Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous Once, the mighty Finnish army | Patriotism Next »
YEAH! cause nothing makes me madder is when two gay dudes wanna get marridged
(Protest sign)
I think these two are marridged
Picture by: dunno source Caption by: Grimmiekins via Advanced Lol Builder
 | The Steve on Let’s imagine the look o… |
 | mabsba on TRAIN ORIGAMI |
 | Nucky, the Official … on TRAIN ORIGAMI |
| mabsba on WOOPS |
| The Steve on WOOPS |
 | EddiePscetti on TRAIN ORIGAMI |
 | Rando the Filthiest,… on WOOPS |
| Rando the Filthiest,… on WOOPS |
| mabsba on WOOPS |
| Nucky, the Official … on WOOPS |
Cheezburger Network Blog
yay grimmie! a funny one!!
Hah! I agree!
Ditto!
what? Making fun of dyslexia isn’t funny to you?
What’s next? Can’t make fun of AIDS victims or Cancer patients?
Is this supposed to be a funny, sarcastic reply or are you just being a douchebag?
I’m going with option B.
Make that two votes for the latter.
3 votes.
4
5
As a dyslexic, I’m offended and vote B. (I can so spell marriage! *kicks gravel, muttering*)
Eleventy
Twelvety
thirty-eleven
Quarenta
Umpteen.
THE MAGICAL TROGDOR NUMBER OF FLAMING PEASANT!
TROGDOOOOOR!
Burninating the countryside,
Burninating the peasants!
Elebenty-trogdor.
schwifty five!
poor babies.
Hey look everybody! It’s cornhole! Hi cornhole!
Dyslexia is where you read and place letters in the wrong place, you know where they should go, but the brain mixs them up…..this lady here just done did misspelled it wrong..-shakes hands with kettle-
How d’you now it’s a lady, huh?
You dipshit, it’s a language processing disorder, not just spelling trouble.
No need to be nasty about it. Though you are correct. My wife is dyslexic. And while it does cause random/out of order letters, it can also do the same with words. It often makes it hard for her to distinguish between similar sounding words. For instance, hard drive, optical drive, and a driver file. They all contain “drive,” and while she knows what she is looking for, it can be hard to communicate to her. This has caused her to be rather shy, and sometimes mistaken as not intelligent. Though she is very intelligent. We all get a good laugh at it, and she jokingly refers to herself as a blonde. (She has dark, asian hair)
He said “read and place”.
Actually BT explained very well the difference between someone who’s just illiterate (the sign maker) and someone who misspells because of dyslexia. You, on the other hand, are just being a jerk.
Please note thet he, like all the other regulars, came to the defense of the dyslexics (like me!).
It’s always those full of hate that seem to lose their ability to spell. At least as far as PK lols are concerned.
Considering how many spelling errors you have made today, I actually think you may be on to something.
But he doesn’t hang his spelling errors on a his mailbox for everyone to see.
You can bet that if I were to hang a sign of intolerance on my lawn, it would have been properly spell checked.
So you’re saying we’re less important than your lawn? Your Lawn?1??!1!
I am just saying I type faster and don’t take my time while I am at work. So… yes? Sorry.
I’ve never seen mower of a disgrass!
Its a sod day indeed.
Weed better leave it there..
Anything less would be con-seeded.
Your wisdom makes me green with envy.
Thank you very mulch.
Oh fertilizer of God, stop!
What, you think weed wacker if she continued?
You guys just need to turf it out.
Nay sayers aside, this is fun. Pesticide, it would be funner.
I’m just waiting for the grass roots people to come along and worm their way into this.
Sorry to be a crab…grass makes me sneeze.
Well fescue then, I’m going to bermuda!
I think you’re clover reacting.
Aerate! Aerate! Enough with the puns already!
Water you on about? The yelling hose to stop!
This pun run has really got me on the edger. I want to rake whoever came up with this over the coals.
All these puns make me laugh – hoe hoe hoe!
Grown,
let’s cut this pun run short before it gets out of hand
We checked the lay of the landscape and at this juncture, we don’t see the point in clipping it short.
No one can beat Eddie when it comes to lawn puns, the silly sod.
Pampas me a tissue, these puns are making me blue.
These aren’t you’re dad’s puns, these are ENERGY PUNS!!
TURBO-PUNS!!!
Then again, the mailbox guy didn’t post to the interwebs, where is mistakes will live FOREVER….
Until now. Now it is here with the rest of the errors.
Yeah, because having pictures of your stupidity on the internet won’t last forever either.
Pictures of my stupidity are all over this site, Rando, and I’m fairly sure no one will ever have time to go back and revisit all of them.
I’ve got an awful lot of stupid.
Welcome to the club.
I’ve kept everything on file, Tygor Old Bean.
ummm…. so people are supposed to assume that pictures of anything they do will end up on the internet?
Riiiiiight.
In this day and age……..yes.
videos too.
Plenty of public spaces these days have numerous cameras in them, capturing everything.
and camera phones in everyone’s hand just waiting to catch idiot in the act to share with friends, not to mention idiots who record their own stupidity and then post to the web
Yeah. Peopleofwalmart. com is a perfect example of that.
VNV isn’t full of hate.. He’s full of lovely lovely EBM and Futurepop.
I think you failed to see some of what he’s called me today.
I know, he’s a real kick and good for laughs and lashings of the old ultraviolent!
I did.. But I’m too lazy to look for it.
It doesn’t really matter. I’ve come to take it as a compliment.
*shrugs* I kinda hate to see you guys going after each other like that, but I figure it’s the internet, you can’t really hurt each other. Maybe…you could leave each other alone tomorrow? For Friday?
We should have a pizza party and be nice to eachother.
I am liking this idea!
I would definitely attend, you’d just need to invite me via Facebook, because I spend all my time now sleeping and eating and going to school… and then going back to sleep, waking up for a jog/tennis, watching TV.
That is a whole day.
Not kidding.
Lol…add “playstation” to that and I’d think you were my son.
Slap him in the back of the face for me and tell him that Microsoft is more fun.
And remind him of this
{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3e6Wy19jbo&feature=related}
“Okay, these battles are based on real battles that actually took place in ancient Japan. Now, I’m fighting a giant enemy crab and have to flip it over and attack it’s weak point for massive damage.”
Be nice, he just got a PS3 for his birthday and he’s in luuurrrvvve.
It is pretty damn cool.
Bleh. Xbox360 > PS3 any day, but I’ll gladly take my PC- except for games like Assassin’s Creed II, which I am a total nerd fanboy for and want to buy the DAY they come out.
{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g1fr5vk72M}
Admit it, Diss: You HAVE to love the guy who says that. Sony does a pretty good job of negatively advertising themselves…
Well….yeah.
I could play blue-ray discs! If I had any!
Both consoles play DVDs, Diss
*grumbles* whatever.
So we’ve had Puns, added food, Eddie kicking people off his lawn (sorry about the accident I swear I didn’t realize I had cleats on), so to finish off this LOL all we need is shorty naked.
umm, ILPB… i never put anything back on. i’ve been naked this whole time. O_o
Hah, I tried to actually stick up for him. Tried to just play nice. But as soon as I comment from a different point of view, here comes the poop storm of how stupid I am. And no matter how much he denies it, he IS wrong from time to time. As I am, and have admitted it.
Remember, while it wasn’t a pizza party, I was doing my best to offer beer/bbq, ect… for some time. And even to make the meme of he and I sticking up for each other.
-German accent- SILENCE! THERE SHALL BE NO ARGUING AROUND THE CRAB!
{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3e6Wy19jbo&feature=related}
So….you guys each feel like the other is attacking you for no reason? Hmmm.
I do not know how to solve this problem.
Well, I know it would be impossible to follow the time lines, so I don’t know what to say. I know the responses I get every time I check back. Even when I go out of my way to say that I’m trying to be encouraging.
He feels it’s a personal attack if I chime in at any time. But has stated that it’s his mission in life to shout down people whom he feels are wrong. A lot of what I do is simply returning the flack flying my way. And admittedly, once the fire is burning, I keep my eyes open for chinks in the armor.
I vote we just give you two sticks and beat the opposition out of each other.
Popcowahn at the gate! Five dolla’s a pop!
A country boy CAN survive. Just saying.
True, Justa, but with all that pacifism VNV would HAVE to be able to take a pretty good beating.
Just stop responding to each other for ONE day. Make a chick happy.
I’ve tried that too. There comes a point when you get sick of being bashed everytime you speak up. Not a differing opinion, but bashed.
I won’t be able to respond any more tonight, as the remnants of that hurricane appears to have just taken out my cable. I had to go to my cell phone to post this. And as much as I like my G1, this isn’t the way to post on PK.
Night ya’ll! Love yah’s even without reach arounds.
Well, I tried a stungun and THAT didn’t work. I could bring cookies tomorrow…but I will probably have to go work if I feel well enough. (Haven’t been sick for ages and now I think I’ve had the flu twice this fall!)
Lol…you know I’d give you the old reacharound, JAC, but your wife might object.
Good luck with the hurricane! (or residuals thereof).
Diss: Simple kick them both in the nuts and run away. I have a feeling you’re the serial nut kicker roaming the streets of Miami.
There’s a serial nut kicker in FL? Wowser!
Cereally?
I won’t be sowin’ my oats down there. Wheat ’till I tell my great-uncle–he barley leaves the house, now!
don’t have to hate anyone to agree with it.
“nothing makes me madder is when”
Was that on purpose? To add to the redneckery of it all?
Hey it’s Grimmiekins aka BT. Some latitude should be granted!
That’s why I asked. Otherwise I would have just sassed.
donno who this grimeyken guy is, but he done do talk mighty funny like
Bloody hell. Grimmiekins gets ANOTHER lol up there! Well done old bean! Thought you might like my attampt at that one…
“attempt” I think is the word you were looking for.
I’m tampted to giggle here.
Pretty grueling.
Your responce puts me to shame.
I will just call it a receipt. We all make typos. Maybe that’s why we shouldn’t call them out as long as we know what the word they meant is.
But then you couldn’t bash the people you don’t agree with. Like above.
I see how it is. When it’s a point of view you don’t like, you insult their intelligence, but when you do it, it’s *snicker* a common thing.
Now Baby, there’s no need to be Ruth.
Hate to interupt, but I’m so excited that it’s Payday and I can go shopping tonight!
Yay for payday, mine finally came around too! Getting paid monthly really sucks, but when it finally hits the bank it’s PARTY TIME!!
Uh oh, this skittle max out the card again …
I may have to Take Five out of the bank.
I don’t mean to Snickers, but I’d rather have Mounds..
I hope you don’t think I’ll just Rolo-ver for you. I’m not that kind of gal…except maybe Now and Later.
Almond-joying the puns this afternoon!
I’m lauging to reeses pieces.
Oh I give up, you guys are just being KitKat-ty..
Don’t mind hershey always acts that way.
I think I’ll just take a walk to 5th Avenue.
Not to be a ccc combo breaker, but that Kit Kat commercial, with all the crunching? I swear I’m gonna lose it if it plays much more. They really cranked up the annoyance factor on that one.
No, my fault for being douchy to VNV over spelling in another lol. Then I go and make a whole series of typos. I keep forgetting that if you’ve got nothing useful to contribute, having a go at spelling is just wanky. It’s just too tempting…
True, but trolls are fair game.. always keep that in mind!
