Hitchens has said this several times before. Maher wouldn’t know an original thought if it bit him on the ass.

Dude’s a COMEDIAN .

co·me·di·an (k-md-n)
noun
1. A professional entertainer who tells jokes or performs various other comic acts.
2. An actor in comedy.
3. A writer of comedy.
4. A person who amuses or tries to be amusing; a clown.

I would have thought his stand up shows would have been the give away .

The reason people doubt Obama is a Christian is because he was a follower of Rev. Wright. The reason they think he is a Muslim is because Wright was a Jew hater and so are Muslims. Obama acts like he hates the Jews.

The reason why people think that he is a muslim is because his middle name is hussein and his father was a muslim. The reason why people believe that he is an atheist, myself included, is because he is not passionate about the church and only used it to get the black vote in Chicago. I’d rather him be an atheist than a muslim.

So Maher thinks that Obama is really agnostic, but plays the Christian card to appeal to more people and yet he thinks that he is an honest guy and not someone who would tell people whatever they want to hear, just to get elected. Hmmm…interesting.

Apparently, Maher thinks Obama is a liar and a phony. Who knew?

Seems like Arianna HuffPo has found religion, and may not be voting for ‘O’ in 2012.

So what was it Arianna?

Taking energy assistance from the poor, while Goldman Sachs gives out record bonuses?

Or was it his bff Jeff Immelt taking 24,000 GE jobs from Cleveland, and shipping them to China – to avoid the safety regulations here!

Or is it more his inspiring speeches, which keep the masses’ indoctrination paralyzed in “Hope & Change”?

Who am I to tell someone else what their religion is?

gordonbloyershow said:
The reason people doubt Obama is a Christian is because he was a follower of Rev. Wright. The reason they think he is a Muslim is because Wright was a Jew hater and so are Muslims. Obama acts like he hates the Jews.

Very many Jew haters are Christian. Open your eyes Gramps.

Gasket said:
Who am I to tell someone else what their religion is?

Very many Jew haters are Christian. Open your eyes Gramps.

yeah, we see a lot of christians killing jews around the world, you moron.

espo222 said:
yeah, we see a lot of christians killing jews around the world, you moron.

Blower didn’t say anything about killing, genius. Maybe you should actually respond to what was said dummy.

Actually, I think Obama is really a ‘hidden’ Jew. Don’t forget all those liberal Wall Street and Hollywood Jews who helped finance his campaign. I’ll bet he’s even had secret backing from the nazi loving Jew, Soros, and I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that he’s been circumcised. Rightwingers really don’t have much of a sense of humor. Maher might be a bit hyperbolic at times, but he’s definitely one of the funnier people around and, I just found out he’s half Jewish and half Irish, an outrageous combination when it comes to pulling the wool over one’s eyes.

Gasket said:
Who am I to tell someone else what their religion is?

Very many Jew haters are Christian. Open your eyes Gramps.

Last I heard they worshiped a Jew…

He is a blank slate upon which people who don’t act with reason paint their hopes and fears.

More specifically, he’s a devotee of the socialist inspired Christian sect of Black Liberation Theology, for that’s the church with which he affiliated himself for 20 years. Just sayin’.

gordonbloyershow said:
The reason people doubt Obama is a Christian is because he was a follower of Rev. Wright. The reason they think he is a Muslim is because Wright was a Jew hater and so are Muslims. Obama acts like he hates the Jews.

He has to be an xtian if he is the messiah. http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/

Jack Burns said:
Last I heard they worshiped a Jew…

You overestimate their intelligence. :) Remember when Ann Coulter said Christians are “perfected” Jews? Not exactly a compliment. There has been friction between Christians and Jews for centuries.

Bill Maher is a national treasure and he puts on a great show.

It’s like Redeye only it’s funny.

There are varying degrees of being a Christian, various splinter groups and individual philosophies. You got your guilt ridden Catholics, suburban beer drinkin’ Baptists, haven’t been to church in twenty years guys, militant laying on hands type fundamentalists, snake healers, and on and on and on.

Calling yourself a Christian isn’t about a building you go to or not, it’s not even about believing in God.

It’s about following the teachings of Jesus Christ in an intimate way, forming a relationship with them and adhering to them. Obama does that, he follows Christ’s philosophies, which you can’t say about plenty of Christians who are only there for the “Get Into Heaven Card” while they act against his teachings.

The issue isn’t what faith Obamo is or isn’t, it’s that he LIES. Mr. ’8-percent-unemployment’ is utterly dishonest and needs to be humiliated these next two years (not that I think there will be any difficulty accomplishing that).

“For the record, the belief Maher apparently holds – that Obama isn’t actually a Christian, but merely pretends to be one to keep up appearances for the sake of his political career – strikes us as one of the most cynical things anyone could possibly believe about Obama. Is it possible?”

Yes, it is possible, that’s what Richard Wolffe said, and that’s what I keep saying. Obama made this mess by lying. For the same reason Bill doesn’t believe Obama is a Christian others believe he is Muslim. Because he has lied over and over again about his past, and his church devotion.

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=91075256932
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=ydaGZunzuz

ChrisNH said:
The issue isn’t what faith Obamo is or isn’t, it’s that he LIES.

exactly!

UPDATE!! I still don’t care what this clown thinks.

Just wondering folks, when was the last time you ever met a Christian that wanted to be able to abort children that were not even in the womb any longer?

Yeah, he is a Christian just like the other Hussein, Saddam.

I believe it. Among highly educated people in the general population a large percentage of them are atheist.
A large percentage of elected politicians are highly educated.
That none of them confesses to be atheist is purely for political reasons.

Does it bother me as an atheist? Not really, I’d rather have an atheist in office than someone who is guided by a 2000 year old book rather than reason.

Who cares if he lies right?
I mean an employee should always lie to his boss right?

Bill Maher Says He Doesn’t Think …

Knew it .

gordonbloyershow said:

What about Pope Pious the X11. He was not exactly friendly to Jews. Obama’s has always been very close to the Jewish community. That community was a significant part of his base in chicago and before that at Harvard Law School. Bill Maher simply believes that President Obama is to intelligent to be religious.

Maher creates and exploits controversy for the publicity controversy brings him!

…but I would guess Obama is agnostic, that he subscribes to no formal tenets of religion, but has a self-evident awareness of some energy, spirit, what-have-you, animating his flesh & bones.

That, and the fact that his ego would preclude him from worshiping any entity or establishment higher than himself!

armwood said:
What about Pope Pious the X11. He was not exactly friendly to Jews. Obama’s has always been very close to the Jewish community. That community was a significant part of his base in chicago and before that at Harvard Law School. Bill Maher simply believes that President Obama is to intelligent to be religious.

Yea, they just LOVE him in Israel!
lol

I don’t think most of the Republicans who claim to be Christian really are either.

Seriously, you know most of them don’t go to church anymore….but they probably did while growing up, so they’re able to keep quoting the Bible to pander to the wingnuts and the rednecks.

Never thought I’d say this…Maher is correct.

Obama is a political expedient when religion is concerned – his “beliefs” are a means to an end – to push his globalist agenda.

NORBIT Jr. said:
Yea, they just LOVE him in Israel!
lol

Speaking of religions, Mormonism, crazy Glen Beck’s religion has the most racist doctrine of any religion in the world.

Gasket said:
Very many Jew haters are Christian. Open your eyes Gramps.

I will open my eyes when you tell everyone your real name and quit lying.

It’s quite clear that Obama is an atheist, I’ve been saying it for over a year since I found out how he “found God”. He coincidentally “found God” through Jeremiah Wright right before he decided to seek public office. Basically, Obama reasoned that Americans could elect a half-black politician, but that they couldn’t elect an atheist politician. So he did what all politicians do, he lied and joined a Marxist church — a church that worships Marx rather than God.

armwood said:
What about Pope Pious the X11. He was not exactly friendly to Jews. Obama’s has always been very close to the Jewish community. That community was a significant part of his base in chicago and before that at Harvard Law School. Bill Maher simply believes that President Obama is to intelligent to be religious.

uh…actually Obama has had very close ties to PLO spokespeople in Chicago.

I think he is probably an atheist Leftist and because he is he is sympathetic to Islam. Most Leftists see Islam as an oppressed people. Many times Leftists side AGAINST any group that is against the USA and our interests.

Obama was very close to Khalid Rashidi

http://www.suite101.com/content/obama-and-khalidi-another-chicago-connection-a73747

armwood said:
Speaking of religions, Mormonism, crazy Glen Beck’s religion has the most racist doctrine of any religion in the world.

Actually the Quran and hadiths teach that Muslims have to kill Jews, and fight Christians and kill atheists.

Tony Westover said:
It’s quite clear that Obama is an atheist, I’ve been saying it for over a year since I found out how he “found God”. He coincidentally “found God” through Jeremiah Wright right before he decided to seek public office. Basically, Obama reasoned that Americans could elect a half-black politician, but that they couldn’t elect an atheist politician. So he did what all politicians do, he lied and joined a Marxist church — a church that worships Marx rather than God.

I agree, Wright’s church is politically connected in the African-American community. I think that he used his connections with Wright to get himself elected.

Obama definitely believes in God, so, he would not be a secular humanist if that implies atheism.

Latin2 said:
Actually the Quran and hadiths teach that Muslims have to kill Jews, and fight Christians and kill atheists.

Want to share with us who has to be killed according to the bible? Or will you run up against the characters per post limit?

armwood said:
Speaking of religions, Mormonism, crazy Glen Beck’s religion has the most racist doctrine of any religion in the world.

Really, or are you just talking out of your backside. Have you ever liked taken a comparative religion class or two, I have, call me after your finals. That is unless you believe that only “Whitey” can be a racists, then you may have me there.

