Page 2 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,358
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

26 Oct 2011, 5:25 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I have friends who are Catholic, and while I don't agree with all their theology, I still consider them to to Christians.
My favorite Catholic, though, is Michael Moore, as his love and concern for those without, and his fight for their interest as his response to God's grace, is very exemplary of Christianity in general.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Michael Moore is worth around $50 million, even though he chooses to dress like a bum. So as a humanitarian, his "love and concern for those without" comes up a bit short, especially when you consider that a) he claims to be against capitalism and for spreading the wealth around (how about his wealth? Lead by example!), and that b) he made his millions as a capitalist.

So he's a rich fat cat who has love and concern for those without.

He has $49+ million more than he needs to survive, while others he could help are dying of hunger. So he's easily on the greedy side of the greedy/giving scale.

Quote:
Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!” The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

Mark 10:23-25


Michael Moore in fact uses his money to help the disadvantaged. That's the whole point of his documentaries, which in fact have drawn attention to the needs of the poor, the under insured, downsized workers, etc. And now, he's lending his support to the Occupy Wall Street movement, speaking up for the 99% who have been left adrift by unregulated capitalism.
And when has Sean Hannity ever cared about those without? As I recall, he and the rest of Fox noise is on this kick so popular among conservatives these days, that if you complain about social and economic inequities between the super rich an the rest of us, you're engaging in class warfare against the poor, poor rich!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Hannity cares about defeating Obama, under whom black unemployment has increased to its highest level ever (16.7%). Also, by every metric you care to name, Obama has destroyed the economy. Protestors shouting at rich executives doesn't do anything, and Obama knows it. He still gets the huge campaign contributions from the very same rich corporations these OWS people he claims to support are protesting! He likes a good rabble, so he keeps stoking it on. Again, HE is the PRESIDENT. HIS policies have hurt these people who are protesting, along with the rest of America. So WHY aren't they protesting HIM?
Call in to Hannity's radio program sometimes. Lemme know when, I'd love to hear it.


The fact of the matter is, Obama had tried to fix the economy, it it was the Republicans who had dug their heels in. Obama, to his discredit, had tried to be a conciliator working with the right. The economy is in the toilet because of unfettered capitalism, and because the Republicans are more interested in siding with big money who they appease with not only tax cuts, but also with cuts in social programs. And now, they want the rest of us to shoulder the tax burden, while the so called job creators are free to create employment - - in Bangladesh.l And yes, this does all go back to Bush.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,358
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

26 Oct 2011, 5:37 pm

HerrGrimm wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
I also take issue with the Crusades and the Inquisition, as well as with the Catholic Church's multi-century record of hatred of God's Chosen People, the Jews, all the way through the Nazi era, where they sat idly by while millions were slaughtered.


Martin Luther was one of the most virulent anti-Semites in Christian history. I also take offense because numerous evangelicals only like the Jews as part of a plan for Armageddon.

You mean while 6 million Jews were slaughtered? Around, 11 million total people were killed, but for some reason I have a problem believing you thought about the Communists, gays, Roma, and even other Catholics who converted from Judaism dying. I think you and the Catholic hierarchy are in unison on this one concerning your thoughts on those people.


(Sigh) While Luther in his later years had written some very ugly things about Jews, he never had those things put into action, nor did any other Protestant religious or civil leader. Considering that the worst history of Antisemitism was one of violent action, Luther hardly belongs anywhere the top of the list. And while Luther's hateful writings against Jews was used by the Nazis to justify their position, those writings had almost been forgotten till Hitler and friends had dug them up. In no way do any of these Antisemitic writings have any influence on modern American Lutheranism.

And to give you a little history; Luther wrote those things only in later life, after he had more than one catastrophic illness which had left his behavior and thinking erratic. A very good argument for organic brain damage can be made.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

26 Oct 2011, 5:49 pm

HerrGrimm wrote:
Bataar, while I question if Pius XII actually did that, I am apologizing to you. This hate thread was started by my sayings on another thread and I did not intend for this to happen, and I did not expect to happen. I am sorry you saw this.


