have sold over 4 million copies. Bruce Wilkinson's The Prayer of Jabez also sold millions of copies and invited readers to seek prosperity.

By the 2000s, adherents of prosperity theology in the United States were most common in the Sun Belt. In the late 2000s, proponents claimed that tens of millions of Christians had accepted prosperity theology. A 2006 poll by Time reported that 17 percent of Christians in America said they identified with the movement. There is no official governing body for the movement, though many ministries are unofficially linked.

In 2007, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley opened a probe into the finances of six televangelism ministries that promoted prosperity theology: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, Creflo Dollar Ministries, Benny Hinn Ministries, Bishop Eddie Long Ministries, Joyce Meyer Ministries, and Paula White Ministries. In January 2011, Grassley concluded his investigation stating that he believed self-regulation by religious organizations was preferable to government action. Only the ministries led by Meyer and Hinn cooperated fully with Grassley's investigation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology
 
2013-12-04 02:48:35 PM  

FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards

Mixed economies do not equal socialism.

The goal of socialism is communism.

Sincerely,

A Socialist


Odd goal there, communism. A system that has demonstrably failed wherever attempted.
 
2013-12-04 02:49:14 PM  

simplicimus: FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards

Mixed economies do not equal socialism.

The goal of socialism is communism.

Sincerely,

A Socialist

Odd goal there, communism. A system that has demonstrably failed wherever attempted.


Socialism has been attempted.  Communism has not.
 
2013-12-04 02:49:23 PM  

simplicimus: Tripp Johnston Private Eye: I'm convinced some sort of Lovecraftian monstrosity from the darkest portion of the cosmos is manipulating the minds of American Christians into worshipping it while they still believe they are worshipping Christ.

I think that's part of the job description for the antichrist.


I'd love to see Pat Robertson, Joseph Farah, Ted Cruz, and all the other nutbags rip off their elaborate masks to reveal tentacled hideous visages, turn to the crowd of derpities who like them, and say "Gotcha! Lake of fire for you all. What were you farking people thinking?"
 
2013-12-04 02:52:43 PM  

muck1969: SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism


Social programs are not equal to Socialism, Communism, Marxism, or <insert any "-ism" that wing-nuts use incorrectly>.


FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Our healthcare system/employment insurance/maternity leave/subsidized everything is going to turn us into a Communist State?

No. A mixed economy is still a capitalist economy.  What you have there are concessions made to the working class.  They can (and probably will be) scaled back at some point.  Happens all the time.


I think I need to brush up my understanding of Socialism....I do shop at Co-Op though. That is about as Socialist as you can get...I think.
 
2013-12-04 02:53:49 PM  

FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Our healthcare system/employment insurance/maternity leave/subsidized everything is going to turn us into a Communist State?

No. A mixed economy is still a capitalist economy.  What you have there are concessions made to the working class.  They can (and probably will be) scaled back at some point.  Happens all the time.

One can only hope!

I just asked for a raise at work. Hopefully I will be rich enough to start hating the poor and not caring!


What do you call a socialist who can afford to drink good scotch? A capitalist. Welcome aboard, comrade!
 
2013-12-04 02:54:34 PM  

Biff_Steel: The KGB? Really?


I know, field work was the job of the GRU.
 
2013-12-04 02:55:45 PM  
You know, for people who believe in hell, they sure are working hard to end up there.
 
2013-12-04 02:55:57 PM  

SovietCanuckistan: I think I need to brush up my understanding of Socialism....I do shop at Co-Op though. That is about as Socialist as you can get...I think.


Could be run by anarchists could be run by socialists.  It could also be run by capitalists lol.  You just never know with these things
 
2013-12-04 02:56:09 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Felgraf: You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?

Which denomination is that again?


It's generic label Christianity. Most, if not all, of the mega churches and evangelicals that influence the republican party subscribe to prosperity gospel beliefs.
 
2013-12-04 02:56:18 PM  

simplicimus: FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards

Mixed economies do not equal socialism.

The goal of socialism is communism.

Sincerely,

A Socialist

Odd goal there, communism. A system that has demonstrably failed wherever attempted.


Cut FarkedOver a break. Once you get past his ridiculous politico-economic views, dude likes booze and boobs like the rest of us. Or most of us. Some people don't drink. Everyone loves boobs tho
 
2013-12-04 02:57:04 PM  
Wait till they find out the last guy was a Nazi.
 
2013-12-04 02:57:15 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: Okay, they hate helping the poor in ways in which they can't put personal strings on it.

True. FSM knows there are no strings whatsoever when the government helps the poor.


Private charities might be contributing, but they are FAILING. That is why the government needs to step in, because the faith based people can talk the talk, but they fail miserably walking the walk.
 
2013-12-04 02:59:44 PM  

Tigger: One would be forgiven for questioning the honesty with which you pursued this investigation.

zeroman987: You should read The Protestant Work Ethic.

Tripp Johnston Private Eye: I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either;


Perhaps some clarification or definition of terms is in order. No Protestant denomination that I am aware of teaches that poverty is a result of sin. Baptist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Church of Christ, etc.

Now, "Prosperity Gospel" is not a denomination, and you generally see this nonsense being spewed by these unaffiliated non-denominational mega churches. I do not consider these to be "evangelical" churches, largely because they don't actually HAVE a theology or a doctrine. These are motivational seminars held once weekly peddling their nonsense by packaging it in scriptural snippets. They are as much a 'religion' as AA is a religion.

Let me be clear: Joel Osteen and the like can DIAF. And I suspect, when they die, will end up in fire either way.

So if you are saying that non-denominational prosperity gospel 'church' members are selfish, uncharitable assholes, I would say that probably not ALL of them are (I'm sure many individual members are very nice, loving, and charitable people), but I would agree that MOST are.
 
2013-12-04 02:59:46 PM  

skullkrusher: What do you call a socialist who can afford to drink good scotch? A capitalist. Welcome aboard, comrade!


When asked why he always had a fine cigar in his mouth, Big Bill Haywood (prominent socialist and labor activist) replied: "Nothing is too good for the working class."

James P. Cannon (a prominent socialist and trotskist and drunk) once said that if the revolutionary masses first demand was to nationalize the production of liquor and put it under worker control then that is the first thing they would do.
 
2013-12-04 03:02:44 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Tigger: One would be forgiven for questioning the honesty with which you pursued this investigation.
zeroman987: You should read The Protestant Work Ethic.
Tripp Johnston Private Eye: I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either;

Perhaps some clarification or definition of terms is in order. No Protestant denomination that I am aware of teaches that poverty is a result of sin. Baptist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Church of Christ, etc.

Now, "Prosperity Gospel" is not a denomination, and you generally see this nonsense being spewed by these unaffiliated non-denominational mega churches. I do not consider these to be "evangelical" churches, largely because they don't actually HAVE a theology or a doctrine. These are motivational seminars held once weekly peddling their nonsense by packaging it in scriptural snippets. They are as much a 'religion' as AA is a religion.

Let me be clear: Joel Osteen and the like can DIAF. And I suspect, when they die, will end up in fire either way.

So if you are saying that non-denominational prosperity gospel 'church' members are selfish, uncharitable assholes, I would say that probably not ALL of them are (I'm sure many individual members are very nice, loving, and charitable people), but I would agree that MOST are.


You would think it would just be less painful to accept the truth, but apparently not.
 
2013-12-04 03:03:02 PM  

FarkedOver: That's a bunch of horseshiat. From what I've read in transcripts he was complicit of acting in concert with the military junta of Argentina during the Dirty War.


So he worked for Henry Kissinger.  I would think that would be a plus.
 
2013-12-04 03:04:09 PM  

technicolor-misfit: A 2006 poll by Time reported that 17 percent of Christians in America said they identified with the movement.


Which means that 83% (the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of Christians) are NOT Prosperity doctrine.

technicolor-misfit: In the late 2000s, proponents claimed that tens of millions of Christians had accepted prosperity theology.


I wonder if you likewise accept it as proven fact when people like Rush Limbaugh claim that most Americans are right-wing conservatives?

I do not.
 
2013-12-04 03:04:24 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: FarkedOver: That's a bunch of horseshiat. From what I've read in transcripts he was complicit of acting in concert with the military junta of Argentina during the Dirty War.

So he worked for Henry Kissinger.  I would think that would be a plus.


I believe he informed on the activities of priests in his charge that were working with the poor, because that was "radical" and "commie shiat".
 
2013-12-04 03:04:29 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Tigger: One would be forgiven for questioning the honesty with which you pursued this investigation.
zeroman987: You should read The Protestant Work Ethic.
Tripp Johnston Private Eye: I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either;

Perhaps some clarification or definition of terms is in order. No Protestant denomination that I am aware of teaches that poverty is a result of sin. Baptist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Church of Christ, etc.

Now, "Prosperity Gospel" is not a denomination, and you generally see this nonsense being spewed by these unaffiliated non-denominational mega churches. I do not consider these to be "evangelical" churches, largely because they don't actually HAVE a theology or a doctrine. These are motivational seminars held once weekly peddling their nonsense by packaging it in scriptural snippets. They are as much a 'religion' as AA is a religion.

Let me be clear: Joel Osteen and the like can DIAF. And I suspect, when they die, will end up in fire either way.

So if you are saying that non-denominational prosperity gospel 'church' members are selfish, uncharitable assholes, I would say that probably not ALL of them are (I'm sure many individual members are very nice, loving, and charitable people), but I would agree that MOST are.


It's meaningless what you think when these groups are the most vocal and media savy parts of Christian society. If the rest of Christianity is so fed up, they need to get their message out there, which they aren't.
 
2013-12-04 03:04:36 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Tigger: One would be forgiven for questioning the honesty with which you pursued this investigation.
zeroman987: You should read The Protestant Work Ethic.
Tripp Johnston Private Eye: I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either;

Perhaps some clarification or definition of terms is in order. No Protestant denomination that I am aware of teaches that poverty is a result of sin. Baptist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Church of Christ, etc.

Now, "Prosperity Gospel" is not a denomination, and you generally see this nonsense being spewed by these unaffiliated non-denominational mega churches. I do not consider these to be "evangelical" churches, largely because they don't actually HAVE a theology or a doctrine. These are motivational seminars held once weekly peddling their nonsense by packaging it in scriptural snippets. They are as much a 'religion' as AA is a religion.

Let me be clear: Joel Osteen and the like can DIAF. And I suspect, when they die, will end up in fire either way.

So if you are saying that non-denominational prosperity gospel 'church' members are selfish, uncharitable assholes, I would say that probably not ALL of them are (I'm sure many individual members are very nice, loving, and charitable people), but I would agree that MOST are.


The prosperity gospel is more like the bastard child of Capitalism and Christianity.
 
2013-12-04 03:05:39 PM  

machodonkeywrestler: Private charities might be contributing, but they are FAILING. That is why the government needs to step in


You might not have noticed, but government HAS stepped in. Would you say they are succeeding?
 
2013-12-04 03:07:25 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: machodonkeywrestler: Private charities might be contributing, but they are FAILING. That is why the government needs to step in

You might not have noticed, but government HAS stepped in. Would you say they are succeeding?


Compared to private charity, actually, yes, public anti-poverty efforts have been enormously successful up until the radical right began dismantling them.
 
2013-12-04 03:07:48 PM  

Obama's Reptiloid Master: meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.

Today on my way to work I saw a message scrawled on the back of a pickup, written in shoe polish, excoriating the president for being a dictator and king and concluding with a Bible verse. I couldn't believe I was seeing paranoid schizophrenia in real time so I pulled alongside this patriot, only to discover the fattest man I have ever seen crammed into a Ford Ranger, wearing a USMC cap and camo balaclava.


Did his butthurt nourish you?  I know I would drink of the delicious tears.
 
2013-12-04 03:07:56 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: machodonkeywrestler: Private charities might be contributing, but they are FAILING. That is why the government needs to step in

You might not have noticed, but government HAS stepped in. Would you say they are succeeding?


We will never completely eliminate poverty.

Therefore we should cut all social welfare programs.

What's the point of your question?
 
2013-12-04 03:09:12 PM  
Big trouble in little Freepertown. The Rush / Pope Francis schism is causing some serious rifts:

"Rush and Sarah should mind their own business when it comes to our Pope.Let he without sin cast the first stone.Rush used drugs and Sarah's family is no longer threatened.Us Catholics will clean up the rest."

"We're in big effing trouble when we equate some radio entertainer's blabber to the Pope's Apostolic Exhortation."

"If the Pope told you to drink flavor aid mixed with cyanida, i am willing to bet the ultramontanists would follow. What slavish automatons they are..."

"Okay, now I'm PO'd at the pope again. His derisive reference to "trickle-down theories" is like something you'd see at Daily Kos. This can't be chalked up to a translational error."

"I have thought this would happen--he's flaky, incoherent, and South American "Liberation Theology" Jesuit. We are in trouble. "
 
2013-12-04 03:10:03 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: machodonkeywrestler: Private charities might be contributing, but they are FAILING. That is why the government needs to step in

You might not have noticed, but government HAS stepped in. Would you say they are succeeding?


"In 1935, more than 50% of the elderly population lived in poverty. Today that poverty rate stands officially at 9.4%."

Unless there is some other cause that you can think of outside of the creation of Social Security and Medicare, I'd say yes, they can succeed.
 
2013-12-04 03:12:12 PM  

machodonkeywrestler: It's meaningless what you think when these groups are the most vocal and media savy parts of Christian society. If the rest of Christianity is so fed up, they need to get their message out there, which they aren't.


I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it.

But out of curiosity, what do you think the new Pope is DOING?
 
2013-12-04 03:12:34 PM  
EVERYTHING I DONT LIKE IS MARXIST
 
2013-12-04 03:13:00 PM  
img1.fark.net   = [Seemslegit.jpg]
 
2013-12-04 03:13:48 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: EVERYTHING I DONT LIKE IS MARXIST


I don't know the first thing about Marxism.... BUT I FARKING HATE IT.  That's usually how americans are.
 
2013-12-04 03:13:52 PM  

Almost Everybody Poops: We will never completely eliminate poverty.Therefore we should cut all social welfare programs.


I think that is a TERRIBLE idea. I'm going to assume you are kidding.
 
2013-12-04 03:14:44 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: EVERYTHING I DONT LIKE IS MARXIST


That does seem to be the standard issue republican reply don't it?
 
2013-12-04 03:15:04 PM  

FarkedOver: don't know the first thing about Marxism.... BUT I FARKING HATE IT. That's usually how americans are.


You should be careful about assuming that people who oppose Marxism only do so because they don't "understand" it.

Many of us oppose it because we do.

/heya :)
 
2013-12-04 03:15:11 PM  
If this pope were genuinely concerned with the plight of the wealthy he would dump all the church's assets, property and gold and use the proceeds to enrich the flock.  This will never happen.  The pope is concerned with keeping parishioners numbers up!
 
2013-12-04 03:15:55 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Almost Everybody Poops: We will never completely eliminate poverty.Therefore we should cut all social welfare programs.

I think that is a TERRIBLE idea. I'm going to assume you are kidding.


Honestly, it's like you haven't read the news in a decade....
 
2013-12-04 03:16:19 PM  

Graffito: Obama's Reptiloid Master: meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.

Today on my way to work I saw a message scrawled on the back of a pickup, written in shoe polish, excoriating the president for being a dictator and king and concluding with a Bible verse. I couldn't believe I was seeing paranoid schizophrenia in real time so I pulled alongside this patriot, only to discover the fattest man I have ever seen crammed into a Ford Ranger, wearing a USMC cap and camo balaclava.

Did his butthurt nourish you?  I know I would drink of the delicious tears.


That sounds gross
 
2013-12-04 03:16:46 PM  
HOLY FARK! It took today's "conservatism" in this exceptional and mostly "Christian" nation to go and finally malign the biggest living figure of Christianity on Earth,

Please! Someone put Francis in the LOPCATGOPATA if he is not there already.
 
2013-12-04 03:16:59 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: FarkedOver: don't know the first thing about Marxism.... BUT I FARKING HATE IT. That's usually how americans are.

You should be careful about assuming that people who oppose Marxism only do so because they don't "understand" it.

Many of us oppose it because we do.

/heya :)


I love debating you, but from what we've discussed I think your grasp of Marxism is very limited.  I'm not saying that to belittle you or say you're an idiot because a lot of people are in this boat.  Hell, I am still learning.
 
2013-12-04 03:17:05 PM  

Serious Black: BojanglesPaladin: machodonkeywrestler: Private charities might be contributing, but they are FAILING. That is why the government needs to step in

You might not have noticed, but government HAS stepped in. Would you say they are succeeding?

"In 1935, more than 50% of the elderly population lived in poverty. Today that poverty rate stands officially at 9.4%."

Unless there is some other cause that you can think of outside of the creation of Social Security and Medicare, I'd say yes, they can succeed.


When they can't chew the leather, they should be put out on an ice flo.
 
2013-12-04 03:17:51 PM  

Weaver95: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

Well, to the prosperity gospel types Francis is a very real threat to their ideology.


Well, save that they're not dirty Papists. 'Course, it might jeopardize some of their favorite talking points about the War on Christianity, so it should be fun as they scramble to keep the Idiot Brigade in check before they lose the Cstholic vote...
 
2013-12-04 03:17:55 PM  

machodonkeywrestler: It's meaningless what you think when these groups are the most vocal and media savy parts of Christian society. If the rest of Christianity is so fed up, they need to get their message out there, which they aren't.


I am going to argue a counter-argument here: It is hard for left wing/tolerant churches to get their message out their when their message literally gets banned from the air waves.

No, I am not making this up.

This http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRcv9u9x3z8  is a UCC advertisement from around 2006. It, (And I believed two others like it), were banned from sevreal networks (including NBC) for being "Too Controversial." (Anti-abortion commercials during the superbowl? A-OK!).

I don't know if they've tried again recently. They may have felt the money was better spent helping people, after three advertisements were literally banned by the networks.
 
2013-12-04 03:18:05 PM  

FarkedOver: If this pope were genuinely concerned with the plight of the wealthy he would dump all the church's assets, property and gold and use the proceeds to enrich the flock.  This will never happen.  The pope is concerned with keeping parishioners numbers up!


Or, ya know, the pope could use the wealth of his church to better the lives of the poor and leverage secular organizations into doing good despite their desires to be selfish pricks....
 
2013-12-04 03:18:56 PM  
Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.
 
2013-12-04 03:20:05 PM  

unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.


It's amazing to watch, isn't it? One letter and the republicans had a full on melt down.
 
2013-12-04 03:21:01 PM  
I reiterate the point that you judge a man by the enemies he earns: this Pope is doing alright in my book.