Sidhekitten said:
Really, or are you just talking out of your backside. Have you ever liked taken a comparative religion class or two, I have, call me after your finals. That is unless you believe that only “Whitey” can be a racists, then you may have me there.

I would have just stopped at calling it crazy, unless you truly believe Joseph Smith met the angel Moroni in upstate NY in the 1820s who led him to some golden plates that for some reason nobody else was allowed to see.

Not saying that the Mormons are not a little “out there”, I lived within 50 miles of the last place the Mormons were before they were burned out of Illinois. What I am pointing out is that using “the most racists doctrine in the world” is very very sloppy. And no, “Whitey” is not the only group on the planet that can be racists and bigots. Sometimes you only need a little power or a club.

armwood said:
Speaking of religions, Mormonism, crazy Glen Beck’s religion has the most racist doctrine of any religion in the world.

You should sue them .

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1048938.html

An Idea said:
You should sue them . http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1048938.html

Heh…

armwood said:
Speaking of religions, Mormonism, crazy Glen Beck’s religion has the most racist doctrine of any religion in the world.

You must not be familiar with the caste system in India.

Jesus, Maher and I actually agree on something: Obama’s a liar.

Sidhekitten said:
Not saying that the Mormons are not a little “out there”, I lived within 50 miles of the last place the Mormons were before they were burned out of Illinois. What I am pointing out is that using “the most racists doctrine in the world” is very very sloppy…..

True, there’s a lot of competition in that area.

This is pretty interesting reading regarding mormons and race http://www.angelfire.com/mo2/blackmormon/homepage.html

I think Maher is bring up the point the every politicians embellishes on their “faith.” For some reason there are people out there that actually care about it.

You will notice that the politicians that you know for a fact are 100% serious about their religion, never get elected.

Its one of those “fibs” or embellishments that the American people are willing to take in good faith as long as we know you’re not TOO serious about it.

armwood said:
Speaking of religions, Mormonism, crazy Glen Beck’s religion has the most racist doctrine of any religion in the world.

That must be why I see blacks, hispanics, pacific islanders, asians, and whites all coming and going from the local stake center.

You people who constantly dump on Mormons for their “racist” doctrine don’t understand one speck, and you step out like little idiots and make assholes of yourselves. No, the Mormon’s aren’t PC, they say that in the early America’s, these people were white, and they were good, and those people who turned to their evil ways were made dark. And present day, here we all are, one, big, imperfect family. The Mormons are, generally speaking, much less racist than the population as a whole. They aren’t afraid to tell their story.

sarainitaly said:
“For the record, the belief Maher apparently holds – that Obama isn’t actually a Christian, but merely pretends to be one to keep up appearances for the sake of his political career – strikes us as one of the most cynical things anyone could possibly believe about Obama. Is it possible?” Yes, it is possible, that’s what Richard Wolffe said, and that’s what I keep saying. Obama made this mess by lying. For the same reason Bill doesn’t believe Obama is a Christian others believe he is Muslim. Because he has lied over and over again about his past, and his church devotion. http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=91075256932http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=ydaGZunzuz

Behold! The Serial Basher from Berlusconireich is hard at work bashing our American President and all things American, not because there is truth in what she says, indeed there is none, but because she has discovered a niche, a group of rabid rightists who will welcome here in merely because she is willing to sacrafice her personal integrity and intellectual honesty merely for some small measure of acceptance. A truly pathetic things it is to behold, I should add. But, all real Americans, regardless of ideology, ought to rise up and tell her is you wish to senselessly bash our President and our Nation from afar, we won’t support you. It’s every bit as tacky as hanging your dirty laundry in the front yard. If you so need popularity, learn to bake and stop diminishing America in the eyes of the rest of the world by your decidedly anti-American bleating, kvetching, moaning and whining when you’re not in America.

Mr.Papshmer said:
That must be why I see blacks, hispanics, pacific islanders, asians, and whites all coming and going from the local stake center. You people who constantly dump on Mormons for their “racist” doctrine don’t understand one speck, and you step out like little idiots and make assholes of yourselves. No, the Mormon’s aren’t PC, they say that in the early America’s, these people were white, and they were good, and those people who turned to their evil ways were made dark. And present day, here we all are, one, big, imperfect family. The Mormons are, generally speaking, much less racist than the population as a whole. They aren’t afraid to tell their story.

What a marvelous whitewash of the history of a violent, racist cult and a prime source of heretical Christianity in the world today.

In a nation in which we have no established religion and in which we generally allow the free exercise of religion, most mainline Christians hold and practice their beliefs in the hearts in souls, in their homes and communities and in their churches, whilst showing tolerance for other religions, true religions, not necessarily cults, in our gouvernance. Fundamentalists, be they Christian, Jewish or Muslim, often mistake this, perhaps intentionally, for secular humanism. It is simply tolerance.

That seems to me to be a much better practice than the Gle(n)n O’Beckerhead model which makes one seem like a pathetic clown and fool whilst diminishing religion for the believer and in the eyes of the world.

Mr.Papshmer said:
That must be why I see blacks, hispanics, pacific islanders, asians, and whites all coming and going from the local stake center.

You people who constantly dump on Mormons for their “racist” doctrine don’t understand one speck, and you step out like little idiots and make assholes of yourselves. No, the Mormon’s aren’t PC, they say that in the early America’s, these people were white, and they were good, and those people who turned to their evil ways were made dark. And present day, here we all are, one, big, imperfect family. The Mormons are, generally speaking, much less racist than the population as a whole. They aren’t afraid to tell their story.

You make it sound like the church is completely open and full of forgiveness about their past, but until 1978 blacks were not allowed to become priests or elders or whatever they’re called (they still deny women and gays this right). The current members might not be racist to any larger extent than other people, but don’t you think the church should make some sort of apology for 140 years of officially established racism?
Reform mormonism seems to split from the official mormon church to a large extent because of this issue.

The Real Royal King said:
What a marvelous whitewash of the history of a violent, racist cult and a prime source of heretical Christianity in the world today.

I always dig how the assholes who want the LDS church marginalized always call it a “cult”. Homes, 20 guys in San Diego killing themselves for a coach ticket on a UFO is a cult. Fourteen million people going to church each Sunday isn’t. Deal with it.

Mr.Papshmer said:
I always dig how the assholes who want the LDS church marginalized always call it a “cult”. Homes, 20 guys in San Diego killing themselves for a coach ticket on a UFO is a cult. Fourteen million people going to church each Sunday isn’t. Deal with it.

This is America, and I am a Christian. I have the right and the duty to call out the practice of heretical Christianity wherever I see it, and you can’t stop me. Deal with it.

ProgLib said:
until 1978 blacks were not allowed to become priests

And now they are, right?

ProgLib said:
(they still deny women and gays this right)

Most religions do. Men and women are different, and have different roles in life, and only a retard would deny that on an intellectual level.

ProgLib said:
You make it sound like the church is completely open and full of forgiveness about their past, but until 1978 blacks were not allowed to become priests or elders or whatever they’re called (they still deny women and gays this right). The current members might not be racist to any larger extent than other people, but don’t you think the church should make some sort of apology for 140 years of officially established racism?Reform mormonism seems to split from the official mormon church to a large extent because of this issue.

You make a very good point. Catholics and Lutherans had to come to terms with the Inquisition, the abuses of th Reformation the willingness to compromise with Nazism. Catholicism is struggling to come to terms with the abuse of altar boys, yet we are suppose to give Mormonism a pass, afford it some special status. In a religion which has never really dealt with the terrible oppression and degradation of women in a system of polygymy and forced marriage, which no longer, wink-wink-nod-nod-Know What I Mean? Know What I Mean?, still continues and which has never dealt with the slaugter of “Gentile” men, women and children at Mountain Meadow, we give them a pass. Why?

The Real Royal King said:
I have the right and the duty to call out the practice of heretical Christianity wherever I see it

I respect that, but I disagree with you.

The Real Royal King said:
This is America, and I am a Christian. I have the right and the duty to call out the practice of heretical Christianity wherever I see it, and you can’t stop me. Deal with it.

RRKING from the pulpit . As the resident Holy Man here , who practices his faith with with humility and kindness at all times , allow me to explain to you sinners how I got this way .

RRKING sitting in a pew . Most are amazed at what a sweet natured chap I am , particularly after they meet the brutish Armando . My fans have wondered ” Bobbi , were you always such a pious and holy man ? ” . No . My transformation occurred back in 1950 . I stumbled into a church one Saturday night in El Segundo , hungry , tired and broke and immediately passed out on one of the benches . When awakened , I was in the middle of some sort of ritual ! A basket of money was passed my way and I shyly took a few bills , gratefully . Quelle est cette ? I wandered to another room to count my loot and found a row of kids ‘ lunchboxes on a table in the back . The children were busy singing , so I opened a few of the lunches and jammed the food into my handbag . This was heaven ! I have returned each Sunday since !

Mr.Papshmer said:
I always dig how the assholes who want the LDS church marginalized always call it a “cult”. Homes, 20 guys in San Diego killing themselves for a coach ticket on a UFO is a cult. Fourteen million people going to church each Sunday isn’t. Deal with it.

Only difference between a cult and a religion is the number of followers. More followers don’t make it less crazy. See scientology for a prime example.

The Real Royal King said:
What a marvelous whitewash of the history of a violent, racist cult and a prime source of heretical Christianity in the world today.

RRKING again . So , as you can see , as a liar , a thief , a pompous bag of putrid gas such as myself has the ability to point out what I see as flaws in others . I do this constantly , and it is the reason I am much beloved throughout the land . Yea , verily . Amen .