I don’t see VNV as a troll, as he does use his intelligence and tries to argue his point. And to be fair, JAC DOES love to start shit, and then play the victim when he gets a response.
I beg to differ with you there. Unless you mean responding with a differing opinion. Then yes, I start it. I do tend to reply with exactly opposite comments when ever someone decides that only their party is the right side. Like the faux noise comments.
And like I have said, once the fire is burning, I will look for chinks in the armor.
Ehhhh, no. I’ve seen some gleeful sh*t-stirring, just this morning. Don’t ask me for a cite, right now, tho, cuz it’s getting late and I barely have time to read the other 77 comments in my Inbox.
Yeah, then check the time lines. If I respond, it’s a flame war. And yes, I have said that once the flames are burning, I loose the dogs. There comes a time to stand up to a bully.
I am guilty of this as well….
….of course, I’ve also been known to whip out a Sharpie to correct graffiti.
Oh, a sharpie.. for some reason my brain stopped at whip.
Mine stopped at “A”- I thought Diss was transgendered, for a minute!
Lol…no. Definitely no. (notthatthere’sanythingwrongwiththat, ahem.)
Hey, when did I ever make a mistake?
Well, there was the time you spelled “pussy” with only one “s”. That was just sad.
If you can’t spell, you shouldn’t be able to vote.
Because spelling is the only way to determine competency or intelligence. /sarcasm
being able to vote while enable to spell is tolerable, but protesters should be sent home if their signs are spelled wrong (and that goes for every side, not just the rite)
Don’t you mean UNable?
Only the diplomats get that title.
ah well, kay, serah, serah
” . . . not just the rite”? Rite of passage? Secret voodoo rites?
Damn those homonyms!
Dammit, Jim! I’m a fairie, not an English teacher!
I’ll give you a pass for “kay, serah, serah”, since it’s a foreign language. THIS time.
Here: LMGTFY; [http://lmgtfy.com/?q=que+sera+sera]
rofl, ’tis ok, just practicing my mental silly walk for the minister
Americans can’t spell properly anyway. ‘Plow’, ‘color’,'aluminum’… call that spelling?
Yes. I think we should continue the prcss of rmvng l xtrneus lttrs frm Amricn Englsh.
bt dn’t y thnk tht wll rslt n cnfsn? lthgh, th trlls wld prbbly hv brn frts!
Eddie, do those last two words say barn farts?
Ooh, I read Burn Farts…
Well, to burn is a verb, therefore they cannot have a verb, Default. Then again, this is txtspeak we’re talking about, and they don’t follow grammatical rules… But it’s still Eddie, and he does.
You think that’s bad…I got Brown Farts. That’s…kinda gross.
I think it’s “brain farts” though.
ll!
No! Stop that! Look what happened with ancient Hebrew: no vowels and a complete mess when you try to translate the Old Testament.
We already do that. It’s called “texting.”
Euro English
The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility.
As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5-year phase-in plan that would become known as “Euro-English”.
In the first year, “s” will replace the soft “c”. Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy.
The hard “c” will be dropped in favour of “k”. This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have one less letter.
There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome “ph” will be replaced with “f”. This will make words like fotograf 20% shorter.
In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible.
Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling.
Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent “e” in the languag is disgrasful and it should go away.
By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as re plasing “th” with “z” and “w” with “v”.
During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary “o” kan be dropd from vords kontaining “ou” and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil sensibl riten styl.
Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru.
Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze forst plas.
I love this.
Awesome.
I’ve been completely in favor of the first changes for a long time, change c to k and s, but rather than dropping the letter c we can make it represent the ch sound. Of course if they actually did something like that reading things printed before the changes would become rather difficult for later generations.
Also, you get a cookie for that
HA! It depends on who I’m communicating with, but I can spell either way without causing a brain cramp. I still have a problem trying to pronounce aluminium, so I gave up and say it the American way.
I don’t get the Brit pronunciation of aluminium, especially when trying to match it to their pronunciation of schedule or Worcester–which Massachusetts duplicates. Come on folks–make up your minds! Too many syllables or too few!!
Or lieutenant. It’s all a deliberate ploy. All those demmed foreign johnnies trying to learn English. These spellings and pronunciations are traps, don’t you know, just so we can tell who’s really English.
Yeah, when did lieutenant acquire an ‘f’ sound, anyway?!
Of course to me, Nigerian English sounds more British than the Brits do!!
It comes from old French lieu and tenant, and believe it or not they pronounced the first bit ‘lieuf’ once upon a time. Don’t say you never learn anything on PK.. as for the Nigerians, well words fail me
I can’t say shedule either (spelt phonetically).. my question is, should school be pronounced shool as well?
Only if you’re Jewish.
No Eddie because then I’d get confused between a synagogue and a yeshivah
It’s not just the Brit pronunciation, AFAIK everybody else says aluminium too. I think it’s only aluminum in US English.
By the way, don’t people SEE?! This guy isn’t against gay marriage, he’s against HAREMS! 1 man and 1 woman, see? Not 1 man and 14 women. Or 1 woman and 36 men.
And while were discussing differences in spelling, how about terminology as well? I can ask anyone from the States what a truck is and they will tell you it can be anything from a Ford/Chevy/Dodge pick-up all the way to a semi. However, in Australia, anything with a bed is called a ute. This just messes with my mind when trying to talk about cars and such, because for all my life pick-ups have been trucks.
Well, Starling, I only want one man. One man to do the dishes. One man to do the laundry. One man to cook. One man in bed. See? Only one!
36 men, I will admit, is probably too many even for someone as voracious as me. 2 or 3 maybe…. 36 is just…well, that’s more than one a day, so unless they’re QUITE interested in each other as well…I’m going to have to pass.
You want a lek then. (biology term for modest multiple of guys, one gal)
Is a woman a letch if she wants a lek?
Wow. If someone had asked me if I wanted a lek, I would have presumed it was an endearing term for a Dalek. I feel so dirtily pop-culture nerdy and lacking in scientific nerdy now.
Don’t worry. I’ve enough non-computer science nerdy for both of us!!
Worcester’s easy. The r’s are silent. Same goes to all words out there unless the R is first letter of the word.
And in boston toss in a bit of a slur.
Just take your R’s and bend them over…
I live 20-40 minutes out from Boston, and for a true accent it really does sound like someone just decided to stick it to the damned letter.
In Boston, Worcester is also lacking any pronunciation of the letter ‘c’. It comes out Wooo-stuh
I’d pronounce it more “wustuh”
And “worcestershiresauce” is pronounced (roughly and skipping phonetic symbols) “wustusoss”.
Actually, “woostuh”, but with a very short “oo” sound.
“wustuh” works for the winter, when you want to talk fast, so that you can get back inside.
I always want to get back inside, you see…
I know they’re funny but I see grammar and spelling mistakes all the time. Pretending the opposing side is the only one that does it is naive
AMEN BROTHER! PEACH IT. Oh, sorry. Yes, I second that. Wholeheartedly.
(psst) APPLE it too! Or figure that I made a typo.
The word you were looking for is applesauce. It’s that thing where the audience claps and cheers.
We all saw several misspellings against the left yesterday. The funny part is that if you are posting a sign either agreeing or disagreeing with something on your person on in your front yard, you should take extra care to get it right. From the Bush Protests if you missed them.
Or you could go find those nice boys with the neatly printed “Death to the Infidels” signs and see if they’d have the guy that made theirs do you one up. He’d probably be willing to contract out his signmaking skills.
Death to all juice!
. . . and diet drinks!!!
Yes, everyone knows that all liberals and homos (is that redundant?) can spell every word in the English language perfectly.
I bet whoever wrote the stupid sign knows how many states there are and jumped to the obvious conclusion that a Muslim shooting 50 people is terrorism unlike the alleged “president”, so who the stupid one?
They may know all 50 states, but I’ll bet they can only spell 5 of them correctly.
Conecticut. Conneticot. Cunitecut…Ah, fvck it! The state below Masseshusats.
But they can spell Mississippi perfectly every time.
And if they can sing, they can spell Oklahoma.
(Stupid Bit of Trivia: Rodgers and Hammerstein sold the rights to the song “Oklahoma!” to the state of Oklahoma for $1.)
go take a nap
Hey, maybe having an education is what makes people liberal?
You might be confusing correlation with causation.
Or concatenation with confabulation. Anyway, you’re right, I’m not much of a liberal…
Me neither, and I’ve two degrees. Of course they’re not in anything liberal-y like Sociology or Women’s Studies or anything.
Hey now! Women’s Studies was a GREAT place to meet chicks…and the girls in the class think you’re all sensitive because you’re there. *winky-grin*
Conflagration?
actually, you are correct. there is a direct correlation between education and political beliefs. having an education gives people a high propensity to being liberal. there are some facts out there on it, but I’m not gonna look for it.
i think it has do with basing political views on facts v. values. an educated person analyzes and investigates a situation before stating an opinion. in contrast, an uneducated person vociferously makes a statement without giving it much thought. hence misspelling a common word like marriage on a sign that is intended to make a loud public statement. this sign is an obvious display of ignorance on many levels.
another interesting fact is that without an education people often seek information within their reference groups, which sometimes happen to be their favorite t.v. talk show, radio host, friends, church, etc. they don’t often investigate a statement before adopting it as their own. they don’t check out a political science book in their local library to see how policies really impact their lives. often, their values are based on second hand information.
Of course, there are exceptions…Like the ones who responded to your question.
but, like it or not these are just the facts in regards to people that make signs like these.
I call bullsh*t.. Most of the people I know have college degrees, and I would say their party affiliation is running about 50-50. If you’re going to make that claim, you’re going to need to back it up with a cite.
“so who the stupid one?”
Oh, a rhetorical question? No, you’d have to know what that means. So, I’m going to go with: “You”, based on your comment.
The… one who wrote “marridge” on their sign?
You big winner!
I only had to point it out because Captain Obvious was nowhere to be found.
Indeed. Indeed.
I’m a very good speller. For example,
a-s-s-h-a-t. Use it in a sentence? You are an asshat.
*hands Rando first ever PK spelling bee trophy*
*steals the trophy and takes a hammer to it so he can meld a bus’s steering system to a gravity clam propulsion system*
Oh shishkenbockers…. I meant “gravity clamps”!
Is that a basketball team in NY?
I tend to make up words as exclamations or swear words to scare my boss into thinking I’m about to yell out a swear word in the office. Mothrafluckers!
I was trying (too hard I guess) to open a pun run. :blush:
Was that a Dr. Who reference??!! Cause that’s hot.
*nods* Indeed it was. My friends and I were just talking about that special… mainly about how the chalice was some kind of plot hole and they never explained WHAT they did with it to meld the two systems together… and I actually said
“Look! A plot hole! I’ll hit it with a hammer until it no longer exists in the episode!”
Besides I thought I stated long ago in a previous lol that I was a huge Dr. Who nerd? I think I explained it to Froo…
I didn’t see the conversation with Froo, so I have to ask, are you a fan of the old Dr. Who or just the new ones? Doesn’t make that big of a difference, my respect for you just increased tenfold. I’m just curious.
….
Mina, the italics made reading that sound so, so much more creepier than necessary…. /fear.
Exterminate! Exterminate!
-Teleports back in time to eradicate himself and destroy the Earth’s saviour-
Wait, why am I doing your job FOR you?
