published Sunday, December 9th, 2012

Moderation

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

127
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
EaTn said...

Did Mitt's catering to the far right help or hurt his bid for the presidency? Obama securing two-thirds of the electoral votes says it all.

December 9, 2012 at 6:31 a.m.
alprova said...

Tea-Party? What Tea-Party?

December 9, 2012 at 6:54 a.m.
Reardon said...

In voting for and expecting Romney to beat Obama, I failed to recognize the now-obvious textbook example of why anybody selling anything will fail.

The status-quo.

The toughest person to sell is the person who is content or happy with their present circumstances. Even if their are minor problems, or even if the price is high, and you can lower costs or improve on the prospect's experience.

Bottom line -- they won't seriously consider your offer until sh*t hits the fan, all hell breaks loose, and the problem is front and center and in desperate need of fixing.

Truth is, things aren't and weren't ever that bad in the past 4 years with Obama.

The Republicans hate Obama, the Democrats adore him. And the independents still lean Democrat. All that remained the same and expected.

Most Americans, despite various financial problems (credit card debt, mortgage underwater, college debt), still... got up, went to work, made money enough to cover the bills, and rinsed and repeated.

While things have been tough-ER, eh... they're getting by.

And the poor. We've successfully created a system to paper over the results of laziness, disability, and so on. Endless unemployment benefits, rising disability and food stamp claims.

Very few of the people who could be outraged never experience it because, well, things never got that bad.

So how can Republicans win an election? The general population has to be disturbed, so much so, that the alternative (Democrats view of American Society) have such basic, foundational, and obvious (key word) flaws, that the Republican message makes experiential sense and becomes appealing.

Until then, I'm afraid the American Way will be ruled by pseudo-Socialists and Machiavellians for the next decade or two. Until sh*t really hits the fan.

Should have voted for Ron Paul.

December 9, 2012 at 7:09 a.m.
joneses said...

The dummycrats still fear the Tea Party that they said was nonexistent. Being against the Tea Party is against individual freedoms, massive government spending, lower taxes for everyone, massive government intrusion of all our lives, and a balanced budget. Those against the Tea Party support more people dependent on government leading to more people living in poverty.

December 9, 2012 at 7:14 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Reardon - I'm not happy with the status quo. Romney offered solutions that would have perpetuated status quo for the 2%.

Joneses - this cartoon is not about Democrats. It is about the current tension within the Republican party between the congressional leadership and the tea party freshmen, soon to be sophmores.

December 9, 2012 at 7:31 a.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, I have noticed that you try to make everything about homosexuality an issue between you and me. You try to refute me with your own words and not Scripture. You almost never back up or refer to Scripture to support your claims.

The Christian life must be based on the teachings of Scripture, that is doctrine, and not the teachings of man or the traditions of man.

You obviously believe, contrary to Scripture, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 for instance, that a practicing homosexual can be a Christian, a child of God.

Now, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?" Yes or no?

December 9, 2012 at 7:32 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Religious nut-jobs have control of the majority of the Tea Party. Unless that faction of Akin, Mourdoch, Bachmann, Broun, and the zealots of Falwell, Roberson, and Reed are tossed out, the Tea Party will fail. Theocracy stinks just as much as fascism.

You can't call for less government interference and support religious intrusion into personal lives and private decisions without driving away social moderates and libertarians.

Exchanging servitude to the State for servitude to religion still leaves the citizen a slave. Only the master has changed.

December 9, 2012 at 8:12 a.m.
timbo said...

Moderate?...,,.Obama?.....Bennett?....Pelosi?...,..You liberals live in Bizarro World. Your lfar left government control, socialist utopia is not "moderate." You guys are so far out it would be hard for the Hubble to get a look at you. You remind me of an old lady that's had 15 face lifts and then brags about how beautiful she looks.

You people are ridiculous. The Tea Party is for "radical" stuff like eliminating debt, living within our means, personal freedom, ect. You know stuff the founders died for.....

Bennett and the rest of you liuke warm communists are in need of some intense counciling. Come down to the real world.

December 9, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Come down to the real world.

You mean, lower ourselves to your standards?

December 9, 2012 at 8:35 a.m.
timbo said...

Ikeithlu......I guess your going for that fifteenth face lift. Mirror, mirror on the wall...who is the most radical of them all......

December 9, 2012 at 8:40 a.m.
jesse said...

I'm startin to get a grip on why Clay left St.Pete!

Too bad he left his imagination down there!

I think he has just about run thru all his ideas and is now runnin on empty!

December 9, 2012 at 9:10 a.m.
GameOn said...

Bitter? Harry Reid vs. Harry Reid.

December 9, 2012 at 9:26 a.m.
jesse said...

Reid ain't no prize BUT the only way he could out do Mitch is take a double barrel 12 gauge and shoot his foot of from the knee down!

It's allmost like the repub. have a game plan to go down w/the ship!

AND it's workin!

December 9, 2012 at 9:44 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

keithlu......I guess your going for that fifteenth face lift. Mirror, mirror on the wall...who is the most radical of them all......

hahaha not really. Don't have the money for facelifts.

December 9, 2012 at 10:06 a.m.
limric said...

It never ceases to amaze me, why so many middle class people (this is especially true of the Tea Party) vote or align themselves with the rich corporate elite that are waging a class war on those very same people. Or why so many otherwise smart Tea Partiers keep buying the promise that “Supply Side/Trickle Down” economics will somehow really work?

The video below is simplistic enough that even the raging right wingers can understand. It will no doubt further antagonize them – but hopefully they at least understand (learn from) it.

The con/diversion has been to convince the passengers aboard the out of control 747 of the corporatocracy that the blur of clouds and spinning landscape viewed with horror out of the windows is caused by their own lack of discipline and the crash was the fault of the stewardesses. The implicit message is: "If only you would have been listened to ‘us’ you'd have been one of ‘us’ and you could have been cruising above it all in a CitationX like us. How sad for you, losers. And, by the way, "did you know the pilots are socialists (they’re in unions aren’t they?) They were at the controls of the plane - right?"

Is Clay’s cartoon emblematic of the Tea Party’s efforts to recapture (taking all the sugar cubes) their identity, to reject being defined by the exploitative, and co-opting imposed (and the bribes) by their phony elite standard bearers?

Or is it that the Tea Party as with the GOP, out of touch with reality, is finally taking their lumps?

Either way it makes for an unpalatable brew.

December 9, 2012 at 10:23 a.m.
dude_abides said...

timbo said... "...You know stuff the founders died for..." LOL

December 9, 2012 at 11:10 a.m.
potcat said...

OMG, The Great Distraction...........

Spot on limric..................

December 9, 2012 at 11:22 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Lu: Surely face lifts are covered under obamacare, no?

December 9, 2012 at 11:32 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Reardon 7:09: yep

December 9, 2012 at 11:58 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

Limric, that cartoon is spot on. There is not one word of it that is not accurate. I defy any teabagger or Obama-hating, rationally challenged conservative to explain how or why any part of it is not true. I would call it "Economics Common Sense, or How the Crash Happened, Explained for Dummies."

Reardon, we can take your entire post and use it as a perfectly reasonable explanation for why the brain-dead teabaggers and other people who kiss the butts of the rich and stubbornly vote against their own best interests voted for a soul-less, arrogant, flip-flopping know-nothing like Romney. Until they/you feel the pain that will arise from a deeper recession or a full blown depression stemming from playing this insane game of trickle-down economics and pretending that tax cuts for the rich "create jobs," they will continue to slumber in their languid repose of complacency and they will keep buying into the myth of trickle-down.

Con-man, you are truly obsessed with this whole homosexual thing, aren't you? You can't let it go, even when the topic at hand is a hundred miles removed from it. Methinks thou protests too much. Isn't it dark and lonely in that closet you're in?

Timbo, yes, let's talk about "bizarro world." We libs have not moved any further to the left than we ever were. We're just trying like hell to reclaim a country that you righties have stolen from the middle class and the disadvantaged and handed over to the wealthy on a friggin' silver platter. You have been blinded for so long by the lies and self-serving policies and politics of the one-percenters that you believe that their way is supposed to be the "American Way." It is you guys who have become so blinded and dumded-down that you can't see the forest for the trees. It is you guys who inhabit that "bizarro world" you speak of. Open your eyes and ears, man....the truth is out there. It sure as hell ain't in that bizarro world you live in.