You give yourself too much credit. User "91" wrote me today and asked what I thought of Catholicism. The length of my response warranted simply starting a thread where everyone could participate in the discussion. I don't feel strongly one way or another about you.



JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

26 Oct 2011, 5:50 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Ragtime wrote:

Hannity cares about defeating Obama, under whom black unemployment has increased to its highest level ever (16.7%). Also, by every metric you care to name, Obama has destroyed the economy. Protestors shouting at rich executives doesn't do anything, and Obama knows it. He still gets the huge campaign contributions from the very same rich corporations these OWS people he claims to support are protesting! He likes a good rabble, so he keeps stoking it on. Again, HE is the PRESIDENT. HIS policies have hurt these people who are protesting, along with the rest of America. So WHY aren't they protesting HIM?
Call in to Hannity's radio program sometimes. Lemme know when, I'd love to hear it.


There is no way that I would call that Papist. :lol:


Probably cause he would mop the floor with you.

Fact is, the blame Bush thing has gotten old and people don't believe it anymore, so now he's blaming the rich and Republicans.

Well this didn't help FDR in an offyear election back in the 30s, in fact it backfired and actually saved the Republican party whom picked up quite a few house and senate seats because people were afraid FDR was trying to become another dictator.


Yes Cuz Hanity is a super-genius double wash-out bartender I quake at his utterances.


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


HerrGrimm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 987
Location: United States

26 Oct 2011, 5:52 pm

Ragtime wrote:
HerrGrimm wrote:
Bataar, while I question if Pius XII actually did that, I am apologizing to you. This hate thread was started by my sayings on another thread and I did not intend for this to happen, and I did not expect to happen. I am sorry you saw this.


You give yourself too much credit. User "91" wrote me today and asked what I thought of Catholicism. The length of my response warranted simply starting a thread where everyone could participate in the discussion. I don't feel strongly one way or another about you.


That is a rather large problem for me sometimes. I am sorry for thinking that. Even though if you did feel strongly about me, I hope it was complete hate.


_________________
"You just like to go around rebuking people with your ravenous wolf face and snarling commentary." - Ragtime


Last edited by HerrGrimm on 26 Oct 2011, 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

26 Oct 2011, 5:53 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
HerrGrimm wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
I also take issue with the Crusades and the Inquisition, as well as with the Catholic Church's multi-century record of hatred of God's Chosen People, the Jews, all the way through the Nazi era, where they sat idly by while millions were slaughtered.


Martin Luther was one of the most virulent anti-Semites in Christian history. I also take offense because numerous evangelicals only like the Jews as part of a plan for Armageddon.

You mean while 6 million Jews were slaughtered? Around, 11 million total people were killed, but for some reason I have a problem believing you thought about the Communists, gays, Roma, and even other Catholics who converted from Judaism dying. I think you and the Catholic hierarchy are in unison on this one concerning your thoughts on those people.


(Sigh) While Luther in his later years had written some very ugly things about Jews, he never had those things put into action, nor did any other Protestant religious or civil leader. Considering that the worst history of Antisemitism was one of violent action, Luther hardly belongs anywhere the top of the list. And while Luther's hateful writings against Jews was used by the Nazis to justify their position, those writings had almost been forgotten till Hitler and friends had dug them up. In no way do any of these Antisemitic writings have any influence on modern American Lutheranism.

And to give you a little history; Luther wrote those things only in later life, after he had more than one catastrophic illness which had left his behavior and thinking erratic. A very good argument for organic brain damage can be made.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I haven't studied Luther extensively, but the man who wrote those anti-Semitic things is not the same man who nailed the 95 theses to the door, passionately pleading for honesty of doctrine from the Catholic Church when moved by God to do so, so I tend to agree with you. His body of work taken as a whole simply doesn't reflect a true anti-Semite, but a person who longed for the truth of God above all.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,358
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

26 Oct 2011, 6:03 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
HerrGrimm wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
I also take issue with the Crusades and the Inquisition, as well as with the Catholic Church's multi-century record of hatred of God's Chosen People, the Jews, all the way through the Nazi era, where they sat idly by while millions were slaughtered.