Of course, this is coming from a Buddhist who attends Unitarian services, so take that for what you will...
 
2013-12-04 03:21:34 PM  

Weaver95: FarkedOver: If this pope were genuinely concerned with the plight of the wealthy poor he would dump all the church's assets, property and gold and use the proceeds to enrich the flock.  This will never happen.  The pope is concerned with keeping parishioners numbers up!

Or, ya know, the pope could use the wealth of his church to better the lives of the poor and leverage secular organizations into doing good despite their desires to be selfish pricks....


ugh thats what i meant.  I got rocked off my ass last night, cut me some slack.
 
2013-12-04 03:22:18 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Almost Everybody Poops: We will never completely eliminate poverty.Therefore we should cut all social welfare programs.

I think that is a TERRIBLE idea. I'm going to assume you are kidding.


Then what's the point of your question?
 
2013-12-04 03:22:29 PM  

unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.


Don't forget their largest constituency: Frightened dupes. The end of the Cold War and the gradual destigmatization of the left after the political left was driven completely into the ground for most of the 20th century is terrifying to a lot of these people who have had capitalist propaganda injected directly into their eyeballs for most of their lives.
 
2013-12-04 03:23:32 PM  

wildcardjack: Biff_Steel: The KGB? Really?

I know, field work was the job of the GRU.


"The physical appearance of the Marxism makes no difference. Now accept these cuts to social programs."
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-12-04 03:26:38 PM  
It is amazing to me how conservatives truly believe everything is either conservative or liberal. The Pope can't just be trying to do what Jesus wants.

Conservatives, why don't you just stop pretending you worship Jesus and make your own version of the Bible already?

Oh shiat!  You have already gone and done it.
 
2013-12-04 03:28:01 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: A 2006 poll by Time reported that 17 percent of Christians in America said they identified with the movement.

Which means that 83% (the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of Christians) are NOT Prosperity doctrine.

technicolor-misfit: In the late 2000s, proponents claimed that tens of millions of Christians had accepted prosperity theology.

I wonder if you likewise accept it as proven fact when people like Rush Limbaugh claim that most Americans are right-wing conservatives?

I do not.



You keep taking the criticisms that are clearly directed at "Conservative Christianity" and acting as if people are saying ALL Christians are like that.

They're just the most vocal and the most obnoxious. I know damn well there are a great many very good Christians in this country.

When someone criticizes Christians for doing X, then clearly Christians who don't do X should not take it personally.

I'm not going to delineate precisely which Christians I mean every goddamn time I make a point about the assholes... particularly when the "good ones" quite frankly aren't doing enough to make the distinction themselves.

How about instead of getting butthurt and shouting "not all Christians believe that!!!" when someone criticizes something like prosperity doctrine, maybe the good Christians should shout "bullshiat" when other Christians advocate crap like prosperity doctrine.

The conservatives are the ones who make the noise. They took the mic for Christianity in America and said "THIS is what Christianity is." And, until Pope Francis came along, there hasn't really been anyone in Christianity standing up to say "the hell it is!"

So, while there are a lot of good Christians who don't believe that bullshiat, maybe they ought to take issue with the ones who are preaching it and creating the perception, rather than other people who take note and criticize it.
 
2013-12-04 03:28:19 PM  

zetar: Big trouble in little Freepertown. The Rush / Pope Francis schism is causing some serious rifts:

"Rush and Sarah should mind their own business when it comes to our Pope.Let he without sin cast the first stone.Rush used drugs and Sarah's family is no longer threatened.Us Catholics will clean up the rest."

"We're in big effing trouble when we equate some radio entertainer's blabber to the Pope's Apostolic Exhortation."

"If the Pope told you to drink flavor aid mixed with cyanida, i am willing to bet the ultramontanists would follow. What slavish automatons they are..."

"Okay, now I'm PO'd at the pope again. His derisive reference to "trickle-down theories" is like something you'd see at Daily Kos. This can't be chalked up to a translational error."

"I have thought this would happen--he's flaky, incoherent, and South American "Liberation Theology" Jesuit. We are in trouble. "


If those words were food, they'd be the most delicious meal ever.
 
2013-12-04 03:28:26 PM  

unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.


The party at this point has given over to corporatists who pay some lip service to the Religious Right, and the last vestigages of the Cold Warriors who still think of Russia as our immediate enemies. They NEED Boogeymen to point to. Because otherwise folks might start looking too close to home, and we can't have that, can we?
 
2013-12-04 03:29:06 PM  

Serious Black: "In 1935, more than 50% of the elderly population lived in poverty. Today that poverty rate stands officially at 9.4%."


That is an interesting statistic, but it may not "prove" exactly what you think it proves. I am not arguing that Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are not good and worthwhile programs, but there is a causation/correlation issue that would have to accounted for, and a problem of metrics drift. The workforce has changed significantly in that time, for instance, so the number of women with no income is radically different then than it is today.

As your own link makes clear: "~~The U.S. Census Bureau did not begin tracking the poverty rate until 1959. On top of that, data for individuals aged 65 and older are not available for the years 1960 through 1965."

As a simple illustration, an elderly mother of the local bank owner in 1935 would register as having no income and therefore 'living in poverty', but her wealthy son bought her a home, and a maid and someone to cook her very nice meals every day. While an elderly woman today with Social security income and a modest pension left from her dead husband could be above the federal poverty line.

More important, and why your stat isn;t quite the proof I think you hope it would be is that that super high poverty rate includes people who relied on CHARITY for survival. "Dependent poverty among the old grew inexorably, from 23 percent in 1910 to 40 percent in 1930, and 50 percent in 1935." So there is a bit of a double count. Half of those 'in poverty' were being taken care of by private charity.

Again, not disputing at all that improvements have not been made, and no question that poverty is way down from the peak in the 30s. But as your own cite correctly points out "We found no official statistics for the rate of elderly poverty for the year 1935, only academic projections, and making apples-to-apples comparisons between eras is difficult."
 
2013-12-04 03:29:08 PM  

Weaver95: unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.

It's amazing to watch, isn't it? One letter and the republicans had a full on melt down.



It's like a bad dream. We could be doing so much better.
The propaganda from the GOP has completely rotted the minds of more than a few friends and family. It's like a bad 50s sci-fi movie.

Anecdote: The people I personally know who are proud to be GOP are the worst people I personally know. Judging by the direction of the party, this must be true all over the country.
 
2013-12-04 03:31:48 PM  
Huh? I thought that right-wingers love Putin now because he hates teh gheys. And Putin used to run the KGB.

/won't click on WND
 
2013-12-04 03:32:56 PM  

technicolor-misfit: I'm not going to delineate precisely which Christians I mean every goddamn time I make a point about the assholes... particularly when the "good ones" quite frankly aren't doing enough to make the distinction themselves.


Counter argument: There is A) Only so much they can do when the networks litterally ban their attempts to spread the message (asI pointed out earlier), and B) If they're good christians... they're not supposed to be *shouting* "I'M A CHRISTIAN!" when they're helping other people, or just, indeed, trying to live good lives. (The bible kind of explicitly frowns upon open displays of LOOK HOW PIOUS AND A GOOD CHRISTIAN I AM. .. .Yeah, the assholes kind of ignore that one, too.)
 
2013-12-04 03:33:20 PM  

zetar: Big trouble in little Freepertown. The Rush / Pope Francis schism is causing some serious rifts:

"Rush and Sarah should mind their own business when it comes to our Pope.Let he without sin cast the first stone.Rush used drugs and Sarah's family is no longer threatened.Us Catholics will clean up the rest."

"We're in big effing trouble when we equate some radio entertainer's blabber to the Pope's Apostolic Exhortation."

"If the Pope told you to drink flavor aid mixed with cyanida, i am willing to bet the ultramontanists would follow. What slavish automatons they are..."

"Okay, now I'm PO'd at the pope again. His derisive reference to "trickle-down theories" is like something you'd see at Daily Kos. This can't be chalked up to a translational error."

"I have thought this would happen--he's flaky, incoherent, and South American "Liberation Theology" Jesuit. We are in trouble. "


Once you start questioning the Religion of Supply Side Economics you're branded as a heretic.
 
2013-12-04 03:33:22 PM  

bmongar: It's sad that it is scary when the Pope preaches the philosophy of Jesus.


It's expected. America is an anti-Catholic country and always has been. When the big issue is something like Abortion, Catholics are made to feel welcome. When it comes down to issues of greed, pride, and selfishness, Catholics find themselves on the outside or forced to violate Catholic teachings. I was raised Catholic. I'm used to this crap. The problem was that, in the 1980s, the Catholics were a major group against abortion. What is not known is that traditional Catholic "right to life" is also anti-war, anti-capital punishment, pro-feed-the-poor, free clinics are wonderful, etc. Traditional, old-fashioned, ultra-conservative Catholic right-to-life is not just anti-abortion. However, the anti-abortion schtick played well, so Catholics were courted on that issue, while "social justice" was brushed under the rug. Conservatives thought that, since Catholics were all gung-ho against abortion, they'd be gung-ho Ameriprotestants the whole way. Conservatives are morons.

Now, the thing is that liberals are morons, too. Since the current Pope is bringing some old Catholic tropes back to the fore, they think he's "one of them". They're going to be in for a big disappointment. Fully traditional Catholic morals don't fit well into Ameriprotestant liberal/conservative pigeonholes.
 
2013-12-04 03:33:44 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.

Don't forget their largest constituency: Frightened dupes. The end of the Cold War and the gradual destigmatization of the left after the political left was driven completely into the ground for most of the 20th century is terrifying to a lot of these people who have had capitalist propaganda injected directly into their eyeballs for most of their lives.


no doubt, I know a couple of those...still even though many are acting out of fear, the shiat that comes out of their mouths is often indistinguishable from the shiat the sociopaths say.

Formerly decent people who for some reason have suddenly decided that the poor deserve to die from perfectly curable illnesses, because....I don't know, they deserve it I guess. It's fookin depressing.
 
2013-12-04 03:34:07 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Headso: yeah, how terrible

Not advocating. Just stating that they have a different worldview. And it's as valid as your or mine, whether we agree with it or not.


Oh, you mean like NAMBLA, or the American Nazi Party.
People with different, but valid, worldviews.
As valid as yours or mine. Whether we agree or not.
After all, how could I possibly summon the arrogance to think my worldview is more valid than a Nazi's, or a NAMBLA member's, or a member of some ignorant sect of bronze age primitives who want to stone gays and make abortion a crime again?
How DARE I?
 
2013-12-04 03:34:15 PM  

FarkedOver: I think your grasp of Marxism is very limited.


I know you do. But I also know you often struggle with addressing some fundamental questions about Marxism in practice, which suggests you are still at the data collection stage, and haven't reached the syncretism stage of knowledge yet. When you do, I suspect that you will, like so many of ahead of you have, realize why it's a broken ideology.

Or not. I'm happy to kick that ball around most days :)
 
2013-12-04 03:36:56 PM  

hubiestubert: unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.

The party at this point has given over to corporatists who pay some lip service to the Religious Right, and the last vestigages of the Cold Warriors who still think of Russia as our immediate enemies. They NEED Boogeymen to point to. Because otherwise folks might start looking too close to home, and we can't have that, can we?


Most of the asshat GOPers I know wouldn't fall under corporatists or cold warriors really...but they sure do get led around by the kind of BS both those groups push. They're selfish angry children.
 
2013-12-04 03:38:03 PM  

technicolor-misfit: So, while there are a lot of good Christians who don't believe that bullshiat, maybe they ought to take issue with the ones who are preaching it and creating the perception, rather than other people who take note and criticize it.


I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it.

But out of curiosity, what do you think the new Pope is DOING?
 

jso2897: After all, how could I possibly summon the arrogance to think my worldview is more valid than a Nazi's, or a NAMBLA member's, or a member of some ignorant sect of bronze age primitives who want to stone gays and make abortion a crime again?How DARE I?


You might want to slow your roll a little there, turbo. Take a deep breath, allow yourself to accept the beauty of the world and find peace in the miracle that is your existence.

And maybe not compare Christians we don't like with Nazis?
 
2013-12-04 03:38:52 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: FarkedOver: I think your grasp of Marxism is very limited.

I know you do. But I also know you often struggle with addressing some fundamental questions about Marxism in practice, which suggests you are still at the data collection stage, and haven't reached the syncretism stage of knowledge yet. When you do, I suspect that you will, like so many of ahead of you have, realize why it's a broken ideology.

Or not. I'm happy to kick that ball around most days :)


I think I am a little past the data collection stage.  I think where I get hung up on your questions is in the way you phrase them.
 
2013-12-04 03:45:31 PM  

unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.


This. I'm going to borrow this because you've put it perfectly.
 
2013-12-04 03:45:35 PM  

FarkedOver: I think where I get hung up on your questions is in the way you phrase them.


Very likely. But they are phrased the way they are on purpose. The difficulties you have had in answering them as asked is kinda the point. Many of them are the same questions I encountered as I began to understand why Marxism doesn't work.
 
2013-12-04 03:45:48 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: So, while there are a lot of good Christians who don't believe that bullshiat, maybe they ought to take issue with the ones who are preaching it and creating the perception, rather than other people who take note and criticize it.

I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it.

But out of curiosity, what do you think the new Pope is DOING?
 
jso2897: After all, how could I possibly summon the arrogance to think my worldview is more valid than a Nazi's, or a NAMBLA member's, or a member of some ignorant sect of bronze age primitives who want to stone gays and make abortion a crime again?How DARE I?

You might want to slow your roll a little there, turbo. Take a deep breath, allow yourself to accept the beauty of the world and find peace in the miracle that is your existence.

And maybe not compare Christians we don't like with Nazis?


The word "compare" does not mean to say that two things are the same. But I will no more axiomatically accept that a "Christian's" views are valid by my standards than I would a Nazi's.
I might find a self described Christian's views to be valid, I might not. I am not bound to respect anyone's views as valid. Neither are you, or anyone else, for that matter.
Certainly, any dispute between the Bible Thumpers and the Mackerel Snappers doesn't mean shiat to me - it's the equivalent of two stinkbugs fighting over a turd. But, like a boxing match or a football game, I'm still allowed to have an opinion.
 
2013-12-04 03:45:50 PM  
It's nice to see WND finally admit the KGB did some good.
 
2013-12-04 03:49:08 PM  

FarkedOver: If this pope were genuinely concerned with the plight of the wealthy he would dump all the church's assets, property and gold and use the proceeds to enrich the flock.  This will never happen.  The pope is concerned with keeping parishioners numbers up!



I've heard several people make this point and it's just childish low-hanging fruit. One man, even the Pope, can't single-handedly undo decades of institutional inertia with the wave of his hand.

It's just cheap cynicism masquerading as some sort of keen insight or shabby facade of wisdom

 "I can knock down anybody and criticize them no matter what they do! Because everything is bullshiat and you can't put one over on me!"
 
2013-12-04 03:51:34 PM  

technicolor-misfit: FarkedOver: If this pope were genuinely concerned with the plight of the wealthy he would dump all the church's assets, property and gold and use the proceeds to enrich the flock.  This will never happen.  The pope is concerned with keeping parishioners numbers up!


I've heard several people make this point and it's just childish low-hanging fruit. One man, even the Pope, can't single-handedly undo decades of institutional inertia with the wave of his hand.

It's just cheap cynicism masquerading as some sort of keen insight or shabby facade of wisdom

 "I can knock down anybody and criticize them no matter what they do! Because everything is bullshiat and you can't put one over on me!"


So they should live in opulence while most of their adherents live in abject poverty?  Ok.
 
2013-12-04 03:55:29 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Very likely. But they are phrased the way they are on purpose. The difficulties you have had in answering them as asked is kinda the point. Many of them are the same questions I encountered as I began to understand why Marxism doesn't work.


I understand your objective, but that doesn't help me answer a question that doesn't make sense.  I could attempt to answer some of your questions if I assumed you meant something that you didn't write, but I wouldn't put words into your mouth, it's not fair to the person asking the question or to the person answering a question.
 
2013-12-04 03:57:30 PM  

Tripp Johnston Private Eye: Felgraf: Tripp Johnston Private Eye: Felgraf: BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: If your moral philosophy suggests that poor people are that way because God is punishing them for being sinful wretches, then you might hate the poor just a little bit.

I am not aware of any religious denomination that teaches that. Nor have I ever encountered anyone who has said that. (I have, however, seen a lot of people who say that OTHER people believe that.)


You haven't encountered the prosperity gospel?

ARe you living under a rock?

/Hint: It god makes you rich because you are faithful/good, that kind of implies that if you're poor, you're just not being faithful/good enough.

I'm surprised he hasn't encountered it either; it stems logically from Calvin's ideas and is a non-fringe idea in mainstream Protestantism.

It also makes me frothingly *angry*. I'm not really sure I even count as a Christian anymore (I'm... not really sure WHAT I count as. Pratchettist?), but the prosperity gospel is such a perversion of the original work and message it just... really, really makes me angry. I think it in part has to do with the *willful* ignorance that must be part and parcel of it, since the bible rather explicitly states, repeatedly, *THAT IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY*.

I'm convinced some sort of Lovecraftian monstrosity from the darkest portion of the cosmos is manipulating the minds of American Christians into worshipping it while they still believe they are worshipping Christ.


Right after I read that I instantly thought that is exactly how Jesus describes Satan, deceiving those to follow a phony Jesus that rewards doers and performers. The real Jesus of the Bible says, My grace is sufficient. Republican Jesus says, perform and do good then I will reward you with a Cadillac.
 
2013-12-04 03:57:47 PM  

gshepnyc: unexplained bacon: Today's GOP is so full of the worst kind of people that even something so obvious as the pope calling for his followers to be generous and forgiving is seen as an attack on them.


think about that....

/sociopaths, liars, the mentally ill, and the ultra-rich
//looking forward to hearing all about it during your primaries. Speak up patriots, make sure everyone can hear you.

This. I'm going to borrow this because you've put it perfectly.


Have at it friend

They make it pretty easy to quantify just how terrible they are as Americans and human beings in general. I love it when they say just what they're thinking.
 
2013-12-04 04:01:07 PM  
netgamer7k:

Right after I read that I instantly thought that is exactly how Jesus describes Satan, deceiving those to follow a phony Jesus that rewards doers and performers. The real Jesus of the Bible says, My grace is sufficient. Republican Jesus says, perform and do good then I will reward you with a Cadillac.

Sola Fide
is also a corrupting influence that turns Christians into terrible people, who don't care about anyone else.  Prosperity gospel is a lesser crime than "faith alone" idiots, because it's fewer people.
 