ProgLib said:
Only difference between a cult and a religion is the number of followers. More followers don’t make it less crazy. See scientology for a prime example.

So Mormons are crazy, but, isn’t? Please fill me in.

The Real Royal King said:
This is America, and I am a Christian. I have the right and the duty to call out the practice of heretical Christianity wherever I see it, and you can’t stop me. Deal with it.

You are a douche bag. Deal with it.

The Real Royal King said:
This is America, and I am a Christian. I have the right and the duty to call out the practice of heretical Christianity wherever I see it, and you can’t stop me. Deal with it.

You can do whatever you like, but considering the history of the Catholic church I’d suggest some restraint. I can’t think of anything more heretical than church officials covering up heinous crimes and allowing them to continue.

Mr.Papshmer said:
So Mormons are crazy, but, isn’t? Please fill me in.

I think any religion is crazy, but the degree of craziness varies. Mormons are crazier than other christians because a large part of their beliefs is based on one dude’s stories only a few generations ago which are easier to disprove as total bunk than things from 2-3000 years ago which have had time to become rooted in tradition. By this reasoning stuff made up by a second rate sci fi author in the 1970s makes scientologists crazier still.

All religions are invented by man in order to gain control over other men.

As long as religions don’t interfere with my daily life and aren’t outright cruel or harmful to people I’m not bothered by them. My biggest inconvenience personally is not being able to buy beer on Sunday mornings when I go grocery shopping. Tea partiers who are all about constitutionality should be armed and dangerous over this issue.

Was that the Rev. Wright on the Show? He looks terrific. This is a nothing show. Why does MEDIAITE OBSESS ON IT?

Mr.Papshmer said:
So Mormons are crazy, but, isn’t? Please fill me in.

No true.

The initiation into Christinaity, the Church Universal, is the rite of baptism. Practices vary, but a person baptized a Lutheran can become a Catholic without being baptized again. This holds true with all mainline and virtually all other Christian sects. However, none of the mainline churches recognize the efficacy of Mormon baptism.

I actually have no problem with Mormonism, much as I have no problem with Islam, Judaism, Buddhism or the like. My problem is the misappropriation of “Christian”.

CosmosDan said:
You can do whatever you like, but considering the history of the Catholic church I’d suggest some restraint. I can’t think of anything more heretical than church officials covering up heinous crimes and allowing them to continue.

Horrid to be sure. To be denounced by all. Vigorously prosecuted. And, some in the Church, most notably Cardinal Law and the present Pope and his predecessor were more interested in covering up the incidents, in some misplaced belief that salvages the Church’s image, than in confronting the problem, the profanity, the disgrace.

However, you make a false distinction between the individual believer’s propensity to sin, and to sin mightily, and institutionally based false doctrine. They have to be understood and attacked differently.

ProgLib said:
As long as religions don’t interfere with my daily life and aren’t outright cruel or harmful to people I’m not bothered by them.

You and I agree.

ProgLib said:
My biggest inconvenience personally is not being able to buy beer on Sunday mornings when I go grocery shopping.

A funny one, years ago, whiile in the navy, I was driving from San Diego to Jacksonville, and stopped at a Best Western in Vinton, LA, on the Texas border, because they had a billboard on I-10 advertising a lounge; I’d been driving all day and wanted a beer.. Checked in, and asked when the lounge opened. (I could see it from the front desk, and it was dark) The lady said, “It’s Sunday!”. Drove across the border to Texas, bought a six pack, and watched TV. :(

Regarding blue laws, why don’t the angry atheists target those instead of whether it says GOD on the back of quarters. Who cares?

I believe that the true value of a Christian is their commitment to God.

A fundamental tenet in any organized religion is the concept of a gathering of like believers. Conflict always arises when like-minded people disagree with other like-minded people.

I’m not a “big group person” in my church but I do see the value in socializing and interacting with others in my church…which is pretty big for the size of my locale. I go to church most every Sunday, my church is live on the Net in case I miss a service and I’m in a comfortable place in my own personal belief.

If I was asked the question that is demanded of the President…”Are you a Christian?”…I would answer…Yes.

It would have nothing to do with my church attendance. It would, in my belief, be a simple answer.

Maybe politics precludes the President from answering…it definitely would polarize him with a lot of voters. I don’t know if it is a fair question to ask coming from a media scrum that is more interested in catching a “gotcha moment” than an actual theological discourse.

But, the easy answer to the question, if the President responds that he has accepted that Jesus Christ is his Savior and with his intercession all things are possible….I would say that would satisfy any and all questions about our Presidents’ faith.

If he doesn’t answer it…I don’t really care. Personally, I don’t think he is a Christian. But it really has nothing to do with anything as far as his governance.

Sigh, I actually agreed with Bill Maher.

Mr.Papshmer said:
I always dig how the assholes who want the LDS church marginalized always call it a “cult”. Homes, 20 guys in San Diego killing themselves for a coach ticket on a UFO is a cult. Fourteen million people going to church each Sunday isn’t. Deal with it.

You are correct that LDS is not a cult. Technically, it is a sect.

It’s pointless to speculate about Obama’s belief. Bush professed to be a Christian as he lied to us and sent our citizens off to kill and be killed. We’ve had plenty of presidents and politicians whose actions indicated they didn’t hold their beliefs very seriously.

One thing that Obama said I completely agree with is that regardless of our personal choice of religion or not , because our nation and the world is so diverse we must develop a way of communicating that doesn’t encourage division.

I hear people talk about this country being founded on Christian values , and I wonder what values are uniquely Christian? The principles of living that Jesus taught were taught long before him by others. The principles we talk about in our patriotic speeches , liberty, justice, equality, are not unique to Christianity or even the US as a country. Maybe we can focus on those principles that mankind has in common without focusing on the division of religious labels.

Gasket said:
Very many Jew haters are Christian. Open your eyes Gramps.

Open your mind, A**hole.

The Real Royal King said:
This is America, and I am a Christian. I have the right and the duty to call out the practice of heretical Christianity wherever I see it, and you can’t stop me. Deal with it.

Interesting. Do you feel the same way about other religions? If you are a Christian (and really, with all your BS stories, who knows what true and what isn’t), wouldn’t anything other than what you practice be “heretical?” Thusly, you could (and should to be consistent) look down upon all other religions, and apply the same insults and disrespect to them.

But you don’t. No, you’re far more likely to call out other people who perceived insults against (for example) Islam, despite your continued bigotry towards Mormonism. So your argument that you “call out heretical Christianity” is bogus… it’s the excuse you give for attacking Glenn Beck, and a group of people who (somewhat traditionally) don’t agree with you politically. You use religion as a cover, but it’s not really the reason.

Once again, you a hypocrite. At this point, I’m sure no one is surprised.

Mr.Papshmer said:
I respect that, but I disagree with you.

His view is hypocritical, and not worth your respect.

ProgLib said:
Regarding blue laws, why don’t the angry atheists target those instead of whether it says GOD on the back of quarters. Who cares?

A big ol’ poster for this group was hanging in one of the supermarkets I go to.

http://endctbluelaws.org/

When I first moved to CT, I had no idea about the Blue Laws… so I undid the curtain and grabbed a six pack. It was only after a moment or two of wondering why there was a curtain in the first place, that I decided to put it back.

Independent said:
Obama does that, he follows Christ’s philosophies, which you can’t say about plenty of Christians who are only there for the “Get Into Heaven Card” while they act against his teachings.

If they are against his teachings, they aren’t Christians.

ProgLib said:
Regarding blue laws, why don’t the angry atheists target those instead of whether it says GOD on the back of quarters. Who cares?

Yeah, the blue laws were set up to limit alcohol consumption after you’d work all week. Get to church…then buy booze. The ones I remember limited Sunday sales until after 1 pm.

Of course, it wasn’t just alcohol. I’m older, but I remember the shock that business communities started experiencing when car dealerships started selling on Sundays.

It’s antiquated. Most churches hold multiple services, a lot of them on Wednesday evenings.

lol, I live in Daytona Beach…. my pastor is very aware of NASCAR. He will be brief and will be giving out driving instructions for I-95.

armwood said:
What about Pope Pious the X11. He was not exactly friendly to Jews. Obama’s has always been very close to the Jewish community. That community was a significant part of his base in chicago and before that at Harvard Law School. Bill Maher simply believes that President Obama is to intelligent to be religious.

Maybe you should sue everyone….Oh wait , you can’t. You’ve been disbarred for being unintelligent and havig 5th gade reasoning like Maher

ProgLib said:
Does it bother me as an atheist? Not really, I’d rather have an atheist in office than someone who is guided by a 2000 year old book rather than reason.

I think this is good insight into how most “progressives”/liberals see things.

ProgLib said:
Regarding blue laws, why don’t the angry atheists target those instead of whether it says GOD on the back of quarters. Who cares?

Because atheists pretty much exist only to piss people off? They don’t serve much else of a purpose really.

Since Maher is wrong about everything, we can assume BHO is a Christian.

ProgLib said:
Only difference between a cult and a religion is the number of followers

So liberalism is a cult, eh?

I agree.

ProgLib said:
Regarding blue laws, why don’t the angry atheists target those instead of whether it says GOD on the back of quarters. Who cares?

Oh, and just to send ya’ll into a tailspin… I’m actually against having “God” on money or in the Pledge. On money, I think it’s disrespectful to “God,” and in the Pledge… well, I just don’t think we are actually a “nation under God.” We are a nation where anyone can be “under God,” “with God,” or “free from God.” But as a nation, “God” is not one of our government tenants.