December 9, 2012 at 1:35 p.m.
alprova said...

"MTJohn, I have noticed that you try to make everything about homosexuality an issue between you and me. You try to refute me with your own words and not Scripture. You almost never back up or refer to Scripture to support your claims."

Perhaps that is because there is more to being a Christian than cherry-picking a few scriptural quotes to condemn one singular example of sin that you, yourself...have contempt for. The more you type, the more convinced that the source of your contempt can be found in the mirror, whenever you gaze into one. I am firmly convinced that you are a closet case of the worst kind.

You very much remind me of Andrew Shirvell, the former Michigan assistant state attorney general, who lost his job last fall after launching an on-line campaign against the openly gay president of the student body at the University of Michigan, Chris Armstrong.

There is no doubt in my mind that Andrew Shirvell wouldn't hop in bed with another man in a New York minute, if invited to do so. The man exudes gaydar every time he opens his mouth.

"You obviously believe, contrary to Scripture, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 for instance, that a practicing homosexual can be a Christian, a child of God."

You obviously believe that the English translation of that particular sentence of scripture is accurate. It has been proven many times that it was not translated accurately.

Hint: The ancient Greek word that opinionated Bible translators assumed that it referred to homosexuality in general, was "Arsenokoitai."

Rather than to leave you hanging or to assume that you would dare do a little research on your own, I'll be happy to cut to the chase.

Arsenokoitai, as it was defined in ancient Greek, referred to a man who forcibly raped another man or young boy. Paul was not referring to two consenting adults of the same gender.

"Now, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?" Yes or no"

I'm sorry, but it's not up to you to set the parameters for an answer to that question. You're operating at all times with the assumption that the Bible you read was accurately translated into English 100% and that every word of it came from God.

You believe what you believe. Try to understand for once that no matter how many times you post and repost the same cherry-picked scriptures, your beliefs do not necessarily apply to others.

December 9, 2012 at 1:58 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Al - I replied to him in the other thread, which is where this conversation really belongs.

I agree with your observation that it is a stretch to apply the Scriptural references to homosexuality - and there are very few - to two people who choose to live together in a loving, committed, same gender relationship. Like your explanation of the Corinthians passage, the passages in Leviticus are all in the context of homosexual acts or rape, idolatry or hedonism. The passage. The one exception might be the passage in Romans and, in the broader context, that passage is about sin and grace and not a sorting out of which sins are worse than others.

December 9, 2012 at 2:26 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

DAYTONDARWIN. SAYS....You can't call for less government interference and support religious intrusion into personal lives and private decisions without driving away social moderates and libertarians...... You stated in one sentence what I tried to articulate in several paragraphes just the other day..... good job. It is hard to alighn oneself with the opressers. Untill the republican party stops demeaning others they will not grow as a party.... It's time to look to the libratarians for a socially liberal and fisically conservative party.

December 9, 2012 at 2:42 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

Are we really still up in arms about an extra 3% tax on income above 250K ? So if you make 250k you keep the same rate. If you make 350k you are asked an extra 3% on the 100k above the threshold so 3k additional tax (approx) on each 100k above 250K. So if you clear 500K your tax burdon increased $7,500 before deductions. This pittiful amount has had the country at each other for 4 years and counting! And the kicker is if a small business person doesn't want to pay higher taxes that person could..... hire someone and shift the income to the expense side of the ledger. And it seems like the ultra rich would have a bigger burdon but they get taxed less on capital gains so investment becomes a tax shelter and the burdon is avoided. For the life of me I can't see how anyone with that kind of money would not be able to fiqure out a way to move it from taxable income to a more favorable position. Seems like a distraction both major parties are using to fundamentally change America. If this post questions your worldview please feel free to follow with any insult you see fit!

December 9, 2012 at 2:56 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Libertarians are not nearly as socially liberal as they like to appear. Rather than taking serious stances on things like a woman's right to choose (abortion), health care, decriminalizing marijuana, and other major issues of importance, they cop out by saying those matters should be left up to the states. And yes, to cry states' rights on such issues is a cop-out. There are many things that need to be decided at a national level. Most libertarians I know even think the Civil Rights Act was an intrusion into states' rights and that it would have been better to have done nothing at all than to pass that act!

Libertarians are a joke. They are nothing more than anti-government anarchists who like to pretend that states' rights is the answer to everything. The only difference between the teabagging conservatives and libertarians is that the conservatives want to make national laws against the things they hate while the libertarians say they don't really care one way or the other, just let the states decide. Libertarians would turn their eyes away from blatant injustice or discrimination, as long as the hallowed states were the ones saying that the inustice and discrimination were perfectly fine with them.

December 9, 2012 at 3:03 p.m.
conservative said...

MtJohn, regarding your "Yet, you argue that a homosexual cannot be justified by God's Grace because his sin is proof of unbelief. Well, if sin is proof of unbelief, neither you nor I can hold to the promise of grace that you would withhold from the homosexual because we are both sinners."

Wrong! so wrong.

I have argued no such thing, you deliberately constructed a straw man.

You used "his sin" singular, where I repeatedly wrote "practicing" and "lifestyle", meaning, well just what these two words mean, that is often, or continually. I also often (not just once) used 1Corithians 6:9-10 to show you what the Bible teaches on the subject and this is NOT my opinion but the word of God.

Again, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."

This verse, from the word of God, clearly states that homosexuals and sodomites will NOT, will NOT, will NOT, inherit the kingdom of God.

Now, tell me that God's word is wrong and doesn't say that. I expect a yes that is right or no God is wrong and then tell me why you are right and God is wrong.

Now, to finish responding to your first paragraph in your 8:14 comment. Your "Well, if sin is proof of unbelief, neither you nor I can hold to the promise of grace that you would withhold from the homosexual because we are both sinners."

Another constructed straw man by you. You tried to change what I have writeen about what the word of God has said on the subject. Again, from these two verses, it is very clear that the practicing homosexuals are considered the "unrightous" and will not inherit the kingdom of God!

December 9, 2012 at 3:23 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Con-man, give it a rest. I don't know who will inherit that "kingdom of God" you like to speak of but you're sure as hell gonna inherit the kingdom of the insane. Actually, you already inhabit that kingdom, dude. I don't understand why so many posters on here waste their time engaging in debate with you, acting as if their logic will make one speck of difference in that thick-as-a-brick, tightly sealed little mind of yours. I know your type well. You are a lost soul, your brain has rotted from over-saturation in Bible nonsense and you are incapable of using your mind for anything other than a robotic vessel of transmitting Biblical BS. I pity you. You are a sad, sad, pathetic little man who is so afraid of facing the reality of that great big question mark of death that you cling to your childish beliefs in order to live in your little fantasy world of so-called salvation and eternal life. I really hope you see the light one day, dear fellow. I don't mean that ridiculous "Jesus" light, which you are so obviously blinded by, but I mean the real light of truth. There is so much more to life than that little bubble of childish belief that you insulate yourself in.

December 9, 2012 at 3:49 p.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, regarding your second paragraph from 8:15a.m. "My first response to you in this exchange was a reference to the first three chapters of Romans from which you selected a single verse to focus on homosexuals. In my opinion, you missed the larger spiritual truth."

Well here are my first three comments from which you responded and they are correct, with no spiritual truth missed:

conservative said... Sexual perverts want legal protection for having sex with people of the same sex. Furthermore they want their views taught in the schools and promoted over the airwaves.

"You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." Lev. 18:22 December 8, 2012 at 8:53 a.m.

The spiritual truths here are that homosexuality is sexual perversion and an abomination in the eyes of God.

conservative said...

God says the husband and wife marital relationship is natural and the homosexual relationship is unnatural and shameful.

"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." Romans 1:26-27.

December 8, 2012 at 12:21 p.m.