Martin Luther was one of the most virulent anti-Semites in Christian history. I also take offense because numerous evangelicals only like the Jews as part of a plan for Armageddon.

You mean while 6 million Jews were slaughtered? Around, 11 million total people were killed, but for some reason I have a problem believing you thought about the Communists, gays, Roma, and even other Catholics who converted from Judaism dying. I think you and the Catholic hierarchy are in unison on this one concerning your thoughts on those people.


(Sigh) While Luther in his later years had written some very ugly things about Jews, he never had those things put into action, nor did any other Protestant religious or civil leader. Considering that the worst history of Antisemitism was one of violent action, Luther hardly belongs anywhere the top of the list. And while Luther's hateful writings against Jews was used by the Nazis to justify their position, those writings had almost been forgotten till Hitler and friends had dug them up. In no way do any of these Antisemitic writings have any influence on modern American Lutheranism.

And to give you a little history; Luther wrote those things only in later life, after he had more than one catastrophic illness which had left his behavior and thinking erratic. A very good argument for organic brain damage can be made.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I haven't studied Luther extensively, but the man who wrote those anti-Semitic things is not the same man who nailed the 95 theses to the door, passionately pleading for honesty of doctrine from the Catholic Church when moved by God to do so, so I tend to agree with you. His body of work taken as a whole simply doesn't reflect a true anti-Semite, but a person who longed for the truth of God above all.


8)

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

26 Oct 2011, 7:00 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Bataar wrote:
Have you read the Bible?


Yes. The whole thing twice, and certain books about 30 times. Thanks for your interest.
Surprised you didn't become an atheist by now then.


_________________
.


91
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

26 Oct 2011, 8:54 pm

Ragtime wrote:
HerrGrimm wrote:
Bataar, while I question if Pius XII actually did that, I am apologizing to you. This hate thread was started by my sayings on another thread and I did not intend for this to happen, and I did not expect to happen. I am sorry you saw this.


You give yourself too much credit. User "91" wrote me today and asked what I thought of Catholicism. The length of my response warranted simply starting a thread where everyone could participate in the discussion. I don't feel strongly one way or another about you.


My intention was not to stir a public sectarian pot, rather just have a private chat. I personally see myself as a 'mere Christian' first and a Catholic after that.

Ragtime wrote:
I find wholly unscriptural their promotion of Mary to "co-redemptrix"


That title is hotly debated within the Church, but it does not mean what you think it does. The title is not meant to imply that Mary is the redeemer, since she herself needed redemption also through Christ. The term mostly relates to the view of Pius XII that she was predestined. The special place of Mary within Christian theology goes back to the first century and is clearly evident within the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch. His writings give us a clear view into Christianity's early years and it is a telling sign that within his lifetime the practice of the power of the Bishops, the real presence of the Eucharist and even the use of the word Catholic are all emphasized as mainstream (katholikos meaning according to the whole) Christian teachings.

Baatar has kind of taken care of the 'praying to the dead' claim. Also I would like to add that you would find it in the Bible, if Luther had not chopped Maccabees out. Baatar has also taken care of the whole 'salvation by works claim'. I would like to add that the Catholic Church has a joint doctrine on justification with the Lutherans now... we actually agree on the matter


_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.


Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

26 Oct 2011, 10:40 pm

91 wrote:
I would like to add that the Catholic Church has a joint doctrine on justification with the Lutherans now... we actually agree on the matter


North Ireland can breathe free.