Oh, whoops! Meant to close that after word “old”. Guess I didn’t. Never-the-less, you should be afraid, be very afraid.
LOL. Nice.
I must have missed your admission of Dr. Who nerd-hood. It’s not surprising; PK seems to be filled with sci-fi geeks of all persuasions.
Plot hole? Where? I was distracted by Michelle Ryan in a skin-tight black outfit.
this wouldnt work in chard uk
EEK! Have they burnt the place down while I wasn’t looking? *looks out of window* No, it’s still p!ssing down with rain..
Chard’s in Somerset
Oi know thaat, moi dearrr…
Somehow, I had a feeling that you would know that Chard is in Zommorzett.
Then why is it called “Swiss Chard”?
lol, fine. I figured you didn’t from your comment. It’s not like a lot of people know the place exists – not exactly one of the biggest towns out there. *g* I used to live in Wincanton, so I do…
OTOH I read it as meaning that Keith is living and/or working in Chard.
No, just the UK. And just a terrible pun.
Sheeesh, I didn’t even catch the pun ’til you pointed it out.
::blushes::
It doesn’t work in bumf*ck, Alabama either..
Ironically anal sex is still illegal in the town of Bumf*ck Alabama.
Congratulations bitter baby!! I love it!! *deep tongue kiss*
You can clearly see it’s photoshopped… =/ Pretty much takes the fun out of it =(
Yes, the shadows are all wrong. And the buildings are oriented up not down!
Yeah the line above the 2nd A in marriage (to make it look like a d) is blurry in comparison to the rest of the poster.
Come to think of it, how do we know the vertical line making it a ‘d’ wasn’t added by the photographer (with a Sharpie) right before taking the picture?
No, that’s wrong. 1 man + 4 women = marridge
*snerk*
I suspect “1 man + 4 women = 1 really, really tired and slightly whipped man”
Only slightly whipped? Those ladies are doing something wrong!
Close 1 Man + 4 Women = 1 tired man.
I thought that was porridge.
No, that’s 1 Girl + 3 Bears.
This comment is just right!
No, I think that’s called bestiality.
Goldilocks didn’t have anything going on with the bears “that way”, she just burglarized their home and stole their stuff.
Well, yeah, in the G-rated version.
Hey, if the bears are sophisticated enough to wear hats, use chairs, and know what a picnic basket is, I say its legit. Though the baby bear would be underaged, I guess.
Goldilocks is a statutory rapist??
So that’s why the bed was just right.
Hah-haaaa, yeaaah, right! She tried out their beds, remember? I think they came home earlier than she wanted to admit!
Who needs to spell marriage? The important thing got spelled correctly, which is ‘overturned’. And here’s another one for you. ‘Schadenfreude’.
I love the word schadenfreude! In fact it’s almost Schadenfreude season where I tie jingly bells to my shoes to annoy people when I walk, or tap my feet, or move and claim I’m getting into the Christmas spirit. Ah, I love my schadenfreude bells.
Can you spell “temporarily”?
Ahh, that’s okay; you can fall back on shorter words: It’s only a matter of time.
What, before another judge forces a legal amendment on people that they didn’t vote for? Probably so. And also probably ‘just a matter of time’ before people vote and shoot that one down, too.
Yes, temporarily is right. As in it was temporarily legal to have gay marriage in the state. Oh, but then the real world intervened. Aww. Too bad.
Just a matter of time before freedom rears its ugly head and forces equal rights for EVERYONE.
It can take centuries, but it happens. The “real world” has shown this to be true …. (well, all except for women; we’re still waiting, even in this country …. but we’re nothing if not patient).
Constitution of the United States. Read it. Learn it. Live it.
“What a fearful thing is it that any language should have a word expressive of the pleasure which men feel at the calamities of others; for the existence of the word bears testimony to the existence of the thing.” – Richard Trench, 1852
Here’s a word for you: equality.
I prefer onomatopoeia.
I prefer Gemutlichkeit. See the Germans came up with some nice words, in my Weltanschauung..
I swear I posted this link on here earlier but it appears to have got et.
(et = past tense of eat. Like eaten but better.)
Is there some anti-linking going on? I notice others post links in brackets so I shall try that in hopes this doesn’t get et.
Protect the sanctity of marriage!
{http://sdgln.com/news/2009/10/27/california-divorce-ban-gets-approval-signatures}
AWESOME.
The ironic thing is, if every American had to take a basic citizenship test in order to be eligible to vote, the Democratic party would cease to exist, because the vast majority of them are f*cking idiots. But hey, keep finding those rare conservatives who can’t spell and pat yourselves on the back for being so gosh darn sophistimicated.
Idiots? Why, then, do the cons call many of the Democrats the “liberal elite”? Why does higher education get painted with a broad brush of the epithet “liberal”? You know, the professors who teach everyone how to do everything in this country, including take those tests, political science and government included? Those lefty eggheads . . . What about the educated journalists, who keep getting called the “liberal media” . . . all idiots, too?
I think it’s much more accurate to say that most of the American population would cease to–I mean, be disqualified. There is a definite correlation between higher education and liberal beliefs, and based solely on that fact it makes no sense to generalize that most liberals are uneducated. The truth is that people believe different things, and there are just as many uneducated, mindless American sheep following the traditional conservative banners as those following the kind-hearted liberal ones.
Are you sure you’re in America? Or is it Bizarro America?
Think a moment before you answer. If instead of “Birthers” you have “Hatchers” where people are convinced Obama is illegitimate for presidency by reason of him being hatched from an egg off the coast, you might be posting in the wrong Internet.
*nods*
It was a raptor egg, it was…
*adjusts tinfoil bra*
*makes sure tinfoil hat is glued on tight*
The “death panels”? A cover for slaughterhouses that produce tasty human flesh for him and his fellow raptors-in-disguise. Soylent Green is your grandma! It aaaallll true.
tinfoil bra…. Hee!
That image has made my day!
And in some parts of the US, one nephew and one niece also make one marridge.
I would guess that would be your home.
I am disgusted that every time most of you folks waste no opportunity to ridicule old fashion Christian principles with your political correctness. It is NOT a human right for a man to put his penis in the anus or mouth of another man. It is disgusting and filthy. Furthermore, the first marriage was NOT between Adam and Steve, but between Adam and Eve. Romans 1:18-32 discusses the immorality that most here apparently support:
The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
Furthermore, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is very clear about this topic:
Chastity and homosexuality
2357
Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358
The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359
Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
America is a secular state. Your religious views are of no import. Suppose the flying spaghetti monster endorses gay marriage?
*MY* god endorses gay marriage. In fact, she DEMANDS it! No one listens to -my- god though. Or my book of rules.
Well… maybe Adam and Steve just never got the chance to get acquainted
good luck with the rapture and all!
WIN
Let Christians exercise their right to abstain from homosexuality. And let the rest of us alone.
hahah FAIL.
What about a woman to put her vagina on top of another woman’s mouth? I mean, since we’re already on the subject we might as well address the other half of the issue…
Also, are you going to volunteer to watch these people’s houses and make sure they don’t do these disgusting and filthy things?
i wonder what his feelings are on ass to mouth? i’ll bet he gets REALLY frothy over that!
And toys. Can the two men use toys instead? How about the two women? And what about enemas and video cameras? Is there a rule book listing all these things out? Or a diagram? Especially a diagram?
i think you’re on to something. can we get a list of all the things paul doesn’t approve of? i want to try to do as many of them as possible!
“Also, are you going to volunteer to watch these people’s houses and make sure they don’t do these disgusting and filthy things?”
Uh, DUH. Only he’s secretly hoping they DO.
Good luck with that. Hope to see you and your magic invisible giant “God” in heaven.
Keithybabes and Twizzle,
America was founded as a Christian nation, NOT as a secular state. Freedom of religion does NOT mean freedom from religion. The Preamble to the Declaration of Independence states:
We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…We, therefore, the representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, do, in the Name and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly Publish and Declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent States…And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor…
James Medison in 1787 described in this way how the model of US government would be devised as he read Isaiah 33:22 at the Consitutional Convention that year:
“For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us.” Hence the current model of the US Government: Supreme Court, Congress, President.
In virtually every state during and after the Revolutionary War, public office holders were required to affirm their belief in Biblical teachings. For example, the Delaware Constitution once prescribed this formal oath, “I do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, on God blessed forevermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures in the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration.”
The Washington Monument’s aluminum capstone is engraved with the words, “Deo Laus”, which in Latin means “Praise to God.” Indeed, George Washington himself declared, “No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States.”
John Adams stated in 1798, “The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God. We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.”
You atheists and secularists are completely wrong. And in your wrongness you have changed a once great Christian Republic into a national Democracy whose people have rejected the ONLY KIng there can rightfully be: Jesus Christ. Indeed, John Hancock declared on April 18, 1775, “We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!”
When you stop recognizing Jesus as King, then you descend into the madness of sodomy, abortion, thievery, and all manner of denegeration, filth and disease.
God does not exist. Next.
“America was founded as a Christian nation, NOT as a secular state.”
Wrong. If you want to live in a theocracy there are plenty out there, have fun.
And another thing. I know this is an impossible scenario, but just supposing irrefutable evidence came to light of the non-existence of God. Would YOU descend into the madness of sodomy, abortion, thievery, etc.? You personally? I suspect not. So what makes you so sure that others would?
Oooh, good answer.
But you know arguing with “Wall o’ Text” up there is pointless . . . right?
I dunno, I suspect he’ll come round eventually. Or not?
I’m thinking he was run off. Maybe to return, but probably not. He had limited to no support, even the conservatives on here were nailing on him.
I rather hope if he does return he does so only after learning the definition of the word ‘Brevity’.
and a few cracks to let the light into his mind
Because they already have.
Men invented religion and morality.
Cite statistics that prove atheists are more likely to commit any form of crime than believers.
Circular argument. LOGIC FAIL.
FAIL
O hai there Ioannes. I just saw your other preachy, rambling comment. You sure do hate them non-Christians. I, personally, love being a heathen. My Sundays are free of waking up early to admire clothing and gossip about people I don’t care about and I’m not expected to stop playing video games. Yeah, it’s pretty sweet.
You are aware that most of the founding fathers were members of a society that respected (and continues to respect) all religions? And that America was envisioned as a place of religious freedom – not just “christian” freedom. Also, I don’t recall the Statue of Liberty asking for “christians” only…….but I could be wrong. Which I’m willing to admit, and you, apparently, are not.
In fact, many of the founding fathers as well as many presidents throughout the years were Unitarian.
And really, let’s stop acting like the Founding Fathers were GODS to be revered (which we practically do, in this country); they were men, capable of frailty and making mistakes.
After all, such a PERFECT country, with no corruption in it whatsoever, would not have committed genocide (in some cases, and near-genocide in others) against the Native people and stolen and raped and pillaged, would they? How right and Christian was that? You wonderful Bible-thumping patriots seem to forget some of the HORRIBLE things done in America’s (and God’s) name.
Don’t EVEN bother trying to refute this comment. You can’t tell me that the massacres, the mutilation, the genocide, the theft, and the racism was–IN ANY WAY–justified by, or would have been sanctioned by, Jesus the Christ.
Errr, reply button FAIL.