I noted two spiritual truths here that are contained in God.s word.

conservative said... Notice that homosexuality is a CHOICE.

"Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen" Romans 1:24-25. December 8, 2012 at 12:58 p.m.

The spiritual truth I noted and you probably missed is this "homosexuality is a CHOICE" The key words from God's word proving this is "in the lusts of their hearts"

December 9, 2012 at 4:22 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Hmmm...what about the "practice" and "lifestyle" of assuming the mantle of god, misrepresenting scripture and judging others? Seems sinful in my (not holy) book.

December 9, 2012 at 4:30 p.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, regarding your latest false accusation/ straw man :

"You understand that you do not need to keep the Law to be saved. Yet, you insist that homosexuals must keep the Law to be saved. Your logic does not compute."

I have never insisted that homosexuals must keep the law to be saved. You made that up and your list of false accusations and straw men is long. You can't provide any proof that I have made such a statement.

I know that no homosexual or anyone can be saved by keeping the law. How do I know that? The Bible tells me so.

Romans 3:20 KJV Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 3:28 KJV Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Galatians 2:16 KJV Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified .

December 9, 2012 at 4:55 p.m.
patriot1 said...

There is no way the GOP will ever be able to "out gift" the democrats with OPM (other peoples money) so why even attempt. There will always be issues to dream up, Obamaphones to give out, and endless ways to redistribute money to the low information voter. We are headed to the cliff alright, and it's gonna be bitter, much more than a little tea.

December 9, 2012 at 5:03 p.m.
jdavid said...

Conservative- You really seem to spend way too much time worrying about everyone elses sex life. If God has a problem with homosexuality, he's perfectly capable of taking care of it himself. The idea of Jesus sitting on a cloud all day checking on what people do with their "pee-pee" sort of demeans the whole idea, doesn't it. Not that it really matters but are you aware that King James had a boy friend- referred to him as his "little husband"

December 9, 2012 at 5:22 p.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, there are other Scripture passages that teach that a person can not be a Christian when that one lives a sinful lifestyle and therefore will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, I chose 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." because the words of God here are very simple, plain and easy to understand.

Since you have not or have refused to accept the plain and easily understood words of this passage, I am going to be slow and deliberate in showing you that no practicing homosexual will inherit the kingdom of God. Then I will share with you other Scriptures dealing with the impossibility of a Christian living a life in sin and rebellion to the word of God.

December 9, 2012 at 5:39 p.m.
Easy123 said...

patriot1,

What gifts are the Democrats giving?

Obamaphones are a myth.

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/myth-obama-phone/story?id=17507339#.UMUXYI41Gl4

How is money being redistributed? Nothing has changed. No new programs have been implemented.

You are the lowest of the low in terms of information.

You can only hope we go off that cliff. It'll be your wet dream-come-true.

December 9, 2012 at 5:59 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

You have obviously had some type of Jerry Sandusky-esc encounter with someone in your past. That is the only explanation for you to be this adamant about homosexuality. I understand that your religion has been beaten into your head and you bought into the ignorant/bigotry/etc. (and spew it every chance you get) but you have now made the conscious effort to keep the conversation about homosexuality going ON A NEW, THREAD!

Your pitiable existent only seems to get worse. Seek help.

December 9, 2012 at 6:03 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

If it makes everyone feel better just remember, "Every time Conservative posts, a Justin Bieber fan dies."

That helps brighten my day at Conservative's blather.

December 9, 2012 at 6:06 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Patriot1, a huge, dispropotionate share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent? $31,244. In 1980 the CEOs of America'a largest companies made an average of 42 times the pay of the average worker. Today they make an average of over 300 times what the average worker makes. And it's not because they are any smarter or they work any harder than the CEOs of 1980, or that they work that much harder than the average worker. It is because of entitlements, tax cuts, loopholes, deductions, and policies that heavily favor the super-rich over the average person.

If not sensible income "redistribution" now, then when? We have had over 30 years of "redistributing" the money upward without so much as a crumb of it trickling downward. It's about time we turned the tables. No libs that I know are ASKING for anything, just for some of that income to be recirculated back into the pot so that more people have an opportunity to prosper.

If you think that such huge income disparity and obscene pay scales for CEOs is healthy in any way for the ecomomy overall, then you yourself are that "low information voter" you are talking about.

December 9, 2012 at 6:30 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Hazelnut creamer is the stuff.

MT & co, Bible translations can always be improved on, but most of them are close enough to work with. (In calculus you may not get the exact answer but you can get as close as you need to.)

The Tea Party notices a problem: our government has made promises it cannot afford to keep. Look at President Obama's deficits, worse instead of better than before--and before, the Tea Party notices, was bad enough.

The election offered a choice between vote-buying with other people's money (Obama, a millionaire famous for golfing) and plain big money (Romney). Yeah, the GOP needs to connect with the poor, so embrace the Institute for Justice agenda: let poor people make jobs for themselves, e.g. as taxi drivers or barbers, without facing walls of regulation. (Bank regulation I don't know about, but the regulations IJ strikes down need to go.) Let poor people choose their own schools: a cheaper voucher may be worth more than a more expensive bureaucracy. Protect the poor from the rich having the govt seize their property, e.g. Trump's casino wanted to throw a widow out of her house to enlarge its parkinglot--did either Romneyu or Obama denouce Kelo as a Supreme goof, a litmus test for new justices?

Re sex, what Jesus approved--God from the beginning made them male and female to get married and stay married--could be taken to rule out sex outside marriage, divorce, and homosexual action.

Suppertime.

December 9, 2012 at 6:30 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

AdrewLohr. Yet another holy-rolling self-righteous knuckle dragger who is comfortably ensconced in the Kingdom of the Insane.

December 9, 2012 at 6:44 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

easy..you need spell-check little one.

December 9, 2012 at 7:02 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Who is this AdrewLohr person? (Kin to the Romneyu person I mentioned?)

Whoever says, You fool, shall be in danger of Hell fire (Mt 6). Is "knockle dragger...Insane" close enough to "fool"? Repent, man--we Christians have to do it all the time, for God is perfect and we fall short. (Repent means change, not just say sorry.)

Got any facts to contradict what I offered, or just slander?

December 9, 2012 at 7:16 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Yeah, I got some "facts" for ya, Mr. Lohr: It's not regulations that prevent poor people from starting a business of their own, it's lack of M-O-N-E-Y. It takes a LOT of it to start even a very small, modest business. Poor people barely have enough money to put food on the table, most likely can't afford health insurance, and have a hard time just paying their rent or mortgage each month, and you are saying that one of the main obstacles to them starting a business of their own is too much regulation?! That's funny.

And how are cheaper vouchers going to help in any way? Even the maximum amount paid out now is not enough for many of the better private schools. What is a cheaper voucher supposed to do for poor people? Anyway, even if the government handed out vouchers for everyone today, there are not nearly enough private schools to take care of all the kids. And the government-hating conservatives don't want the government to have a hand in anything (but the government providing vouchers seems to be okay with them) so what are we supposed to do...just wait until the free market takes it upon itself to build cheap, affordable schools for every kid in America, and all the while we continue to siphon funds away from our public schools?

As for repenting, I have nothing to repent of. I didn't slander you, I just stated a fact: you're nuts. Your Bible is a book of fiction and nonsense and if you are childish enough and stupid enough to believe that it is the literal, inerrant word of God, as you have claimed it to be, you need to be called out for your stupidity. I say, YOU repent of your willful blindness, stupidity, and your arrogant self-righteousness.

December 9, 2012 at 7:47 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

AndrewLohr says: “The Tea Party notices a problem: our government has made promises it cannot afford to keep. . . The election offered a choice between vote-buying with other people's money (Obama, a millionaire famous for golfing) and plain big money (Romney):”

I believe when it comes to money, the Tea Party has a rather large share of big business and big money guys. . . and two of their big money guys are related:

“Listening to John Boehner, we all know who owns the Republican Party, the TEA Party. Their members claim to be a grass roots organization who want to change the “status quo” of Washington. But who owns them?