____________

As for Obama… who cares? I believe it’s most likely that he’s not very religious (in the sense that he feels he needs to practice the way others do). Joining Rev. Wright’s church, but not hearing him be a racist or anti-American time and time again, points to the fact that even when Obama was there, he wasn’t really paying attention. He was there for the votes… and maybe a cookie and some coffee after services (you guys do that too, right?).

But who cares? Does it matter if he goes to Church or not? Nah. What’s more important is his willingness to use religion to get votes, to lie to the American public and pretend that he’s someone or something he’s not. THAT, at least to me, is not a good sign… and suggests we cannot trust the person. Surely, he’s not the first person to do this… but it doesn’t make it any more acceptable.

ProgLib said:
Does it bother me as an atheist? Not really, I’d rather have an atheist in office than someone who is guided by a 2000 year old book rather than reason.

But libs voted for Barry because they thought he was God and the passing of time, son, doesn’t alter the truth.

ImNotBlue said:
The Real Royal King said:
This is America, and I am a Christian. I have the right and the duty to call out the practice of heretical Christianity wherever I see it, and you can’t stop me. Deal with it.
Interesting. Do you feel the same way about other religions? If you are a Christian (and really, with all your BS stories, who knows what true and what isn’t), wouldn’t anything other than what you practice be “heretical?” Thusly, you could (and should to be consistent) look down upon all other religions, and apply the same insults and disrespect to them.
But you don’t. No, you’re far more likely to call out other people who perceived insults against (for example) Islam, despite your continued bigotry towards Mormonism. So your argument that you “call out heretical Christianity” is bogus… it’s the excuse you give for attacking Glenn Beck, and a group of people who (somewhat traditionally) don’t agree with you politically. You use religion as a cover, but it’s not really the reason.
Once again, you a hypocrite. At this point, I’m sure no one is surprised.

My dear Philistine, again, you contribute nothing.

Heresy is generally judged by the collective wisdom of the Church Universal. In addition to the mainline Christian churches, the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Methodism, Lutheran, Presbyterian and the rest and for almost all Christian sects, the determination has been made that Smith and Young were false prophets teaching a heresy. This churches have formalized that in coming together to declare there is one Baptism, for all and among all, and it is that one Baptism which defines Christian membership. They have declared the Mormon practice of baptism to not be baptism at all. Now, you may disagree with this, as is your right, but it appears you are simply woefully ignorant of it.

As I noted above, I have no particular problem with Mormonism, save and except its odd need to usurp the “Christian” banner. It is not Christianity, as I have shown above. Personally, I find Mormonism to offer very little except a strident materialism. But, that is simply a personal observation and belief. With respect to Christian, Jews, Muslims of all stripes, Buddhists, Hindus and other religions, Mormonism has a place at the table. It is simply not the Christian place at the table.

Now, go rant again. I am done with you and your abject silliness for the day.

I want to read armwood’s context but

notsofast said:
armwood said:
What about Pope Pious the X11. He was not exactly friendly to Jews. Obama’s has always been very close to the Jewish community. That community was a significant part of his base in chicago and before that at Harvard Law School. Bill Maher simply believes that President Obama is to intelligent to be religious.

That’s an interesting comment to say the least. To intelligent to be religious.

lazzzlo said:
I want to read armwood’s context but That’s an interesting comment to say the least. To intelligent to be religious.

Tolerant isn’t he? If you are religious you are stupid? Says a lot about ol’ armchair and his bigotry.

armwood said:
Bill Maher simply believes that President Obama is to intelligent to be religious.

Beware of people who are “to” intelligent. Often they are too stupid to understand the truth.

The Real Royal King said:
Heresy is generally judged by the collective wisdom of the Church Universal. In addition to the mainline Christian churches, the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Methodism, Lutheran, Presbyterian and the rest and for almost all Christian sects, the determination has been made that Smith and Young were false prophets teaching a heresy. This churches have formalized that in coming together to declare there is one Baptism, for all and among all, and it is that one Baptism which defines Christian membership. They have declared the Mormon practice of baptism to not be baptism at all. Now, you may disagree with this, as is your right, but it appears you are simply woefully ignorant of it.

Most of that is true. You did forget the Reformed faith!

Who is the Church Universal? Jesus Christ.

As an aside here….I rarely get involved with religion and politics.

I’m here for the media and politics.

The Real Royal King said:
My dear Philistine,

I must admit, I do like “Philistine,” more than Kumquat. At least it’s clear you’re trying to talk down to me, instead of just accusing me of being an obscure fruit.

Meh.

With respect to Christian, Jews, Muslims of all stripes, Buddhists, Hindus and other religions, Mormonism has a place at the table. It is simply not the Christian place at the table.

Well… two things. One, I think you’d have a hard time figuring out who takes the Christian place at the table, provided that there’s only one spot (and this is a rather small table). Do the Catholics take it? What about the Protestants? Unitarians? Lutherans? Baptists? Methodists? There sure are a lot of you guys.

Fact is, the Mormons are just another sect of Christianity… and just because they’re not your sect, doesn’t mean their heretical, does it? Or are you willing to call all the other ones heretics too?

And secondly, your full of crap. If you had shown even the slightest bit of respect for Mormons in the past, you’d have an argument… but again, we’ve all read your words before, we know the things you’ve said. You show no respect for them, so to claim that “you’re fine with them,” now is BS.

I’ve asked you this before, and never gotten an answer, but I’ll ask again… who are you trying to fool?

Now, go rant again. I am done with you and your abject silliness for the day.

Yeah, I bet.

ImNotBlue …

When I first moved to CT, I had no idea about the Blue Laws… so I undid the curtain and grabbed a six pack. It was only after a moment or two of wondering why there was a curtain in the first place, that I decided to put it back.

I lived close enough to NY in CT that I could always get beer in a pinch, but I moved from CT to NC a few years ago and while I can get beer on Sundays here I have to wait till noon. Inconvenient as I choose to go shopping while the believers are in church.
Really inconvenient and annoying if you plan to tailgate before a 1 PM Panthers’ game. I don’t see how these laws would hold up if seriously challenged.

lazzzlo said:
Most of that is true. You did forget the Reformed faith! Who is the Church Universal? Jesus Christ.

Indeed. “And, Then The Church Triumphant Will Be the Church at Rest”. Beautiful hymn.

The Real Royal King said:
lazzzlo said:
Most of that is true. You did forget the Reformed faith! Who is the Church Universal? Jesus Christ.

The Real Royal King said:
Indeed. “And, Then The Church Triumphant Will Be the Church at Rest”. Beautiful hymn.

So perhaps heresy is best judged “later on”.

ProgLib said:
Really inconvenient and annoying if you plan to tailgate before a 1 PM Panthers’ game. I don’t see how these laws would hold up if seriously challenged.

Yes, I could see how not being drunk for a Panthers game would make actually watching them difficult.

*ZING*

ProgLib said:
I lived close enough to NY in CT that I could always get beer in a pinch, but I moved from CT to NC a few years ago and while I can get beer on Sundays here I have to wait till noon. Inconvenient as I choose to go shopping while the believers are in church.Really inconvenient and annoying if you plan to tailgate before a 1 PM Panthers’ game. I don’t see how these laws would hold up if seriously challenged.

The Warren Court, believe it or not, was the most recent Court to address this issue and held that these laws are, in fact, Consitutional, in McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420 (1961). The only qualifier seems to be there must also be an independent secular reason. However, the standard is very low. Simply the desireability of a universal day or rest seems sufficient.

In Texas, our Blue Laws have been largely repealed, except for liquor laws. Beer and Wine only on Sunday, after 12:00 Noon. None of the real stuff, and no real stuff on national holidays or on election days until after the polls close. Interestingly, it is not religious reasons for this. The liquor lobby always opposes Sunday and holiday openings for that secular rest reason.

The Real Royal King said:
Indeed. “And, Then The Church Triumphant Will Be the Church at Rest”. Beautiful hymn.

RRKING on song . Armando ‘s favorite song was always ” I can ‘t get over a boy like you , so answer the phone yourself ” .

lazzzlo said:
So perhaps heresy is best judged “later on”.

In the sense of burning heretics, yes, I say so.

In the sense of individual churches and believers and defining doctrine and practice, absolutely not.

There is a very, very, very long piece in the New Yorker magazine on Scientology that comes out on news stands this Monday.

Here’s the link

I think it highlights a lot of questions about cults/sects. There is a difference between organized religion.

It is well worth a read….it’s a very, very, very long read.

The Real Royal King said:
In the sense of individual churches and believers and defining doctrine and practice, absolutely not.

So you do believe in ex-communication and the shunning of aposates.

To be fair, I don’t believe in an intercession between a believer and God.

I’m not going to go any further here.

lazzzlo said:
So you do believe in ex-communication and the shunning of aposates.

In the same sense I believe in the Rite of Exorcism. I can’t deny it exists, but it so seldom surfaces it is scarcely worth note.

I will say, I am troubled by the Church rushing to declare John Paul II a saint. There is evidence of great work, courageous work in the War and the Communist era in Poland, which make him a great man, but the obligatory miracles seem contrived and tenuous. We need to step back from this. It’s like naming schools after living or recent presidents or national figures, when history raises serious questions about them. Warren G. Harding. Robert E. Lee. Ronald Raygun.

ProgLib says:

You make it sound like the church is completely open and full of forgiveness about their past, but until 1978 blacks were not allowed to become priests or elders or whatever they’re called (they still deny women and gays this right).

Speaking as a Mormon woman, we don’t have a problem with that. We each have different roles to fill. If you actually did some research, you would know how highly woman are regarded in the church. But face it, you bigots have NO desire to actually find out for yourself and stick to your stupid talking points. Fortunately, we don’t give a holy crap what you think about us.