I agree. I think there are way too many people who want to invoke the “founding fathers” as if they were deities. That was 200 years ago and some of the things they stood for might still be applicable and some of the things they believe are no longer relevant at all. We need to cut that crap out and just by saying “founding fathers” in a response doesn’t make you right. It just means you probably don’t know the issues being dealt with or have any relevant ideas on how to further proceed.
isn’t that why they scream their rule book at the rest of us? make us into fellow zombies so they don’t feel so stupid for not thinking for themselves…
and isn’t that they are call themselves sheep & a flock and their leader a shepherd?
The lord is my shepherd…to bad I’m a goat.
Jesus didn’t commit the crimes, men did. Doesn’t mean that it’s not still a blessed country or else you wouldn’t be able to make the comments that you are about your country. Other countries that feel as you do would put you to death for speaking against your country in such a way. Are you so wise that you can start such a strong nation that has been a world leader for 200 years? Apparently they knew a little bit more than you. What an idiot you are.
Nao never said Jesus committed them, but they were committed in Jesus and God’s name.
Also…we haven’t been a world leader for 200 years…we were mostly a piddly little backwoods country to the rest of the world until about WWI
I was about to reply and see that Default User got there ahead of me; said just what I was going to. Thank you.
Unitarians – 2. (initial capital letter) a member of a liberal religious denomination founded upon the doctrine that God is one being, and giving each congregation complete control over its affairs.
Still Christianity
As Unitarianism does not require a belief in the divinity of Jesus as the Son of God and savior, technically not considered “Christian” as a religion; although it’s certainly possible to be a Christian and a Unitarian.
They recognized other denominations of Christianity.
Keithybabes,
You owe your very freedom to those who believed in and had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. We won our freedom NOT because of atheists, but because of Christians.
Atheist Stalinism murdered 20 million Russians and Ukranians. Atheist Nazism murdered six million Jews. Atheist Maoism murdered 60 million Chinese. The facts are in: those who are atheists have no respect for human life. And that was exactly the philosophy against which the Founding Father of this once great nation – all those Christians – fought, shed their blood and died.
Today, you atheists continue your murderous ways in North Korea, Cuba and even here in these United States by murdering the unborn in what is supposed to be the safest and most secure place in the universe: the mother’s womb.
“The fool saith in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” The God whom you deny lovingly holds out His nail pierced hands for you to accept. If you don’t accept now, then you will bend your knee on Judgement Day, but you’ll have already made your decision to send yourself to hell. Jesus doesn’t make that decision – YOU do. I pray that that doesn’t happen. “Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.”
Perhaps you could take the 5s needed to realise that not everyone on this site is a Septic? Keith isn’t, and neither am I.
Whether or not God exists, “organised religion” is a power trip run by the heads of the Church(es).
Actually, your paragraph 3 shows you to be the sort of right-wing “Christian” Septic that gives organised religion a worse name than the many wars (Crusades, 100 and 30 years wars, pretty much every other Anglo-French was prior to the Napoleonic wars…) conducted in the name of religion do.
I’m nore of an anti-septic
nore? NORE? Oy vey.
I hope Paws comes back & explains that one, ‘cuz knowing him, I thought it was a typo, but he did it twice. Skeptic I could see (or even Sceptic), yet …. I dunno.
Paws, help us out, here.
Maybe the k quit working on his keyboard. This idiot HP does that from time time.
Can’t leave out the children’s war! Some pope thought that sending a bunch of children to reclaim the holy land was a good idea. It didn’t work out quite as well as he had hoped.
Oh please. Not the old ’selective reading from history’ device. Way to dig yourself into a hole. Crusaders? Conquistadors?
I put it to you that an atheist is more likely to respect human life because he knows that’s all there is.
And if I go to Hell I won’t feel a thing because I’ll be dead.
Notice the complete failure to actually answer any of our points? I mean, I didn’t even mention theism, just organised religion.
Even were I to believe in God I wouldn’t believe in Hell (esp. “burning in”) … never mentioned in the Bible. Made-up crap to keep the Middle Agers in line (oh, wait, but that explains a lot of Christianity since the crucifixion). Even when I was little, I never could integrate the stuff I “learned” in Sunday School about a loving God who would on one hand give free will to accept him or not, but punish with torture for eternity on the other … but then, lots and lots of it didn’t make sense. No room for it all, here.
Then you apparently haven’t read the text for yourself. There are plenty of places in the Bible that refer to hell as burning, wailing, gnashing of teeth, where the worm does not rot, etc. And God does not punish we make that choice freely. He tries to save us all our lives from making such a horrible decision. Hell= a place devoid of God. If God=all good then what kind of place would you expect Hell to be if He is no where to be found there?
This is obviously a spoiled, self-centered society.
Jesus never talks about hell. The place he talks about in the bible where it says hell is translators taking liberties. He is actually referring to what amounts to the equivalent of the city dump. It’s not a pleasant place but there are apparently people living there and fires are rather constant.
Wait, hell is in Mexico City?
No Mexico City isn’t that bad…Tijuana on the other hand…
Are you serious? Hope that works out for you. Nice how we pick and choose what we want the Bible to mean. It means what it says and says what it means. It couldn’t be any plainer, but I can see where you’d want to think that we can just rewrite it to mean what we want it to mean.
Are YOU serious?
Translate “Gehenna” for me. Go on.
How about (not sure if I’ll get the spelling right), sheol.
Please show me:
I HAVE read the text for myself—ALL of it, and while it has been MANY years since I’ve done so, I can’t recall. So, please, point me in the right direction. Chapters, verses. Thank you. Because I was under the impression that “burning in Hell” was something the church leaders dreamt up to scare the illiterate followers into falling in line.
Romans says the wages of sin are death, and mentions eternal life as a gift from God through Jesus. That is not the same as eternal life in one place vs. another; ONLY death being final vs. not final.
Revelations has things that indicate a possible eternal torment in its “lake of fire”, but that is only after the Return, and not at each and every person’s death. And it’s interesting how Revelations says the dead are judged according to works, rather than simply their acceptance of Jesus the Christ. Just a side observation, another inconsistency, to me.
‘we pick and choose’ Do you eat pork? Or any meat on Friday? It’s forbidden you know. Do you go into seclusion while on your period? Or after giving birth? These are all things in the bible, do you follow these are are you picking and choosing what is convenient to follow?
Shellfish? Mixing of fabrics?
I like how when those things come up, people get all huffy and talk about how it’s no longer necessary thanks to hygiene and cultural mores and all that.
But some of the other issues, like, oh say.. THE GAYS.. That’s just wrong FOREVER! Because cultural and societal standards on THAT will never change!
So sayeth the bible!
The bible was written by men, some with particularly vivid imaginations.
Idiot.
Ioannes/Primavera – thanks for making being an atheist feel SO DAMNED GOOD.
I have NEVER understood why you Christian right-wing anti-abortion nuts, who believe SO strongly in a heaven and the soul–some of you who act as if earth is torment and you’re living only to get to your heavenly reward and be with God–not only assign souls to zygotes and each and every fetus, but then cry over them as if they’ve been murdered!
–First of all, they haven’t tasted what it’s like to be alive, so the loss of life is not comparable to losing one’s life as you know it.
–Secondly, don’t these souls, then, get to be in heaven? Isn’t that a wonderful thing? Or, possibly, think of this now: what if God just puts that soul into another little baby about to be born. I mean, God can recycle, can’t he? A blank slate, all ready to be written on … see, that way, it still gets to LIVE!
But wait, I thought the heavenly reward was better. But if that were the case, you’d be happyabout it. Oh, darn it; this is getting all confusing, now. Does it matter if I’m dealing with a Protestant or a Catholic? Does a Baptist baby have to be baptized, so you’re afraid that little zygote soul is going to Hell? ::ulp:: That’s it, isn’t it?! But they’re innocent!
I heard somewhere the little aborted baby souls have to go to Purgatory if they’re Catholic. How long do they have to stay there? Can you tell me?
I’ve always wondered: If the aborted fetuses’ souls are in a non-Christian country, and their parents never get to hear the Word of God and accept Jesus the Christ as their Savior, then do they all three–parents and fetus–go to Hell? That doesn’t seem right; I mean, there are 6.8 billion people on the planet, not all of them get to hear about Christ, so they’re just chucked off God’s list? I thought He loved everyone who was made in His image?
I dunno, maybe you anti-abortionists are right, if all those fetus souls are going to Hell, then Hell’s getting mighty overfull. Still doesn’t seem fair. Doesn’t seem like something a LOVING God would do. Maybe you’re angry at the wrong party.
“I mean, there are 6.8 billion people on the planet, not all of them get to hear about Christ, so they’re just chucked off God’s list?”
Some centuries the Catholic church sent missionaries to Asia. Now the goal of a number of religions in the area is to join with your ancestors when you die. This was problematic when trying to gain converts as the locals were told their ancestors were in hell and if they continued to not worship christ they too would join their ancestors in hell. Since they wanted to join their ancestors converting seemed like a bad idea. So the bishops and cardinals and pope in Rome decided that if you had never heard the word of god but had otherwise lived a good life god would probably let you into heaven. Now the ancestors are in heaven. To join the ancestors you have to convert and become christian.
And reusing a soul from an aborted fetus is just silly. If god is all knowing he is already aware that little zygote isn’t going very far so attaching a soul to it is a waste of time. God works smarter not harder
Well, yeah, it *is* just silly. But then, even using their own religious tenets sometimes doesn’t help when arguing with the anti-abortion crowd. They sputter and fall back on “you’re killing the babehs!”
– - God already knows what will happen/God has a plan for all of us/God works in mysterious ways/etc. > Then don’t interfere!
That thing wasn’t MEANT to be born, didja ever think of that? Huge numbers of fertilized eggs are flushed down the toilet every day, sometimes without the bearer even realizing it, and you’re not holding candlelight vigils for them! That’s N A T U R E. They estimate that only a percentage of the fertilized eggs ever make it very far at all. Trillions of chromosomal combinations are possible; oftentimes there are screwups, and those are discarded.
“God” seems to be to be a cruel bastard, who really doesn’t differentiate between good and innocent or evil and depraved, not when he’s doling out the suffering. A sweet reprieve from the worldly suffering for the little zygote should be looked upon as a blessing . . . but yeah, if he’s omniscient, why would he bother attaching a soul to it at all . . . ?
My advice to ‘em? Worry about the suffering of the ones who are ALREADY HERE, sentient, awake, ALIVE, and possibly needing your help.
(For F&@K’S SAKE, this topic always pisses me off! I like to poke fun, but it’s a frustrated, teeth-grating fun sometimes, only because it seems simple to me, and I want to drill the logic into their heads, preferably with a power tool. I need some sleep. Good night.)
And, one can carry it to X number of weeks, *wanting* it to come to fruition, and it aborts itself. I know.
Life isn’t fair and it’s hard as hell, and it sucks! And rather than *interfering* in others’ lives, we should be asking each other how we can help.
Ceefax,
The Facts (not fax) speak for themselves, Virtually ALL the Founding Fathers of these United States – even Deist Thomas Jefferson – fervently believed in a Divine Soveriegn. Just read the Declaration of Independence which clearly states that we owe our equality in dignity to having been made in the Image and Likeness of the Divine Creator.
Sadly, however, you atheists have changed our nation from a Christian Republic to a secular national democracy. Indeed, democracy is nothing other than two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner – exactly the thing our Founding Fathers fought against.
“Democracy is…for dinner.” – Surely if you believe this, then you should take no part in politics?
Religion does not rely on facts, so you should not feel constrained by them in your arguments.