On August 30, 2012, a New Yorker magazine article written by Jane Mayer reported the the Koch brothers through Koch Industries were providing financial and organizational support for the TEA Party through “Americans for Prosperity”, an organization founded by David Koch. . .

Former ambassador Christopher Meyer wrote in the “Daily Mail” that the TEA Party is a mix of “grassroots populism, professional conservative politics, and big money”, the last supplied by the Koch brothers. . .

So, if the TEA Party is owned by big business, and the TEA Party owns the Republican Party, what does it all mean? . . .

The American people deserve a government that works, and works for everyone. I want to return to being an independent. I want real Republicans, the G.O.P. of the past that worked hard to make our country and its people prosper. I don’t want big business running the country, concerned only with increasing their wealth.”

http://guardianlv.com/2012/12/koch-brothers-own-the-tea-party-and-tea-party-owns-republican-party/

December 9, 2012 at 9:24 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Troll_Dennis,

"easy..you need spell-check little one."

And you need to get laid.

December 9, 2012 at 9:33 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

'Gangnam Style' Rapper Heading to WH Christmas Party Despite Rapping about 'Killing F'ing Yankees'

A sound and very thoughtful invite, Mr. President.

December 9, 2012 at 10:49 p.m.
GameOn said...

The cartoon limeric posted has a lot of truth to it but we have all allowed this to happen. When corporations left the country, we kept buying their products. When politicians in both parties were bought, we kept voting for them. If we all really tried to buy American products, we could force corporations to make products here.

December 9, 2012 at 11:26 p.m.
GratefulDawg said...

"The dummycrats still fear the Tea Party that they said was nonexistent. --joneses"

Senator Claire McCaskill did not get the memo about fearing the tea party. In fact, McCaskill spent two-million dollars from her campaign to buy ads in the GOP primary to turn things in favor of Todd Akin. Money well spent as tea party sweetheart Akin took the prize. Akin delivered in a big way for McCaskill, and for that matter all Democrats, when he dropped his "legitimate rape" comments. McCaskill was considered vulnerable in the 2012 race by most political observers, not just the human jukeboxes over at Fox Noise. Then Akin opened his mouth. While many called for Akin to leave the race, McCaskill took a quite, let the voters decide approach. She won by fifteen points. The Senator handpicked a defective opponent and pulled the victory. The tea party took the bait and lost another senate race for the pachyderms.

Harry Reid should thank the tea party everyday. Sharron Angle was a gift delivered via the tea party express.

December 9, 2012 at 11:39 p.m.
hambone said...

TEA PARTY to the GOP

It'll take more than a spoonfull of sugar to make THIS medicine go down.

December 9, 2012 at 11:54 p.m.
MTJohn said...

GratefulDawg said..."Harry Reid should thank the tea party everyday. Sharron Angle was a gift delivered via the tea party express."

Richard Mourdock was another gift.

December 10, 2012 at 7:14 a.m.
joneses said...

It is amazing the dummycratic party and obastard do not support these simple ideas. They are actually totally against the folowing:

Eliminate Excessive Taxes Eliminate the National Debt Eliminate Deficit Spending Protect Free Markets Abide by the Constitution of the United States Promote Civic Responsibility Reduce the Overall Size of Government Believe in the People Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics Maintain Local Independence

December 10, 2012 at 7:22 a.m.
joneses said...

It is amazing the dummycratic party and obastard do not support these simple ideas. They are actually totally against the folowing:

Eliminate Excessive Taxes, Eliminate the National Debt, Eliminate Deficit Spending, Protect Free Markets, Abide by the Constitution of the United States, Promote Civic Responsibility, Reduce the Overall Size of Government, Believe in the People, Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics, Maintain Local Independence

December 10, 2012 at 7:41 a.m.
jesse said...

Game on!

Lemric is fallin into the same ego trip all the so called SMART fkers do! HE'S startin to believe his own b/s! I had an idea for a while that Limric was a "thinker"! I was wrong!He THINKS he is Hunter Thompson when in fact he is the Rush of the left!

December 10, 2012 at 8:08 a.m.
delmar said...

Excellent post GameOn, I've been preaching this for years to, what seems, always deaf ears. (hmm, could be the start of a song):')

December 10, 2012 at 8:16 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

President Barack Obama was photographed as he shook hands with the controversial Korean singer PSY, whose 2012 hit “Gagnam Style” video was preceded by a viciously anti-American tirade in 2004. Vice President Joe Biden also allowed himself to be photographed with the suddenly-tainted singer, along with several other entertainment industry personalities.

NOTHING surprising about this, folks.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/10/obama-greets-newly-controversial-singer/#ixzz2Ef0PwSTt

December 10, 2012 at 9:45 a.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, I want to try out some reasoning on you. Please read the words of God here, for I want to ask you some questions.

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 18:29 For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

December 10, 2012 at 10:12 a.m.
limric said...

Jesse,

It would seem the assertions from my 10:23 a.m. post were only partially correct inasmuch as: A) ‘The video below is simplistic enough that even the raging right wingers can understand.’ And, B) ‘but hopefully they at least understand (learn from) it.’ You neither understood the metaphor or the cartoon. Did you? Sorry.

I however understand the pointed (and oh so the eloquent) derision aimed at me.

*Try a Leupold on your Brown Bess next time. It’ll surely improve your aim, but it will still be as smokey as ever and still give away your position. * A metaphor

December 10, 2012 at 10:24 a.m.
limric said...

Conservative,

Is it not better to: "Question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.” :Gene Roddenberry,

I know your answer is Jesus, and that he died for gods creation of the faulty Humans. But in truth, “The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for this absurdity.” : John Adams

Thus, “All thinking men are atheists.” :Ernest Hemingway

December 10, 2012 at 10:37 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

conservative said...

MTJohn, I want to try out some reasoning on you. Please read the words of God here, for I want to ask you some questions."

Which god? You've got proof of this god? How about someone who has a different god than you? god? Is your god the only god or just the god you choose?

Before listening to your god, how do we know that your god wrote what you say he did?

Can you answer these questions? Or are we supposed to have faith that you're correct about god?

December 10, 2012 at 10:38 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

dayton123: Where's your proof of no God? Just curious.

December 10, 2012 at 10:49 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

I'm not making the claim of a god. It's up the claimant to provide the proof of his claims.

What applies to claims of pink elephants, tooth fairies, and leprechauns, applies to claims about god.

December 10, 2012 at 10:54 a.m.

In reality, the Tea Party wants to throw out the "tea" and somehow make things better. But nobody else likes their bitterness.

December 10, 2012 at 11 a.m.
ibshame said...

"daytonsdarwin said... conservative said...

MTJohn, I want to try out some reasoning on you. Please read the words of God here, for I want to ask you some questions."

Which god? You've got proof of this god? How about someone who has a different god than you? god? Is your god the only god or just the god you choose?"

You see daytonsdarwin that's the problem with phonies and hypocrites like conservative. He's wants to waste his time trying to push HIS interpretation of the Bible. He wants people to believe if they aren't following his interpretations of the Bible, they are condemned to eternal damnation. Yet he was all too willing (as was Billy Graham, Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson and all the rest of the so-called famous evangelicals) to overlook the tenets of the Mormon Faith to put Bishop Romney in the White House.

People like conservative like to throw the Bible in people's faces when it suits their purposes which are mostly POLITICAL and have very little to do with THEOLOGY.

December 10, 2012 at 11:15 a.m.
joneses said...

Obama: Give me Dictatorial Powers or I’ll Take your Country out - by Sher Zieve  Well…well. The Obama has finally begun his now-open for all to see and hear demands for a dictatorship over the [former] United States of America. A few days ago, Dictator-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama laid out his demands to Congress for not yet pushing the current USSA (aka “Amerika”) and its people over the ostensible fiscal cliff. These demands include: a doubling of his campaign “promise” to $1.6 Trillion in new taxes levied on the American people (which will decimate what’s left of the middle-class…his intent all along), an immediate funding (to Obama) of $50 Billion (to be used for political purposes as he sees fit…in other words a “gift” to him personally for any political purposes he deems necessary) and personal unlimited sole authority to raise the USSA’s debt ceiling as he desires…whenever he wants. Translation: Obama now demands full dictatorial powers over the US economy and the elimination of Congressional authority—or even input—in all economic matters. In exchange, Obama said he “may” consider spending less of the taxpayers’ (aka “serfs”) money—but, he did not say it was a guarantee. We discovered a day or so ago that these most recent Obama Demands are not negotiable. Either Congress gives him full dictatorial control in this matter or he will 1. Bring the country to an immediate close or 2. Write another illegal non-binding Executive Order giving himself supremacy in this matter. As Congress has not yet challenged Obama on any of his EOs we can assume they will, also, remain silent on this one…should it be written.