Oh and as for gay marriage, a large portion of blacks and hispanics are opposed to it also. Why do you only focus your hate on Mormons regarding this issue? No need to anser, I know the reason.

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Oh and as for gay marriage, a large portion of blacks and hispanics are opposed to it also. Why do you only focus your hate on Mormons regarding this issue? No need to anser, I know the reason.

Because Blacks and Hispanics are not religions, Mormonism is, perhaps?

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Speaking as a Mormon woman, we don’t have a problem with that. We each have different roles to fill. If you actually did some research, you would know how highly woman are regarded in the church.

You can’t speak for all Mormon women. Many do have a problem with that and are pressing reform efforts.

Even aside from that, we have the Adoration of the BVM but no women priests at the altar. It’s what you call a bone.

Irrelevant spin, Royal Dimwit.

The Real Royal King said:
Because Blacks and Hispanics are not religions, Mormonism is, perhaps?

What does that matter? You’ll attack a religion for it’s “intolerance,” but not communities?

@RRKing…to sum up. I believe in a one on one personal relationship.

That is highly personal. I’m not evangelical but I worship in a reformed faith, mostly based from John Calvin.

You have your beliefs, which I think are Catholic.

I don’t have a problem with your belief…but it isn’t mine.

But I do not think our beliefs give either one of us any authority to tell others what they should or shouldn’t believe.

Royal Dimwit says:

You can’t speak for all Mormon women. Many do have a problem with that and are pressing reform efforts.

Can you link to that? BTW, if they are, they don’t have a true testimony of the Church. But even if they are pressing for these reforms, they won’t get them. Unlike some Churches, ours doesn’t bow to the current PC crap of the outside world. But I’d still love to see your links.

The Real Royal King said:
I believe in the Rite of Exorcism

RRKING says . I ‘ ve had three myself . They don ‘t work on Lucifer ‘s close relatives , apparently .

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Can you link to that? BTW, if they are, they don’t have a true testimony of the Church. But even if they are pressing for these reforms, they won’t get them. Unlike some Churches, ours doesn’t bow to the current PC crap of the outside world.

Dear Bitter, Tormented Michelle-in-Utah, why is it I would do that for a closed-minded person like you. As for the unchangeability of the faith, let’s all remember that the essential tenant, the prophesy, the Word of the Holy Father regarding polygymy miraculously changed when Brigham Young and bled the settlers in Utah and the newly faithful dry for his personal enrichment, and needed to have a state created to become even wealthier.

The Lantern of Truth said:
RRKING says . I ‘ ve had three myself . They don ‘t work on Lucifer ’s close relatives , apparently .

You are on fire today! heh!

Ryoal Dimwit, did you forget to provide your link, because I don’t see it.

Should be Royal before I’m cited.

2012, I believe the King won’t comment on blacks being against gay marriage because they’re not present.

The Real Royal King said:
Dear Bitter, Tormented Michelle-in-Utah, why is it I would do that for a closed-minded person like you..

This is Royal admitting he has no link, and isn’t going to provide one.

The Real Royal King said:
Dear Bitter, Tormented Michelle-in-Utah, why is it I would do that for a closed-minded person like you. As for the unchangeability of the faith, let’s all remember that the essential tenant, the prophesy, the Word of the Holy Father regarding polygymy miraculously changed when Brigham Young and bled the settlers in Utah and the newly faithful dry for his personal enrichment, and needed to have a state created to become even wealthier.

Just out of curiosity, do you hold the faith of Islam in as low a regard as you do Mormonism?

The Real Royal King said:
Dear Bitter, Tormented Michelle-in-Utah, why is it I would do that for a closed-minded person like you. As for the unchangeability of the faith, let’s all remember that the essential tenant, the prophesy, the Word of the Holy Father regarding polygymy miraculously changed when Brigham Young and bled the settlers in Utah and the newly faithful dry for his personal enrichment, and needed to have a state created to become even wealthier.

You are attacking someone’s belief. You sure want to stick with that?

Good theory Writer, but I’m more inclined to think libs like him don’t focus on blacks and hispanics because they need their votes to get into office and are afraid to offend them. It’s easy to pick on us Mormons because while they may get the Harry Reid vote, they don’t get much more than that from us. But like I said, I couldn’t possibly care any less what he thinks of me or my religion. Of course, I would never bash his religion, but that’s the difference between the two of us.

Kind of like the King is against anti-Semitism, but is unable to criticize the Nation of Islam.

And, it is, indeed, sad when a religious organization makes itself immune from the change, as the LDS has, and as, in some measure, Roman Catholicism has as well. Unlike Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, and I use that term as one of art, since Mormonism itself is a disparate, splintered group of worsippers united only by the Book of Mormon and various interpretations, does have such a movement. See:

http://www.reformmormonism.org/message-to-women.htm
http://www.reformmormonism.org/convert/approachingRM-LDSperspective.htm

To be sure, the LDS brutally crushes any reform spirit, until it doesn’t, as is witnessed with the polygymy experience.

The decision to admit women to the Catholic priesthood, which will come, will be driven by efficacy and not righid orthodoxy to questionable ecclesiology, as will the inevitable LDS change.

And now the King will point out all of the intolerance in Islam and in the Nation of Islam. Right, King?

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Ryoal Dimwit, did you forget to provide your link, because I don’t see it.

ImNotBlue said:
This is Royal admitting he has no link, and isn’t going to provide one.

Looks like we have two big liars working the blog today.

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Good theory Writer, but I’m more inclined to think libs like him don’t focus on blacks and hispanics because they need their votes to get into office and are afraid to offend them. It’s easy to pick on us Mormons because while they may get the Harry Reid vote, they don’t get much more than that from us. But like I said, I couldn’t possibly care any less what he thinks of me or my religion. Of course, I would never bash his religion, but that’s the difference between the two of us.

Not everyone is as cynical and bitter as you, Bitter, Tormented Michelle-in-Utah.

Any minute now.

The Real Royal King said:
Looks like we have two big liars working the blog today.

And what od Allah & Islam, oh wise one??

lazzzlo said:
You are attacking someone’s belief. You sure want to stick with that?

If stating historical reality is attacking belief, I guess you are correct.

How is it a lie if you hadn’t done it yet, Royal Dimwit? I just ask if you forgot to post it. Once again, just because you are a big liar, doesn’t mean the rest of us are also.

timzank said:
And what od Allah & Islam, oh wise one??

OF…oops

Here it comes.

The Real Royal King said:
The decision to admit women to the Catholic priesthood, which will come, will be driven by efficacy and not righid orthodoxy to questionable ecclesiology, as will the inevitable LDS change.

That is actually a good statement specific to the antiquated hierarchy of western teaching…Islam as well?

writer said:
Here it comes.

Drum roll please!

writer said:
And now the King will point out all of the intolerance in Islam and in the Nation of Islam. Right, King?

RRKING , meekly . If that were the case , I would . Mohammed is great . … Imhotep ….Imhotep …
Amen .

Wait for it.

Oh and your links prove nothing more than one person’s opinion, who obviously doesn’t like the church. Let me know when a majority of Mormon woman feel that way. Right now, it’s probably 1/100 of 1%, if that, so you could be in for a long wait.

Now as much fun as it’s been to listen to your religious bigotry for the 1000th time, I’m off to Walmart to hang with the common folk!

But before I go Royal Dimwit, Writer and Tim ask a great question. Why do you feel the need to constantly ridicule Mormon’s but say nothing of the Muslim religion? Why are you avoiding their question?

lazzzlo said:
That is actually a good statement specific to the antiquated hierarchy of western teaching…Islam as well?

I honestly couldn’t say. Women have made some strides in some Islamic communities (we have to remember Islam is not monolithic). To something formalized, I simply don’t know. But you have to remember, my remarks are about Christianity and those usurping the Christian mantle. You’re not doing that. Your reformed believe is Creedal and clearly Christian. The Church recognizes that.

I’ll state again. I respect all religions, including Mormon/LDS. Just don’t tell me Mormonism is Christianity. The Creedal Churches, of which I am a member, as are you, have spoken to that issue in a loud, firm, unbroken voice.

It’s easier to link someone to their personal beliefs versus their religious organizations.

That may be this round and round question that is being asked of the President.

What do you believe?

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
But before I go Royal Dimwit, Writer and Tim ask a great question. Why do you feel the need to constantly ridicule Mormon’s but say nothing of the Muslim religion? Why are you avoiding their question?

Again, you speak both in ignorance and prematurely. That has been answer before and after. As a “stand alone” religion, I respect Mormonism/LDS as much as I do Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity. Mormonism/LDS is no more Christian than Sunni Muslim is.

The King picking on Mormonism more than Islam is pure coincidence. He would comment on Islam, but Mormonism just takes up so much of his time, he can’t squeeze it in.

I know the Creeds. sorta, there are a couple.

What is man’s chief end? I know that answer.

Does it need to be politicized?

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Oh and your links prove nothing more than one person’s opinion, who obviously doesn’t like the church. Let me know when a majority of Mormon woman feel that way. Right now, it’s probably 1/100 of 1%, if that, so you could be in for a long wait. Now as much fun as it’s been to listen to your religious bigotry for the 1000th time, I’m off to Walmart to hang with the common folk!

Polls for everything, even faith. Since I am a member of a 1B+ church, I win!!! Geez, Michelle-in-Utah, think, please.

The Real Royal King said:
I’ll state again. I respect all religions, including Mormon/LDS.

Well, no you don’t… and that’s rather obvious. I’m not sure how you’re missing it.

The King’s strong faith is in evidence by the way he mocks Mormonism. Something about tolerance for others’ beliefs.

This is getting wild…let’s just take it down a notch.

Everyone breathe easy.

lazzzlo said:
It’s easier to link someone to their personal beliefs versus their religious organizations. That may be this round and round question that is being asked of the President. What do you believe?