Other way ’round. Religion has no place in logic-based argument.
That’s a fallacy. You can’t BASE the argument on religion, but there are many arguments that fit perfectly with religious views.
Not listening to someone who has faith, just because of that faith, is silly.
Unless I’ve misunderstood you. In which case. Proceed.
I think you’ve misunderstood me. I said nothing about not listening to a person of faith, only that their use of their faith (& everything that goes with it, including their religious texts) as a basis for argument against a fact-based argument is, well, a FAIL.
To be clearer:
I believe in X, so it negates Law A.
Doesn’t work, does it?
Dude! If you want to reply to someone PLEASE use the REPLY button. It nests directly under the person you’re talking to. Seriously, you’re giving me a migraine.
As stated a few comments back, saying “Founding Fathers” does not atomatically make you right.
Chapter 4 of the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous has a most excellent discussion on the topic of God, Atheism and Agnosticism. It is entitled, “To the Agnostic”. Below I have excerpted pertinent paragraphs for the stubbornly agnostic and atheist. As Bill Wilson writes at the end of this chapter, “Who are you to say there is no God.”
…we have written a book which we believe to be spiritual as well as moral. And it means, of course, that we are going to talk about God. Here difficulty arises with agnostics. Many times we talk to a new man and watch his hope rise as we discuss his alcoholic problems and explain our fellowship. But his face falls when we speak of spiritual matters, especially when we mention God, for we have re-opened a subject which our man thought he had neatly evaded or entirely ignored.
We know how he feels. We have shared his honest doubt and prejudice. Some of us have been violently anti-religious. To others, the word “God” brought up a particular idea of Him with which someone had tried to impress them during childhood. Perhaps we rejected this particular conception because it seemed inadequate. With that rejection we imagined we had abandoned the God idea entirely. We were bothered with the thought that faith and dependence upon a Power beyond ourselves was somewhat weak, even cowardly. We looked upon this world of warring individuals, warring theological systems, and inexplicable calamity, with deep skepticism. We looked askance at many individuals who claimed to be godly. How could a Supreme Being have anything to do with it all? And who could comprehend a Supreme Being anyhow? Yet, in other moments, we found ourselves thinking, when enchanted by a starlit night, “Who, then, made all this?” There was a feeling of awe and wonder, but it was fleeting and soon lost.
Yes, we of agnostic temperament have had these thoughts and experiences. Let us make haste to reassure you. We found that as soon as we were able to lay aside prejudice and express even a willingness to believe in a Power greater than ourselves, we commenced to get results, even though it was impossible for any of us to fully define or comprehend that Power, which is God.
Besides a seeming inability to accept much on faith, we often found ourselves handicapped by obstinacy, sensitiveness, and unreasoning prejudice. Many of us have been so touchy that even casual reference to spiritual things make us bristle with antagonism. This sort of thinking had to be abandoned. Though some of us resisted, we found no great difficulty in casting aside such feelings. Faced with alcoholic destruction, we soon became as open minded on spiritual matters as we had tried to be on other questions. In this respect alcohol was a great persuader. It finally beat us into a state of reasonableness. Sometimes this was a tedious process; we hope no one else will prejudiced for as long as some of us were.
The reader may still ask why he should believe in a Power greater than himself. We think there are good reasons. Let us have a look at some of them.
The practical individual of today is a stickler for facts and results. Nevertheless, the twentieth century readily accepts theories of all kinds, provided they are firmly grounded in fact. We have numerous theories, for example, about electricity. Everybody believes them without a murmur of doubt. Why this ready acceptance? Simply because it is impossible to explain what we see, feel, direct, and use, without a reasonable assumption as a starting point.
Everybody nowadays, believes in scores of assumptions for which there is good evidence, but no perfect visual proof. And does not science demonstrate that visual proof is the weakest proof? It is being constantly revealed, as mankind studies the material world, that outward appearances are not inward reality at all. To illustrate:
The prosaic steel girder is a mass of electrons whirling around each other at incredible speed. These tiny bodies are governed by precise laws, and these laws hold true throughout the material world, Science tells us so. We have no reason to doubt it. When, however, the perfectly logical assumption is suggested that underneath the material world and life as we see it, there is an All Powerful, Guiding, Creative Intelligence, right there our perverse streak comes to the surface and we laboriously set out to convince ourselves it isn’t so. We read wordy books and indulge in windy arguments, thinking we believe this universe needs no God to explain it. Were our contentions true, it would follow that life originated out of nothing, means nothing, and proceeds nowhere.
Instead of regarding ourselves as intelligent agents, spearheads of God’s ever advancing Creation, we agnostics and atheists chose to believe that our human intelligence was the last word, the alpha and the omega, the beginning and end of all. Rather vain of us, wasn’t it?
We, who have traveled this dubious path, beg you to lay aside prejudice, even against organized religion. We have learned that whatever the human frailties of various faiths may be, those faiths have given purpose and direction to millions. People of faith have a logical idea of what life is all about. Actually, we used to have no reasonable conception whatever. We used to amuse ourselves by cynically dissecting spiritual beliefs and practices when we might have observed that many spiritually-minded persons of all races, colors, and creeds were demonstrating a degree of stability, happiness and usefulness which we should have sought ourselves. Instead, we looked at the human defects of these people, and sometimes used their shortcomings as a basis of wholesale condemnation. We talked of intolerance, while we were intolerant ourselves. We missed the reality and the beauty of the forest because we were diverted by the ugliness of some its trees. We never gave the spiritual side of life a fair hearing.
We asked ourselves this: Are not some of us just as biased and unreasonable about the realm of the spirit as were the ancients about the realm of the material? Even in the present century, American newspapers were afraid to print an account of the Wright brothers’ first successful flight at Kittyhawk. Had not all efforts at flight failed before? Did not Professor Langley’s flying machine go to the bottom of the Potomac River? Was it not true that the best mathematical minds had proved man could never fly? Had not people said God had reserved this privilege to the birds? Only thirty years later the conquest of the air was almost an old story and airplane travel was in full swing.
But in most fields our generation has witnessed complete liberation in thinking. Show any longshoreman a Sunday supplement describing a proposal to explore the moon by means of a rocket and he will say, “I bet they do it maybe not so long either.” Is not our age characterized by the ease with which we discard old ideas for new, by the complete readiness with which we throw away the theory or gadget which does not work for something new which does?
We had to ask ourselves why we shouldn’t apply to our human problems this same readiness to change our point of view.
When we saw others solve their problems by a simple reliance upon the Spirit of the Universe, we had to stop doubting the power of God. Our ideas did not work. But the God idea did.
The Wright brothers’ almost childish faith that they could build a machine which would fly was the mainspring of their accomplishment. Without that, nothing could have happened. We agnostics and atheists were sticking to the idea that self- sufficiency would solve our problems. When others showed us that “God-sufficiency worked with them, we began to feel like those who had insisted the Wrights would never fly.
Logic is great stuff. We like it. We still like it. It is not by chance we were given the power to reason, to examine the evidence of our sense, and to draw conclusions. That is one of man’s magnificent attributes. We agnostically inclined would not feel satisfied with a proposal which does not lend itself to reasonable approach and interpretation. Hence we are at pains to tell why we think our present faith is reasonable, why we think it more sane and logical to believe than not to believe, why we say our former thinking was soft and mushy when we threw up our hands in doubt and said, “We don’t know.”
Imagine life without faith! Were nothing left but pure reason, it wouldn’t be life. But we believed in life of course we did. We could not prove life in the sense that you can prove a straight line is the shortest distance between two points, yet, there it was. Could we still say the whole thing was nothing but a mass of electrons, created out of nothing, meaning nothing, whirling on to a destiny of nothingness? Or course we couldn’t. The electrons themselves seemed more intelligent than that. At least, so the chemist said.
Hence, we saw that reason isn’t everything. Neither is reason, as most of us use it, entirely dependable, thought it emanate from our best minds. What about people who proved that man could never fly? Yet we had been seeing another kind of flight, a spiritual liberation from this world, people who rose above their problems. They said God made these things possible, and we only smiled. We had seen spiritual release, but liked to tell ourselves it wasn’t true.
Actually we were fooling ourselves, for deep down in every man, woman, and child, is the fundamental idea of God. It may be obscured by calamity, by pomp, by worship of other things, but in some form or other it is there. For faith in a Power greater than ourselves, and miraculous demonstrations of that power in human lives, are facts as old as man himself.
We finally saw that faith in some kind of God was a part of our make-up, just as much as the feeling we have for a friend. Sometimes we had to search fearlessly, but He was there. He was as much a fact as we were. We found the Great Reality deep down within us. In the last analysis it is only there that He may be found. It was so with us.
Somebody has WAY too much time on their hands.
someone figured out highlight, ctrl+c, click in text box, ctrl+v. he thinks he’s AAAAAAWESOME now.
Oh, I wouldn’t give him that much credit. He’s probably using the “edit” dropdown on his browser and selecting “copy” and “paste” rather than using the control-key shortcuts.
WHO CARES HOW HE’S DOING IT!
:::whimpers:::
He just needs to stop. Please!
And I thought I was long winded.
you are… but this guy takes the cake. actually, he takes the whole fvcking bakery.
Ooo…I get to use the new thing I learned yesterday: tl;dr.
So proud of myself! *more cookies to share — except with the long-winded people*
And except the a$$holes that use PK as their personal religious pulpit.
*hands tea to mabs and skips off with cookies*
Isn’t that redundant?
Yes. But the redundancy makes it a stronger statement.
*pays fine to the Department of Redundancy Department*
*uses fine to buy more cookies — WIN for everyone!*
Congratulations, you spent and hour typing for nobody to care
Homosexual marrige will eventually be legalized, you know that’s an inevidibility.
Folks,
I can’t take credit for the following essay. It was written by the senior apologetics instructor at my parish. (I did however make a few grammatical changes). I issue this because liberalism, secular humanism, agnosticism, atheism and relativism must be confronted head on. Now pay attention particularly to why Aldous Huxley says liberals don’t want any shred of religious morality. It isn’t because of science, truth or anything like that. In his own words:
I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning, consequently I assumed that it had none, and was able without difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. For myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.
That’s why we have the Obamanation of Desolation in the Oval Office, and why liberalism is in the ascendency. Please read on. Yes, it IS long – in Arial 10 point font it works out to a little less than four pages in length.
The Crisis of Truth
Pope John Paul II dealt with many questions of truth in two encyclicals, The Splendor of the Truth (VS), and Faith and Reason . Cardinal Ratzinger wrote on the same topic in Truth and Tolerance, and since becoming Benedict XVI has often spoken of a “dictatorship of relativism.” Benedict XVI starts his new encyclical with the words, “Charity in Truth, to which Jesus Christ bore witness by his earthly life and especially by his death and resurrection, is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity.” The denial of truth leads directly to some form of practical atheism.
What follows in this essay are some reflections based on the major topic presented in these aforementioned writings, along with some statements showing how this is reflected in the life of our centers of learning, popular culture and public policy. A brief analysis of the causes and possible cure of this problem is provided mostly drawn for The Priority of Christ (PC) by Father Robert Barron.
Some reflections on the age old question of truth.
Jesus then said to those Jews who believed in him, “If you remain in my word, you will truly be my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8: 31-32)
“For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.” Pilate said to him, “What is truth?” (John 18:37-38)
From the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”
How is this crisis reflected in our Universities?