As for Bataar's explanations, each one is symantics-based, and thus weak to me. Mary is revered beyond that which she should be. She should never be prayed to, only God should. Prayer to anyone else never exists in a righteous context in all of Scripture. Also, asking dead people to pray is prayer itself. "Pray" means ask, as in "I pray thee let me go." And as the verse I quoted says, you're not to "consult" them, which would mean any contact. As for his claim that the Catholic Church never teaches salvation is by anything but God's grace, I just find that disingenuous; the Catholic Church does not teach full and final assurance of salvation -- and, on that note, they invent Purgatory out of thin air. They teach that sins must be followed with little payment rituals, like "hail Mary"s. Not true! Jesus died for ALL sins for ALL time, because He was an infinite Being who was infinitely innocent when He died. Therefore His sacrifice is once-for-all. You don't need payment for salvation. The Bible is clear that the only other way to Heaven besides Jesus Christ is a non-way for any human: keeping the law perfectly.
As for the pope, that office simply should not exist; there are only two classes of believers in Scripture -- God, and humans. That's why such "layers of middle management", if you will, are expressly forbidden in Scripture (Mark 10:42-44). It's always us-to-God, God-to-us -- there is NO other order of divine communication or accountability in the New Testament. The Bible teaches that, among each other, we are accountable as equals, not with a church member confessing to a "father" and asking that mere man to "forgive me for I have sinned", in that kind of one-way, you're-above-me fashion. That leadership is just a false, self-appointed priesthood. We are all priests at Salvation, not just some of us later on (1 Peter 2:9-10). And we are also all saints, not just who the Catholic Church deems suitable for it. A saint is a Christian.



Last edited by Ragtime on 26 Oct 2011, 11:18 pm, edited 6 times in total.

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

26 Oct 2011, 10:53 pm

Ragtime wrote:
91 wrote:
I would like to add that the Catholic Church has a joint doctrine on justification with the Lutherans now... we actually agree on the matter


*North Ireland can breathe free.

As for Bataar's explanations, each one is symantics-based, and thus unconvincing to me. Mary is revered beyond that which she should be. She should never be prayed to, only God should. Prayer to anyone else never exists in a righteous context in all of Scripture. Also, asking dead people to pray is prayer itself. "Pray" means ask, as in "I pray thee let me go."


Because Catholics are the problem there?
Oh I'm sorry I did not mean to pray to you but I do not know any other way to get info.
:)


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


TheBicyclingGuitarist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,332

26 Oct 2011, 11:26 pm

I read the Bible and see clear indications Jesus intended to teach the same message as Buddha regarding enlightenment. There has been much editing of the Scriptures, but in some passages it seems pretty clear to me that is what He intended. There is also some legitimate doubt about whether or not Jesus was an actual historical personage, much less divine. If He was a manifestation of God in the flesh, it seems clear to me He was trying to tell us that each of us are that too. Of course that was and is a subversive message, so the Scriptures were edited heavily. It is still possible to read the Christian Bible from a Hindu perspective (for example) and see what I am talking about. I am neither the first nor the only person to realize this. It is my opinion (and not just mine) that Christians put Jesus on a pedestal and worshiped the messenger instead of understanding His message.

I don't think the Christian Bible is relevant to us today. It was written by and for people of a different time and place. Perhaps it communicates timeless truths, but in my opinion those truths are also expressed in other religions that were in their turn written by and for people of their particular times and places. If one gets hung up on the details of stories used to communicate spiritual teachings, it is easy to completely miss the point of what the stories are trying to teach. Also, such teachings are by their nature ineffable (cannot be adequately communicated by language alone), and once put into words they become subject to errors of translation, misinterpretation, and polluted and diluted by cultural baggage.

So for me, to hear Protestants bashing Catholics or vice versa is ridiculous. They are both right, and both wrong. It is possible to transcend the polarities of ordinary thinking and go beyond thoughts or feelings to directly experience one's ground of being. Different people are at different levels of spiritual awareness, and that's okay. For some, the fundie path is the only way. I disagree with those who insist their interpretation is the only way for everyone. I am not saying my interpretation is the only way. For you, maybe being a Protestant Christian is the only way that will work for you. For others, perhaps being a Catholic. I do not see this as a problem nor a conflict. Obviously, many people don't see it this way, and of course, I could be wrong!