You are very intelligent, and you raise some wonderful points. This site is lucky to have the two of us. all I am saying is look at the substance, not the titles, when it comes to Christianity, to Mormonism, to Judaism, to Islam, &c. It helps avoid some of the regrettable “us-them” false dichotomies which make Maher and Beck fools and do nothing to advance our own discourse.

I’m not sure how you’re missing it.

INB, sometimes I’m not sure if he’s just putting us on, or if he really is a psychopath.

ImNotBlue said:
The Real Royal King said:
I’ll state again. I respect all religions, including Mormon/LDS.
Well, no you don’t… and that’s rather obvious. I’m not sure how you’re missing it.

Yes, I do, but not as a Christian sect. It is not. Pure and simple.

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Oh and as for gay marriage, a large portion of blacks and hispanics are opposed to it also. Why do you only focus your hate on Mormons regarding this issue? No need to anser, I know the reason.

What makes you think I don’t? The catholic church for example treats gays and women terribly if you ask me but to be honest islam is the most oppressive of all religions I know of.
I’m not hating mormonism, just pointing out what I think is wrong. Just because I think your church is wrong in its treatment of women and gays (and formerly of blacks) don’t flatter yourself in to thinking it’s the only one I have a problem with.

Since I have never discussed religion with a mormon, do you honestly believe that Joseph Smith met an angel in NY who gave him gold plates that only he was allowed to see that he translated. Do you believe this to literally be true?

Why you’d switch from arguing about a religion to a race issue is beyond me.

RRKing…take a deep breath.

That was a lot of people that hit you at the same time.

The Real Royal King said:
You are very intelligent, and you raise some wonderful points. This site is lucky to have the two of us. all I am saying is look at the substance, not the titles, when it comes to Christianity, to Mormonism, to Judaism, to Islam, &c. It helps avoid some of the regrettable “us-them” false dichotomies which make Maher and Beck fools and do nothing to advance our own discourse.

That’s a very artful back pedal.

The Real Royal King said:
I’ll state again. I respect all religions, including Mormon/LDS. Just don’t tell me Mormonism is Christianity. The Creedal Churches, of which I am a member, as are you, have spoken to that issue in a loud, firm, unbroken voice.

Now I can’t really pretend to understand all this “Creed” stuff… not my religion, not my understanding.

However, from a quick bit of research, it appears that Mormons aren’t the only “non-creed” Christian group out there:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creed#Christians_without_creeds

I wonder if Royal would give us a moment or two talking about his disdain for Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unitarians, and Baptists… all whom (according to Wiki) are creed-less.

Please, enlighten us, Royal.

lazzzlo said:
RRKing…take a deep breath. That was a lot of people that hit you at the same time.

Well, I’m on my way to a rugby game, a bunch of old, out-of-shape men, so I am expecting some real hits and eagerly awaiting the post match beer swilling.

The Real Royal King said:
However, you make a false distinction between the individual believer’s propensity to sin, and to sin mightily, and institutionally based false doctrine. They have to be understood and attacked differently.

You can split whatever hairs you like but this wasn’t the failing of a few members but the long term repeated criminal acts of officials in the church. It seems like the “set your own house in order” or “Why see the speck in another’s eye” passages apply.
Do you think an alcoholic should condemn someone addicted to drugs?

IMO all doctrines are created by men and subject to improvement or complete dismissal. It’s behavior that counts. But that’s just me.

CosmosDan said:
You can split whatever hairs you like but this wasn’t the failing of a few members but the long term repeated criminal acts of officials in the church. It seems like the “set your own house in order” or “Why see the speck in another’s eye” passages apply.Do you think an alcoholic should condemn someone addicted to drugs? IMO all doctrines are created by men and subject to improvement or complete dismissal. It’s behavior that counts. But that’s just me.

bingo

ImNotBlue said:
Now I can’t really pretend to understand all this “Creed” stuff… not my religion, not my understanding.

There are different Apostolic creeds but the major questions that reformation rebels debated was whether man could talk to God without the Church.

And one of the creed questions was: What is man’s chief end?

The answer: To glorify God and enjoy him forever.

No intercession…no rules. Just faith.

It’s a little bit more complicated than that. But that’s it in a nutshell.

Here’s the thing. The King will point out that Mormonism used to have segregation, but won’t criticize the Nation of Islam for it. He’ll point Mormon views on gays, but not Islam’s views on gays. When picking out a religious group to criticize, he never seems to spread the wealth.

writer said:
Here’s the thing. The King will point out that Mormonism used to have segregation, but won’t criticize the Nation of Islam for it. He’ll point Mormon views on gays, but not Islam’s views on gays. When picking out a religious group to criticize, he never seems to spread the wealth.

I’m trying to back out of this but yeah.

You have to be humble, not arrogant.

And seriously, some religions are batshit crazy.

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Speaking as a Mormon woman, we don’t have a problem with that. We each have different roles to fill. If you actually did some research, you would know how highly woman are regarded in the church.

Can women be in the priesthood yet?

Liberal Tormentor (formerly Seeing 2012 From My Window) said:
Fortunately, we don’t give a holy crap what you think about us.

I heard there’s actually a temple ceremony involving this. Is that true? Probably not.

So if Bill Maher can question Obama’s beliefs why is it politically incorrect for Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, and everyone else to do it? Is it because Maher is a “comedian?” What a joke.

http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/

writer said:
Here’s the thing. The King will point out that Mormonism used to have segregation, but won’t criticize the Nation of Islam for it. He’ll point Mormon views on gays, but not Islam’s views on gays. When picking out a religious group to criticize, he never seems to spread the wealth.

That’s because King, like all liberals, is afraid to disparage the Muslim faith. On the surface they make it appear as though it would be racist to do so, but in reality, they realize to do so simply invites the possibility of having their throat slit or being blown to smithereens.

Liberal hypocrisy.

CosmosDan said:
Can women be in the priesthood yet?

Nope, not even in my religion.

They can be teachers; I got married by a woman pastor and it was “technically” heretical.

But that to subsided over time.

Organized religion and the changing of time seems to contradict the Bible’s message.

As lazzzlo said, all religions have their crazy aspects. But the King focuses inordinately on Mormonism.

Primarily Obama is a community organizer, and the CO listens to any and all sides and seeks to find common ground to break down barriers and bring the community closer together. That is Obama’s view on religion, and the secular world, too. Does he believe in a head CO? Sure.

The Real Royal King said:
The decision to admit women to the Catholic priesthood, which will come, will be driven by efficacy and not righid orthodoxy to questionable ecclesiology, as will the inevitable LDS change.

A dubious distinction built from your imagination.

I prefer the Bahai, a much more sensible forward thinking religion with no clergy.

That was fun to dip my toes. I’m not getting any deeper.

lazzzlo said:
There are different Apostolic creeds but the major questions that reformation rebels debated was whether man could talk to God without the Church. And one of the creed questions was: What is man’s chief end? The answer: To glorify God and enjoy him forever. No intercession…no rules. Just faith. It’s a little bit more complicated than that. But that’s it in a nutshell.

It’s like you’re speaking a different language. Christianity to me is a mystery. I wish I understood more about it, but I don’t. And while your post was very concise, I’m so lacking on some of those basic concepts (Apostolic?) that I’m not sure I really get it. But I appreciate your attempt.

writer said:
Here’s the thing. The King will point out that Mormonism used to have segregation, but won’t criticize the Nation of Islam for it. He’ll point Mormon views on gays, but not Islam’s views on gays. When picking out a religious group to criticize, he never seems to spread the wealth.

Well there is a different in excluding people, or disagreeing with a lifestyle… and outright murdering them. Clearly, disagreeing is much worse, and more worthy of finger pointing.

Or at least, that’s how Royal sees it.

CosmosDan said:
Can women be in the priesthood yet?

There are plenty of religions which exclude women from being the religious leaders. I believe it’s only the more liberal sects (most modernized) which allow it. That’s just “one of those things.” And if you’re going to call out the Mormons for it, you better get the long list of everyone else ready.

lazzzlo said:
Nope, not even in my religion.

They can be teachers; I got married by a woman pastor and it was “technically” heretical.

But that to subsided over time.

Organized religion and the changing of time seems to contradict the Bible’s message.

The RLDS, a church with a shared history with LDS, started ordaining women a few years back , changed their name to Community of Christ, which brought more splits as congregations wouldn’t accept the new “revelation” and went off on their own.

CosmosDan said:
I prefer the Bahai, a much more sensible forward thinking religion with no clergy.

My graceful exit: We are each to our own.

My 1st Bahai experience

writer said:
As lazzzlo said, all religions have their crazy aspects. But the King focuses inordinately on Mormonism.

Whether or not mormonism can be regarded as christianity came up when Romney was running for the nomination last time around. Most christians surveyed then didn’t think it could be. Just because your patron saint Beck says he’s a christian while being mormon doesn’t automatically change all those minds.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Beck converts to a more mainstream church in order to get around this in the future. He’ll say God spoke to him directly and he listened, and he’ll become even more popular.

ImNotBlue said:
There are plenty of religions which exclude women from being the religious leaders. I believe it’s only the more liberal sects (most modernized) which allow it. That’s just “one of those things.” And if you’re going to call out the Mormons for it, you better get the long list of everyone else ready.

Dam those liberal sects going all equality and everything.
I didn’t call out anyone. I asked a question because a know a relative of the LDS started ordaining women some years ago.

Religions in general don’t do much for me but I do see them changing as mankind and society changes.