The following is from an address given by Jill Mann, an atheist and Cambridge scholar specializing in Chaucer at Notre Dame where she teaches: “If you believe, as I do, that ‘there is nobody here but us chickens’, then you also believe that there is no predetermined or transcendental truth. I agree with Richard Rorty and Stanley Fish that truth is not something we discover, but something we make. The dangerous people are not those who say there is no absolute truth, but those who say there is, and that they know what it is.”
Stanley Fish comments on objective, non-relative standards in the following manner: “The norms and standards to which our behavior conforms are us, they aren’t a set of rules we consult.” He goes on to describe how he thinks society decides questions: “Does right make right? In a sense the answer I must give is yes, since in the absence of a perspective independent of interpretation, some interpretative perspective will always rule by virtue of having won out over its competitors.”
Richard Rorty, speaking on the goal of education, says that universities need “…to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own”. Students should count themselves fortunate to be “…under the benevolent lordship of people like me and to have escaped the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents.” He tells parents that “…we are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable.”
Describing the general confusion of thinking in the University system, Dr. Glenn Olsen of the University of Utah observed the following: “Either there is a truth to be found, defended, and passed on, or there is not. I cannot see that it is even intelligible to defend the proposition that there is no truth, for the proposition itself is a truth claim. Life choices become no more important than preferences for vanilla or chocolate. There can be no talk of rights, justice or such things and no moral indignation if things you want are rejected. The logic of the abandonment of truth is a reductions of all questions to that of power.”
The motive for rejection of God and truth: a false liberation
Dr. S.J. Gould said concerning the meaning of life, “…we may yearn for a higher answer, but none exists. This explanation, though superficially troubling if not terrifying, is ultimately liberating and exhilarating.”
Stanley Fish said of his ideas, “The political left loved it. They began to say, ‘…once you realize that standards emerge historically, then you can see through and discard all the norms to which we have been falsely enslaved.’”
Even more revealing is the statement from the atheist Aldous Huxley: “I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning, consequently I assumed that it had none, and was able without difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. For myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.”
Pope Benedict XVI shows the true nature of this flawed logic: “Isn’t this precisely the logic of the modern age? Let us declare that God is dead, then we ourselves will be God. At last we no longer belong to anyone else: rather, we are simply the owners of ourselves and of the world. At last we can do as we please. We get rid of God; there is no measuring rod above us; we ourselves are our only measure.
This is but a repeat of Genesis 3:2-5: The woman answered the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die.’” But the serpent said to the woman: “You certainly will not die! No, God knows well that the moment you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods who know what is good and what is bad.”
Hence now we to what Dostoevsky said, “If God does not exist, then everything is permitted.”
Pope John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor explains, “Certain currents of modern thought have gone so far as to exalt freedom to such and extent that it becomes and absolute, which would then be a source of values. This is the direction taken by doctrines which have lost the sense of the transcendent or which are explicitly atheistic. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment, which hands down infallible decisions about good and evil. Once the idea of a universal truth about the good, knowable by human reason, is lost, inevitably the notion of conscience also changes.”
This we have the Casey vs Planned Parenthood Decision by SCOTUS on Abortion: “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
The source of the thinking that desires a rejection of God
Fr. Barron identifies the major modem trend of thought, based on enlightenment rationalism, as presenting God and man as rivals. William James typifies this type of thinking: “God is not heart of out heart and reason of our reason, but our magistrate.” (PC p.195) “ Having ruled out the Creator God as hopelessly alien and threatening, James moves to a more immanent conception of God, something confirmable by personal experience.” (PC p197). “Religion shall mean for us the feelings, acts and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they consider the divine.” (James)
Again, Veritatis Splendor explains this: “To the affirmation that one has a duty to follow one’s conscience is unduly added the affirmation that one’s moral judgment is true merely by the fact that it has its origin in the conscience. But in this way the inescapable claims of truth disappear, they yield their place to a criterion of sincerity, authenticity and “being at peace with oneself”, so much so that some have come to adopt a radically subjectivist conception of moral judgment.”
Francis Cardinal George summarization is most apropos: “The original sin of liberal Christianity is to reduce divine self revelation to personal religious experience.” (PC P.8)
This type of thinking was in turn the result of a late medieval corrupted scholasticism, especially as promoted by Duns Scotus and William of Occam. There were strong elements of Pelagianism (a teaching of salvation by works) in the life of the church at that time. Martin Luther was greatly influence by Occam. Luther implicitly solves this false problem of having to choose between the sovereignity of God and mans free will by having God reign supreme. John Calvin clearly has God deciding all in his doctrine of predestination. Both views come from the same source, a false individualistic rationalistic nominalism that distorted the prior work of Thomas Aquinas. “Nominalism is an empirical system that excludes any category not subject to our own experience, and thus excludes the possibility of anything transcendental.” (The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism, Bouyer, P. 191)
In all this type of thought, the God as revealed in scripture is ignored and is replaced by one of our own construction. All is based on the individual experience and can only be verified through that lens. From Veritatis Splendor: “Such an outlook is quite congenial to an individualistic ethic, where-in each individual is faced with his own truth, different from the truth of others. Taken to its extreme consequences, this individualism leads to a denial of the very idea of a human nature.”
A proposed solution to the modern crisis of truth
Fr. Barron states that we must return to the understanding of God as He has revealed Himself. “Jesus cannot be measured by a criterion outside of himself or viewed from a perspective higher than himself. He cannot understood as one object among many or surveyed blandly by a disinterested observer.” Since Jesus is the all-grounding Word, “…we must say that Jesus determines not only what is to be known, but also how we are to know what is to be known.” (PC p 135)
Isaiah 55:8-9: For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the LORD. As high as the heavens are above the earth, so high are my ways above your ways and my thoughts above your thoughts.
“Since we are not able to know what God is, only what God is not, we are not able to consider in regard to God how He is, but rather how He is not.” (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Preface to Q3)
As Jesus Himself declared, “All things have been handed over to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him.” Matthew 11:27
Fr. Barron proposes the following alternative to the problems posed by modern thought. “Because in Christ God becomes a creature without ceasing to be God or undermining the integrity of the creature He becomes, God must not be a worldly or finite nature. His otherness to the world is, simultaneously, radical and non constrictive. God is neither one being among many or the sum total of all creatures understood collectively. Nor is He a supreme being squatting outside the world and intervening in it on occasion. That God transcends and inheres in this way must be affirmed, and even as Thomas Aquinas says, we don’t know quite what we are saying when we affirm it. The God disclosed in the incarnation is a reality that that can let the other be other even as He draws close.” (PC p 205-6)
Fr. Barron notes that St. Thomas Aquinas had anticipated all these modern problems in his teachings. These are not new problems, but only perennial problems with slightly different faces. In the time of Aquinas, a similar problem arose promoted by the Averrotists.
The ultimate consequence of the denial of truth, the negation of human freedom and all meaning
Pope John Paul II stated, “Side by side with its exaltation of freedom, yet oddly in contrast with it, modern culture radically questions the very existence of this freedom”.(VS 33)
If, as atheists conclude, man is nothing more than a bunch of material operating according to physical laws, then free will is an illusion, and quite a number of them openly assert that this is the case.
E. O. Wilson writes that: “…the hidden preparation of mental activity gives the illusion of free will”
Sir Francis Crick states, “It seems free to you, but it’s the result of things you are not aware of.”
Richard Dawkins, the current guru of atheism says about genes: “Now they (genes) swarm in huge colonies, safe inside gigantic lumbering robots, sealed off from the outside world, communicating with it by tortuous indirect routes, manipulating it by remote control. They are in you and me; they created us, body and mind; and their preservation is the ultimate rational for our existence. They have come a long way, those replicators. Now they go by the name of genes, and we are their survival machines.” Yet Dawkins says we have free will, but when questioned he cannot come up with a reason.
Those who wish to keep free will are impaled by a circular logic. This was expressed by British biologist Haldane as follow, “If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of the atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose my beliefs are true, and hence I have no reason to suppose my brain to be composed of atoms.”
Stephen Hawking, pondering this point, ends up chasing his tail. “But there is a fundamental paradox in the search for such a complete unified theory. Our ideas about scientific theories assume we are rational beings who are free to observe the universe as we want and to draw logical deductions from what we see. In such a scheme it is reasonable to suppose that we might progress ever closer toward the laws that govern the universe. Yet if there really is a complete unified theory, it would also presumably determine our actions. And so the theory itself would determine the outcome of our search for it! And why should it determine that we come to the right conclusions from the evidence? Might it not equally well determine that we draw the wrong conclusion?”
Romans 1: 19-26, written almost 2000 years ago, is still true today: “For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions.”
I have a quote for ya:
“Brevity is the soul of wit.”
did you honestly just post a FULL FVCKING ESSAY as a comment?!
you’re even fvcking stupider than i thought you were. link to it next time you dumb fvck.
also, the reply button. learn where it is. love it. also, re-read the history about separation of church and fvcking state. we’re not a christian country we can fvck whomever we want… and if you christian assholes stopped being so damned scared of the “evil gay man” coming to marry you we’d be able to fvcking marry who we want to.
all in all, you’re a raging asshole and please NEVER come back to PK.
fvcks shortright out of wedlock just to help prove her point.
See?
*fetches sandwiches*
Actually Shortright, we can make it a 3-way if you’re up for it.
Uhhmmm…orgy, anyone?
It’s not Shortright that needs to be up for it. So, there.
::spreadsout600-thread-count-sheets::
Shall we get started?
i don’t get a choice anymore?
i want my ivaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan. *whine*
ivan’s not gonna be happy about that steve…
Don’t forget Shorty’s got Steven Tyler’s STDs. I’d double bag it.
the steve has steven tyler’s herp now too! pretty soon everyone here will have it. mwa ha ha!
Now I know I’m not doing the reach around thing.
Don’t worry, I brought him a sandwich too!
is mine turkey and swiss on rye bread? if not… no 3some for you!
Of course! And none of that crappy grocery store cheese either, this is Wisconsin, I’ll get some real Swiss.
I … Was a bit disappointed. I lived in Wisconsin for a year, and am a BIG cheese lover, so I had hopes of a veritable orgy in fermented dairy products, but the standard offer of cheese in stores was cheddar, cheddar, swiss, swiss, cheddar, cheddar. Meh. :/
Now, I am sure there are good cheese shops, I just never saw one. ;p
mmmmm jewish deli food. now i just need some latkes and a big bowl of matzoh ball soup.
Mmm…now I want latkes too! With sour cream or applesauce!
I’m totally off pasta primavera now. Thanks a lot.
Hey stop polluting mah funny with your religious tripe, besides its clearly all about Zeus
I KNOW!!
I will look at it on every menu, and graffiti them with “TL; DR”.
please take a photo of this and make it your gravatar. i will laugh every time… promise!
:::whines:::
I already made a gravatar, and it’s not working. And nobody will help me with it, NEITHER! I asked politely and stuff . . . :::sniffs:::
Can YOU help me? :::big,tearful,brown,puppyeyes:::
The beach picture? It works grand.
yeah, i see it… maybe nao needs to clear his/her cache and cookies.
Sounds plausible!
Oooh, could be! TANKS!
Cache & cookies … is that something one leaves for Intel Claus?
There I am! I feel like such an idjit for not thinking of something so simple!
(Pretty little tho, eh? I was afraid it was going to be too small … I even zoomed and cropped it.)