December 10, 2012 at 11:24 a.m.
joneses said...

Another “discovery” is that only Boehner (Obama’s new BFF) and Obama are “negotiating” behind closed doors. The American people—long ago—were shut out of their own government. Now Congress is being shut out, also. Sadly, most people will not accept that which is right in front of them…the truth that we have been living under a dictatorship for at least the last four years. The media won’t report it as, for some inexplicable reason, they rather like barbaric totalitarian governments. Besides, with the Benghazi assassinations being “okayed” by Obama, we already know the media support, if not endorse, murder from this “president” and they will protect and serve him no matter what additional atrocities he commits. And said new atrocities are coming, folks. The media stopped reporting the news years ago and now only deliver what the White House tells them to “report.” As a matter of record, Obama most recently met with Marxist channel MSNBC reporters privately 4 December, 2012.

December 10, 2012 at 11:25 a.m.
joneses said...

Any one who still has the ability to think clearly and reason logically understands perfectly well what’s going on. We have been taken over by a criminal totalitarian syndicate that has no intention of letting go until every last liberty is destroyed, every perversion imaginable is employed (the only things Obama will allow to be employed by the way) and every last dollar is either spent or squeezed from our cold dead hands. With no one stopping him, Obama will nationalize everything—including us—for his own reprehensible purposes. Note: For those of you who grew up in the US government school system over the past 20-30 years, please Google USSR. Lenin, Karl Marx Communist Manifesto, Marx’s poems to Lucifer and Josef Stalin’s genocide. You will then get a truer picture of what you—and we—are now facing. For those who say “Obama won this reelection” I say “garbage” and Obama won nothing. The election was “won” via massive voter fraud. In my last column “It’s Official: Obama Voter Fraud Reason for “Reelection”/growing Totalitarian Government”,  I identify and sourced where much of the fraud was affected. Or, you may Google “massive voter fraud Obama reelection.” One of the old leaders of the USSR and one of Obama‘s personal favorites Josef Stalin wrote quite accurately of all totalitarians: “It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything”—Josef Stalin.

December 10, 2012 at 11:26 a.m.
joneses said...

We cannot do anything about Obama’s adoring media—except not watch them—but, we may still be able to do something about Congress. If we do not vote out all of the House and Senate members who are hell-bent upon enslaving us—our slavery is assured. There is currently a conservative movement afoot in the House of Reps to replace Boehner as Speaker. In January, only 16 House members need to abstain from voting for Boehner as Speaker of the House. Despite his protestations to the contrary, Boehner has already signaled his intent to give Dictator-in-Chief Obama what he wants. I urge you to call and write your Congress man or woman and tell them not to vote for Boehner but, to abstain. In that way, the door will be opened for a conservative representative. At least that will give us a small margin of clout. These have become some of the hardest days of many of our lives. Watching the complete dismantling of our country—including our military, liberties, transfer of our wealth overseas or into the pockets of those who have stolen not earned it—is only the beginning of the torture Obama has planned for the remnant left in what was once our country. If we continue to sit back and do nothing, our fate is already sealed and we have accepted the bondage Obama demands and that which is already upon us. Above all else and all others, remember by whose authority we are here and what our actions convey on multiple levels. By the way, look to Egypt’s Morsi as a foreshadowing of the still-emerging Obama.

December 10, 2012 at 11:26 a.m.
miraweb said...

Funny how so many people read one verse, then stop reading as soon as it gets inconvenient.

If you read just a couple verses on from conservative's citations:

Leviticus 20:25 You shall therefore separate the clean beast from the unclean, and the unclean bird from the clean. You shall not make yourselves detestable by beast or by bird or by anything with which the ground crawls, which I have set apart for you to hold unclean.

Romans 1:29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips.

I hope everyone is avoiding bacon and never arguing (strife), especially anonymously (deceit) on them internets.

December 10, 2012 at 11:32 a.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, having looked over some of your recent comments, I no longer believe that you are just deceived but that you are out to deceive.

For instance, your "The real hogwash in this exchange is your use of proof-texting to suggest that homosexuals stand outside of God's promise because of their orientation and/or their desire to act based on that orientation."

Now, the gist of those who put forth this Liberal nonsense is that the homosexual was created a homosexual and that he can't help his behavior.

Now, there are ramifications of such error, stay tuned.

December 10, 2012 at 11:35 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

Jesse, I scrolled through all the previous posts to see if I missed something from limric that might warrant such pointed derision from you about something he said. All I could come up with was that cartoon. It's perfectly straightforward, simple to understand, and...true! And what he said about it is basically the same as what the cartoon itself is saying. Care to take any one part of it and tell us how it's not true or how something has been portrayed inaccurately? We eagerly await your sage explanation of the reality of things, professor. I'm sure you see things from your independent, unbiased, objective, taoist perspective that we biased liberals are not able to grasp. Go ahead, blast the b/s from our minds forever and bathe us in the light of your brilliant intellect so that we might see more clearly...oh great thinker who dwells in the rarified air of truth, far above the b/s of us mere opinionated mortals.

December 10, 2012 at 11:35 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

daytoneasy: Your position is for a non-god. Prove it. Empirical evidence, what? Or do you just have faith that's no God exists? Show me some evidence, Bunky.

December 10, 2012 at 11:36 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Poor Jack Dennis, Logic is not your strong suit, is it?

December 10, 2012 at 11:41 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

JD-you can't provide evidence for a negative. Just like you can't prove someone innocent (as opposed to guilty) A person is innocent UNLESS proven guilty of a crime.

One cannot "prove" that Bigfoot doesn't exist. Those who say there are such creatures must present physical evidence of such. Same with spirits, ghosts, demons, angels, and yes, God. People don't believe in God because there is empirical evidence for God (there isn't). Your demand is a logical impossibility.

December 10, 2012 at 11:45 a.m.
joneses said...

Jack,

These atheist claim they are related to monkeys and they might be as, like a monkey, they lack the intellect to understand creation by design. There only argument to prove there is no God is to chalk the creation of the earth up to s$%t happens. They have a very limited capacity to understand that there is a greater power than man. Even Albert Einstein wondered how God did it. Stop wasting your time with these primates.

December 10, 2012 at 11:46 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

joneses, you displayed an extraordinary amount of ignorance in just a couple of sentences. Bravo!

December 10, 2012 at 11:50 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Einstein wrote this. "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses," the physicist wrote in German in the 1954 letter addressed to the Jewish philosopher Eric B. Gutkind.

Einstein goes on to refer to the Bible as "a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."

Sounds like Albert didn't wonder about a god after all, does it?

December 10, 2012 at 11:52 a.m.
alprova said...

daytonsdarwin wrote: "Poor Jack Dennis, Logic is not your strong suit, is it?"

It never has been. He's suited for two things, both of which he is an ace at; Asking stupid questions and offering snide comments.

December 10, 2012 at 11:56 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

The con-man is a bigoted, deluded, self-righteous little twit whose hypocrisy and arrogance are despicable. His mind is locked as tight as a sealed drum and I honestly don't know why any of you are wasting your time with your logic and common sense on someone who has the mental capacity of a gnat and yet has the audacity to tell others how they're supposed to live their lives. But good luck with it. Maybe one of you will succeed in getting through to him but I seriously doubt it. At any rate I will leave that up to you. You have much more patience than I do with people like him. I come from a long line of Bible thumping idiots who believe they have the only ticket to salvation and I wish them all a speedy one-way ticket to their heaven - which I have a sneaking suspicion will turn out to be much more of a hell than they ever imagined. Wherever they are going in the after-life, if indeed there is one, I will gladly go the opposite direction from them.