While I have no evidence besides my personal experience (which cannot be shared but only vaguely described to others) about these spiritual matters, I am on much more solid footing regarding the fact evolution happens. On this subject, the Catholics are much more grounded in reality than some Protestant denominations. Most Christian sects (including Roman Catholics and most Protestant churches) either accept the fact evolution happens or say it is not relevant to their faith. Those denominations that don't though seriously damage their credibility on spiritual matters by denying what is observably real. Saint Augustine warned a long time ago (ca. 400 A.D.) that if Christians make ignorant assertions about the natural world that nonbelievers can easily see are false, it can turn people away from Christ. It also makes Christians look really stupid. Those Christians who deny the fact of evolution are just as wrong as if they were to insist the earth is flat.


_________________
"When you ride over sharps, you get flats!"--The Bicycling Guitarist, May 13, 2008


Last edited by TheBicyclingGuitarist on 27 Oct 2011, 1:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Cash__
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2010
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,381
Location: Missouri

26 Oct 2011, 11:58 pm

What the OP said. Plus their constant hiding of and moving around of pedophile priests.

catholic logic:
Homosexual = bad
priest touching boy = Depends? is anyone looking?



91
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

27 Oct 2011, 1:05 am

Ragtime wrote:
As for Bataar's explanations, each one is symantics-based, and thus weak to me.


Bataar's reasoning is sound, it is based on Catholic doctrine and the reasoning behind it; your position unfortunately seems to be based on appearances.

Ragtime wrote:
Mary is revered beyond that which she should be. She should never be prayed to, only God should.


We do not pray to Mary. It is as simple as that. We ask her to pray to God for us; now and at the hour of our death.

Ragtime wrote:
Prayer to anyone else never exists in a righteous context in all of Scripture.


Nonsense; 1 Timothy 2:5 says that we ought to pray for one another. That we should pray for our king's and queen's; that God might intercede on our behalf. The dead also engage with the living for example in Matt 17:3 where Elijah and Moses talk to Christ. Paul encourages us to pray for each other all the time Rom. 15:30–32, Eph. 6:18–20, Col. 4:3, 1 Thess. 5:25, 2 Thess. 3:1, and if the Protestants had not cut out Maccabees you would see clear instances of prayer to the dead. We ask the dead to pray for us; Mary included.

Ragtime wrote:
Also, asking dead people to pray is prayer itself.


No more than a pray for you would be a prayer to you.

Ragtime wrote:
As for his claim that the Catholic Church never teaches salvation is by anything but God's grace, I just find that disingenuous;


From the joint declaration on the doctrine of justification;

"The strict emphasis on the passivity of human beings concerning their justification never meant, on the Lutheran side, to contest the full personal participation in believing; rather it meant to exclude any cooperation in the event of justification itself. Justification is the work of Christ alone, the work of grace alone"

"Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works."

Seems pretty clear cut to me. The main issue I have is that this is rarely taught to many Protestants; especially evangelicals.

Ragtime wrote:
they invent Purgatory out of thin air.


Catholic doctrine does not consider purgatory to be a place; but there is plenty scriptural evidence for some sort of intermediate state; especially in the OT. I am not really read up on Purgatory but if you are looking for something on the subject check out; John Henry Cardinal Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine.

Ragtime wrote:
That's why such "layers of middle management", if you will, are expressly forbidden in Scripture


The passage you listed does not expressly forbid power within the Church, it is a statement that leaders should be servants. Now I will admit that Catholics do not always get it right but neither does anyone. The authority of Peter is well established; Matthew (16:17‑19), Luke (22:32)and John (21:15‑17). It is however within the apostolic tradition that you will encounter the Bishops and the Papacy etc. Protestant study of the early Church usually stops at the moment the books of the NT have been written. If you want to understand how the people believed then, you need to read about the early Church. You need to read St. Ignatius of Antioch, St Iranaus, Pope St Clement I, St Polycarp,St Athanasius, etc.