DONE.
Try, try again!)
.
.
.
.
.
(I don’t know how well it will show up, tho. I’ve used several graphics editing programs over the years, just dinking around at home, but I suck at Photoshop, apparently.
hee hee, i love it!
God thinks all blacks are obsolete farm equipment
God thinks the Jews killed his son and must be punished
God thinks the white man is Satan
God, they know what God thinks
God thinks we should all convert to Judaism
God thinks we must all be Christians and
God thinks we should all embrace Islam
God thinks the only true religion is Hinduism
And I
I know what God thinks
God thinks you’re a waste of flesh
God prefers an Atheist
God God
God thinks all people like you are hateful
God thinks all people like you are an embarrassment to creation
self-righteous, judgmental, first to throw a stone
and using His name for your own protection
God thinks the sun revolves around the Earth
God thinks there was something very wrong with Copernicus
God thinks abortion is murder and
God thinks everything that science gave us is wrong
God thinks women deserve it
God thinks AIDS is a form of punishment
I hate people who blame the Devil for their own shortcomings and
I hate people who thank God when things go right
And I
I know what God thinks
God thinks you’re an idiot
God prefers a heretic
God God
God thinks all people like you are hateful
God thinks all people like you are an embarrassment to creation
self-righteous, judgmental, first to throw the stone
and using His name for your own agenda
God is a liberal
God is a democrat
God wants you to vote republican
never trust a man who puts his words in the mouth of god
and says it’s absolute truth
its lies and it smells like death
its all in a day’s work taking money from the poor
Why do you think that God would need your dirty money
if He wants to start a holy war?
self-righteous, judgmental, first to throw a stone
and using His name for your own protection
God thinks puppies need to die and
God thinks babies need to drown
’cause God is neither good nor bad
God is you and me
God is Everything
YAY Voiltair!!
“God thinks puppies need to die ”
Reminds me of the best response I ever heard to the phrase “Every time you masturbate god kills a puppy/kitten”
“Every time you kill god a puppy/kitten masturbates”
Paws4thot,
I firmly believe in every word that I wrote. The US was founded as a Christian Contitutional Republic, NOT as a National Democracy. Virtually ALL of the Founding Fathers of these United States saw NO difference between the tyranny of the King of England and the tyranny of the majority. When the majority can vote in favor of murdering the unborn in the womb, then it is obvious that “Democracy” has failed us. Unless we keep the twin principles of the individual right to life and the non-initiation of force sacrosanct, then we are doomed as a nation.
At each step of the way in this conversation I have lucidly provided my point of view and all you secularists have to offer is one or two line sarcastic comments. You ridicule the spelling of a person who supports traditional marriage, but when a reasoned debate is opened to you, you resort to what atheists do best: ad hominem attacks. Exactly who here is ignorant? The religious person who doesn’t always spell correctly, or the secularists who spells correctly but can’t tell the difference between sodomy and true marriage?
Opps, I misspelled “Constitutional” as “Contitutional”. -10 pts for me. I am sure the atheists are keeping score because to them spelling accuracy counts more than human life.
Glad you figured that out. We can now give you a legal permit to buy guns which fire lions at unsuspecting Christians, abort fetuses with an accuracy of up to a range of 80 yards, and make red marks to indicate grammatical errors on essays and protest signs. Enjoy.
Well. I think you’ve managed to convince yourself, anyway. Keep up the good work, and may your god go with you.
That’s reassuring anyway. I think Paul’s convinced himself too, but then he would only convince himself; no-one else is going to read chunks of copy and paste that length!
How is it that you’ve clearly managed to master the use of copy and paste, but you can’t cope with the very simple concept of using the “reply” function when you are addressing somebody’s comment?
Is there some Bible verse I am ignorant of proclaiming proper nesting and replies sinful?
Yes
*walks off*
Cite!!!
*snerk*
Leviticus 28:2
And lo god spake saying to reply to a heathen directly was unclean
And he that doth reply must cleanse himself in the temple for he who hast spoken direct to a heathen is unclean in my eyes.
can i use that the next time the missionaries come knocking at my door?
Niiiiice.
Thou shall not clicketh the reply button! It’s a commandment. Number 12 I think.
Hee, hee. He called diss a ’secularist’! Okay, not as funny as calling froo a liberal, but still….
BTY, lots of non-Christians among the founding fathers (or are they Founding Fathers?).
Well, that is pretty funny.
More importantly, lots of Deists among the Founders, which I see as a more important distinction when these religious nutters sputter about the Founders being religious. Yes, they were, but they didn’t believe in direct interdiction of God, any more than they believed in direct interference of religion into the State!
Yeah, those are the ones I was referring to, but then I figured I’d have to explain Deist and then have to explain that not all religious people are Christians…just seemed like a lot of work.
CMIIW, I think you could still include Deists in Christianity.
it can be kind of iffy — looking at the writing of the 17th-18th cent when deism was new, there are many references to ’supreme being’ and ‘god or gods.’ belief in the divine, but not in a hands-on, meddling-in-your-drawers uber parent is a simple explanation. deists also tend to reject revelations and the superstitions enshrouding christianity and look for reason within faith and the divine. deism is the bridge between calvinism & catholicism and modern science.
Nao: I don’t want to be an a$$, but seriously you can’t generalize about the founding fathers. Many of the founding fathers were of Church of Christ (Congregationalists), Episcopalian, and Presbyterian. Each one of those versions of Protestant has direct conversation with God, and believe in God’s will/ plan.
Please don’t get me started on the “Separation of Church and State”.
And mabsa: Not really. 100% of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Christian (all but one Protestant), 100% of the signers of the ARticles of Confederation, and 100% of the signers of the Constitution were Christian.
Franklin belonged to a Christian church, but was a Deist. I think his writings speak more clearly of his religious beliefs than a church affiliation.
Twain, after all, attended church with his wife.
Ok so Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, 2 out of about 100 or so. The founding Father’s were predominantly Christian. However, they had the foresight to realize that religion should not dictate the governing of a country (as it did in England). They had the hindsight to see that forcing religion upon people will not work. However if they were to see how the ACLU and liberal left were attacking religious symbols on public land, “So help me god.”, etc.. they would be appalled. It’s not freedom FROM relgion, but freedom OF religion. (Once again not a religious person).
I was trying to make the point that just because someone *belongs* to a church doesn’t mean she/he actually believes in it.
And, sorry, but I do believe in freedom *from* religion, at least if by that you mean that I don’t have to have people constantly pushing their religion on me. (I work at home a lot.)
I understand your point, but it wasn’t very clear.
What’s your definition of “pushing” on you? If someone has a cross in their lawn, is that pushing? If someone says “god bless you” when you sneeze is that pushing? I’m trying to figure out where most the people who bitch and moan about religion being pushed on them work and live. I live in a conservative portion of NOVA (about 20 churches per Sq mile from my house). Yet I think I might one solicitor a month about religion (Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are the most frequent). Maybe one person at work. I get more from the liberal agenda of this country of morals pushed upon me. (need to “share the wealth” is th emost prevelant).
Sorry I was not clear.
Um, definitely people knocking on my door. People leading “non-denominational” prayer that’s Christian (there are other religions). Don’t care what you put on your lawn. Churches getting involved in politics, but still getting tax-exempt status (ditto for any other type of group that does that BTW). People trying to teach creationism as science in public schools. People throwing conniption fits because someone said “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas.” People who pronounce that it is their mission to save me (or my child)…still don’t know from what. Is my house on fire?
As far as ‘bless you,’ etc., could care less. Although I do take exception when I do something really out of the way for someone and they thank god for me doing it. If you’re going to give credit (and I’m okay with a mitzvah -sp?- a good deed without credit), give it to me. I do have free will.
It may be that the area you are in is so highly populated with right/conservative/christians that the churches see little reason in going door to door in your neighborhood to convert you because if you live there you have most likely already heard the word of god. Whereas the left/liberals feel more a need to push their agenda in your area because trying to convince people in areas that are already in line with their beliefs is a bit of a waste of time. Therefore liberals push ideas in conservative areas and conservatives push ideas in liberal ares. I don’t know if this is accurate but it is (at least I think it is) a reasonable possibility.
“It’s not freedom FROM relgion, but freedom OF religion. ”
This argument I find very, very interesting. (Not least because we have the same issues going on, to and fro, here, but most Swedes blame it on those darkie muslims instead of on atheists.)
I would say that any society, any government, that seriously talks about freedom of religion should favour none or all (and forms of lack of). I don’t think anyone* finds one person’s expressions of beliefs a problem, but systematic use of tax money to promote or support one particular religion to be.
Demanding all removal of anything that may appear religious from all public land is a bit over the top in my opinion, demanding symbols representing a wider variety of religions to be erected/painted/whatevered might be saner, but that’s more a detail argument in a rather interesting large scale question.
*) anyone sane, that is
I agree. I would rather the US government promote all religions rather than detract from others. To me it’s absurd and devisive. The best way to create a unity in people is through understanding, rather than “No you can’t show that or say that.” I think if every religion was represented it would be more favorable to us as a people. (There VNV I’m being somewhat worldly). Just like in the episode of B5 when all the Alien races were celebrating their biggest religious fesitvals, and Cmdr Sinclair set out all representatives from every religion.
I loved that episode.
I forgot the worst imposition of religion: when I lived in Texas you couldn’t buy beer from midnight Saturday until noon Sunday. Talk about other people’s beliefs infringing upon our freedom to get drunk!
And while in theory the promotion of all religions is a good idea, there are some I don’t really want to see promoted. (Scientology leaps to mind.) But I am cool with having a Christmas tree and a Menorah and Easter bunnies. My son is at a private school so we can do all that. Heck, we can have Halloween without people screaming that we’re celebrating Satan!
(Actually that’s not really a joke here.)
I can’t generalize? Didn’t you? You just said “many of the ….”????
As did I……I said, “Lots of …..”
Since when does generalize mean “absolutely ALL of them were X”??
You’re a moron.
“Exactly who here is ignorant? The religious person who doesn’t always spell correctly, or the secularists who spells correctly but can’t tell the difference between sodomy and true marriage?”
Wait, I’m confused. Does this mean that married couples can’t enjoy sodomy? What about lesbians? No sodomy, just wall to wall carpet. Surely they should be allowed to marry.
More importantly, “sodomy” doesn’t literally have to mean anal sex, even though most people use it that way.
There was a time sodomy meant any form of non-reproductive sex. Every time you use a condom or birth control or just go with oral sex you are committing sodomy.
/Devout sodomite!
That’s what I was referring to, and I believe “there was a time” is not correct in past tense—I believe that time is still now. It is really any form of “deviant” sex (which could mean a lotta things :::winkwinknudgenudge:::); it’s just that most people jump right to the anal.
*winces* No! You don’t jump right to the anal! You have to be gentle with that!
Crap. Does that mean my hetero marriage isn’t real because I enjoy sodomy? I guess I”ll have to alert the IRS that I have a fake marriage and owe back taxes now.
Curses!
keithybabes,
May God rather forgive and go with YOU and me.
The reply button. Use it. Love it.
And may YOU forgive your fellow man.
God (yes, taking the name in vein!) you sure are good for a laugh Paul!
i wish i had as much time to preach to strangers on the internet as you do…
btw
Jesus humped your mother
And you have proven that you are of your father, the devil. Paul was wrong in his post, but you are worse.