2013-12-04 04:02:15 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Mikey1969: Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...

It's a telephonic mis-recounting of a popular saw in Republican circles - that the poor in America are better off than the poor in any other nation.

Which is still incorrect, but at least closer to the truth. The poor in America have it better than the poor in just about any other country, but we have more of them than the developed ones, and do less. Also, THEY'RE STILL FARKING POOR.


And, if the American poor have so much as a refrigerator, the right wing goes batshiat crazy.
 
2013-12-04 04:03:26 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: I've seen a disturbing number quoting Jesus as saying "The poor will always be with us." as evidence that we should end all social programs because none of them will ever help, or that Jesus was seriously insisting hat the poor will never take responsibility for themselves.


The last two popes and mother Teresa all believed that there would always be poor people, so there was no reason to do anything to improve their lot in life.  All you could do was salve their wounds and help them die well.
 
2013-12-04 04:03:32 PM  

ikanreed: netgamer7k:

Right after I read that I instantly thought that is exactly how Jesus describes Satan, deceiving those to follow a phony Jesus that rewards doers and performers. The real Jesus of the Bible says, My grace is sufficient. Republican Jesus says, perform and do good then I will reward you with a Cadillac.

Sola Fide is also a corrupting influence that turns Christians into terrible people, who don't care about anyone else.  Prosperity gospel is a lesser crime than "faith alone" idiots, because it's fewer people.


Oh, don't get me started on Faith Alone. Even if my own beliefs have drifted, I'm glad the church I grew up in felt that was a bullshiat distinction without a difference. "To Believe is to care. To care is to do." If you truly believe something is good/righteous, you will farking *do* it.

/they placed a lot of emphasis on doing good *because it's good*, not because you're afraid you'll go to hell, not for magic-jesus-afterlife points.
 
2013-12-04 04:05:38 PM  

netgamer7k: Right after I read that I instantly thought that is exactly how Jesus describes Satan, deceiving those to follow a phony Jesus that rewards doers and performers. The real Jesus of the Bible says, My grace is sufficient. Republican Jesus says, perform and do good then I will reward you with a Cadillac.


I have long felt that Osteen and his ilk have nothing to do with Christianity, except for a few pieces of scripture:

Mat 24:3-5,10-11 (NIV) ..."Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" Jesus answered, "Watch out that no one deceives you, for many will come in my name,.. At that time many will turn away from the faith... and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people."

Matthew 7:15-23  "Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will [a]know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will [c]know them by their fruits.

And ESPECIALLY:

2 Peter 2: "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
 
2013-12-04 04:06:15 PM  

jso2897: But I will no more axiomatically accept that a "Christian's" views are valid by my standards than I would a Nazi's.


Good for you. Aren't you just precious.
 
2013-12-04 04:07:39 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: The last two popes and mother Teresa all believed that there would always be poor people, so there was no reason to do anything to improve their lot in life.


I'm wondering if you have any handy quotes from them that support your understanding of them?
 
2013-12-04 04:08:48 PM  
 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat


 House Republicans narrowly pushed through a bill on Thursday that slashes billions of dollars from the food stamp program, over the objections of Democrats and a veto threat from President Obama. The bill, written under the direction of the House majority leader, Eric Cantor, Republican of Virginia, would cut $40 billion from the food stamp program over the next 10 years.   http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/us/politics/house-passes-bill-cutti n g-40-billion-from-food-stamps.html

 I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink

 Democrats spent much of Tuesday arguing against the cuts to WIC already included in the bill, and all can be expected to vote against further cuts.

Republicans also offered several amendments that would cut the Food for Peace program. Rep. Paul (R-Ariz.) proposed cutting it by $200 million, offered a separate amendment to cut it by $100 million, and Rep. Broun proposed zeroing out the program entirely, a $940 million cut.  Recorded votes on all of these are expected later Wednesday.Other votes are expected on amendments to cut $180 million from the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition program grants, and cut $175 million from the Foreign Agricultural Service. Both of these amendments are also from Broun.http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/166653-republicans -looking -to-gut-wic-food-programs-in-amendment-debate

 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in

In the House, though, and specifically among Republican members and the GOP base, the very idea of any kind of pathway to citizenship is seen as a deal killer for immigration reform. Based on the polling, though, it seems rather obvious that this is yet another issue where Republicans are out of step with the country as a whole.

GOP presidential contender Herman Cain walked back comments Sunday that he made a day earlier when he called for a deadly electric fence on the United States-Mexico border. "That's a joke," Cain said on NBC's "Meet the Press.   http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/16/electric-fence-remark - was-a-joke-cain-says/

I needed clothes and you did not clothe me

  COSTA MESA, Calif. -- Army veteran Don Matyja was getting by alright on the streets of this city tucked in Southern California suburbia until he got ticketed for smoking in the park. Matyja, who has been homeless since he was evicted nearly two years ago, had trouble paying the fine and getting to court - and now a $25 penalty has ballooned to $600.  The ticket is just one of myriad new challenges facing Matyja and others living on the streets in Orange County, where a number of cities have recently passed ordinances that ban everything from smoking in the park to sleeping in cars to leaning bikes against trees in a region better known for its beaches than its 30,000 homeless people.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/08/cities-homeless-regu lations-b udgets_n_1947719.html

In 2012, thanks to Republicans ending the tax break Michigan residents can receive for charitable giving, most people predicted that charitable giving would plummet. It wasn't a risky prediction, of course. It's common sense. It was a move made by the GOP to pay, in part, for a massive tax break they gave to corporations. Well, the results are in and, as predicted, the impact is having profound effects on the ability of Michigan's food pantries to keep up with ever increasing demands on their services.  http://www.eclectablog.com/2013/11/michigan-republicans-ending-of-tax - credits-for-charitable-giving-coming-home-to-roost.html

"Things like the federal shutdown and all of this wrangling in Washington over the debt ceiling aren't helping," Palmer said of the Chronicle's research. "Those kinds of things don't help people feel charitable or feel like giving as much as they gave in the past." Other findings included the growing significance of so-called "donor-advised-funds," like Fidelity Charitable, which have allowed rich philanthropists to "park" money and receive an immediate tax benefit even though the funds may not actually be given to a particular charity until weeks or months later.  http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-charitable-giving-2013 1 021,0,3104421.story#ixzz2mXeoGoAU

I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.

For all the wrong done during this stormy session of the General Assembly, the greatest wrong remains what lawmakers have chosen not to do: expand Medicaid.
Republicans who lead the legislature have balked out of spite. The expansion is a key part of President Obama's Affordable Care Act, and they want no part of "Obamacare." Republican Gov. Pat McCrory has said he would consider expansion after North Carolina's "broken" Medicaid system is fixed.
The Republicans' reasons for opting out vary, but the effect is same: A forgoing of federal funds that will leave many low-income people uninsured and will cost the state and hospitals more for uncompensated care. Those consequences did not stop North Carolina and 14 other states - all with Republican governors - from refusing to participate.http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/06/06/2944030/nc-needs-t o-look-again- at-medicaid.html#storylink=cpy

The folly and cruelty of refusing the Medicaid expansion have been much discussed. But the cost of also saying no to a state-run exchange has not been so apparent or much debated. Its effects didn't begin to materialize until last week, when Blue Cross and Blue Shield and Coventry Health Care posted their plans and premium prices on the North Carolina exchange being run by the federal government.Considering the meager competition - Blue Cross is the only statewide provider, and Coventry is offering plans in only 39 of the state's 100 counties - the premium prices are surprisingly reasonable after federal subsidies are included. But while rates may be affordable, it's harder to calculate how much may be missing from North Carolina plans compared with those at the same price in states that fully cooperated with the new law.http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/10/05/3256323/ncs-cost-of-obsti nance- of-obamacare.html#storylink=cpy

(August 2012) Since 2002, the United States has had the highest incarceration rate in the world. Although prison populations are increasing in some parts of the world, the natural rate of incarceration for countries comparable to the United States tends to stay around 100 prisoners per 100,000 population. The U.S. rate is 500 prisoners per 100,000 residents, or about 1.6 million prisoners in 2010, according to the latest available data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).  Men make up 90 percent of the prison and local jail population, and they have an imprisonment rate 14 times higher than the rate for women.2 And these men are overwhelmingly young: Incarceration rates are highest for those in their 20s and early 30s. Prisoners also tend to be less educated: The average state prisoner has a 10th grade education, and about 70 percent have not completed high school.3 Incarceration rates are significantly higher for blacks and Latinos than for whites. In 2010, black men were incarcerated at a rate of 3,074 per 100,000 residents; Latinos were incarcerated at 1,258 per 100,000, and white men were incarcerated at 459 per 100,000.http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2012/us-incarcerati on.aspx

"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' "He will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

"Then they will go away to eternal punishment
 
2013-12-04 04:10:08 PM  
Just to recap:

My wanting insurance policies to cover contraceptive medication... that's an assault on religious freedom.

Someone directly attacking the Pope himself... that's standing up for freedom!

Am I getting this right?
 
2013-12-04 04:10:27 PM  
STOP proselytizing! The bible commands you!

"When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. "But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you. "And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words....
 
2013-12-04 04:14:51 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: "In 1935, more than 50% of the elderly population lived in poverty. Today that poverty rate stands officially at 9.4%."

That is an interesting statistic, but it may not "prove" exactly what you think it proves. I am not arguing that Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are not good and worthwhile programs, but there is a causation/correlation issue that would have to accounted for, and a problem of metrics drift. The workforce has changed significantly in that time, for instance, so the number of women with no income is radically different then than it is today.

As your own link makes clear: "~~The U.S. Census Bureau did not begin tracking the poverty rate until 1959. On top of that, data for individuals aged 65 and older are not available for the years 1960 through 1965."

As a simple illustration, an elderly mother of the local bank owner in 1935 would register as having no income and therefore 'living in poverty', but her wealthy son bought her a home, and a maid and someone to cook her very nice meals every day. While an elderly woman today with Social security income and a modest pension left from her dead husband could be above the federal poverty line.

More important, and why your stat isn;t quite the proof I think you hope it would be is that that super high poverty rate includes people who relied on CHARITY for survival. "Dependent poverty among the old grew inexorably, from 23 percent in 1910 to 40 percent in 1930, and 50 percent in 1935." So there is a bit of a double count. Half of those 'in poverty' were being taken care of by private charity.

Again, not disputing at all that improvements have not been made, and no question that poverty is way down from the peak in the 30s. But as your own cite correctly points out "We found no official statistics for the rate of elderly poverty for the year 1935, only academic projections, and making apples-to-apples comparisons between eras is difficult."


Sure, there's no real way to prove that Social Security or Medicare actually caused that reduction in poverty, especially since there are no official numbers dating back to the 1930s. That's why I spelled out that we'd have to exclude other potential causes first. I think we can exclude private charity as a source of reducing that poverty. The rate of giving to charitable organizations has stubbornly remained right around 2% of GDP every year dating back to the 1960s. If we're specifically looking at those over 65, the work force participation rate for those people is almost certainly fairly steady and low dating all the way back to the 30s since most older people like retiring and may only have a part-time job at the most. That would suggest that paychecks from work are likely not the result of this decline.

As for whether the rate of poverty for the elderly back in the 1930s is correct, I don't think the exact number is all that relevant since nobody could possibly dispute that the elderly poverty rate was astronomical back then without being criminally insane.
 
2013-12-04 04:15:56 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: So, while there are a lot of good Christians who don't believe that bullshiat, maybe they ought to take issue with the ones who are preaching it and creating the perception, rather than other people who take note and criticize it.

I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it.



I'm not saying they have an obligation to take issue with them.

I'm saying that if they don't care enough to make the distinction when other Christians are LOUDLY and FREQUENTLY saying "this is what Christianity is," then they have much right to get all butthurt when other people don't take the time to make the distinction for them.

It's not "squelching" someone to offer a counter position. And it's a good idea because if you don't want people thinking "Christians believe X," then when a bunch of Christians are on TV saying "Christians totally believe X," then it's a good idea to say "No... not really."

The way it goes now is:

GUY 1: "Christians believe marriage is between a man and a woman! Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!!! We, as Christians, believe this country ought to stand strong against the homosexual agenda to subvert the sanctity of holy matrimony!!!"

GUY 2: "....."

GUY 1: "The Bible said 'the poor will be with us always.' You can't make poverty go away.. and it ain't the government's job to enforce Christian charity. It has to be done out of people's hearts. It don't mean nothing if it's enforced at the barrel of a gun!!!"

GUY 2: "...."

GUY 1: "Everything wrong with this country can be traced directly to taking God out of our schools! Until we put the Lord back at the center of our communities, in the heart of our schools and ask Him to look over our children each and every day, this country is going to remain on a road to ruin. What more important lesson can children learn in those classrooms than that of the love that their Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ has for them, and the sacrifice He made for them on the cross."

GUY 2: "...."

GUY 3: "Wow... Christians sure believe a lot of stupid shiat these days."

GUY 2: "NOT ALL CHRISTIANS THINK THAT WAY, ASSHOLE!!!!"


I'm not saying GUY 2 has an obligation to take GUY 1 to task. But, it sure is interesting that he doesn't have a problem taking GUY 3 to task.
 
2013-12-04 04:17:44 PM  
In fairness, there are Buddhists who follow their own version of the Prosperity Gospel, and figure that the poor and set upon were just bad people and it is their karma sorting itself out.

The Nichiren do their bit to make the teachings of the Dharma moot.

F*cking Nichiren...
 
2013-12-04 04:19:57 PM  

jake_lex: The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.


Newt Gingrich is going to have to switch religions again. Also it's probably about time for a new wife.
 
2013-12-04 04:20:58 PM  

FarkedOver: technicolor-misfit: FarkedOver: If this pope were genuinely concerned with the plight of the wealthy he would dump all the church's assets, property and gold and use the proceeds to enrich the flock.  This will never happen.  The pope is concerned with keeping parishioners numbers up!


I've heard several people make this point and it's just childish low-hanging fruit. One man, even the Pope, can't single-handedly undo decades of institutional inertia with the wave of his hand.

It's just cheap cynicism masquerading as some sort of keen insight or shabby facade of wisdom

 "I can knock down anybody and criticize them no matter what they do! Because everything is bullshiat and you can't put one over on me!"

So they should live in opulence while most of their adherents live in abject poverty?  Ok.


I hate to point this out but there are many thousands of people who have lived their lives in service of the Catholic Church. This includes those who have taken vows of poverty.
Were the Pope to divest the Church's assets he would leave these people literally homeless.

I understand your railing at the opulence of the Catholic Church but the immediacy of your solution would not result in the net gain you think.

Think of the Church as a job creator - only the employees take vows to work nowhere else for life, often to accept no salary, without any other safety net than what the Church provides upon retirement - which is generally somewhere between the ages of 80-90.

Similarly? The Pope has far less authority to divest of Church holdings than, say, a CEO. Unless you think putting the Shroud of Turin on E-bay to help feed the masses (for example - much of the wealth of the church is in priceless artifacts) wouldn't result in his immediate ouster as a heretic.

If you want to wish for something? why not hope that the library is made more public?
 
2013-12-04 04:21:59 PM  

FarkedOver: STOP proselytizing! The bible commands you!


Umm. Yeah. Actually, the bible is very clear that you are supposed to go out and spread the word of Jesus and proselytize. What you are reffering to is instruction on how to PRAY.

~~
Matthew 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mark 16:15
And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
Matthew 24:14  ESV
And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Psalm 96:3  ESV
Declare his glory among the nations, his marvelous works among all the peoples!
2 Timothy 3:16  ESV
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,


I could go on, there are many, MANY verses exhorting Christians to go forth and spread the word. I'm afraid you may misunderstand this point if you think proselytizing is 'unchristian' or against the teaching of the bible. Not really sure how you could have arrived at that misunderstanding.
 
2013-12-04 04:23:33 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: FarkedOver: STOP proselytizing! The bible commands you!

Umm. Yeah. Actually, the bible is very clear that you are supposed to go out and spread the word of Jesus and proselytize. What you are reffering to is instruction on how to PRAY.

~~
Matthew 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mark 16:15
And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
Matthew 24:14  ESV
And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Psalm 96:3  ESV
Declare his glory among the nations, his marvelous works among all the peoples!
2 Timothy 3:16  ESV
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

I could go on, there are many, MANY verses exhorting Christians to go forth and spread the word. I'm afraid you may misunderstand this point if you think proselytizing is 'unchristian' or against the teaching of the bible. Not really sure how you could have arrived at that misunderstanding.


Twas a joke haha
 
2013-12-04 04:24:37 PM  

parasol: Think of the Church as a job creator


Nope. I'll just want to make them suffer more.
 
2013-12-04 04:27:50 PM  
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy My brothers. And you will know My name is the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon thee."

--Ron Paul
 
2013-12-04 04:29:37 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: FarkedOver: STOP proselytizing! The bible commands you!

Umm. Yeah. Actually, the bible is very clear that you are supposed to go out and spread the word of Jesus and proselytize. What you are reffering to is instruction on how to PRAY.

~~
Matthew 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mark 16:15
And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
Matthew 24:14  ESV
And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Psalm 96:3  ESV
Declare his glory among the nations, his marvelous works among all the peoples!
2 Timothy 3:16  ESV
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

I could go on, there are many, MANY verses exhorting Christians to go forth and spread the word. I'm afraid you may misunderstand this point if you think proselytizing is 'unchristian' or against the teaching of the bible. Not really sure how you could have arrived at that misunderstanding.


I think I see the problem
Catholics do not proselytize

In fact? It's a fairly common "inside joke" we don't actually know the bible all that well and, really, we worship Mary.

In the minutia of Christianity Catholics are often looked at askance for our basic laziness regarding things biblical - and we are quite well known for beating it out of the parking lot on Sunday having done our bare minimum attendance.
 
2013-12-04 04:31:10 PM  

Serious Black: I don't think the exact number is all that relevant since nobody could possibly dispute that the elderly poverty rate was astronomical back then without being criminally insane.


I agree. My main observation is that there is a lack of concrete or conclusive evidence that "government" has substantively addressed the problem of poverty. At this point, there's no way of knowing. Government has been in the charity business for generations now. There is simply no way to untangle the myriad overlapping, complementary and contradictory effects of public and private poverty programs much less the changes in economy, workforce, demographics, migration, technology, and the whole myriad of contributing factors. Not to mention that the country was fundamentally different in the 30s than it is today.

We cannot say that private charity would have risen to the challenge in the absence of government social programs, nor can we say that it would not have.