December 10, 2012 at 12:03 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

The same arguments Clarence Darrow used to demolish William Jennings Bryan in the Scopes trial still work today against fundamentalists who believe in a literal reading of the Bible as factual and inerrant.

The movie "Inherit the Wind" gives a good idea of Dayton, Tennessee in 1925 and the same Bible-thumpers who exist today in ignorance and denial.

December 10, 2012 at 12:07 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Yes, dd....brilliant, logical arguments, all of them. But while you and I can see the logic and the merit of his arguments and how he "demolished" William Jennings Bryan, I'm sure that Mr. Bryan or anyone other fundie Christians in that courtroom didn't see it that way. I doubt that they stopped going to church or reading and believing in their Bibles just because of the brilliance of Clarence Darrow's arguments. The trouble is, fundies do not relate to logic, at least not when it comes to their religion. They live in a vacuum. Their wish to have eternal life supersedes any desire to know and accept the truth. They would rather believe in a fairy tale and think they are going to heaven to live forever than to accept the cold hard truth that death might actually be just an eternal sleep. Being a Christian is not so much about being a truth seeker or living a life of love and compassion; it's almost solely about having eternal life, period. The fear of death and the wish for eternal life is the number-one motivating force behind all Christians. They will not let anything or anyone, no matter how logical the arguments, take that away from them.

I can understand their need/desire to believe in something or someone other than themselves and to feel that there is more to life than just a few years on earth and then we die, end of story. And I don't wish to try to take away from anyone whatever beliefs give them comfort. But the trouble comes when they have the arrogance and audacity to say that their way is the ONLY way to believe and that anyone who believes differently is going to hell. Those cold-hearted, self-righteous jerks can go to hell themselves as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not saying that there aren't any Christians who can be reasoned with. I know some who have been swayed by logic and common sense. But I have never known any hard-core Bible thumpers like conservative or Andrew Lohr or Ken Orr to ever change their ways. Logic can no more penetrate their minds than a BB could penetrate bullet-proof glass. Still, there are always exceptions. If you think you can get through, then more power to you. I honestly hope you can. You and a few other truth-tellers on here seem to have more patience than I do with stubborn asses like them.

December 10, 2012 at 12:58 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

I see plenty of good coming from Christianity as a belief system. Belief is very personal, and I cannot make someone not believe anymore than they can make me believe something I don't. I will not interfere unless that belief contradicts the evidence for things that are real. Believe in Jesus, his divinity, his virgin birth, his rising from the dead. No one can prove them, but that isn't the point in a belief system. Say that humans are not related to all other life on the planet (most closely with apes, as we share the most recent common ancestor), that the universe is 8000 years old, and that a global flood happened, in spite of the overwhelming evidence that says otherwise, and I will consider you a fool. That's your right to deny reality. It is your right to be wrong. BUT, demand that your silly notions be taught as fact to children in science classes, I will do everything in my power to stop you. Demand that others ignore massive amounts of evidence collected by countless scientists over hundreds of years, and I will point out your lunacy.

December 10, 2012 at 1:31 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Rickaroo, It's not that I hope to change JD, Lohr, Conservative, Orr, or any other religious zealot. I do, however, hope to give those in doubt such as the young — those not yet indoctrinated by religious fundamentalism of any stripe —thoughts that will open their mind to free inquiry and free thought.

If one can see that dogmatic belief in a religious doctrine shuts down the capacity to expand knowledge through reason, science, and experience, then I have been successful.

For instance, the Christmas story of "Peace on earth, goodwill to men" is admirable. But fundamentalists insist that it's only their god, savior, and dogmas that provides for a coerced "peace" and that "goodwill" is defined by their way of hate and punishment for non-believers in their particular creed.

To read myths as factual and historical misses the whole point of the mysteries that myths veil. The ancient myths of the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and all other civilizations are viewed as stories that point beyond ourselves.

But the myths of the Abrahamic traditions, rather than stories that should seek to provide guidance, instructions, and insight to the eternal mysteries are presented as absolutes without question.

Fortunately the tide against such myths as reality is rising. Church attendance is declining as science and reason replace superstition and religious dogmas. Religious services are more social than dogmatic, more traditional than believable.

Within a few hundred years it's my hope that the Abrahamic religions will be viewed the same as those of the Greeks and Romans. Interesting stories that offer instruction about life and people, but not accepted as reality and historically accurate.

That's the reason I challenge those Bible literalists to offer proof of their god, not just faith.

December 10, 2012 at 1:32 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Troll_Dennis,

First of all, daytonsdarwin and I are no the same person. It's comical that you think so. But I'll chime in.

"Your position is for a non-god."

That is the default position for humans.

"Prove it."

The burden of proof is on those that claim there is a god.

"Empirical evidence, what?"

The god of the Bible, Allah, etc. are easily disproved.

"Or do you just have faith that's no God exists?"

Lack of belief isn't the same as believing in the negative. There is no such thing as "faith" in the negative. Do you have "faith" that unicorns, Minotaurs, or the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist? Obviously not. Why do you have faith that a God does exist on zero evidence?

"Show me some evidence, Bunky"

The evidence for what? It doesn't work that way. Atheism is the default position. The burden of proof lies with anyone that claims there is a god.

December 10, 2012 at 1:47 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

darwin123: So i believe in God and you don't. Yet the burden of proof is on me? Sounds like some screwy logic to me. And BTW, no one on here is better at snide, rude comments than you, easy.

December 10, 2012 at 1:48 p.m.
limric said...
    JONESES (double wide) TRAILER OF NIGHTMARES

Zzzz…Obastard….Dictator…Death of America…zzz.

The theme from ‘Leave it to Beaver’ starts. It reaches a crescendo then, DING DONG.

‘I’ll get it June!” Ward opens the door to reveal a tall well-dressed black man.

“Hello Mr Cleaver. My name is Barack Obama and I’ve been re-elected president of the USA.”

Ward smiles and says, “Well, please come in. June enters the foyer and ward asks Barack, “What can we do for you Mr. President?”

Obama replies, “Mr. and Mrs. Cleaver, I’m here to –Destroy traditional America!”

“NOW HOLD ON THERE A MINUTE BUSTER!” Ward quickly interjects. “ What do you mean?”

Obama explains is nefarious plan. “I will do things like raising the top tax rate to a nation crushing 37%.

Beaver enters and interrupts, “Golly Mister, this is 1959. The top tax rate now is 91%!”

“Well young man, I also want an egalitarian country. CEO’s making over 200 times what an average worker makes seems problematic.”

June, raising an eyebrow says’ “You sound like you’re describing a third world country. Here in ‘traditional America’, CEO’s make less than a tenth of that.”

Looking at June Ward replies, “Right you are June.” Turning again to the president Ward says, “My boss lives down the street.”

Obama continues, “Well, I’m also going to bolster the social safety net.”

Wally, who until now was standing on the bottom step of the staircase, comes forward. He looks right at the president and asks rhetorically, “Wasn’t all of that settled with the ‘New Deal’? Mr., I think you’re bringing back ‘traditional’ America!”

Beaver looks up at Wally, "Gee Wally, you’re right!”

Zzz…Obastard…Traditional…UH- AUGH! Jonses bolts up. WARD! JUNE! BEAVER! WALLY!! Look at his skin. That isn’t traditional. NOOooo……..

Thank you Ruben. (:-D

December 10, 2012 at 1:48 p.m.
Easy123 said...

joneses,

First of all, you're an idiot.

"These atheist claim they are related to monkeys and they might be as, like a monkey, they lack the intellect to understand creation by design."

We are related to a lot of things. Chimpanzees are our closest relative. Also, it requires no intellect to assume something. Intelligent design requires nothing but a big imagination.

"There only argument to prove there is no God is to chalk the creation of the earth up to s$%t happens."

Evolution has nothing to do with god. Absolutely nothing. However, there are arguments against the Christian god you place belief in. And evolution is exponentially more complex than sh!t happens. You're an absolute idiot for making this statement.