ProgLib, I rarely watch Beck. And the King criticizing Mormonism for not being ‘Christian’ is just an excuse. When he points out past Mormon practices of segregation, or views on gays, why does he never bring Islam into the mix? He hates ‘Michelle-in-Utah’, she’s said she’s a Mormon, and there you go.

If it acts like a radical islamic muslim, and if it’s trying to destroy America like a radical islamic muslim, and if it’s as anti-Semitic as a radical islamic muslim, and it was raised as a radical islamic muslim, and if it hates America like a radical islamic muslim — then IT”S A RADICAL ISLAMIC MUSLIM !!!! DUH !

Kudos to lunatic-left maher for stating the obvious —that’s a first for him.

lazzzlo said:
My graceful exit: We are each to our own.

My 1st Bahai experience

????? Carlos Santana is your 1st Bahai experience?

CosmosDan said:
????? Carlos Santana is your 1st Bahai experience?

Yep!

lazzzlo said:
Yep!

Do mind sharing any details to address my curiosity and confusion.

“Primarily Obama is a community organizer, and the CO listens to any and all sides and seeks to find common ground to break down barriers and bring the community closer together.”

Really? He listens to all sides? The National BLACK Chamber of Commerce disagrees:

“The Washington Post quotes Barack Obama, “In Chicago, sometimes when I talk to the black chambers of commerce, I say, ‘You know what would be a good economic development plan for our community would be if we make sure folks weren’t throwing their garbage out of their cars’”.

First of all this sounds very derogatory ala Amos ‘n Andy or Stepin’ Fetchit. Our chambers have sound and progressive economic development plans and they are far more intricate than stopping litter. Second and most importantly, Senator Barack Obama refuses to meet with any and all Black chambers of commerce. There are 21 Black chambers of commerce in the state of Illinois which is the most for any state in the nation. They are well run, hardworking and dedicated to the economic development of Black communities throughout the entire state. They are respected by their Governor, the entire Illinois Legislative Black Caucus and the powerful Chicago political machine. But they get no props from Senator Barack Obama. He appears to despise Black chambers of commerce.”

Read the whole article here: http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=199&Itemid=112

I like the Black Chamber of Commerce, specially this quote: “We don’t need him! We are doing fine and making great strides. The NBCC accounts for more Black dollars in the Gulf Rebuilding than the federal government. We are providing opportunities at every level of the American economy. The NBCC is the largest Black business association in the world and no one senator who has a phobia about meeting a group of Black business persons is going to stop us. The Illinois State Black Chamber just took 60 Black business owners to the capital, Springfield, and met with the Illinois Legislature to discuss a business agenda. We are having proud moments and great successes. He has a problem but it is his problem not ours. Let’s pray for him.
Senator, you don’t have to meet with us. But don’t say you do, when you don’t. We don’t need the lies or the jive. ”

See? That’s the way America should be, good people working for themselves instead of asking the federal government for money, bailouts, scholarship money, taxpayer-funded Minority History Month celebrations, and all that nonsense.

Barrack Obama epitomizes collectivism, the latest outrage is he wants to spend BILLIONS on high speed rail. Really Barry? Amtrack loses money every year yet you think high-speed rail will be profitable? What are you gonna do? Ban the car? Force people to ride the choo choo?

Barrack is what happens when you don’t check a birth certificate, America. Don’t make that mistake again.

http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/

ProgLib said:
I wouldn’t be surprised if Beck converts to a more mainstream church in order to get around this in the future. He’ll say God spoke to him directly and he listened, and he’ll become even more popular.

That’s why I don’t agree with religion and politics intertwined.

Faith is personal and shouldn’t have to come in to play.

CosmosDan said:
Do mind sharing any details to address my curiosity and confusion.

Young, mushrooms, the Clash were getting a bit jarring, rebellious, bitchin’ guitar.

Plus Carlos was an adherent. So I watched a lot of young kids that got into the song, idolize the musician.

I still love that song and Carlos plays it, more jazzy now, to the Bahia religion.

I just liked the grooves…it was my 1st exposure.

lazzzlo said:
That’s why I don’t agree with religion and politics intertwined.

Faith is personal and shouldn’t have to come in to play.

US is one of very few western countries where religion plays a role in elections at all.

I think the Europa song was from 1972 recording “Moonflower”

lazzzlo said:
That’s why I don’t agree with religion and politics intertwined.

Faith is personal and shouldn’t have to come in to play.

it is, and religious labels don’t really tell you anything about a person’s character.

Sadly, people judge by those labels too often.

greg454 said:
Barrack Obama epitomizes collectivism, the latest outrage is he wants to spend BILLIONS on high speed rail. Really Barry? Amtrack loses money every year yet you think high-speed rail will be profitable? What are you gonna do? Ban the car? Force people to ride the choo choo?

Monday Big O announces the $7500 rebate for buying an electric car. He simply refuses to put the frickin’ checkbook away.

lazzzlo said:
Young, mushrooms, the Clash were getting a bit jarring, rebellious, bitchin’ guitar.

Plus Carlos was an adherent. So I watched a lot of young kids that got into the song, idolize the musician.

I still love that song and Carlos plays it, more jazzy now, to the Bahia religion.

I just liked the grooves…it was my 1st exposure.

I see. I didn’t realize Carlos was Bahai. So are Seals and Croft, Diamond Girl, Summer Breeze, and the actor who plays Dwight Schroot on The Office.

I just like the way the Bahai stresses or interaction with each other over ceremony. They believe science and religion must be compatible since they both seek the truth. They believe all religions came from the same source and focus on unity. They often read from various religious texts regarding a topic.

The Real Royal King said:
Well, I’m on my way to a rugby game, a bunch of old, out-of-shape men

RRKING explains . By rugby , I mean checkers .

writer said:
INB, sometimes I’m not sure if he’s just putting us on, or if he really is a psychopath

RRKING adamant . I NEVER put anybody on . So , there you have it .

timzank said:
Because atheists pretty much exist only to piss people off? They don’t serve much else of a purpose really.

Atheist scientists have come up with quite a few useful things that you benefit from on a daily basis. If you agree not to use any of them you’ll have to log off right now.

What’s whats his name sitting next to Maher? I don’t watch this stupid show, is he suppose to be Mahers sidekick or something? Just wonderin…

A couple of white guys invented the airplane, yet the King flies around the world on a daily basis.

CosmosDan said:
They believe all religions came from the same source and focus on unity.

That’s what Europa is supposed to be about in the guitar of the Santana song.

If you’ve seen him in concert; that’s the idea.

lazzzlo said:
That’s what Europa is supposed to be about in the guitar of the Santana song.

If you’ve seen him in concert; that’s the idea.

Ohhhhhh cool. Thanks

Obama’s religion has himself at the peak of the ‘to be worshipped’ pillar. He is bad for America. Mahar is grappling with his mortality and his consideration that he might not be the smartest person in the world. He is becoming more and more incoherrent daily on the subjects of religion and politics. Unreal! Biden makes more sense than Mahar these days. lol

ProgLib said:
Atheist scientists have come up with quite a few useful things that you benefit from on a daily basis. If you agree not to use any of them you’ll have to log off right now.

I’m sure they have. Do their business cards say “Atheist” on them? Probably not. The only time the fact that someone is an atheist comes up as an issue is when they are whining, pissing & moaning about stoooopid sh*t like “In God We Trust” on money or a prayer at a football game.

Their manufactured outrage annoys the sh*t out of people.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Matthew 7:15-20

ProgLib said:
Atheist scientists have come up with quite a few useful things that you benefit from on a daily basis. If you agree not to use any of them you’ll have to log off right now.

Yet who gave life to the scientists?

ProgLib said:
Among highly educated people in the general population a large percentage of them are atheist.

Some of the dumbest folks I’ve ever met have been highly educated people (“book smarts”) with no real world intellect (“street smarts”)

It takes MORE faith to NOT believe in God than to believe in Him.

I’m a scientist, and was a rocket scientist a few years ago. Obviously I know a lot of scientists. During many years of interactions with scientists I do not recall any discussion about religion while on the job. Out of the office I know that some were religious enough to go to church, while others played golf on Sunday Morning.

I do not know a scientist who uses religion in any way in doing science. I don’t care what you believe personally, but I have no experience to rely on that convinces me that either your prayers or your lack of prayers determines whether or not the rocket will work properly. I’ve heard, and uttered, the words “Holy Sh*t!” several times. I’ve never known a scientist to stop trying to solve a problem and offer a prayer instead…. Not even those who are religious.

Liberal Tormentor, I was wondering when you were going to show up. I know you’re a Mormon woman, and over time, you’ve probably figured out that I’m a baptized Mormon who no longer believes. That said, I almost marvel sometimes at the stupidity of others and their ignorance of the Mormon Church. Christians have a problem with Mormons, because it extends Christian doctrine. Non-Christians don’t have a clue, but because traditional Christians don’t like Mormons, they just jump on the “cult” bandwagon. (see Valkyrie) The vast majority of people who have negative perceptions of the LDS church don’t know one speck about it, and are just going by shit they’ve heard from someone else who calls themselves “Christian”.

CosmosDan said:
Dam those liberal sects going all equality and everything.

I don’t recall saying it was a “bad thing.” I’m a Reform Jew, one of the most (but not the most) liberal sects of the religion. I’ve had female rabbis before, and everything is/was fine. Just because I said “liberal” in referring t those groups, you can’t assume (one) that I’m talking politics, or (two) that I was saying it was a negative.

I didn’t call out anyone. I asked a question because a know a relative of the LDS started ordaining women some years ago. Religions in general don’t do much for me but I do see them changing as mankind and society changes.

Well, since we were talking about Mormonism, my assumption was that you were trying to make a snarky point about them not allowing women priests. My point is that it’s not just the Mormons, so using that as a reason to denigrate the religion requires the same for many other groups.

dahni said:
I’m a scientist, and was a rocket scientist a few years ago. Obviously I know a lot of scientists.