Oy vey! Jesu Christi! I suppose you think The Life of Brian is a hanging offense, too, eh, J.a.C.?
‘Tis long been an easy way to outrage the ultrareligious, the irreverent despoiling of their deities . . . but it’s such an obvious ploy, really not worthy of much more than an 8th grade mentality. You’re playing into it, by exhibiting shock, saying that person is ” . . . of your father, the devil”.
I don’t think any thing is a hanging offense. I do think his comment was out of line, and totally disrespectful.
And what I used was a quote from Jesus himself. And while I could, hopefully, be proven wrong on his parentage, his comment reflected that mindset.
My pantheon can beat up your trinity any day!
/cheer
For somebody who proclaims to like facts, you sure aren’t able to prove the existence of God with them, are you? Ah, hypocrisy. Every religious zealot’s secret weapon.
The closest proof for this particular conversation would be that, while people have been and will be discussing the existence of God for thousands of years and thousands of years to come, the discussion of you and your teachings probably will not.
Likewise.
Or is it: “Saint” Mary?
All of which proves nothing. Ideas often outlast the fame of individuals.
:::perks::: Does that mean you’re going?
Dude, you’re giving Christians and Italians a bad name. There’s this thing called the New Testament and in it, Jesus talked about loving your neighbor. So stop being a douchebag because it’s a sin. M’kay Cupcake?
Ahem. I think the problem we have here is we aren’t speaking in a manner he understands. Let me try and see if this gets anywhere
/googles some stuff, highlights bits, goes to the edit menu, selects copy, jumps back here and selects paste
The Gospel according to
St. Matthew
7
Judging Others
Lk. 6.3738, 4142
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again
I know it’s a bit shorter than he’s used to but maybe he’ll get an idea?
OMG, you mean there’s parts of his rule book that don’t conform to the parts he likes?
but even if you could get to read those parts then miracle of miracles, apply them to himself, he’d @ssplode and someone would have to clean up the mess
I’M DONE BEING MOP GIRL!
*throws down mop in frustration*
kicks mop out of the way and hands over 2 fully loaded barrettas {insert devil smiley winking here!}
show-off
i think i’ve permanently lost my nerd card because of this place – all because i can’t make the stupid smilies work for me
*grumbles in the corner with the rest of the lame-o dorks. take pity on me, he’s picking his nose — ewwww!
Psst! Right click on the face you want >> click properties >> you see, e.g., icon_twisted.gif
>> to use put colontwistedcolon, using : instead of colon. To wit:
That’s it?
All right! You go, um, girl? Boy? Gender unknown person?
(Hard part is remembering the names of the different faces.)
Girl. I promise.
She’s way hot too.
Still have that leash?
Ouch.
Wait, are you implying I’m a dog, or hinting at some sort of BDSM practices I haven’t tried yet–errr, admitted to–uhh, I mean, what are you trying to say?!
*sigh*
I guess you forgot you offered to take me away on a goat(?) leash.
Utterly and completely.
Forgive me?
Depends. Do you still have the leash?
::patsleathertrunklovingly::
That and more. Much more.
Then you’re forgiven!
*stares longingly at leather chest, among other chests*
The problem is that we can’t pick and choose the parts we like the most. All of it applies. The parts that convict us the most are the parts that we tend to want to ignore.
This thread has been taken over by the sunday-school brigade, and all the funny has leaked away. I vote we officially close this thread and move along.
We’re off to see the Wizard, the wonder wizard called God!!! Because, because, becuase, of all the gays he hates!!!!
Would all the religious freakazoids PLEASE tell me how this whole anti-gay thing is correct. “Love thy neighbor as you love thy self” (Now in Ivan’s terms it takes on a brand new conotation, but still). Nothing else you state in the bible can overcome that one command from God. Sorry, ain’t happening.
Oh and btw I’m a conservative who usually defends religion, until y’all say stupid $hit.
Now you’ve done it! NEVER, never ask them to tell you how one of their religious OPINIONS came about, esp. with this one!
You’re going to evoke another wall of text!
Well at least you realize now I’m not one of those crazy religozoid.
I will try to remember that.
The problem is that it is, for the most part, the only sin that is glorified and defended to such a fault that it renders the defender assuming to be wiser and all-knowing than God to a believer. If the whole of the country can respect a religion that teaches converting or killing the infidel, it would seem the same could be afforded Christianity. It appears that it is the only belief system where PC is not applicable. The believer at least does still love the person, and hates the act only.
Amen, brother.
can’t we just taunt him incessantly and post links to things like goat.se that are hidden behind a {conservochristiansagainstgaymarriage.com} sort of link??
Goatse! You naughty naughty girl.
i figured it would be just the sort of thing that would make him throw himself off a very tall building.
“oh lord, this man has clearly forsaken your christian ideals and has proven that the world is eeeeeeeeeevil. i must save myself before i am tainted by their horrible gay-ness.”
*throws self off building preferably hitting lots of large metal objects on the way down and ending up a puddle of goo in the middle of a large street that then gets run through by a semi carrying pigs being taken to slaughter who are shitting through the floor so he ends up a puddle of goo covered in pig shit*
I imagine loathing, fear, self-righteousness, trouser accident, guilt, another look just to make sure…
your imagination is far too tame for my tastes. pile of goo covered in steaming pig shit is WAY more accurate for paul.
oh yes, and your beliefs are so much less hateful.
Your commenting on this person’s bad spelling with poor grammar.
n00b
PSST use the reply button. It helps to understand what and who you’re responding to.
Pot? Kettle?
yeah, thanks… i was about to point out the your =/= you’re.
I had someone say, “Their! Put that in you’re pipe and smoke it!” on IMDB and I just facepalmed.
ow. send them back to 5th grade.
That hurts me.
I was thinking for a moment that they meant the possessive with “commenting” as a gerund, but then I realized it’d be an incomplete sentence so it’d still be a fail.
Had the same thought, immediately followed by “OMG, there’s someone else in the world who remembers what a gerund is!” Of course, I have to know (part of my job)…what’s your excuse?
Gerund? That’s like a hamster with a tail, right?
Actually a gerbil-hamster cross that only bites people who post religious lectures as posts.
I really hope they threw in some Great Dane genes to make that thing massive. Bites hands off, no more posting any of that sh*t and no more problems for us.
Great Danes (unlike great dane people) are wussy, break easily, prefer to sleep and slobber, and … Yeah. (I love them to death, mind you.)
A Gerbsterweiler (Rotthambil? Rottbilster?) would be so much more interesting.
rotties are babies too… try a rabid pit bull?
Oh, they’re the most adorable dogs ever! I was just thinking of the sheer massiveness. The insaninty bit I figured was covered by gerbil/hamster already.
i’m glad you think rotties are so freaking cute too! i love ‘em!
i figured if we were going for a dog/gerbil/hamster monster that would bite peoples hands off we might do well with a rabid pit bull…
Rabid anything massive, yeah. (I just … The very few “pit bulls”* I’ve met have been really sweet critters.)
*) The term seems to be used very loosely sometimes.
Let’s throw in some Jack Russell terrier and Dachshund, just for the temerity, doggedness (see what I did there?), and the sharp-as$ teeth.
(When I worked in a pet food & supply store, nearly every customer that asked for a toy their dog couldn’t destroy in 5 minutes, when asked what kind of dog they had, answered, “Dachshund”. Not kidding.)
Danbala:
Yeah, *most* pit bulls are sweet, but ….
My opinion? It’s a status-of-the-breed-with-the-wrong-kind-of-owner-problem. “There are no bad dogs, just bad owners.”
I agree on the owner problem. I know quite a few people who refer to them as “suburbia Ferraris”, where it’s implied that suburbs are where the poor, the wellfare people, the criminals, the immigrants, etc. live.
Any dog can be dangerous with the wrong owner, it’s just that many of the wrong owners seem to choose a pitbull :/
That means it would probably die early of heart failure though.
Clicky for a picture of a gerund ‘cutting’ a gerundive, drawn by the great cartoonist Ronald Searle..
And here’s one of a gerund attacking a pair of peaceful pronouns..
Those are terrific.
I took Latin for five years, allowing me to actually learn English at the same time. Linguistic studies FTW!
Wait, wha there’s other languages than English? I just thought those people had horrible lisps.
ok, i only took one year of conversational spanish way back just after the iquisition, but i learned more there about how the english language works [or doesn't] than i did in 10 yrs of english [grammer, writing, etc] classes. the only other class i remember getting much out of was a journalism class – short, sweet, bait the hook, then set it. all in the first paragraph if not the first sentence.
then i had a required advanced english class in college, i swear the teacher wanted to be paid by the word. ruined me it did!
I don’t get why religions get special treatment, to be honest. They are on the same level as psychics, mediums and alternative medicine.
None of those beliefs are any more/less valid than the other.
I’m just happy you’re honest enough to put everything on the same level.
Except that religion has had more time to establish itself and become an integral part of culture in most societies (I would say “all”, but I honestly have no idea whether there might be some teeny tiny society somewhere that has actually developed without develop a religion as well), and religions tend to have more established dogmas.
Oh, grrah. Leaving out which part I responded to made that look a bit different than I meant it. I didn’t mean that it makes religion more valid, but that it explains why it gets special treatment. :p
I’m pretty sure Astrology is older than most modern religions. And probably has had more politicians believing in it, too.
I agree. (Well, I can’t agree about the age thing, beause I simply don’t know enough about astrology in soceties that predate judaism). But I also suspect that astrology probably could get special treatment if it demanded it.
Insteresting point though. What does astrology lack that religion has? The organisation, the hierarchy, the holy texts and the dogma?
Astrology had some pretty good organization and hierarchy for a while. As for holy texts and dogmas… they did have professional Astrologists that were taught very specific ways to read the stars (and if they screwed up, the Gods help them!).
But maybe that organization fell out of style a wee bit.
Yes – something must’ve happened. Other organised religions might’ve just stepped in and started taking over. Religions are good at that!
The thread that holds humanity together is our strength to unite against a common enemy. We define ourselves by what we don’t agree with.
We’re gonna need some alien race to try and kill us before we all take a step back and realise that the only thing that matters is being a decent human being to others.
Guarenteed that phrase will turn up in the next Roland Emmerich film.
Today.. Is our independence day!!!!!!!
wheeeeee aliens always attack on holidays to steal the fireworks and watermellon
They may have burned down my house but I really can’t complain, you see, I was out of lighter fluid and couldn’t get the barbecue to start. So now we can use the burning house to cook the hot dogs and hamburgers. Also, this has been the best fireworks display we’ve had in years.
MARRY ME!!!
Paul, you break my heart.
Even a spell checker couldn’t cure that level of retarded.
I love this picture, you can actually visualise the person who wrote it and the know that the gene pool has evaporated a little bit more because of them.
I’m surprised they could use a pen without eating it.
I hope you’re referring to the person who wrote the sign, not the person who captioned the pic.
Incase your wondering, i can very well use a pen with out eating it. I simply choose not to.
I was wondering. How about that.
Christianitys hate to homosexuality is made up by the curch. jesus for example didn’t judge anyone.
Really? Like telling people their father was the devil?
I totally agree, I do go to a christain church, both my parents are against gay marrige as well as my bother…. I think its insane and i think churches are turning into cults
Mawage is wot bwings us togeder tooday. Mawage, that bwessed awangment, that dweam wifin a dweam…