What I *CAN* say is that contrary to a few Farker's comments upstream, we can say that government *IS* already in the charity and poverty business, and that the problem has not been 'fixed' by government.

Serious Black: The rate of giving to charitable organizations has stubbornly remained right around 2% of GDP every year dating back to the 1960s.


Isn't that about the time we started the "War on Poverty"?
 
2013-12-04 04:32:24 PM  

FarkedOver: Twas a joke haha


Woops. Sorry. The tone of the thread overall was interfering with my sensors.
 
2013-12-04 04:33:43 PM  

parasol: I think I see the problem
Catholics do not proselytize

In fact? It's a fairly common "inside joke" we don't actually know the bible all that well and, really, we worship Mary.

In the minutia of Christianity Catholics are often looked at askance for our basic laziness regarding things biblical - and we are quite well known for beating it out of the parking lot on Sunday having done our bare minimum attendance.


I was raised catholic.  It was fun because my parents wanted to get the fark out of church as fast as possible just as badly as I did.  We never discussed the bible or religion in the house and during lent, friday was pizza night! WOO HOO!
 
2013-12-04 04:34:42 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: What I *CAN* say is that contrary to a few Farker's comments upstream, we can say that government *IS* already in the charity and poverty business, and that the problem has not been 'fixed' by government.


It sure as hell has lessened the social harm, and your ignorance of that is a testament to how much improved poverty is in the U.S. today because of it.

You're like the people who don't get vaccines for their children because they've never seen the pre-vaccine world.
 
2013-12-04 04:36:06 PM  

FarkedOver: parasol: Think of the Church as a job creator

Nope. I'll just want to make them suffer more.


So? Taking a vow of poverty, chastity and obedience for life based on nothing but faith in order to (maybe) work with the sick, the young, the dying - and often in places far from home - isn't enough suffering?

I mean, as a gig, it isn't the same as working for Microsoft or NASA but, there are people who choose that path - give them some credit - even if it is "man, not for me at all, tyvm"
 
2013-12-04 04:39:43 PM  
ikanreed: ~~It sure as hell has lessened the social harm, and your ignorance of that is a testament to ...

You might want to step back and take a look around, maybe read what has been posted, get a feel for what's going on before you just jump in making assumptions about whose ignorant of what. It will prevent you from looking silly.

ikanreed: You're like the people who don't get vaccines for their children because they've never seen the pre-vaccine world.

Oh. I see. You are one of those. You don't even ATTEMPT to have something to base your comments on. Just find a recent post and start jumping in spewing made-up nonsense willy-nilly hoping to get someone to pay attention to you.

Do you know what a seagull is? A seagull is a bird-brained creature who swoops in uninvited and makes a lot of meaningless noise while crapping all over the place. Can you guess why I bring that up?
 
2013-12-04 04:40:09 PM  

FarkedOver: parasol: I think I see the problem
Catholics do not proselytize

In fact? It's a fairly common "inside joke" we don't actually know the bible all that well and, really, we worship Mary.

In the minutia of Christianity Catholics are often looked at askance for our basic laziness regarding things biblical - and we are quite well known for beating it out of the parking lot on Sunday having done our bare minimum attendance.

I was raised catholic.  It was fun because my parents wanted to get the fark out of church as fast as possible just as badly as I did.  We never discussed the bible or religion in the house and during lent, friday was pizza night! WOO HOO!


:)
I have clear memories of tromping around flowerbeds in patent leather church shoes waiting for the grown-ups to finish talking so we could go eat pancakes after mass
(also sang in the choir for a few years much later)
 
2013-12-04 04:40:49 PM  

tinderfitles: jake_lex: meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.

Yeah, that's the thing that strikes me here.  What Pope Francis is proposing here is not radical in any sense: he's just saying "Let's refocus our energy on what is important and vital in Christianity and not so much on gays and/or abortion."   It just shows how many people would rather just derp about the gays than actually have to do something that might require them to help out the poors.

Personally I think its less of Pope Francis being a genuinely "good guy" and more of a schism between the loose coalition of catholics/christians here. Think about how for the last thirty years, catholic and christians have been rather united, especially looking back and seeing how there was a very real segment of protestants afraid of a catholic president (JFK). So all of these Mega-Church preachers/politicians realize that while they have operated with the unspoken consent of The Roman Catholic Church, for the first time there is actually friction between the two power bases and it has scared the shiat out of them. So how do they attempt to keep their power base (and more importantly money) flowing? Attempt to isolate the pope by using political rhetoric like calling him a liberal.


Catholics are Christians. I'm not sure what you mean by Catholics/Christians. Who do you think that guy on the cross is? True, the American cardinals and bishops have been acting more like fundamentalists in their political stances, and this Pope is not. But in what universe are Catholics not Christian?
 
2013-12-04 04:41:44 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: ikanreed: ~~It sure as hell has lessened the social harm, and your ignorance of that is a testament to ...

You might want to step back and take a look around, maybe read what has been posted, get a feel for what's going on before you just jump in making assumptions about whose ignorant of what. It will prevent you from looking silly.

ikanreed: You're like the people who don't get vaccines for their children because they've never seen the pre-vaccine world.

Oh. I see. You are one of those. You don't even ATTEMPT to have something to base your comments on. Just find a recent post and start jumping in spewing made-up nonsense willy-nilly hoping to get someone to pay attention to you.

Do you know what a seagull is? A seagull is a bird-brained creature who swoops in uninvited and makes a lot of meaningless noise while crapping all over the place. Can you guess why I bring that up?


because you looked in a mirror?
you do have a way of nattering on sometimes BP
 
2013-12-04 04:42:22 PM  
several of my favorite Latin Americans are named Jesus
 
2013-12-04 04:45:27 PM  

parasol: you do have a way of nattering on sometimes BP


Perhaps. Often as a result of a pronounced tendency to respond to people who address me directly.

But as I often and frequently say, I urge anyone who doesn't want to read my posts to use the Ignore function. I won't be offended, and it's probably best for everyone.
 
2013-12-04 04:47:29 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: The rate of giving to charitable organizations has stubbornly remained right around 2% of GDP every year dating back to the 1960s.

Isn't that about the time we started the "War on Poverty"?


Yes. However, I lack any credible numbers about how much money Americans gave to charity before the 1960s, so that is a limiting factor.
 
2013-12-04 04:50:08 PM  

parasol: BojanglesPaladin: FarkedOver: STOP proselytizing! The bible commands you!

Umm. Yeah. Actually, the bible is very clear that you are supposed to go out and spread the word of Jesus and proselytize. What you are reffering to is instruction on how to PRAY.

~~
Matthew 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mark 16:15
And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
Matthew 24:14  ESV
And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Psalm 96:3  ESV
Declare his glory among the nations, his marvelous works among all the peoples!
2 Timothy 3:16  ESV
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

I could go on, there are many, MANY verses exhorting Christians to go forth and spread the word. I'm afraid you may misunderstand this point if you think proselytizing is 'unchristian' or against the teaching of the bible. Not really sure how you could have arrived at that misunderstanding.

I think I see the problem
Catholics do not proselytize

In fact? It's a fairly common "inside joke" we don't actually know the bible all that well and, really, we worship Mary.

In the minutia of Christianity Catholics are often looked at askance for our basic laziness regarding things biblical - and we are quite well known for beating it out of the parking lot on Sunday having done our bare minimum attendance.


Looking at the Fundamentalists, not turning the Bible into a graven image to worship above God's Creations seems sort of smart.
 
2013-12-04 04:51:15 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: parasol: you do have a way of nattering on sometimes BP

Perhaps. Often as a result of a pronounced tendency to respond to people who address me directly.

But as I often and frequently say, I urge anyone who doesn't want to read my posts to use the Ignore function. I won't be offended, and it's probably best for everyone.


I would not put you on ignore - it isn't of any value
Forgive my being curt but I was dismayed that you seem unfamiliar with the growing popularity of the prosperity gospel as a justification to marginalize the poor

This Pope - so far - seems headed into a new territory that will require more self-examination and less assumptive judgement - it will likely be uncomfortable for many
 
2013-12-04 04:54:11 PM  

odinsposse: jake_lex: The Republicans just don't want that Catholic vote, do they.

They really, really do actually. That's why they are backing the Catholic universities fighting against contraception coverage in the ACA. Catholics are pretty closely split between Republicans and Democrats so it's a not-impossible population for them to capture.

The problem is that straight Catholic doctrine is not ideologically pure enough for Republicans. The official doctrine opposes abortion and gay marriage, which they like, but it also supports unions, opposes the death penalty, advocates for the poor, and discourages warmongering.

Like most religious people Catholics usually pick and choose what parts of their faith they follow and what they pay attention to. Republicans would like Catholics to pay attention to the parts they like but the Pope is drawing focus to the parts they don't like. It will be interesting to see how they deal with it because there doesn't seem to be a good way to blow off the Pope without hurting the support they currently have with Catholics.


I still think that the pope might get killed by some nutter that thinks he's lying about Jeebus teachings.

Seriously. He's just preaching the gospels. I know, it's the parts you don't like. The parts that show prosperity gospel (in particular) to be heresy. Trick being, your ancestors chose to be heretics. STFU and own the heresy.
 
2013-12-04 04:54:49 PM  

DeaH: Looking at the Fundamentalists, not turning the Bible into a graven image to worship above God's Creations seems sort of smart.


i.usatoday.net

Seen above: Irony.
 
2013-12-04 05:11:44 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: jso2897: But I will no more axiomatically accept that a "Christian's" views are valid by my standards than I would a Nazi's.

Good for you. Aren't you just precious.


We are all precious. But nobody gets a blank check from me - not even Christians. Sorry.
 
2013-12-04 05:16:03 PM  

DeaH: tinderfitles: jake_lex: meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.

Just leave the jackboots at home when you come for the non-believers please.  They are so unflattering to the full waisted figures that are the epitome of American Christianity.

Yeah, that's the thing that strikes me here.  What Pope Francis is proposing here is not radical in any sense: he's just saying "Let's refocus our energy on what is important and vital in Christianity and not so much on gays and/or abortion."   It just shows how many people would rather just derp about the gays than actually have to do something that might require them to help out the poors.

Personally I think its less of Pope Francis being a genuinely "good guy" and more of a schism between the loose coalition of catholics/christians here. Think about how for the last thirty years, catholic and christians have been rather united, especially looking back and seeing how there was a very real segment of protestants afraid of a catholic president (JFK). So all of these Mega-Church preachers/politicians realize that while they have operated with the unspoken consent of The Roman Catholic Church, for the first time there is actually friction between the two power bases and it has scared the shiat out of them. So how do they attempt to keep their power base (and more importantly money) flowing? Attempt to isolate the pope by using political rhetoric like calling him a liberal.

Catholics are Christians. I'm not sure what you mean by Catholics/Christians. Who do you think that guy on the cross is? True, the American cardinals and bishops have been acting more like fundamentalists in their political stances, and this Pope is not. But in what universe are Catholics not Christian?


I suppose I should clear that up. When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic". So in conversation I just take a step back to the most general form possible. Coming from the south its the only real way to not offend people because people might be baptist, protestant, non-denominational, etc while still discussing differences among theology.
 
2013-12-04 05:18:11 PM  
I for one love the trolly nature of the new Pope and how he's basically hijacked Catholic teaching which was too heavily focused on social issues like gay marriage and abortions, and started to steer the focus back to actually helping people instead of trying to pretend to be Protestants in fancy outfits.

The fact that the Catholic leadership here in this country seems to be ignoring that and continuing on with their regular derp is why I've taken the Catholic Church less seriously in recent years.
 
2013-12-04 05:18:59 PM  

parasol: Forgive my being curt but I was dismayed that you seem unfamiliar with the growing popularity of the prosperity gospel as a justification to marginalize the poor


I am, sadly, familiar. I pass by Osteen's 'Oasis of Love' every day. However, I do not consider them to be a valid denomination of Christianity, but rather a secular movement robed in scriptural snippets. They lack a coherent doctrine, theology, or dogma. They are 'Christian' in exactly the same way that the Klu Klux Klan is 'Christian', or North Korea is 'democratic'. (In my opinion, obviously). My original comment was clarifying that no official Christian denomination holds with this 'Prosperity Doctrine' nonsense, but I recognize that this was not clear, because many mistakenly  assumed that I was arguing that NO ONE believed this.

By now, my posts should be clear that I have nothing but contempt for 'prosperity doctrinists'. More to the point, I consider them to be as good an example of "False Prophets" as we are likely to see in the world today. I forced myself to sit through three of Osteen's 'sermons' because I believe I should not jump to conclusions, and that I should give it a fair shake. It's not Christianity, it is a corruption of Christianity. It's not even really Christian-ISH. It's Tony Robbins feel-goodism with scriptural excerpts.
 
2013-12-04 05:20:01 PM  

jso2897: But nobody gets a blank check from me - not even Christians. Sorry


Awesome. I did not know that Christians had asked you for one.
 
2013-12-04 05:21:53 PM  

tinderfitles: while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".


Protestant. That word is Protestant.


/yes, yes, Eastern Orthodox, but for most practical purposes, Protestant is the word for "Not Catholic".
 
2013-12-04 05:23:25 PM  

tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".


You have never heard the term "Protestant"?
 
2013-12-04 05:27:18 PM  
The KGB must have invented a time machine too, and must have been secretly mind-controlling Jesus when he said all that stuff about helping the poor and sick.
 
2013-12-04 05:32:05 PM  

DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?


Not all non Roman Catholic Christians are Protestsant. Eastern Orthodox being the largest example
 
2013-12-04 05:38:04 PM  

skullkrusher: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

Not all non Roman Catholic Christians are Protestsant. Eastern Orthodox being the largest example


Most Catholics I know consider non Catholic Christians as Protestants, even if the Eastern Orthodox split early and are not "Protestants".  Not saying they're right, just how they use it

Mormons aren't considered Protestant though, they're Mormons.
 
2013-12-04 05:41:20 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: jso2897: But nobody gets a blank check from me - not even Christians. Sorry

Awesome. I did not know that Christians had asked you for one.


You did, when you suggested that I should accept their doctrines as "valid", sight unseen.
Are you now arguing with your own self?
Are you forgetting how we got here? You said that we all should accept the views of fundamentalist Christians as being as valid as our own, even if we disagree with them.
 I responded that I would not extend that carte balnche to fundamentalists, Nazis, child molesters or anyone else. In short, that I regard someone's views as being valid or invalid based upon what those views actually are, and nothing else.
And again - i don't give anybody that blank check. Why would I?
 
2013-12-04 05:41:22 PM  

DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?


You ever try calling a group of Southern Baptist protestants? I know its the technical term, but regionally in the south people get extremely pissy if you don't refer to their denominations correctly even if it is the "Non-Unified first baptist church of the holy word of god and jesus christ armed with the sword of Joshua, Number one gator hater council of 1925". So I just side step the issue with using the generality that all people accept, even though it is technically incorrect when referring to specifics. It allows a discussion to take place without everyone getting angry because you called the House of Go Dawgs Sick 'em protestant. 

Talking religion in the south is like walking on eggshells, so generally I do what I can to avoid any agitation before the conversation even begins. Because that will come later when you start discussing sacraments.
 
2013-12-04 05:41:31 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: tinderfitles: while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

Protestant. That word is Protestant.


/yes, yes, Eastern Orthodox, but for most practical purposes, Protestant is the word for "Not Catholic".


EO is the 2nd largest Christian sect after RC
 
2013-12-04 05:46:56 PM  

meat0918: skullkrusher: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

Not all non Roman Catholic Christians are Protestsant. Eastern Orthodox being the largest example

Most Catholics I know consider non Catholic Christians as Protestants, even if the Eastern Orthodox split early and are not "Protestants".  Not saying they're right, just how they use it

Mormons aren't considered Protestant though, they're Mormons.


In the US that's probably a safe simplification but not globally. Plus there are non-Roman Catholic Catholic sects in communion with the Bishop of Rome (old Frannie boy) as well as others which call themselves Catholic but aren't like the Church of Ireland
 
2013-12-04 05:48:54 PM  

skullkrusher: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

Not all non Roman Catholic Christians are Protestsant. Eastern Orthodox being the largest example


Eastern Orthodox considers Catholics protestants, but Eastern Orthodox is not a big mover and shaker in the United States. Certainly, they certainly do not fall under the umbrella of the conservative Christian groups that the American Catholic church seemed to be like before the current pope, which was how the OP was using the term. Those groups are correctly described as Protestant (although the more liberal Protestants like to call themselves Mainline Protestants). I would even argue that the group of people that the OP was referring to as Christians were actually Conservative Fundamentalists.
 
2013-12-04 05:55:36 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: tinderfitles: while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

Protestant. That word is Protestant.


/yes, yes, Eastern Orthodox, but for most practical purposes, Protestant is the word for "Not Catholic".


You beat me to it by one post. And, yes, Eastern churches are different. Somehow, I doubt he was talking about Eastern Orthodox or the Coptics.
 
2013-12-04 05:56:44 PM  

DeaH: skullkrusher: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

Not all non Roman Catholic Christians are Protestsant. Eastern Orthodox being the largest example

Eastern Orthodox considers Catholics protestants, but Eastern Orthodox is not a big mover and shaker in the United States. Certainly, they certainly do not fall under the umbrella of the conservative Christian groups that the American Catholic church seemed to be like before the current pope, which was how the OP was using the term. Those groups are correctly described as Protestant (although the more liberal Protestants like to call themselves Mainline Protestants). I would even argue that the group of people that the OP was referring to as Christians were actually Conservative Fundamentalists.


EO do not consider Roman Catholics to be Protestant. The Protestant sects came as a result of the Reformation when they broke from the RC Church.

The Catholic Church has long been a bunch of socialists in dresses. There's almost a century of papal writings that would make the leftiest lefty blush. The change the current Pope has brought is to focus less on issues like abortion and gay marriage (two things he still opposes, btw) and instead focus on more important things like poverty, disease and the elderly. It's a shift in focus, not teaching.
 
2013-12-04 06:00:43 PM  

ikanreed: BojanglesPaladin: What I *CAN* say is that contrary to a few Farker's comments upstream, we can say that government *IS* already in the charity and poverty business, and that the problem has not been 'fixed' by government.

It sure as hell has lessened the social harm, and your ignorance of that is a testament to how much improved poverty is in the U.S. today because of it.

You're like the people who don't get vaccines for their children because they've never seen the pre-vaccine world.


This also fails to acknowledge that one of our two major political parties has been utterly committed to deliberately sabotaging the government's efforts for over four decades in an attempt to prove an ideological point and to foster hatred of the government itself.