I am not sure I caught every issue you raised there but surely I have given you grounds enough for second thoughts regarding your rejection of the Catholic position.


_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

27 Oct 2011, 1:44 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I have friends who are Catholic, and while I don't agree with all their theology, I still consider them to to Christians.
My favorite Catholic, though, is Michael Moore, as his love and concern for those without, and his fight for their interest as his response to God's grace, is very exemplary of Christianity in general.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Michael Moore is worth around $50 million, even though he chooses to dress like a bum. So as a humanitarian, his "love and concern for those without" comes up a bit short, especially when you consider that a) he claims to be against capitalism and for spreading the wealth around (how about his wealth? Lead by example!), and that b) he made his millions as a capitalist.

So he's a rich fat cat who has love and concern for those without.

He has $49+ million more than he needs to survive, while others he could help are dying of hunger. So he's easily on the greedy side of the greedy/giving scale.

Quote:
Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!” The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

Mark 10:23-25


Michael Moore in fact uses his money to help the disadvantaged. That's the whole point of his documentaries, which in fact have drawn attention to the needs of the poor, the under insured, downsized workers, etc. And now, he's lending his support to the Occupy Wall Street movement, speaking up for the 99% who have been left adrift by unregulated capitalism.
And when has Sean Hannity ever cared about those without? As I recall, he and the rest of Fox noise is on this kick so popular among conservatives these days, that if you complain about social and economic inequities between the super rich an the rest of us, you're engaging in class warfare against the poor, poor rich!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Hannity cares about defeating Obama, under whom black unemployment has increased to its highest level ever (16.7%). Also, by every metric you care to name, Obama has destroyed the economy. Protestors shouting at rich executives doesn't do anything, and Obama knows it. He still gets the huge campaign contributions from the very same rich corporations these OWS people he claims to support are protesting! He likes a good rabble, so he keeps stoking it on. Again, HE is the PRESIDENT. HIS policies have hurt these people who are protesting, along with the rest of America. So WHY aren't they protesting HIM?
Call in to Hannity's radio program sometimes. Lemme know when, I'd love to hear it.


The fact of the matter is, Obama had tried to fix the economy, it it was the Republicans who had dug their heels in. Obama, to his discredit, had tried to be a conciliator working with the right. The economy is in the toilet because of unfettered capitalism, and because the Republicans are more interested in siding with big money who they appease with not only tax cuts, but also with cuts in social programs. And now, they want the rest of us to shoulder the tax burden, while the so called job creators are free to create employment - - in Bangladesh.l And yes, this does all go back to Bush.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Looks more like Obama has tried to wreck the economy even further.

Btw, Obama was one of the ones sueing banks when they weren't making these loans to people that couldn't afford them.



Tadzio
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 877

27 Oct 2011, 2:35 am

Cash__ wrote:
What the OP said. Plus their constant hiding of and moving around of pedophile priests.

catholic logic:
Homosexual = bad
priest touching boy = Depends? is anyone looking?




Tadzio wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
I've chosen to assume that LjosalfrBlot's and LKL's error is already apparent to all -- that any comparison of God's rights to human rights is going to be flawed from the start. Why they think this makes no sense I cannot tell.


Tadzio wrote:
Joker wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Joker wrote:

The right wingers do but the left often pass way dumber laws.


What about laws against sodomy. That is purely a right wing stunt.

ruveyn


That is true but we never enforce sodomy laws unless it is rape.