"They have a very limited capacity to understand that there is a greater power than man."

There are plenty of powers greater than man. This is your problem. You believe that man holds only a second place ranking to your false god. This is a myth. Nature and the cosmos are the greatest powers anyone can fathom. And we can prove those exist, yet you would rather stand in awe of a deity that was invented by humans and now perpetuated in your tiny brain.

"Even Albert Einstein wondered how God did it."

Einstein's god is not the god you want to hinge your argument on.

"Stop wasting your time with these primates."

You are living proof that some humans have not evolved very far mentally. I would much rather be called a primate than an ignorant human. At least they don't have a say in their own ignorance.

December 10, 2012 at 1:58 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Troll_Dennis,

Again, I'm not daytonsdarwin. LMAO! You're like a child.

"So i believe in God and you don't. Yet the burden of proof is on me?"

I'm not making any claims. Withholding belief is the default position. The burden of proof will always lie with the people that are making the claims.

"Sounds like some screwy logic to me."

And this would, again, show your ignorance.

:And BTW, no one on here is better at snide, rude comments than you, easy."

And no one is more ignorant than you. Well, maybe joneses.

December 10, 2012 at 2:07 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Actually, we are primates. I am proud to be one. I share a larger brain, opposable thumbs, binocular vision, longer childhood, and cooperative social structure with all my primate relatives.

December 10, 2012 at 2:07 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Troll_Dennis,

Again, I'm not daytonsdarwin. LMAO! You're like a child.

"So i believe in God and you don't. Yet the burden of proof is on me?"

I'm not making any claims. Withholding belief is the default position. The burden of proof will always lie with the people that are making the claims.

"Sounds like some screwy logic to me."

And this would, again, show your ignorance.

:And BTW, no one on here is better at snide, rude comments than you, easy."

And no one is more ignorant than you. Well, maybe joneses.

December 10, 2012 at 2:07 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Ikeithlu,

"Actually, we are primates. I am proud to be one. I share a larger brain, opposable thumbs, binocular vision, longer childhood, and cooperative social structure with all my primate relatives"

Only joneses views "primate" as an insult. Darwin would be ashamed.

December 10, 2012 at 2:11 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

easy says "I'm not making any claims. Withholding belief is the default position. The burden of proof will always lie with the people that are making the claims." So easy, you're not claiming that God doesn't exist? I must have missed a memo.

December 10, 2012 at 2:29 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

lkeithlu, you are right, there are some really good Christians who do some really good things. And as long as they LIVE their beliefs and don't PREACH them, or at least preach them in such a way that tells others that they are wrong to believe differently, then I have complete respect for them. I never attempt to dissuade anyone from their personal beliefs as long as they in turn give me the space and respect of having my own. But when they have the arrogance and audacity to tell me or anyone that we are going to hell because we have not accepted the one "messiah" whom they deem to believe the lord and savior of the entire world, then that is where my respect ends and I am calling them out for the self-righteous creeps that they are.

Also, if their beliefs happen to spit in the face of science and reason, I have no respect for that either. I don't know what good can possibly come from clinging to an absurd, nonsensical belief just to support blind faith. As it turns out, most of the more liberal minded Christians who are not so dogmatic and who actually accept other people's beliefs also tend to not take the Bible literally and they acknowledge that the far-fetched stories and characters in the Bible are mythological or allegorical, not to be taken literally. And instead of dwelling on the ridiculous and the negative, they choose instead to focus on the positive, more uplifting aspects of their belief. It is just the self-righteous thumpers who constantly point out others' "sins," or who think that that their way is the ONLY way, that I have such disdain for.

December 10, 2012 at 2:33 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Troll_Dennis,

"So easy, you're not claiming that God doesn't exist? I must have missed a memo."

I withhold belief in a "god". No proof, therefore, no belief. However, all of the man-made gods that are currently worshipped are false/not real/don't exist.

Again, I'm not making any claims. I hold the default position. Do I need to slow it down for you and explain a little deeper? The burden of proof lies with the folks making the claims for a god.

Did you get that memo??? LMFAO!

December 10, 2012 at 2:33 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"These atheist claim they are related to monkeys and they might be as, like a monkey, they lack the intellect to understand creation by design." - joneses

Hmm...according to your creation-by-design story God made us from dirt. That makes us nobler than being related to monkeys, how exactly?? Ya can't get much lower or dirtier than dirt.

December 10, 2012 at 2:44 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"I do, however, hope to give those in doubt such as the young — those not yet indoctrinated by religious fundamentalism of any stripe —thoughts that will open their mind to free inquiry and free thought." - daytonsdarwin

Good point. I sometimes have so little patience with the pig-headed ones who are so heavily indoctrinated that I tend to lose sight of those who might be reading or listening to the debate, who are on the outside looking in.

"Within a few hundred years it's my hope that the Abrahamic religions will be viewed the same as those of the Greeks and Romans. Interesting stories that offer instruction about life and people, but not accepted as reality and historically accurate."

That is my hope, too, and I really think that that will come about. We seem to be going through a phase of unreason now, a sort of modern-day Dark Ages, where so many people among us are still desperately attempting to hang on to the ancient way of thinking that served humanity for so long. But I do believe that we will finally shed ourselves completely of the need to look to an invisible sky-daddy and come to the full realization that we can and will create our own destiny. And it can be a beautiful thing, as long as we do it in a way that is harmonious with nature and not opposed to it. Unfortunatley, though, I think we will sink even lower, much lower, before we reach such heights.

December 10, 2012 at 3:23 p.m.
fairmon said...

Is grid lock bad? Or, is it an excellent example of the intended checks and balances to keep one element of the country from having full control? Is it not a good example of diversity, with a good mix of ignorant, brilliant and in between plus gender and ethnic diversity versus history? Some members of congress try to make things happen, others watch things happen while other are always wondering what happened while the majority of the electorate not giving a rip what happens while assuming nothing is happening. They may watch the news if there is not a game on or some other entertainment they prefer. Many are just too busy trying to make a living to keep up with the shenanigans of the elected leaches.

December 10, 2012 at 3:34 p.m.
Easy123 said...

sTUpid,

From the same source:

"In a 1950 letter to M. Berkowitz, Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."

You don't have a point. Einstein did not believe in the god's we currently worship. That has been stated over and over again. But I have no doubt you will continue to copy and paste your way into oblivion with no ultimate goal.

December 10, 2012 at 3:38 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

T_Q, you have LMFaO'd so much I'm surprised you still have an ass to laugh off. Tell me, is there anything that is NOT LMFaO funny to you? It must be nice being so simple minded that you find everything to be so funny.

December 10, 2012 at 3:42 p.m.
jesse said...

HEY ROO!

She musta started out w/a REALLY BIG one!!L MY A O!

December 10, 2012 at 4:08 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"You don't have a point. Einstein did not believe in the god's we currently worship." - Easy123

Exactly. Whatever Einstein might or not have believed about God it's abundantly clear that he did not even remotely entertain the notion of a monotheistic, possessive, sadistic God in the sky who judges us and throws non-believers into an eternal pit of torture and flames called hell. Whether Einstein was an agnostic, deist, pantheist, or anything else, it's entirely irrelevant. Whatever his beliefs, he was most definitely NOT a born-again Christian, bowing down to some jealous daddy-god in the sky.

T_Q, your argument is as lame as a 3-legged donkey.

December 10, 2012 at 4:10 p.m.
limric said...

"BTW LimpDic … It appears that Hemingway was full of sh!t about true thinkers and atheism … LMFaO"

Posts such as this are the very definition of the the following: “No man is so foolish but he may sometimes give another good counsel, and no man so wise that he may not easily err if he takes no other counsel than his own. He that is taught only by himself has a fool for a master.” :Hunter S. Thompson

The shoe fits. Don’t break a heel. LMFaO!!

December 10, 2012 at 4:23 p.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, from reading these verses do you believe that God will give everlasting life to those who continually practice homosexuality?

Do you even believe that anyone who continually practices homosexuality has repented of the sin of homosexuality?