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" - Ronald Reagan

Who sabotages private charity? People are free to give as much as they want, however they want. And when they do, people applaud and say "attaboy! Way to go!"

In fact, if private charity were a remotely successful solution, we wouldn't even be having the conversation. The problem wouldn't exist in any meaningful way for government to address.

Obviously, it's not a solvable problem. It's something of a game of Whac-a-mole. But we could sure as shiat be doing a hell of a lot better on it.
 
2013-12-04 06:02:46 PM  

tinderfitles: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

You ever try calling a group of Southern Baptist protestants? I know its the technical term, but regionally in the south people get extremely pissy if you don't refer to their denominations correctly even if it is the "Non-Unified first baptist church of the holy word of god and jesus christ armed with the sword of Joshua, Number one gator hater council of 1925". So I just side step the issue with using the generality that all people accept, even though it is technically incorrect when referring to specifics. It allows a discussion to take place without everyone getting angry because you called the House of Go Dawgs Sick 'em protestant. 

Talking religion in the south is like walking on eggshells, so generally I do what I can to avoid any agitation before the conversation even begins. Because that will come later when you start discussing sacraments.


If Baptists don't like being called Protestants, then they must hate being lumped in with other Christians, too, eh? It is extremely offensive to refer to Catholics as something other than Christian - and it is meant to be offensive. Many Baptists think the Catholic Church is the Devil's agent on Earth. "Papistry" is seen as something negative and anti-Christian. If you want to avoid offending the Baptists, perhaps you could say Protestants and Baptists if they need some sort of call out? You will, however, insult every Catholic (and there are a lot of them) and most Protestants if you refer to Catholics as something other than Christian.
 
2013-12-04 06:03:17 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it.

But out of curiosity, what do you think the new Pope is DOING?




Is this copy-pasta that you vomit up anytime someone points out that if good Christians take offense to being lumped in with loud-mouth assholes Christians, then maybe they should denounce said loud-mouth asshole Christians with the same fervor with which they whine about being lumped in with them?

Yes, the new pope is finally doing this, and I hope that mentality takes hold here in the US as well, where we have some of the loudest-mouth asshole Christians on the planet.
 
2013-12-04 06:06:25 PM  
...and of course, one of the best ways we could be "doing a hell of a lot better on it" is by not allowing business and the wealthy to run buck-farking-wild pressing their advantage and creating so many people who need "charity" to begin with.
 
2013-12-04 06:10:58 PM  

skullkrusher: DeaH: skullkrusher: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

Not all non Roman Catholic Christians are Protestsant. Eastern Orthodox being the largest example

Eastern Orthodox considers Catholics protestants, but Eastern Orthodox is not a big mover and shaker in the United States. Certainly, they certainly do not fall under the umbrella of the conservative Christian groups that the American Catholic church seemed to be like before the current pope, which was how the OP was using the term. Those groups are correctly described as Protestant (although the more liberal Protestants like to call themselves Mainline Protestants). I would even argue that the group of people that the OP was referring to as Christians were actually Conservative Fundamentalists.

EO do not consider Roman Catholics to be Protestant. The Protestant sects came as a result of the Reformation when they broke from the RC Church.

The Catholic Church has long been a bunch of socialists in dresses. There's almost a century of papal writings that would make the leftiest lefty blush. The change the current Pope has brought is to focus less on issues like abortion and gay marriage (two things he still opposes, btw) and instead focus on more important things like poverty, disease and the elderly. It's a shift in focus, not teaching.


Actually, I have a number of EO friends. It's a running gag that with them that the first protestants were the Catholics. It's part of the idea that Christianity began in the East and the Romans broke away. The actual, official name of the Eastern Orthodox Church is "Orthodox Catholic Church." Now, do they consider them protestants the way the term is used in the the West? No. They are not stupid.

Protestant is, however, the correct term for a person who was talking about conservative, evangelical Protestant churches. It is always incorrect to say Catholics compared to Christians.

/And I am deeply disappointed you did not mention Copts.
 
2013-12-04 06:16:59 PM  

guestguy: Is this copy-pasta that you vomit up anytime someone points out that if good Christians take offense to being lumped in with loud-mouth assholes Christians, then maybe they should denounce said loud-mouth asshole Christians...


Two people in this thread made the exact same dumb-ass argument, so I saved myself some typing, yes. It's a dumb-ass argument, so the less time spent on it the better.

DeaH: Somehow, I doubt he was talking about Eastern Orthodox or the Coptics.


THANK YOU! I couldn't think of the other big one. Coptics. I knew that, just couldn't shake it out of my brain. Now I can sleep tonight.
 
2013-12-04 06:17:15 PM  

Chummer45: The KGB must have invented a time machine too, and must have been secretly mind-controlling Jesus when he said all that stuff about helping the poor and sick.


That was Obama's magical time machine piloted by Pope Francis this time, who forced Supply Side Jesus to become socialist with funding from the Holy See and George Soros. Michelle Obama was also the Virgin Mary after being the Doctor's companion on the Tardis, which is why so many leftist socialist marxist European countries have "Black Madonnas" in this timeline.

Study it out.
 
2013-12-04 06:20:04 PM  

Weaver95: Rev. Skarekroe: They're actually scared of this guy, aren't they?

Yes, very much so. Pope Francis is someone the evangelicals are terrified of having to confront.


Because he worships Jesus the way he is depicted in the bible instead of the pro-capitalism, greedy, gun-toting, gay-bashing Jesus that the Evangelicals made up.  If somebody doesn't stop this Pope, Catholics are going to become downright reasonable, level headed.
 
2013-12-04 06:20:24 PM  

tinderfitles: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

You ever try calling a group of Southern Baptist protestants? I know its the technical term, but regionally in the south people get extremely pissy if you don't refer to their denominations correctly even if it is the "Non-Unified first baptist church of the holy word of god and jesus christ armed with the sword of Joshua, Number one gator hater council of 1925". So I just side step the issue with using the generality that all people accept, even though it is technically incorrect when referring to specifics. It allows a discussion to take place without everyone getting angry because you called the House of Go Dawgs Sick 'em protestant. 

Talking religion in the south is like walking on eggshells, so generally I do what I can to avoid any agitation before the conversation even begins. Because that will come later when you start discussing sacraments.


I could swear you live a few houses down from me. With, of course, three churches between us.
 
2013-12-04 06:25:13 PM  

ikanreed: ikanreed: Did everyone else see their might-as-well-be-KKK race-baiting "deal of the day" book on the sidebar?

Holy shiat.  How can you get more racist than "White girl bleed a lot"?

With a subtitle transcribing loosely as "how black people are going to kill a bunch of white people any day now."  But don't you dare call them racist.

Oh, and of course it turns out WND is publishing that book themselves.  Damned racists.


Could you post it? I don't want to give Weird Nuts Daily another hit.
/Wait, I thought that commies hated religion?
 
2013-12-04 06:30:20 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Mikey1969: Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...

I think he means poor Americans are better off than poor people anywhere else. Which is patently absurd and also ignores the fact that that poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.


Poor people in America DO, in fact, MOSTLY live better than the poor anywhere else; when you consider that the standard for "poverty" according to whichever UN agency does that kind of calculating bases it on an income of "a dollar a day [US]). So most poor in America live in relative comfort compared to, say, shantytown dwellers in Mumbai or favela residents in Rio, who are scraping by on a per capita annual income of $300 a year in tin shacks with dirt floors.

That said, it's not like dirt-floored tin-roofed shacks for all is exactly a target we should be aiming for; and it's not because "capitalism works" either; it's because DEMOCRACY works. (Or really, it's because large-coalitiion politics works, but that's a minor distinction)
 
2013-12-04 06:30:23 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: guestguy: Is this copy-pasta that you vomit up anytime someone points out that if good Christians take offense to being lumped in with loud-mouth assholes Christians, then maybe they should denounce said loud-mouth asshole Christians...

Two people in this thread made the exact same dumb-ass argument, so I saved myself some typing, yes. It's a dumb-ass argument, so the less time spent on it the better.



Yes...

"If you're angry that mean-spirited jackholes are taking control of your religion's public image, you should probably tell THEM to get bent instead of getting angry with the people who react to them."

...such a stupid argument.

as evidenced by the incredibly positive response the new Pope has received by doing exactly that.

Maybe all those good AMERICAN Christians should have farking done it years ago.
 
2013-12-04 06:32:07 PM  

FarkedOver: simplicimus: FarkedOver: SovietCanuckistan: Communism does not equal Socialism. Socialism does not equal Communism

Sincerely,

Progressive Northern Countries Around the Globe with Awesome Socialized Governments and Higher Living Standards

Mixed economies do not equal socialism.

The goal of socialism is communism.

Sincerely,

A Socialist

Odd goal there, communism. A system that has demonstrably failed wherever attempted.

Socialism has been attempted.  Communism has not.


You're trying to sell us on a cross-country all-summer road trip, when everyone's seen your car engine repeatedly catch fire when it's driven more than a few blocks. Yeah, that'd be a sweet trip... too bad it'll never actually happen.
 
2013-12-04 06:36:49 PM  

Gyrfalcon: A Dark Evil Omen: Mikey1969: Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...

I think he means poor Americans are better off than poor people anywhere else. Which is patently absurd and also ignores the fact that that poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.

Poor people in America DO, in fact, MOSTLY live better than the poor anywhere else; when you consider that the standard for "poverty" according to whichever UN agency does that kind of calculating bases it on an income of "a dollar a day [US]). So most poor in America live in relative comfort compared to, say, shantytown dwellers in Mumbai or favela residents in Rio, who are scraping by on a per capita annual income of $300 a year in tin shacks with dirt floors.

That said, it's not like dirt-floored tin-roofed shacks for all is exactly a target we should be aiming for; and it's not because "capitalism works" either; it's because DEMOCRACY works. (Or really, it's because large-coalitiion politics works, but that's a minor distinction)



So, what you're really saying is... poor people in America live better than poor "anywhere else" as long as we don't include other first world nations?

But hey, compared to banana republics, barren deserts, and third-world shiatholes, we're the tops!
 
2013-12-04 06:41:15 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.


Poverty is the default human condition. It wasn't some scheme dreamed up by the bourgeoisie.
 
2013-12-04 06:42:38 PM  

Gyrfalcon: That said, it's not like dirt-floored tin-roofed shacks for all is exactly a target we should be aiming for; and it's not because "capitalism works" either; it's because DEMOCRACY works. (Or really, it's because large-coalitiion politics works, but that's a minor distinction)


So people can just vote themselves wealthy?
 
2013-12-04 06:43:38 PM  

technicolor-misfit: ...such a stupid argument.as evidenced by the incredibly positive response the new Pope has received by doing exactly that.


Perhaps you have noticed that what the Pope is NOT doing is telling other Christian denominations that they are 'doing it wrong'?

So. Again. I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea...
 
2013-12-04 06:44:18 PM  

Mikey1969: According to Lt. Gen. Ion Pacepa, the Soviet communist-led idea of "social justice" was infiltrated successfully by the KGB into Latin America's Catholic Church as a religious movement called "liberation theology." The goal was to "incite Latin America's poor to rebel against the 'institutionalized violence of poverty' generated by the United States." (Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, "Disinformation," WND Books, 2013)

Look, the reference they cite is one of their OWN books...


Which is named Disinformation, unironically.
 
2013-12-04 06:45:16 PM  

DeaH: skullkrusher: DeaH: skullkrusher: DeaH: tinderfitles: When I typed "Catholics" I generally refer to Roman Catholics, while "Christian" I use as a general term for everything else because there is no real blanket term for the rest of denominations that isn't "Not Roman Catholic".

You have never heard the term "Protestant"?

Not all non Roman Catholic Christians are Protestsant. Eastern Orthodox being the largest example

Eastern Orthodox considers Catholics protestants, but Eastern Orthodox is not a big mover and shaker in the United States. Certainly, they certainly do not fall under the umbrella of the conservative Christian groups that the American Catholic church seemed to be like before the current pope, which was how the OP was using the term. Those groups are correctly described as Protestant (although the more liberal Protestants like to call themselves Mainline Protestants). I would even argue that the group of people that the OP was referring to as Christians were actually Conservative Fundamentalists.

EO do not consider Roman Catholics to be Protestant. The Protestant sects came as a result of the Reformation when they broke from the RC Church.

The Catholic Church has long been a bunch of socialists in dresses. There's almost a century of papal writings that would make the leftiest lefty blush. The change the current Pope has brought is to focus less on issues like abortion and gay marriage (two things he still opposes, btw) and instead focus on more important things like poverty, disease and the elderly. It's a shift in focus, not teaching.

Actually, I have a number of EO friends. It's a running gag that with them that the first protestants were the Catholics. It's part of the idea that Christianity began in the East and the Romans broke away. The actual, official name of the Eastern Orthodox Church is "Orthodox Catholic Church." Now, do they consider them protestants the way the term is used in the the West? No. They are not stupid.

Protestant is, however, the correct term for a person who was talking about conservative, evangelical Protestant churches. It is always incorrect to say Catholics compared to Christians.

/And I am deeply disappointed you did not mention Copts.


I married a Protestant who went to Vanderbilt. She still tells stories about her freshman year roommate who was an evangelical. No thanks. I went to a Catholic College in MA. The only Protestants we had were of the blue blood variety. Much less creepy
 
2013-12-04 06:47:39 PM  

skullkrusher: The only Protestants we had were of the blue blood variety.


We call those Episcopalians.
 
2013-12-04 06:52:30 PM  

jigger: A Dark Evil Omen: poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.

Poverty is the default human condition. It wasn't some scheme dreamed up by the bourgeoisie.


Oh no. If it weren't for capitalism, we'd all still be in the Garden of Eden. See, the images you see of indigenous people in communal societies living in mud huts are Photoshops perpetrated by your capitalist overlords. Study it out.
 
2013-12-04 06:53:24 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: skullkrusher: The only Protestants we had were of the blue blood variety.

We call those Episcopalians.


Catholic Lite.
 
2013-12-04 06:58:58 PM  

skullkrusher: jigger: A Dark Evil Omen: poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.

Poverty is the default human condition. It wasn't some scheme dreamed up by the bourgeoisie.

Oh no. If it weren't for capitalism, we'd all still be in the Garden of Eden. See, the images you see of indigenous people in communal societies living in mud huts are Photoshops perpetrated by your capitalist overlords. Study it out.


I mostly like capitalism.  It's the unrestrained bits that tend to screw over those without the means to mitigate the effects.

Those unrestrained bits and effects can be addressed without going full commie, or even part commie.
 
2013-12-04 06:59:24 PM  

dickfreckle: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

To quote my favorite The The song, "If the real Jesus Christ were to stand up today, he'd be gunned down cold by the CN.IR.A."


/FT4YFTTS
 
2013-12-04 07:03:49 PM  

meat0918: skullkrusher: jigger: A Dark Evil Omen: poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.

Poverty is the default human condition. It wasn't some scheme dreamed up by the bourgeoisie.

Oh no. If it weren't for capitalism, we'd all still be in the Garden of Eden. See, the images you see of indigenous people in communal societies living in mud huts are Photoshops perpetrated by your capitalist overlords. Study it out.

I mostly like capitalism.  It's the unrestrained bits that tend to screw over those without the means to mitigate the effects.

Those unrestrained bits and effects can be addressed without going full commie, or even part commie.


Oh no, we gotta tear it all down. Guy on the Internet said so
 
2013-12-04 07:04:12 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: ...such a stupid argument.as evidenced by the incredibly positive response the new Pope has received by doing exactly that.

Perhaps you have noticed that what the Pope is NOT doing is telling other Christian denominations that they are 'doing it wrong'?

So. Again. I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea...



OH MY GOD, YOU JUST SQUELCHED ME!!!!


Openly dIsagreeing with someone is not "squelching" them. You are in no way suppressing or limiting their ability to express themselves or to practice their religion in any way they choose.

When someone very publicly says "Christianity = X," it is not bad form to call bullshiat if you disagree. And if you are such a spineless little shrinking violet that you can't do that, then shut the fark up and don't SQUELCH other people when they say "Hmm, I guess Christianity really does = X."

And you have perfectly expressed the problem... that weak-willed, cowardly-ass, go along to get-along, conformist allegiance to the "club" of Christianity that supercedes devotion to the principles. It's like "good" cops whose loyalty to fellow cops supercedes their obligation to uphold the law.

And yes, the pope farking well did call people out. He ran sword directly through the heart of "Christian Conservatism":

"Some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.  Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting."


You can be as disingenuous and deliberately obtuse as you want, but nobody's buying it.

The "good" American Christians should have been saying that shiat a very long time ago.
 
2013-12-04 07:11:49 PM  
I would pay good money, to the Catholic Church, to see Pope Francis go all "Shoes of the Fisherman" and to watch the tidal wave of exploding heads to follow.
 
2013-12-04 07:12:54 PM  

skullkrusher: We call those Episcopalians.
Catholic Lite.


All the sacraments, half the guilt :)
 
2013-12-04 07:27:10 PM  

technicolor-misfit: that weak-willed, cowardly-ass, go along to get-along, conformist allegiance to the "club" of Christianity that supercedes devotion to the principles.


Thank you for sharing your perspective on Christians broadly. Very informative. Quite a reasoned and calm, completely unbiased assessment you got there. I will not argue that you hold that view.

technicolor-misfit: It's like "good" cops whose loyalty to fellow cops supercedes their obligation to uphold the law.


So now, Christians are supposed to "police" other Christians? Again, I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea...

I don't know if you are aware, but we generally frown on one sect of Christianity declaring themselves to be the 'one true' version and then trying to stop other sects from doing their own thing. Perhaps you have read some materials related to sects of Christianity and the early Americans, for instance? I think if you put your mind to it, you can figure out why, especially in America, most Christians don't think they should be trying to "shut down" versions of Christianity they disagree with.

I may personally think Osteen and the prosperity doctrine thing is complete bullshiat and wrong, wrong, wrong. I have said so repeatedly. As have others here. As have a whole LOT of people in this country all the time. I'm not sure what it is you are looking for, exactly.

technicolor-misfit: He ran sword directly through the heart of "Christian Conservatism"


I'm not really sure what you are talking about, but I am willing to accept that you believe that he did something (not sure what 'ran sword through the heart' means exactly) to what you believe "Christian Conservatism" is.

technicolor-misfit: You can be as disingenuous and deliberately obtuse as you want, but nobody's buying it.


Whew! That's a relief! I'm not selling it, and I'm not about to warranty it.

technicolor-misfit: Openly dIsagreeing with someone is not "squelching" them.


Only you said that. Since it's not clear what, exactly, you expect "someone" to do, I can't provide you any comment on it.