Who are the "we" you are talking about? "Your" sodomy laws were enforced until the U.S. Supreme Court stopped them with a jurisdictional case involving Texas: LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS http://docs.justia.com/cases/supreme/539/558.pdf

The laws are "still on the books", but blocked by the federal courts (in June 2003):

"Blackstone managed to impartially chronicle then-current statues, dated from the reigns of Henry VII [sic?, VIII] and Elizabeth I. Such statutes made sodomy a felony punishable by death." "Journal of law & social challenges, Volume 2", University of San Francisco School of Law, 1998, page 71. and:

SUBCHAPTER VII. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALITY AND DECENCY.
Article 26.
Offenses against Public Morality and Decency.
§ 14‑177. Crime against nature.
If any person shall commit the crime against nature, with mankind or beast, he shall be punished as a Class I felon. (5 Eliz., c. 17; 25 Hen. VIII, c. 6; R.C., c. 34, s. 6; 1868‑9, c. 167, s. 6; Code, s. 1010; Rev., s. 3349; C.S., s. 4336; 1965, c. 621, s. 4; 1979, c. 760, s. 5; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 47; 1981, c. 63, s. 1, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1191; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/s ... apter=0014

"Your" stance involving rape sounds very familiar, as in other posts elsewhere, namely:

Well I see the supposedly optimistic outlook of one of the "Good Old Boy" candidates in the 1990 Texas gubernatorial race is still showing some signs of parasitic life from similar devotees of finding the good in crimes against individual rights and other crimes of macabre inhumanities.

I know our Vice Principal told me and everybody else that we all better just keep quite and not tell anybody anything, but someone still called the police. Being raped with brute force by a High School teacher during seizures didn't have any positive points, but the Vice Principal and police managed to suppress the negative points through intimidation. You would probably label it great service, and add the quip to "Relax and Enjoy It," just like Clayton Williams did about the Texas weather and rape.

In regards to "stop looking for someone to wipe your a**, " there were plenty of witnesses that related my teacher's attack on my epileptic body until he took off running, and I then appeared to be only concerned in getting my pants up and running off in the opposite direction, without any concern of wiping anything. For the first two times, I was more concerned with hiding my bloody butt than getting somebody to wipe it, but this still got me teased for messing by pants on the school bus rides back home, of course I got my own bus seat, because nobody wants to be near squishy bloody butt boy, though I should look on the bright side, since any one of those poor people in New York City might at any moment be selected by the vile few of the many general enforcement to get it with anything from a toilet plunger to a billy-club.

Whining is good, because lucky people tend to complain much more than the unlucky dead people.

And as far as the Great Religions Go:

I was told that God was speaking through me when I was kid with my bouts of "speaking-in-tongues." A somewhat hostile atitude was held against medicine also, somewhat along the lines of Mary Baker Eddy, but with my deja vu near perfection at times, I wondered about predestination much more. All of the more minor churches were very unstable, and anybody kissed-by-the-gods with epilepsy alternated between being regarded as Holy, and then Satanical.

I didn't grow out of epilepsy in adolescence, but I grew into additional neurological problems with epilepsy, and again religion was usually directly involved, with seizures and the Bible mixed with sex and rape. One theologian pronounced my ocassional priapic seizures during my clusters of seizures as the Father's curse, and I didn't know what the guy was talking in a rave about, until a couple decades later when I read the book "The Poisoned Embrace" by Lawrence Osborne, and the written 'Scientific Account (read anti-Semitic myth) of the male menses, recorded by Thomas de Cantimpre in the 13th century. My monthly clusters got me a lot of teasing about it being "that time of the month" for fairies. When the fathers of the church r******d to murder of others involved to force my favors and silence, I escaped and ended up living off the streets, much like an epileptic version of the movie "My Own Private Idaho."

The talk about gay marriage here in California has also again raised the spectre of marriage laws prohibiting people with disabilities not being allowed to marry like it "rightly" used to be before Atheists and Humanism "took over" the great country, with epilepsy being the fanatical subject of debate involving circumcision being God's cure for epilepsy with USA "medical evidence" being central, and bizzare third world "medical evidence" proving "female genital mutilation" curing epilepsy, as "it is in" the B***e and "even in" the K***n.