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 18:29 For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

December 10, 2012 at 4:31 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

conservative, you post the same passages over and over. You don't really get it, do you?

December 10, 2012 at 4:34 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

so now Easy and the boys are aligning themselves with Norman Einstein.

December 10, 2012 at 4:37 p.m.
jesse said...

SOMEBODY needs to put con man out of his misery! It's obvious that he has lost touch w/reality! A pre frontal lobotomy seems to be in order! WHO WANTS to Wield the knife??

December 10, 2012 at 6:33 p.m.
jesse said...

Tu-quo que?

Why do you insist on demeaning your advasaries handles? You make some good points on here BUT ,by your rhetoric you diminish your impact on the discussion! Basically what you do is make yourself useless!

December 10, 2012 at 6:44 p.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn, regarding your "The real hogwash in this exchange is your use of proof-texting to suggest that homosexuals stand outside of God's promise because of their orientation and/or their desire to act based on that orientation."

Now, this is tragic but interesting. You are often sly and deceptive in your choice of words, but this is not a good thing.

You use the word "proof-texting." Well, that "proof-texting" I used was the word of God, Scripture! I used and proved my points with the word of God, that the practicing homosexual, those who's lifestyle is homosexual, will NOT, will NOT, will NOT, inherit the kingdom of God?

Recall this "proof text" - " "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10.

Also, you didn't realize that you ensnared yourself with the term "proof - texting." Yes, yes, yes, I did prove with Scripture text (proof-text) that practicing homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God, but you refuse to accept the proof.

Think about it, you profess to be a Christian, but refuse to believe and accept clearly worded Scriture that the practicing homosexual will not inherit the kingdom of God

December 10, 2012 at 6:48 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

You won't inherit the "Kingdom of god" either. Not only does this kingdom not exist but you don't keep Mosaic Law.

December 10, 2012 at 7:04 p.m.
jesse said...

Rickaroo,you are looking for specifics, look at generalities!

You will see a trend!

Lemric started out one way and was pretty rational. THEN it seems he got caught up in his persona of being the guru and lost track of his rational! NOW he just spouts rhetoric!

December 10, 2012 at 7:09 p.m.
Easy123 said...

sTUpid,

"I showed that the Hemingway quote that LimpDic posted made the both of them out to be fools."

Not in the least have you done so.

"I made the point that even though DaytonsDipSh!t tried to use Einstein to backup his loony and bigoted antireligious rants he would have thought Dippy a mentally low wattage piss ant …"

Again, this isn't a point. Einstein would have thought you a "mentally low wattage piss ant" as well. That's like saying Shaquille O'Neal would think someone to be a shrimp. No sh!t, dumbass.

Heck, you have already stated that you aren't religious or a Christian. You are arguing against your own position.

"BTW … The point I make with this post is that you are sadly in the same low grade status as Dippy."

I wish it were an insult to be called "low grade" by someone as hypocritical, pedantic and self-righteous as you but it doesn't have the sting you would like it to. You argue to argue. Your points are non-sensical and your pedantry is so apparent that your posts are difficult to read, let alone understand.

But please, copy and paste until you're blue in the face, sweetheart. You'll never make the point you are trying to make. Einstein's beliefs and intentions are clear. What he thinks about atheist's does not supersede the fact that his own beliefs aligned more with that of an atheist than a theist.

LMFAO!

December 10, 2012 at 7:15 p.m.
jesse said...

Tu QUE you have, thru your vindictive verbosity made your self a non participant on here! No body gives you credence anymore,so get over yourself! What you are doing is whistling in the dark, so get over it ! Nobody is listening!

December 10, 2012 at 8:05 p.m.
Easy123 said...

sTUpid,

"In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its non-occurrence."

-Irving Copi

You just made every atheists point. There is no evidence for any deity, therefore, it is safe to assume that none exist. However, most people would not accept that as proof. Thus, you cannot prove the evidence of a negative because, in order for something to not exist, the evidence would be that there is no evidence of said thing's existence. Any religious person obviously doesn't accept the lack of evidence of a deity as evidence at all. That's what faith is; believing something on no evidence.

Read it all and educate your own self. Still laughing at your ignorance and pedantry.

December 10, 2012 at 8:07 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

tu_quoque-the perfect example of a loving Christian doing God's holy work.

Buddy Christ would approve.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_BEZaPN8gUY

December 10, 2012 at 8:11 p.m.
Easy123 said...

daytonsdarwin.

tu_quo isn't a Christian or religious. She/He is arguing against her/his own position.

December 10, 2012 at 8:13 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

So Tu_quoqe is not a religious wanker? He/she/ it is just a wanker? Hilarious!

December 10, 2012 at 8:35 p.m.
Easy123 said...

sTUpid,

"A. Einstein sez – “I’m not an atheist … Bro !!”

Einstein is no longer a thinking man, BRO!

But, hey, who ya gonna believe?

"That I have and I have not countered that statement in any of my posts but I’m sure if you had any proof otherwise you would have posted it."

You have countered it with every single one of your posts against atheists/agnostics/non-believers. YOU have posted it on this thread. Everyone is free to read what you have to say. You have just affirmed my statement against your religiosity and Christianity, thus, you are arguing against your own position.

"It’s just that I derive great satisfaction in pointing out the B.S. coming from you self proclaimed brainiac Fleabaggers."

The BS is coming from you, sweetheart. I and others have pointed that out time after time. That is why most people here don't even acknowledge your posts. You simply argue to argue. Arguing against your own position, in fact.

December 10, 2012 at 8:47 p.m.
Easy123 said...

daytonsdarwin,

"Wanker" is only the half of it. And yes, it's quite amusing.

December 10, 2012 at 8:49 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Conservative - in more ways than one you have demonstrated your lack of ability to read for comprehension.

December 10, 2012 at 9:06 p.m.
Easy123 said...

sTUpid,

Obviously I and others are not talking about this particular instance. Any adolescent child could understand that. But seriously, on most days, no one pays attention to your copy and paste BS.

Your pedantry and sophistry is nauseating. RIGHT!

December 10, 2012 at 9:31 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Hey Arnold! I mean sTUpid,

U MAD, BRO?!? LMFAO!!!

December 10, 2012 at 9:53 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

easy and darwin really get into the wanker deal. you boys goin blind?

December 10, 2012 at 10:26 p.m.
Maximus said...

limric, why have so many of your apparent high brow intellectual role models blown their brains out with various firearms? Hmmmmm. Well rounded, stable, folks so considerate of others. My only hope for the world is that the libertarians will get all the pot they want and that Dear Leader Welfare Pimp Obama will succeed in making everything fair so that no one especially Clay will ever, ever, get their feelings hurt again. Tis a far far better thing to have a fine ruling class socialist government like China so that we don't have that nasty free market to compete in and we can leave most everything to the intellectual enlightened ruling class government officials after all they know what's best for us.

December 10, 2012 at 10:35 p.m.
Maximus said...

Oh yea, one more thing.....another enlightened intellectual, Karl Marx, a guy who constantly mooched off his rich friends in his youth, died a penniless pauper. His piss poor economic theory did not work for him and has not worked anywhere in the world unless a dictator is involved. One other little known fact about Welfare Pimp Marx is that his only child a daughter committed suicide, shot herself before age 30. Soooo smart they did not believe in God. Sad way to go through life, a know it all with no future.

December 10, 2012 at 10:46 p.m.

Maximus, you probably want to recheck your allegations on Marx. He recognized quite well that his ideas were for a society that had not yet been attrained rather than a prescription for personal living. And he had several children, not just one. Two of his daughters did commit suicide, but not by firearms, and at 66 and 43. You can contemplate their reasons as you wish, but at least be informed.

FWIW I've known far more "Christians" whose beliefs lead them to believe they know what's best for everybody and they decide to inflict it upon the rest of us with a firm stubbornness that the Chinese truly envy. And if they saw advantage, they'd pretend to follow it as they pursued their goals of personnel enrichment.

We've got plenty here who do that.

December 11, 2012 at 12:04 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

How strange, tu -your post just supported mine. In a round about way, perhaps. Did you even read it?

December 11, 2012 at 6:53 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.