Out of curiosity, Are you also attacking Muslims for failing to 'adequately' denounce Wahhabism ? I mean, sure a lot of Muslims have gone on record as saying that the beliefs of wahhabism are not 'true' Islam, but clearly that alone is not enough. What exactly SHOUDL they be doing to appease technicolor-misfit?
 
2013-12-04 07:29:22 PM  
Reads article:  Trickle Down Economics

Checks year:  2013


i40.tinypic.com
 
2013-12-04 07:54:33 PM  
You almost got me to click a WND link.  No.  Actually, heck no.

But an Argentine Jesuit advocating "liberation theology"?  Hmmm...  Maybe you should stop frackin' acting like you want a frackin' corrupt military junta in charge, and this won't be a frackin' threat.
 
2013-12-04 07:55:01 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-12-04 08:04:56 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: So now, Christians are supposed to "police" other Christians? Again, I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea...

I don't know if you are aware, but we generally frown on one sect of Christianity declaring themselves to be the 'one true' version and then trying to stop other sects from doing their own thing. Perhaps you have read some materials related to sects of Christianity and the early Americans, for instance? I think if you put your mind to it, you can figure out why, especially in America, most Christians don't think they should be trying to "shut down" versions of Christianity they disagree with....



Blah, blah, blah... Straw me, straw men, straw men... as far as the eye can see!

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-12-04 08:07:05 PM  

jigger: Gyrfalcon: That said, it's not like dirt-floored tin-roofed shacks for all is exactly a target we should be aiming for; and it's not because "capitalism works" either; it's because DEMOCRACY works. (Or really, it's because large-coalitiion politics works, but that's a minor distinction)

So people can just vote themselves wealthy?


Kind of. There's a good book that explains why the masses are better off in nations with large-coalition politics, called "The Dictator's Handbook: Why bad behavior is almost always good politics". What it comes down to is that there's really not much distinction between leadership styles--leaders in any political system are in it for the power, getting power and keeping power. How they behave once they're there depends on how many people they have to keep happy to stay there.

In what are called "democracies"--what the authors call large-coalition politics--those in power have to keep a very large number of essential followers happy in order to stay in power, and a large number of "interchangeables" or what might be termed voters also have to be kept happy. This leads to things like social programs and public works projects.

In "autocracies"--what the authors call small-coalition politics--those in power have only a small group of essential followers to placate, and few or no "interchangeables" i.e. voters. Thus once the essentials are paid off, the leaders can do whatever they like with the money left over, which may or may not be in the interests of the people.

In general, large-coalition leaders have to give people the freedom to get and keep money, so even their poor people have some; while small-coalition leaders do not. There are a few exceptions--Singapore is about the only one I know of--but it plays out around the world. The poorest nations are without exception the ones with the least freedom overall, and the ones with the most freedom are the ones with the highest standards of living even for the impoverished classes.
 
2013-12-04 08:14:01 PM  

technicolor-misfit: straw men, straw men


Oh, that is just so sad. You could have kept some dignity and just walked away.

/Seriously, you are the one calling for Christians to police each other. I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.
 
2013-12-04 08:27:11 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: straw men, straw men

Oh, that is just so sad. You could have kept some dignity and just walked away.

/Seriously, you are the one calling for Christians to police each other. I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.


So Christians shouldn't be held to the same standards Conservatives hold Muslims to when it comes to the moderates decrying the extremists?
 
2013-12-04 08:29:36 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: skullkrusher: The only Protestants we had were of the blue blood variety.

We call those Episcopalians.


If they are of a certain blue blood variety, they call themselves, "Episcopalian-but-really-that's-just-the-American-word-for-Anglican-bu t-my-family-fought-in-the-revolution-so-we-can't-call-ourselves-that-e ven-though-I-am-related-to-Diana-Spencer-on-my-mother's-side-and-peopl e-incorrectly-called-her-Princess-Diana-but-really-it-should-be-Prince ss-Charles-even-though-our-ancestors-have-more-right-to-the-throne-tha n-those-German-upstarts." Alcohol is also usually involved.
 
2013-12-04 08:31:32 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: straw men, straw men

Oh, that is just so sad. You could have kept some dignity and just walked away.

/Seriously, you are the one calling for Christians to police each other. I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.

So Christians shouldn't be held to the same standards Conservatives hold Muslims to when it comes to the moderates decrying the extremists?


Do not use contemporary, American "conservatives" as a guide for what standards should be. But I think you already know that.
 
2013-12-04 08:31:58 PM  

Mrtraveler01: So Christians shouldn't be held to the same standards Conservatives hold Muslims to when it comes to the moderates decrying the extremists?


That's weird. I just asked the same question in reverse! Should Muslims be held to the same standards Farkers here are holding Christians to when it comes to the moderates decrying the extremists?

I'm surprised you didn't see that.
 
2013-12-04 08:33:50 PM  

DeaH: If they are of a certain blue blood variety, they call themselves, "Episcopalian-but-really-that's-just-the-American-word-for-Anglican-bu t-my-family-fought-in-the-revolution-so-we-can't-call-ourselves-that-e ven-though-I-am-related-to-Diana-Spencer-on-my-mother's-side-and-peopl e-incorrectly-called-her-Princess-Diana-but-really-it-should-be-Prince ss-Charles-even-though-our-ancestors-have-more-right-to-the-throne-tha n-those-German-upstarts." Alcohol is also usually involved


BULLshiat. They will always mention DAR membership.

But other than that, spot on :)
 
2013-12-04 08:33:59 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: straw men, straw men

Oh, that is just so sad. You could have kept some dignity and just walked away.

/Seriously, you are the one calling for Christians to police each other. I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.

So Christians shouldn't be held to the same standards Conservatives hold Muslims to when it comes to the moderates decrying the extremists?


Weak
 
2013-12-04 08:44:23 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: DeaH: If they are of a certain blue blood variety, they call themselves, "Episcopalian-but-really-that's-just-the-American-word-for-Anglican-bu t-my-family-fought-in-the-revolution-so-we-can't-call-ourselves-that-e ven-though-I-am-related-to-Diana-Spencer-on-my-mother's-side-and-peopl e-incorrectly-called-her-Princess-Diana-but-really-it-should-be-Prince ss-Charles-even-though-our-ancestors-have-more-right-to-the-throne-tha n-those-German-upstarts." Alcohol is also usually involved

BULLshiat. They will always mention DAR membership.

But other than that, spot on :)


C'mon. Isn't there always alcohol involved? I've never met another group of people who use the word "tea" to mean cocktail hour. And then they still have cocktail hour.
 
2013-12-04 08:54:06 PM  
Why do conservatives hate compassion?
 
2013-12-04 08:57:40 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?


When'd you stop beating your wife?
 
2013-12-04 09:11:41 PM  

ikanreed: Did everyone else see their might-as-well-be-KKK race-baiting "deal of the day" book on the sidebar?

Holy shiat.  How can you get more racist than "White girl bleed a lot"?

With a subtitle transcribing loosely as "how black people are going to kill a bunch of white people any day now."  But don't you dare call them racist.


They already ARE! Did you MISS the knockout game thread or something?! It's LITERALLY the biggest threat to White America since emancipation!!!
 
2013-12-04 09:15:29 PM  

Empty Matchbook: ikanreed: Did everyone else see their might-as-well-be-KKK race-baiting "deal of the day" book on the sidebar?

Holy shiat.  How can you get more racist than "White girl bleed a lot"?

With a subtitle transcribing loosely as "how black people are going to kill a bunch of white people any day now."  But don't you dare call them racist.

They already ARE! Did you MISS the knockout game thread or something?! It's LITERALLY the biggest threat to White America since emancipation!!!


I missed the racist ad and I'm scared of going back to crazy land. Could someone please post a pic?
 
2013-12-04 09:31:08 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: parasol: you do have a way of nattering on sometimes BP

Perhaps. Often as a result of a pronounced tendency to respond to people who address me directly.

But as I often and frequently say, I urge anyone who doesn't want to read my posts to use the Ignore function. I won't be offended, and it's probably best for everyone.


Consider your request granted. It's been hard reading your posts in this thread, and getting exponentially harder the further into the thread I come upon your insane ramblings. I'm clicking ignore now, as requested, and I hope others do as well to limit your desperately desired audience.

/firmly agnostic
//loves to listen to intelligent faithful people but not douches like this guy
 
2013-12-04 09:32:38 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: straw men, straw men

Oh, that is just so sad. You could have kept some dignity and just walked away.

/Seriously, you are the one calling for Christians to police each other. I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.


Your patronizing sermons are in no way reminescent of Jesus. fark off.

/ignored now
 
2013-12-04 09:50:30 PM  

Weaver95: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

Well, to the prosperity gospel types Francis is a very real threat to their ideology.


Isn't it beautiful?

I may start going back to church.
 
2013-12-04 09:50:48 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: straw men, straw men

Oh, that is just so sad. You could have kept some dignity and just walked away.

/Seriously, you are the one calling for Christians to police each other. I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.



So, now you don't know what a straw man is?

Show me where I said Christians should "police" each other.

Show me where I said Christiansshould be trying to "shut down" versions of Christianity they disagree with.

Show me where I said Christians have an "obligation" to "squelch another group who thinks differently."

You keep taking what's ACTUALLY said and mischaracterizing it, twisting it into a cartoonish extreme, turning it into a more easily-refuted... wait for it... straw man. You're not arguing against my position. You're arguing against what you want my position to be.


"To 'attack a straw man' is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

What I have said is that if Christians don't want the "Conservative Christian" teabagger crowd setting the tone for Christianity, then they need to speak up and take issue when those are spouting their bullshiat.

If-then... It's a conditional statement.

If they're okay with Rush Limbaugh defining Christianity, then more power to them. But, if that's the case, then they don't really have much justification for whining about how other people perceive Christianity.

----

tl;dr version... If you're not going to criticize those people when they spew their bullshiat, that's you're right. But, don't whine at me when I do.
 
2013-12-04 09:52:34 PM  

inclemency: BojanglesPaladin: parasol: you do have a way of nattering on sometimes BP

Perhaps. Often as a result of a pronounced tendency to respond to people who address me directly.

But as I often and frequently say, I urge anyone who doesn't want to read my posts to use the Ignore function. I won't be offended, and it's probably best for everyone.

Consider your request granted. It's been hard reading your posts in this thread, and getting exponentially harder the further into the thread I come upon your insane ramblings. I'm clicking ignore now, as requested, and I hope others do as well to limit your desperately desired audience.

/firmly agnostic
//loves to listen to intelligent faithful people but not douches like this guy


"Chicken chain farking white knight."
 
2013-12-04 10:12:11 PM  

skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?


That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.
 
2013-12-04 10:15:34 PM  

meat0918: More evidence in the "American's do not worship the God of the New Testament" column.


Historically, that god's been a completely different god every couple centuries to account for social shifts.  The hippie do-gooder interpretation of Jesus is no less fabricated than the Jesus who wants to be rich, and actually slightly more recent (rich-loving Jesus = 1940s, poor-loving Jesus = 1960s).

If you're wanting to go "original intent" on the new testament, you're not going to get much out of it in terms of economic morality, because none of the social or large-scale economic, political, or social systems in use today were so much as a gleam in a philosopher's eye at the time.

I mean, you can back off so far that you basically ignore every single detail of the mythology that exists and go with "don't be a dick", but that's still an individual instruction and not an economic or policy instruction.

// I know context isn't everything, but the context in which the bible was written was a society in which being a slave was considered a legit career path worthy of respect, and was actually usually a pretty good deal for the slave.  That kind of highlights how absurdly alien most of the lessons are in modern context.
 
2013-12-04 10:18:37 PM  

vrax: skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?

That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.


I thought the theme was stupid questions. Congrats in white knighting one of the worst human beings on Fark. That must've felt good.
 
2013-12-04 10:24:16 PM  

skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?

That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.

I thought the theme was stupid questions. Congrats in white knighting one of the worst human beings on Fark. That must've felt good.


He asked a reasonable question.  Conservatives seem to be working really damned hard to prove that compassion is an ability they lack.  Why this is, I can't even fathom.
 
2013-12-04 10:27:27 PM  

vrax: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?

That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.

I thought the theme was stupid questions. Congrats in white knighting one of the worst human beings on Fark. That must've felt good.

He asked a reasonable question.  Conservatives seem to be working really damned hard to prove that compassion is an ability they lack.  Why this is, I can't even fathom.


No. He asked a stupid question and he's a shiatbrick troll. Not insightful, not thoughtful, not interesting. Just the same schtick time and again. Not all conservatives "hate" compassion.
 
2013-12-04 10:33:12 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?



Because they're told to.

They're authoritarians... followers and leaders. That's why they display an incredibly inordinate amount of angst about how high or low other people wear their pants. Conform... fit in... adhere to expectations.

They are expected to eschew compassion and so they do.

/plus racism
//"Welfare queens!!!"
 
2013-12-04 10:33:48 PM  
The author:

3.bp.blogspot.com


3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-12-04 10:37:04 PM  

technicolor-misfit: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?


Because they're told to.

They're authoritarians... followers and leaders. That's why they display an incredibly inordinate amount of angst about how high or low other people wear their pants. Conform... fit in... adhere to expectations.

They are expected to eschew compassion and so they do.

/plus racism
//"Welfare queens!!!"


Simplified life for simplified minds
 
2013-12-04 10:39:06 PM  
Jim_Callahan:

// I know context isn't everything, but the context in which the bible was written was a society in which being a slave was considered a legit career path worthy of respect, and was actually usually a pretty good deal for the slave.  That kind of highlights how absurdly alien most of the lessons are in modern context.

Okay your overall point is completely valid, but I have to nitpick here.

Educated slaves had it all right.

But salt mine slaves?
 
2013-12-04 10:46:37 PM  
It all makes sense now. MORE COMMENTRARY!

staroftexasinn.com
 
2013-12-04 11:08:25 PM  

skullkrusher: technicolor-misfit: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?


Because they're told to.

They're authoritarians... followers and leaders. That's why they display an incredibly inordinate amount of angst about how high or low other people wear their pants. Conform... fit in... adhere to expectations.

They are expected to eschew compassion and so they do.

/plus racism
//"Welfare queens!!!"

Simplified life for simplified minds



Thank you. Yes. That's an excellent way of describing them.
 
2013-12-04 11:21:13 PM  

skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?

That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.

I thought the theme was stupid questions. Congrats in white knighting one of the worst human beings on Fark. That must've felt good.

He asked a reasonable question.  Conservatives seem to be working really damned hard to prove that compassion is an ability they lack.  Why this is, I can't even fathom.

No. He asked a stupid question and he's a shiatbrick troll. Not insightful, not thoughtful, not interesting. Just the same schtick time and again. Not all conservatives "hate" compassion.


Yeah, sure... not "all" of them.


Tea Partiers Mock And Scorn Apparent Parkinson's Victim
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ik4f1dRbP8


Tea Party Crowd Cheers Letting Uninsured Die
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJiao
 

Crowd boos gay soldier at GOP debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27uKHXRFqMI


It's the movement/party of "fark you, I got mine" and everybody knows it. Trying to argue that they don't "all" hate compassion is like saying "I'm sure some of the Manson Family members had their misgivings!"

(And you damn well know that he's engaging in hyperbole. It's enough of a characteristic of the movement that the farking Pope called them out on it.)
 
2013-12-04 11:21:55 PM  

technicolor-misfit: skullkrusher: technicolor-misfit: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?


Because they're told to.

They're authoritarians... followers and leaders. That's why they display an incredibly inordinate amount of angst about how high or low other people wear their pants. Conform... fit in... adhere to expectations.

They are expected to eschew compassion and so they do.

/plus racism
//"Welfare queens!!!"

Simplified life for simplified minds


Thank you. Yes. That's an excellent way of describing them.


I can tell by your use of broad generalizations that you're not to be trifled with.
 
2013-12-04 11:25:43 PM  

technicolor-misfit: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?

That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.

I thought the theme was stupid questions. Congrats in white knighting one of the worst human beings on Fark. That must've felt good.

He asked a reasonable question.  Conservatives seem to be working really damned hard to prove that compassion is an ability they lack.  Why this is, I can't even fathom.

No. He asked a stupid question and he's a shiatbrick troll. Not insightful, not thoughtful, not interesting. Just the same schtick time and again. Not all conservatives "hate" compassion.

Yeah, sure... not "all" of them.


Tea Partiers Mock And Scorn Apparent Parkinson's Victim
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ik4f1dRbP8


Tea Party Crowd Cheers Letting Uninsured Die
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJiao
 

Crowd boos gay soldier at GOP debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27uKHXRFqMI


It's the movement/party of "fark you, I got mine" and everybody knows it. Trying to argue that they don't "all" hate compassion is like saying "I'm sure some of the Manson Family members had their misgivings!"

(And you damn well know that he's engaging in hyperbole. It's enough of a characteristic of the movement that the farking Pope called them out on it.)


No, he's not engaging in hyperbole. He's intellectually lazy, even for a troll and now you're here to carry his shiat filled water.

Again, I can tell by your use of 3 links to Tea Party morons to support the generalized notion describing conservatives en masse that you're a man of great intellect. Please go gentle.
 
2013-12-04 11:29:19 PM  
Liberals are intellectually lazy halfwits who hunt for approval from other intellectually lazy halfwits by spouting stupid generalizations on Fark. Prove me wrong. LOL hyperbole!
 
2013-12-04 11:39:21 PM  

skullkrusher: Liberals are intellectually lazy halfwits who hunt for approval from other intellectually lazy halfwits by spouting stupid generalizations on Fark. Prove me wrong. LOL hyperbole!


EXCUSE ME?!?
 
2013-12-04 11:41:54 PM  

skullkrusher: Liberals are intellectually lazy halfwits who hunt for approval from other intellectually lazy halfwits by spouting stupid generalizations on Fark. Prove me wrong. LOL hyperbole!


Nope... We're  Ivory Tower Elitists  and effete intellectuals with no common sense who've never done an honest day's work.

Can't have it both ways.
 
2013-12-04 11:44:45 PM  

Gyrfalcon: skullkrusher: Liberals are intellectually lazy halfwits who hunt for approval from other intellectually lazy halfwits by spouting stupid generalizations on Fark. Prove me wrong. LOL hyperbole!

EXCUSE ME?!?


I was just being hyperbolic, m'lady. It's what we do on Fark. We make sweeping, stupid generalizations in the hopes we'll be cheered for it and then pretend it was an exaggeration when called on it.
 