While I've been in Federal Court involving medical evidence and many treatments with epilepsy being counter to my religious beliefs, and the EEOC and SSA taking an all or nothing approach, the last church I was closely involved with, again ended in sex scandals, this time making it even on Youtube, with the leader chasing a masseuse around a table stark n***d demanding a "q*****e." Then our local U.S. Congressman told a self-proclaimed "conservative terrorist" that such a declaration makes a true patriot. With all the well armed t** partiers drinking a strong, strange brew straight from the "true American religion," handing out copies of the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," and declaring every other church "cults," I don't want to be the epileptic J** they decide to burn at the stake because my seizures make me a "fairy Satanist."

I looked for Brenda J. Robinson's book on a Kindle, but I found the book "Mad Church Disease: Overcoming the Burnout Epidemic" by Anne Jackson. With Uncle Sam teetering on popular insanity, the title might be taken a bit too seriously, and strict quarantines established to protect whatever's true at the moment.

and as I noted here:

Before adolescence I was often called "creepy" for speaking-in-tongues, foretelling the future, and reading people's aura.

During adolescence, I was often called "creepy" for my simple partial seizures skewing my verbal behaviour, and for my large Becker's Nevus, but most everyone who seen my Nevus still wanted to pet it, which seemed to make them more creepy than me (mine was more "Satyricon-Hadrian-Creepy-Mann" silky and dense, larger, left chest, and with a Janus-Antinous spectre upper divine neurological "nipple effect" from Priap** furry-left to the innocent Tadzio right, than the example often at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CoBvwhPXqg ).
I still wonder if the social joking with periodic seizures is very common, but one theologian pronounced my occasional Priapic seizures during the clusters as the Father's Curse, and I didn't know what the guy was talking about while in his ranting rave, until a couple decades later when I read the book "The Poisoned Embrace," by Lawrence Osborne, and the written 'scientific account' (anti-Semitic myth) of the male menses, recorded by Thomas de Cantimpre in the thirteenth century.

Late adolescence and early adulthood, I was "creepy" for already "deja vu" pre-knowing many people and for many perfect/near-perfect university exam scores (some professors punish students for having great scores!! !).

In adulthood, I was "creepy" for having complex partial seizures, secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures, 100% failed job interviews (with many aspects recorded with many synonyms of creepy), many Rehab discrimination lawsuits, and lately, I'm "creepy" for the way I walk and for my having to use a GPS to know where I'm at and to get anywhere, or to return from anywhere (I'm going to have to try a 360-degree cam for public excursions since my "creepiness" has received threats of "helpful" violence from the public and officials, but I've been luckier than people in Fullerton so far: http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/th ... -standard/ .

Now being labeled as an autistic "retard idiot-savant" over being catergorized with Asperger's Syndrome expands the spectrum of the Great Gods and their Wonderful Churches.

Tadzio


It's a direct observation that officials in the Catholic Church prefer longer relationships, while Non-Catholic Christian Church Officials more prefer "quickies", much as this one did: http://www.ondoctrine.com/1armsg04.htm

At least that one wasn't chasing me at the time. But when the facts are out, it is always the some such claim as:

________"Any comparison of God's rights to human rights is going to be flawed from the start."________

As if the Gods will protect such utter degeneracy of the "rights of any God" through the self-interested-AGENTS of the selected "God" over all Human Rights!! !

Tadzio


Again, it's a direct observation that officials in the Catholic Church prefer longer relationships, while Non-Catholic Christian Church Officials more prefer "quickies", much as this one did: http://www.ondoctrine.com/1armsg04.htm

At least that one wasn't chasing me at the time. But when the facts are out, it is always the some such claim as:
__________"Any comparison of God's rights to human rights is going to be flawed from the start."__________
As if the Gods will protect such utter degeneracy of the "rights of any God" through the self-interested-AGENTS of the selected "God" over all Human Rights!! !

As with Catholics, the SAME with Non-Catholic Christians (just shorter & more frequent with HOT BLOW-GUT Charismatic, commanding, and cult personalities):
Non-Catholic Christian Official Logic:
Homosexual = Sin
Non-Catholic Christian Official getting a quickie with boy or girl = Good, if the Agent-of-a-God lies keep working

Tadzio