2013-12-04 11:48:45 PM  

technicolor-misfit: skullkrusher: Liberals are intellectually lazy halfwits who hunt for approval from other intellectually lazy halfwits by spouting stupid generalizations on Fark. Prove me wrong. LOL hyperbole!

Nope... We're  Ivory Tower Elitists  and effete intellectuals with no common sense who've never done an honest day's work.

Can't have it both ways.


I don't have it either way. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I think generalizations are lazy and stupid.

Wow... It really is that bad for you. You pigeonhole the "enemy" and assume that they must also do the same.

Look at Gyrfalcon here. She's neither effete nor ivory tower. Of course, she's also honest and interesting. And a liberal. Your
mind is blown.
 
2013-12-04 11:51:44 PM  

skullkrusher: Gyrfalcon: skullkrusher: Liberals are intellectually lazy halfwits who hunt for approval from other intellectually lazy halfwits by spouting stupid generalizations on Fark. Prove me wrong. LOL hyperbole!

EXCUSE ME?!?

I was just being hyperbolic, m'lady. It's what we do on Fark. We make sweeping, stupid generalizations in the hopes we'll be cheered for it and then pretend it was an exaggeration when called on it.


Troll harder. They don't get it.
 
2013-12-04 11:54:28 PM  

skullkrusher: technicolor-misfit: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?

That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.

I thought the theme was stupid questions. Congrats in white knighting one of the worst human beings on Fark. That must've felt good.

He asked a reasonable question.  Conservatives seem to be working really damned hard to prove that compassion is an ability they lack.  Why this is, I can't even fathom.

No. He asked a stupid question and he's a shiatbrick troll. Not insightful, not thoughtful, not interesting. Just the same schtick time and again. Not all conservatives "hate" compassion.

Yeah, sure... not "all" of them.


Tea Partiers Mock And Scorn Apparent Parkinson's Victim
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ik4f1dRbP8


Tea Party Crowd Cheers Letting Uninsured Die
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJiao
 

Crowd boos gay soldier at GOP debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27uKHXRFqMI


It's the movement/party of "fark you, I got mine" and everybody knows it. Trying to argue that they don't "all" hate compassion is like saying "I'm sure some of the Manson Family members had their misgivings!"

(And you damn well know that he's engaging in hyperbole. It's enough of a characteristic of the movement that the farking Pope called them out on it.)

No, he's not engaging in hyperbole. He's intellectually lazy, even for a troll and now you're here to carry his shiat filled water.

Again, I can tell by your use of 3 links to Tea Party morons to support the generalized notion describing conservatives en masse that you're a man of great intellect. Please go gentle.


Well, I guess we should be fair.  It only seems to be the entirety of the conservative public face that is doing their damnedest to show that they lack compassion.  Of course, like a tree falling in the woods, there are certainly compassionate conservatives that we don't hear from.  They exist, it's just that their, apparently intentional, public image presents an incredible lack of empathy, on a sociopathic level.  If they weren't proving it every single day, I wouldn't believe it, but you are in serious denial if you don't see how massively dysfunctional the conservative, or should I say "conservative", movement is.
 
2013-12-05 12:00:22 AM  

vrax: skullkrusher: technicolor-misfit: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: vrax: skullkrusher: TV's Vinnie: Why do conservatives hate compassion?

When'd you stop beating your wife?

That may have sounded clever in your head, but as a response, it doesn't really work in this case.

I thought the theme was stupid questions. Congrats in white knighting one of the worst human beings on Fark. That must've felt good.

He asked a reasonable question.  Conservatives seem to be working really damned hard to prove that compassion is an ability they lack.  Why this is, I can't even fathom.

No. He asked a stupid question and he's a shiatbrick troll. Not insightful, not thoughtful, not interesting. Just the same schtick time and again. Not all conservatives "hate" compassion.

Yeah, sure... not "all" of them.


Tea Partiers Mock And Scorn Apparent Parkinson's Victim
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ik4f1dRbP8


Tea Party Crowd Cheers Letting Uninsured Die
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJiao
 

Crowd boos gay soldier at GOP debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27uKHXRFqMI


It's the movement/party of "fark you, I got mine" and everybody knows it. Trying to argue that they don't "all" hate compassion is like saying "I'm sure some of the Manson Family members had their misgivings!"

(And you damn well know that he's engaging in hyperbole. It's enough of a characteristic of the movement that the farking Pope called them out on it.)

No, he's not engaging in hyperbole. He's intellectually lazy, even for a troll and now you're here to carry his shiat filled water.

Again, I can tell by your use of 3 links to Tea Party morons to support the generalized notion describing conservatives en masse that you're a man of great intellect. Please go gentle.

Well, I guess we should be fair.  It only seems to be the entirety of the conservative public face that is doing their damnedest to show that they lack compassion.  Of course, like a tree falling in the woods, there are certainly compassionate conservatives that we don't hear from.  They exist, it's just that their, apparently intentional, public image presents an incredible lack of empathy, on a sociopathic level.  If they weren't proving it every single day, I wouldn't believe it, but you are in serious denial if you don't see how massively dysfunctional the conservative, or should I say "conservative", movement is.


Every day you see a "conservative" saying something unthinking, uncaring, stupid or insensitive. There are, however, literally hundreds of millions of us. You hear from a tiny fraction of shiatbricks with bully pulpits or stupid enough to say or do something that spreads on the web.

Of course, we're not talking about this "public face" but rather the sweeping statement made by Vinnie and then psychoanalyzed by misfit. You see, conservatives are authoritarians and therefore stuff and furthermore can I have
my Internet hi fives now? I've been trying so very hard to say something that'll appeal to the circle jerk.
 
2013-12-05 12:02:30 AM  
Anyway, time for bed. It's 12:02EST and that's when conservatives go to sleep.
Night all
 
2013-12-05 12:16:12 AM  

skullkrusher: technicolor-misfit: skullkrusher: Liberals are intellectually lazy halfwits who hunt for approval from other intellectually lazy halfwits by spouting stupid generalizations on Fark. Prove me wrong. LOL hyperbole!

Nope... We're  Ivory Tower Elitists  and effete intellectuals with no common sense who've never done an honest day's work.

Can't have it both ways.

I don't have it either way. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I think generalizations are lazy and stupid.

Wow... It really is that bad for you. You pigeonhole the "enemy" and assume that they must also do the same.

Look at Gyrfalcon here. She's neither effete nor ivory tower. Of course, she's also honest and interesting. And a liberal. Your
mind is blown.


Wow....that's the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me on Fark this week. I may cry.
[blows nose into lace hankie]
 
2013-12-05 12:58:20 AM  

Phil McKraken: It all makes sense now. MORE COMMENTRARY!


At the Irony Bowl no less.
 
2013-12-05 01:13:52 AM  

Richard C Stanford: Empty Matchbook: ikanreed: Did everyone else see their might-as-well-be-KKK race-baiting "deal of the day" book on the sidebar?

Holy shiat.  How can you get more racist than "White girl bleed a lot"?

With a subtitle transcribing loosely as "how black people are going to kill a bunch of white people any day now."  But don't you dare call them racist.

They already ARE! Did you MISS the knockout game thread or something?! It's LITERALLY the biggest threat to White America since emancipation!!!

I missed the racist ad and I'm scared of going back to crazy land. Could someone please post a pic?


I got nothing on that, I just remember the "knockout game" thread that was here a bit back. Holy HELL, what a thread.
 
2013-12-05 01:15:35 AM  

FarkedOver: That's a bunch of horseshiat. From what I've read in transcripts he was complicit of acting in concert with the military junta of Argentina during the Dirty War.


not
 
2013-12-05 01:16:48 AM  

skullkrusher: Every day you see a "conservative" saying something unthinking, uncaring, stupid or insensitive. There are, however, literally hundreds of millions of us. You hear from a tiny fraction of shiatbricks with bully pulpits or stupid enough to say or do something that spreads on the web.

Of course, we're not talking about this "public face" but rather the sweeping statement made by Vinnie and then psychoanalyzed by misfit. You see, conservatives are authoritarians and therefore stuff and furthermore can I have
my Internet hi fives now? I've been trying so very hard to say something that'll appeal to the circle jerk.



2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-12-05 01:18:33 AM  

Weaver95: Serious Black: I love how people are all but calling Francis a heretic and blasphemer.

Well, to the prosperity gospel types Francis is a very real threat to their ideology.


good they need it...fn selfish hypocrites!
 
2013-12-05 01:36:01 AM  

Gyrfalcon: [blows nose into lace hankie]


You farkin' fancy-ass farker, you!
 
2013-12-05 01:40:11 AM  
Look, fine... I'll be serious for a minute.

Snap was just cut by $5 billion dollars during a time in which those on the bottom end of our society are hurting about as bad as they ever have, and conservatives support it by about 70%. The roughly 30% who don't will likely continue to support the movement and party that allowed it to happen and encourages shredding the safety net even more.

You can spare me all the crap about "not all conservatives hate compassion" because at the end of the day, in the practical world, when you're taking food money out of the hands of the very poorest among us, it's a distinction without a farking difference whether or not someone "hates" compassion, or is simply indifferent, or even if they actually take the time to pay lip service to compassion.

What farking good does it do to be compassionate if you don't act on it?

What farking difference does it make to be compassionate if you endorse the very same policies that the ugly, angry, dollar-bill throwing mob cheers on?

So yeah, I talk shiat about conservatives. But not because I want internet high fives. Not because I want to take part in a liberal circle-jerk. I do it because I farking hate them. Because they're rotten dicks who support atrocious and mean-spirited policies. You can try to attach a bunch of high-minded economic philosophy to WHY they support those policies... but I'm tired of playing the let's be polite and agree to disagree game when it gets to the point that we're talking about whether or not children should be allowed to go hungry.
 
2013-12-05 01:59:32 AM  

technicolor-misfit: BojanglesPaladin: technicolor-misfit: straw men, straw men

Oh, that is just so sad. You could have kept some dignity and just walked away.

/Seriously, you are the one calling for Christians to police each other. I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.


So, now you don't know what a straw man is?

Show me where I said Christians should "police" each other.

Show me where I said Christiansshould be trying to "shut down" versions of Christianity they disagree with.

Show me where I said Christians have an "obligation" to "squelch another group who thinks differently."

You keep taking what's ACTUALLY said and mischaracterizing it, twisting it into a cartoonish extreme, turning it into a more easily-refuted... wait for it... straw man. You're not arguing against my position. You're arguing against what you want my position to be.


Sooner or later, a consensus opinion. Now you at least know to save your breath with him in future threads, right?
 
2013-12-05 02:28:54 AM  

SixPaperJoint: MrBallou: I've been hearing about this "Pope is a Marxist" thing, so I decided to make an exception to my no-WND click rule, just to catch up on exactly what they're saying.

Only got through a few paragraphs before everything went gray. Now my head hurts, my vision is blurred and I can't feel my feet. Please. Someone call a doctor.

[poptop12.files.wordpress.com image 581x441]

Alright, MrBallou, just listen. Everything is going to be fine. You're very over derped right now. You will probably be that way for about five more hours. Try taking some vitamin B complex, vitamin C complex.. if you have a beer, go ahead and drink it...

Just remember you're a living organism on this planet, and you're very safe. You've just taken a heavy derping. Relax, stay inside and listen to some music. Okay? Do you have any Allman Brothers?


For the record, that was my favorite SNL skit of all time.
 
2013-12-05 03:03:08 AM  
This is the political structure that declared that witches were real and justified torture?  I'll leap right on caring what they think.
 
2013-12-05 03:36:39 AM  

syrynxx: This is the political structure that declared that witches were real and justified torture?  I'll leap right on caring what they think.


Hilariously, if you asked a smart, but politically uninformed person, they would think you were talking about relatively ancient history in this country and not something from within the last decade, to be sure.
 
2013-12-05 04:11:45 AM  

skullkrusher: BojanglesPaladin: skullkrusher: The only Protestants we had were of the blue blood variety.

We call those Episcopalians.

Catholic Lite.


Twice the fun,half the guilt...
 
2013-12-05 04:15:31 AM  

vrax: Reads article:  Trickle Down Economics

Checks year:  2013


[i40.tinypic.com image 248x200]


This. people are still talking this simplistic, 19th century grammar school economics.
And it's 20 f**king 13.
Jesus.
 
2013-12-05 04:31:12 AM  

vrax: syrynxx: This is the political structure that declared that witches were real and justified torture?  I'll leap right on caring what they think.

Hilariously, if you asked a smart, but politically uninformed person, they would think you were talking about relatively ancient history in this country and not something from within the last decade, to be sure.


Someone thought witches should be tortured within the last decade? Who?
 
2013-12-05 06:24:34 AM  
The question here is if it were true would it be bad?
 
2013-12-05 06:32:38 AM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Mikey1969: Even the poorest of the poor in the United States live far better than the rest of the world because capitalism works.


Really? The "poorest of the poor live far better than the entire "rest of the world"? So the US has a median income of $51,000, so let's say the poor live off a third of that. NOBODY on the planet makes MORE than $17,000 a year?

Hell that's the farthest I've gotten to this point, came up for air and a pair of hip waders...

I think he means poor Americans are better off than poor people anywhere else. Which is patently absurd and also ignores the fact that that poverty is purely manufactured, unnecessary and only exists at all to enrich the already insanely wealthy.


I hate to break your bubble, but poverty existed long before capitalism.
 
2013-12-05 07:06:00 AM  
I love seeing that the Republicans have something in common with a mentally disturbed foreigner tearing up a picture of the pope on SNL.
 
2013-12-05 07:49:20 AM  

technicolor-misfit: Look, fine... I'll be serious for a minute.

Snap was just cut by $5 billion dollars during a time in which those on the bottom end of our society are hurting about as bad as they ever have, and conservatives support it by about 70%. The roughly 30% who don't will likely continue to support the movement and party that allowed it to happen and encourages shredding the safety net even more.

You can spare me all the crap about "not all conservatives hate compassion" because at the end of the day, in the practical world, when you're taking food money out of the hands of the very poorest among us, it's a distinction without a farking difference whether or not someone "hates" compassion, or is simply indifferent, or even if they actually take the time to pay lip service to compassion.

What farking good does it do to be compassionate if you don't act on it?

What farking difference does it make to be compassionate if you endorse the very same policies that the ugly, angry, dollar-bill throwing mob cheers on?

So yeah, I talk shiat about conservatives. But not because I want internet high fives. Not because I want to take part in a liberal circle-jerk. I do it because I farking hate them. Because they're rotten dicks who support atrocious and mean-spirited policies. You can try to attach a bunch of high-minded economic philosophy to WHY they support those policies... but I'm tired of playing the let's be polite and agree to disagree game when it gets to the point that we're talking about whether or not children should be allowed to go hungry.


U mad huh?
It's not about being polite or agreeing to disagree. It is about one person (me) explaining to another person (you) how farking stupid it is to make sweeping generalizations. Which you continue to do.
Going so far as to say you "hate" an entire group of people. I don't think I can be well described as anything but conservative in some sense of the word... Yet I don't support cutting funding for SNAP. How does that fit into your simplistic view of stuff? Do you "hate" me because judging people on their individual merits and flaws is something you're incapable of?
 
2013-12-05 09:36:17 AM  

erik-k: You're trying to sell us on a cross-country all-summer road trip, when everyone's seen your car engine repeatedly catch fire when it's driven more than a few blocks. Yeah, that'd be a sweet trip... too bad it'll never actually happen.


I didn't attempt to sell you anything.  I attempted to clear up what socialism is, what communism is and what capitalism is.  Obviously there are many people that have no farking idea what they are talking about.
 
2013-12-05 09:52:57 AM  

guestguy: BojanglesPaladin: I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it.

But out of curiosity, what do you think the new Pope is DOING?


Is this copy-pasta that you vomit up anytime someone points out that if good Christians take offense to being lumped in with loud-mouth assholes Christians, then maybe they should denounce said loud-mouth asshole Christians with the same fervor with which they whine about being lumped in with them?

Yes, the new pope is finally doing this, and I hope that mentality takes hold here in the US as well, where we have some of the loudest-mouth asshole Christians on the planet.


Because "good Christians" also try to follow those bits about loving others and not being judgemental. That's a huge part of what Jesus actually taught.

That and they don't get very much airtime in the mainstream media. "Loudmouth asshole Christians", like Fark trolls, stir up angry readers or viewers and increase page hits or ratings so they get in the news more than mainstream WWJD Christians, who may get an occasional human interest clip if they happen to get noticed doing something particularly good. Anyway, Christians don't really relish the limelight: it's too close to boasting.
 
2013-12-05 09:57:23 AM  

meat0918: The pic is new, but the quote is quite old, I think 1890s


It looks like the quote originated with Galbraith circa 1982; though Galbraith indicated it had older origins, Google Books seems to turn up no earlier trace.
 
2013-12-05 10:23:19 AM  

BojanglesPaladin: Two people in this thread made the exact same dumb-ass argument, so I saved myself some typing, yes. It's a dumb-ass argument, so the less time spent on it the better.



How exactly is that a dumb-ass argument?  Forgive me if I don't take your "I dub thee dumb-assery" response to heavily edited down quotes as gospel.
 
2013-12-05 10:34:59 AM  
vinniethepoo: Because "good Christians" also try to follow those bits about loving others and not being judgemental. That's a huge part of what Jesus actually taught.

That and they don't get very much airtime in the mainstream media. "Loudmouth asshole Christians", like Fark trolls, stir up angry readers or viewers and increase page hits or ratings so they get in the news more than mainstream WWJD Christians, who may get an occasional human interest clip if they happen to get noticed doing something particularly good. Anyway, Christians don't really relish the limelight: it's too close to boasting.


So do you think the pope is not a "good Christian" for publicly disagreeing with the loud-mouth asshole brigade?  If the vast majority of Christians in the US don't agree with them, then they could easily have a noticeable media voice with a little organization and will.  The fact is, they have seemed perfectly content to just whine about being lumped in with the vocal minority without doing a damn thing to publicly differentiate themselves from it.  I have little sympathy for the selectively apathetic.
 
2013-12-05 11:35:28 AM  

guestguy: Forgive me if I don't take your "I dub thee dumb-assery" response to heavily edited down quotes as gospel


No one is asking you to take anything I say as gospel, and you would be dumb to do so.
But you are encouraged to read the posts and make up your own mind.
 
2013-12-05 11:47:52 AM  
Protip:  If conservatives don't like being stereotyped as selfish, uncompassionate troglodytes they should probably stop hanging out with and directly supporting a bunch of selfish, uncompassionate troglodytes.
 
2013-12-05 12:12:39 PM  
First off, YOU chimed in on a comment I made to someone else. It's a bit rich to now claim your argument is being distorted when YOU jumped in to defend a pre-existing argument. You are clearly losing track of things.

Here is what I said to SOMEONE ELSE that you responded to:
BojanglesPaladin: "I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it.

So you took up someone ELSE's argument to defend it. If you now want to step away from that. That's fine. As I said at the outset: I TOLD you it was a dumb position to take, don't get all mad at me just because you finally realized it.

But just to clarify a few points:

technicolor-misfit: Show me where I said Christians should be trying to "shut down" versions of Christianity they disagree with.Show me where I said Christians have an "obligation" to "squelch another group who thinks differently."


Here is what you said:
- "If you're angry that mean-spirited jackholes are taking control of your religion's public image, you should probably tell THEM to get bent instead of getting angry with the people who react to them."
- "Maybe all those good AMERICAN Christians should have farking done it years ago."
- And yes, the pope farking well did call people out. He ran sword directly through the heart of "Christian Conservatism":

 

technicolor-misfit: Show me where I said Christians should "police" each other.


Here is what you said:
- that weak-willed, cowardly-ass, go along to get-along, conformist allegiance to the "club" of Christianity that supercedes devotion to the principles. It's like "good" cops whose loyalty to fellow cops supercedes their obligation to uphold the law.

So Christians are like cops. Like Cops who have an obligation to uphold the law even against their own brethren.

So I'm afraid that I have to stand by my characterization that you were calling on the majority of Christians to "correct" the minority of Christians who are the "wrong kind". to "police each other"

If you now want to revise or clarify that you meant by debating the use of terms like "Squelch", "shut down", "call out their bullshiat", or "PUT A SWORD THROUGH THE HEART", I suppose you could go that route. That is arguing semantics. We agree that you mean good Christians should 'denounce' bad Christians, right?

So no. No it's not a strawman to respond to the argument you were actually making. Thankfully on Fark, people here can scroll up and see what you ACTUALLY said.

Anywho, just wanted to clear that up. I think you just got a little turned around posting too fast or something and forgot who was arguing against whom in the first place. It happens.

Have a good day.
 
2013-12-05 12:35:44 PM  

guestguy: The fact is, they have seemed perfectly content to just whine about being lumped in with the vocal minority without doing a damn thing to publicly differentiate themselves from it. I have little sympathy for the selectively apathetic


Stop picking on Muslims. We've been over this. The problem is with the ignorant people who just lump the asshole crazies in with the nice, moderate, peaceful ones. It's the ignorant rubes starts saying "Those Muslims are all the same!" without even trying to understand or respect their religion that is the problem. They don't have to answer to YOU about their religion!!

amidoinitright? I remember these exact arguments being made not too long ago by a lot of the same people now arguing the reverse for Christians. Not saying you, but there's a weird 'whole on the other foot' double-standard.
 
2013-12-05 01:22:19 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: guestguy: Forgive me if I don't take your "I dub thee dumb-assery" response to heavily edited down quotes as gospel

No one is asking you to take anything I say as gospel, and you would be dumb to do so.
But you are encouraged to read the posts and make up your own mind.



I am asking you to explain how they are dumb-ass arguments.  If you don't want to answer me, you are encouraged to say so rather than simply editing that part of my comment out.  I noticed that has been a habit of yours in this thread, severely editing down posts to a series of one-liners that are more easily sniped (since the accompanying context has been stripped away).
 
2013-12-05 01:35:22 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Stop picking on Muslims. We've been over this. The problem is with the ignorant people who just lump the asshole crazies in with the nice, moderate, peaceful ones. It's the ignorant rubes starts saying "Those Muslims are all the same!" without even trying to understand or respect their religion that is the problem. They don't have to answer to YOU about their religion!!

amidoinitright? I remember these exact arguments being made not too long ago by a lot of the same people now arguing the reverse for Christians. Not saying you, but there's a weird 'whole on the other foot' double-standard.



I am actually of the same opinion when it comes to Muslims.  The difference is, I have seen far more examples of Muslims publicly decrying the actions of their highly visible crazies than Christians.  And it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison in the first place, as most of the time you're talking about violent tendencies (e.g. Muslims are terrorists!) vs. general jackassery/intolerance (e.g. Christians hate gay people!) when lumping those religions in with their associated loud crazies.
 
2013-12-05 02:53:24 PM  

guestguy: I am asking you to explain how they are dumb-ass arguments.


I did. Many times. Previous comments are available for review. You are coming in the next day. I do not feel the need to retype everything all over again, but if you would like, here is my stock answer to the argument that "Good" Christians should be 'doing something' about these "bad Christians".

BojanglesPaladin: I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it. But out of curiosity, what do you think the new Pope is DOING?

Also, this may come as a shock, but when responding to a specific point you made it is customary to quote that specific part. Yes, you may have said any number of other things, related and unrelated. Since I may or may not choose to address every single point you may have made, I specify which portion I consider relevant and which I am responding to. That's how Fark works.

And lastly, While I generally make an effort to respond to Farkers who post to me directly, I am not in any way obligated to answer your questions simply because you posed them. I don't owe you and answer, you don't owe me one. If I think you make a good point, or that I need to clarify something about my own position that could have been clearer, or if you said something that I think should be challenged I may choose to do so. Same as anyone else here. If I don't, I don't. Nothing personal.

Don't take offense if I don't answer everything you might wish. You are free to declare yourself "winnah!" if that's your bag, or use the ignore function, or keep asking hoping I will change my mind.

And so when you say "Forgive me if I don't take your "I dub thee dumb-assery" response to heavily edited down quotes as gospel."

I say: Why would you EVER take ANY Farker's posts as gospel? That's not how it works, and no one asked you to do any such thing. If you have a counterpoint to make, then make it. We can discuss like adults.

But please note, I am not here to "win". I am not trying to convert anyone's thinking on a topic, and I DAMN sure don't give a shiat about this brain-dead binary politico redteam/blueteam mental disease that seems to have infected half of Fark. I come here to have a lively discussion with rational and informed people, to sharpen my own thinking and to be challenged with good reasoning or data. Insults, personal attacks, impugning of motives, and all the feeble recourses of small thinkers is part of Fark, but it's not why I am here.
 
2013-12-05 02:55:35 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: guestguy: I am asking you to explain how they are dumb-ass arguments.

I did. Many times. Previous comments are available for review. You are coming in the next day. I do not feel the need to retype everything all over again, but if you would like, here is my stock answer to the argument that "Good" Christians should be 'doing something' about these "bad Christians".


Come on, dealing with the problematic people is everyone's job.  That's how civilized society works.  Other Christians have no more obligation to deal with them than you do.
 
2013-12-05 03:03:09 PM  

guestguy: The difference is, I have seen far more examples of Muslims publicly decrying the actions of their highly visible crazies than Christians.


I can't speak to your experience, but as mentioned above, America has a very pronounced and long-standing tradition of not critiquing someone else's Christianity. It's baked into our national identity and goes back to the very founding of our nation. Also

That being said, any number of mainstream Christians loudly and repeatedly denounce the likes of the KKK and murderers like Eric Rudolph or other abortion doctor killers.

But going out of their way to chastise or condemn a variant of Christianity? Unlikely. Also, ultimately, what would that do? Do you think the people who think all Christians are assholes will change their minds anyway?

guestguy: it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison in the first place, as most of the time you're talking about violent tendencies (e.g. Muslims are terrorists!) vs. general jackassery/intolerance (e.g. Christians hate gay people!) when lumping those religions in with their associated loud crazies.


No it's not a direct parallel. I chose it because it is a more extreme and blatant example. But the reasoning behind it essentially the same. "Hey you! You are a bald guy! Why don't you tell that bald guy over there to stop being an asshole! If you don't, then I guess all you bald guys are the same, and I'll assume you are an asshole too, you asshole baldy!"

We agree it's nonsense.
 
2013-12-05 03:57:53 PM  

technicolor-misfit: Look, fine... I'll be serious for a minute.

Snap was just cut by $5 billion dollars during a time in which those on the bottom end of our society are hurting about as bad as they ever have, and conservatives support it by about 70%. The roughly 30% who don't will likely continue to support the movement and party that allowed it to happen and encourages shredding the safety net even more.

You can spare me all the crap about "not all conservatives hate compassion" because at the end of the day, in the practical world, when you're taking food money out of the hands of the very poorest among us, it's a distinction without a farking difference whether or not someone "hates" compassion, or is simply indifferent, or even if they actually take the time to pay lip service to compassion.

What farking good does it do to be compassionate if you don't act on it?

What farking difference does it make to be compassionate if you endorse the very same policies that the ugly, angry, dollar-bill throwing mob cheers on?

So yeah, I talk shiat about conservatives. But not because I want internet high fives. Not because I want to take part in a liberal circle-jerk. I do it because I farking hate them. Because they're rotten dicks who support atrocious and mean-spirited policies. You can try to attach a bunch of high-minded economic philosophy to WHY they support those policies... but I'm tired of playing the let's be polite and agree to disagree game when it gets to the point that we're talking about whether or not children should be allowed to go hungry.


this^
 
2013-12-05 04:07:09 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I did. Many times. Previous comments are available for review. You are coming in the next day. I do not feel the need to retype everything all over again, but if you would like, here is my stock answer to the argument that "Good" Christians should be 'doing something' about these "bad Christians".



Fair enough; I did not read through the hundreds of comments since my last post, and I probably should have before responding.  However, in your answer to me you could have easily said exactly that, rather than editing out that section of my post entirely.

BojanglesPaladin: BojanglesPaladin: I'm not sure where to go with your weird view of the obligations of one group of Christians to squelch another group who thinks differently, or how you think that would be a good idea, and I have no idea how you think Joel Osteen trumps the Vatican for instance, but I don't see any point fighting about it. But out of curiosity, what do you think the new Pope is DOING?



This dreck does not explain how it's a dumb-ass argument.  It attempts to recharacterize the argument and flippantly dismisses that new version of it.  It was also thoroughly dismantled by technicolor-misfit in earlier posts.

BojanglesPaladin: Also, this may come as a shock, but when responding to a specific point you made it is customary to quote that specific part. Yes, you may have said any number of other things, related and unrelated. Since I may or may not choose to address every single point you may have made, I specify which portion I consider relevant and which I am responding to. That's how Fark works.



It doesn't come as a shock at all.  As you can see, I am going point-by-point through your post right now.  What I'm not doing is deleting large chunks of the points you're making (which have taken you multiple sentences to fully convey), and attacking one or two lines which have a different, more easily refuted meaning when taken completely on their own rather than part of the larger point (i.e. out of context).  It comes off as either a sleazy method of argument (deliberately taking out of context quotes to twist the intended meaning), or just dickish dismissiveness.

BojanglesPaladin: And lastly, While I generally make an effort to respond to Farkers who post to me directly, I am not in any way obligated to answer your questions simply because you posed them. I don't owe you and answer, you don't owe me one. If I think you make a good point, or that I need to clarify something about my own position that could have been clearer, or if you said something that I think should be challenged I may choose to do so. Same as anyone else here. If I don't, I don't. Nothing personal.

Don't take offense if I don't answer everything you might wish. You are free to declare yourself "winnah!" if that's your bag, or use the ignore function, or keep asking hoping I will change my mind.



I didn't say that you owe me jack shiat.  I said you are encouraged to answer my question, which was directly related to the statement that followed it.  See, by deleting that question, you altered the apparent meaning of the sentence that you responded to.  It was intended to be a snarky way of saying "explain your assertion".  Instead, you twisted it into something about me inherently believing some farkers posts but not others...or something equally silly.  Do you see what happens when you take things out of context?

BojanglesPaladin: And so when you say "Forgive me if I don't take your "I dub thee dumb-assery" response to heavily edited down quotes as gospel."

I say: Why would you EVER take ANY Farker's posts as gospel? That's not how it works, and no one asked you to do any such thing. If you have a counterpoint to make, then make it. We can discuss like adults.



The only point I had is that you should explain why it's a dumb-ass argument, rather than just stating it as fact.  As I noted above, you got completely off in the weeds by taking that statement on its own without the accompanying question.

BojanglesPaladin: But please note, I am not here to "win". I am not trying to convert anyone's thinking on a topic, and I DAMN sure don't give a shiat about this brain-dead binary politico redteam/blueteam mental disease that seems to have infected half of Fark. I come here to have a lively discussion with rational and informed people, to sharpen my own thinking and to be challenged with good reasoning or data. Insults, personal attacks, impugning of motives, and all the feeble recourses of small thinkers is part of Fark, but it's not why I am here.



If this is true, then I suggest addressing points in their entirety, rather than sniping out of context quotes of the people you're attempting to have a lively discussion with.
 
2013-12-05 04:33:42 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I can't speak to your experience, but as mentioned above, America has a very pronounced and long-standing tradition of not critiquing someone else's Christianity. It's baked into our national identity and goes back to the very founding of our nation. Also



They don't even have to critique it so much as repeatedly and publicly say "We, the vast majority of Christians in this country, disagree with you; you do not speak for us."  I don't see how that's even judgmental...slightly confrontational maybe, but not judgmental.

BojanglesPaladin: That being said, any number of mainstream Christians loudly and repeatedly denounce the likes of the KKK and murderers like Eric Rudolph or other abortion doctor killers.



The KKK and abortion doctor killers are not viewed as mainstream Christianity in this country.  It is easy to condemn something that is already widely considered an abberation of your religion.

BojanglesPaladin: But going out of their way to chastise or condemn a variant of Christianity? Unlikely. Also, ultimately, what would that do? Do you think the people who think all Christians are assholes will change their minds anyway?



Yes, it very well could.  If nothing else, they then can make a legitimate complaint about being lumped in with them.

BojanglesPaladin: No it's not a direct parallel. I chose it because it is a more extreme and blatant example. But the reasoning behind it essentially the same. "Hey you! You are a bald guy! Why don't you tell that bald guy over there to stop being an asshole! If you don't, then I guess all you bald guys are the same, and I'll assume you are an asshole too, you asshole baldy!"

We agree it's nonsense.



Ugh, I understand what you were trying to do, but the bald guy thing is just an abysmal way of doing it...we're talking about religion which entails a philosophy dictating how you live your life.  It is also something that is adopted by choice.  As such, your religion is far more likely to say something about you as a person than something silly like baldness.  If the public face of your religion is awful, and the majority of the adherents disagree with that public face, yet do nothing to differentiate themselves from it, then they really have no right to complain when assumptions are made based off of that.

That said, I personally try to avoid making such assumptions, and believe others should do the same...but I can't really be too angry at those who do in this case.  They are not being provided evidence to the contrary.
 
2013-12-05 08:38:18 PM  

guestguy: If the public face of your religion is awful, and the majority of the adherents disagree with that public face, yet do nothing to differentiate themselves from it, then they really have no right to complain when assumptions are made based off of that.


Let's try this a different way. Who says that these assholes are the public face? People who have a jaundiced view of "Christians"? People who fixate on the negatives because that's what they are looking for?

How is what a minority of non-denominational congregations who make up, what 17% of Christians, the 'public face of Christianity' compared to the Vatican, Episcopalians (who ordain lesbians and openly gay ministers), Methodists (like the Clintons), Presbyterians, and ALL the rest not the actual public face?

How many people know Mother Theresa? And how many people have even heard of Joel Osteen?

Just because lot of people like to biatch about the prosperity assholes, doesn't mean the overwhelming majority of Americans who are Christians have any obligation to "set the record straight" for people who don't like Christianity anyway.

Even if they did (and sometimes do) it makes no difference to people who dislike the whole thing anyway.

Anymore that Bruce Springsteen or Kiss have an obligation to remind people who don't like pop music that Mylee Cyrus isn't "real rock and roll".
 
2013-12-05 10:41:58 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: how many people have even heard of Joel Osteen?


How many people have heard of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachmann, etc?  Maybe they don't all strictly follow the prosperity doctrine in particular, but they are/were powerful media voices representing themselves as espousing Christian ideals.  These are examples of some of the most visible Christians in our country right now...they are acting as the public face of the religion.  Do the majority of Christians share the views of these people?  Because that's who they will be lumped in with if they don't publicly differentiate themselves from them.
 
2013-12-06 02:11:19 AM  

guestguy: BojanglesPaladin: how many people have even heard of Joel Osteen?

How many people have heard of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachmann, etc?  Maybe they don't all strictly follow the prosperity doctrine in particular, but they are/were powerful media voices representing themselves as espousing Christian ideals.  These are examples of some of the most visible Christians in our country right now...they are acting as the public face of the religion.  Do the majority of Christians share the views of these people?  Because that's who they will be lumped in with if they don't publicly differentiate themselves from them.


I'm not sure that any of the people you listed espouse 'prosperity gospel' at all and some of them, like Rush Limbaugh don't even really identify as Christians. I think you may have just made my point for me.

But yes, by your logic, Bruce Springsteen and Bob Dylan should expect to be lumped in with Miley Cyrus and Marilyn Manson, because they have never made any effort to publicly differentiate themselves.

And seriously. The Episcopal Church is ordaining openly gay and lesbian ministers. I think that is a very public differentiation.

You just keep repeating yourself. You say that Christians have some obligation to denounce other Christians or else they should all expect to be treated like the least palatable of them all. And I say they have no such obligation, and the people who are prejudiced and insisting that they are all the same are the ones in error- they are the ones judging the majority based on their own perception of a sub-group, even when these unaffiliated mega churches are espousing a distorted quasi-theology that is in direct opposition to most Christian faiths.

Joel Osteen and his ilk have as much to do with Christianity as North Korea has to do with democracy.
 
2013-12-06 02:59:02 AM  

BojanglesPaladin: I think you may have just made my point for me.



What point is that exactly?  Seems like you've changed it a couple different times throughout the course of this discussion.  My point has always been that loudmouth asshole Christians have become the public face of Christianity in the US, and that if good Christians take offense to being lumped in with them, they should publicly decry/denounce/differentiate themselves from them or they have no right to whine about it.

BojanglesPaladin: But yes, by your logic, Bruce Springsteen and Bob Dylan should expect to be lumped in with Miley Cyrus and Marilyn Manson, because they have never made any effort to publicly differentiate themselves.



Stop making comparisons...seriously, just stop.  You are terrible at it.

BojanglesPaladin: And seriously. The Episcopal Church is ordaining openly gay and lesbian ministers. I think that is a very public differentiation.



I agree, that is outstanding and certainly a step in the right direction, but they need to accompany this with a greater media presence as well if they hope to take back the public perception of Christianity.  The pope is, by far, the best example of the right way to go about it.  I honestly hope good Christian leaders in the US follow his lead.
 
Displayed 378 of 378 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
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