I’m sure you’re being sarcastic. By the way, I have a brother who’s one of those weird guys who does complex math in his head in a split second. Top of his class at UofW aeronotics school back in the day, and currently works on “special” projects at Boeing. Converted to Catholicism about ten years ago.

If I was the President…

I don’t know if I could answer that question correctly.

No matter what you say….you insult someone.

You have to pick and choose and debate with others on your own personal beliefs.

I think I’d tell them to f*ck off.

Dsiscokid said:
Yet who gave life to the scientists?

Their parents?

Dsiscokid said:
Some of the dumbest folks I’ve ever met have been highly educated people (“book smarts”) with no real world intellect (“street smarts”)

It takes MORE faith to NOT believe in God than to believe in Him.

I agree completely that there are lots of dumb educated people, and that includes elected politicians. But mathematically it is totally unlikely and not at all believable that none of them would be atheist.

I disagree heartily with your other statement, your choice of religion is more based on where you are born and what your parents and friends believe than anything else. To go along with them doesn’t require much effort. To go your own way and choose a different religion takes faith, to become atheist requires none at all.

Anyone that would set in Rev.Wrights church for 20 years is clearly NOT Christian. You’d have to have the IQ of a rock to…wait…didn’t Obimbo do that?!

Asking Obama what religion he is is like asking God what church he attends.

Obama is an atheist straight up. Too much there narcissism to believe in religion.

madtechie said:
Obama is an atheist straight up.

So we can agree that Obama is a lying piece of shitl

ProgLib said:
I agree completely that there are lots of dumb educated people, and that includes elected politicians. But mathematically it is totally unlikely and not at all believable that none of them would be atheist.

I disagree heartily with your other statement, your choice of religion is more based on where you are born and what your parents and friends believe than anything else. To go along with them doesn’t require much effort. To go your own way and choose a different religion takes faith, to become atheist requires none at all.

Thank you for explaining this. The reason that you are Christian in the United States is simply because of chance more than anything else. You were born here and got indoctrinated into the local faith. Someone born in say….Indonesia or Nepal is more likely to be engulfed by the local religions and believe they are also “right.”

Richard Dawkins explains this concisely in the clip below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg

Religion by it’s very essence is irrational.

MR.Papshmer:

I think you can safely say, we are on common ground.

File this under “things only a Leftist Asshat can say without creating a ginormous amount of faux outrage”.

Patrick Henry said:
Open your mind, A**hole.

Are you mad?

At least it’s comforting to see you couldn’t refute my statement. :)

Gasket, your premise of environment influencing one’s beliefs may have some credence, but salvation by faith in Jesus Christ alone is essencial and universal for ALL mankind. He transcends all races and nations and environments. John 3:16. Don’t take my word for it, take His Word for it! Search the Scriptures

Funny as hell to read what some of so-called “conservatives” have to say about Obama, his perceived religious preferences, his “narcissism,” his intellect, &c. Christians — that is to say, those who actually follow Christ and aren’t making it up as they go along — aren’t so instinctively abusive. A bunch of the posters here are also poseurs here.

Talk about narcissism … disparaging the faith of another human is pretty much at the top of the list of a self-aggrandizing belief system.

And, ironically, Maher doesn’t fit into that right-wingnut model of arrogance. Oh, he’s arrogant, alright, but he isn’t so much disparaging Barry for what he (Maher) believes to be the disconnect between belief and practice, as he is suggesting that Obama is more a spiritual theist than an orthodox Christian.

In using the term “secular humanist,’ BTW, I think Maher himself misspoke and, on further analysis, might even agree with this characterization. Obama is a Christian in the same way that Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin were “Christians.”

As for the whole Reverend Wright thing, get over it. Wright grew up in the heart of Jim Crow. Seeing it first-hand myself, I forgive a man who, after serving his country for 6 years as a Marine and Navy Corpsman, obtaining graduate degrees in theology/divinity (including the University of Chicago Divinity School), and a lifetime of good works, is still a little pissed off about not being allowed to drink from the same water fountain as a white man when he was young. He didn’t grow up in the exact same America as some of us, and he’s getting a little cranky in his old age.

Those of you who whine about the economy interfering with your ability to afford a third car, or “the government” stealing your tax dollars, are frikkin’ sissies compared to the people you are abusing in print.

Mr.Papshmer said:
So we can agree that Obama is a lying piece of shitl

So’s your mamma.

Dsiscokid said:
Gasket, your premise of environment influencing one’s beliefs may have some credence, but salvation by faith in Jesus Christ alone is essencial and universal for ALL mankind. He transcends all races and nations and environments. John 3:16. Don’t take my word for it, take His Word for it! Search the Scriptures

This is a religious opinion. It’s not factual. You can not prove it. A Muslim would say the very same thing about Allah, Mohammed and jihad and have conviction and faith that what he’s saying is the “truth.” This is why it’s redundant arguing about the veracity of one’s own faith over others. There’s the well held premise that world religions are like different paths winding up the same mountain to the same peak. What if they are different paths on different mountains? We don’t know. The problem is, you can not prove or disprove any of them. It takes more than manuscripted text scribed by fallible mortal humans to convince me what the “truth” really is. This is the problem with religion. It’s blind faith which is hostile to challenges based on logic and reason.

Gasket said:
This is a religious opinion. It’s not factual. You can not prove it. A Muslim would say the very same thing about Allah, Mohammed and jihad and have conviction and faith that what he’s saying is the “truth.” This is why it’s redundant arguing about the veracity of one’s own faith over others. There’s the well held premise that world religions are like different paths winding up the same mountain to the same peak. What if they are different paths on different mountains? We don’t know. The problem is, you can not prove or disprove any of them. It takes more than manuscripted text scribed by fallible mortal humans to convince me what the “truth” really is. This is the problem with religion. It’s blind faith which is hostile to challenges based on logic and reason.

agreed 100%

Persistence said:
So’s your mamma.

Wow, a “mamma” joke. You must be like, ten, right?

Persistence said:

As for the whole Reverend Wright thing, get over it. Wright grew up in the heart of Jim Crow. Seeing it first-hand myself, I forgive a man who, after serving his country for 6 years as a Marine and Navy Corpsman, obtaining graduate degrees in theology/divinity (including the University of Chicago Divinity School), and a lifetime of good works, is still a little pissed off about not being allowed to drink from the same water fountain as a white man when he was young. He didn’t grow up in the exact same America as some of us, and he’s getting a little cranky in his old age.

T

I have said the same thing many times before. The guy grew up during a very turbulent time in this country and has simply never gotten over it. A lot of other older black folks have never really gotten over it. I recall watching an interview of one of the young black girls turned away from attending school by a racist mob in AR in the 50′s and she clearly even 50 years later had never gotten over it. There are white people who just do not and will never understand the context. This is why there’s always blowback when politicians white wash the Jim Crow era. He should be free to exercise his demons. Just like WWII veterans have never gotten over the horrors of war. Time is very relative. To most of us, those events are historical. To some, those events are still being re-lived and it takes something miniscule to set them off. The guy is mad. It’s a free country. Rant!

Maher is a) a cynic, b) bitter and mean spirited when it comes to religion, and c)as presumptuous as all the religious right who deny Obama his professed faith. We don’t know what is in the heart of another person, in fact we are all pretty good at self deception. As for those who pull out the old tired saw about Reverend Wright: you may not like liberation theology, but it is Christ based and therefore Christian. It is quite amusing to me that the very ones who despise Maher’s anti-Christian views now embrace him for supporting their prejudices. Obama is a man of character. A family man who is morally above board. It kills the right that they can’t “Lewinsky” him, although not for lack of trying. So now they resort to an odd, “Yes, he looks and acts moral, but it is a trick” explanation. Sad

A Muslim would say the very same thing about Allah
—

How do you know?

Obama is a man of character.
————-

Whoa! You got something hanging on your eyes….it looks like wool.

Persistence said:
Talk about narcissism … disparaging the faith of another human is pretty much at the top of the list of a self-aggrandizing belief system.

That is a great point.

So be humble.

And what evidence do you have that Obama is not a man of character? Because you disagree with his politics?

Vicki Jean Hartley said:
And what evidence do you have that Obama is not a man of character? Because you disagree with his politics?

lol, there are 9 previous pages where I agree that he can be a man of character while I disagree with his politics.

But that is not the question…is it?

@ gasket

You make a fine point about Wright, and his “madness.” The problem, however, isn’t that he’s (as you said) mad or that he rants, it’s that he has an audience.

I can sympathize with his anger and bad memories -although when you become a multi-millionaire in the system you rail against, you think you’d change a bit- but his influence among people who do no share those memories, is the problem.

If his hate is fueled by his memories, fine. If he can’t “let go,” okay. But none of that gives him the right to warp the minds of his congregation, and create new hate and racism. He perpetuates the problems, and the future of some will suffer as a result.

Mr.Papshmer said:
Wow, a “mamma” joke. You must be like, ten, right?

…. said the goofball in blackface.

ImNotBlue said:
@ gasket

You make a fine point about Wright, and his “madness.” The problem, however, isn’t that he’s (as you said) mad or that he rants, it’s that he has an audience.

I can sympathize with his anger and bad memories -although when you become a multi-millionaire in the system you rail against, you think you’d change a bit- but his influence among people who do no share those memories, is the problem.

If his hate is fueled by his memories, fine. If he can’t “let go,” okay. But none of that gives him the right to warp the minds of his congregation, and create new hate and racism. He perpetuates the problems, and the future of some will suffer as a result.

Actually, yes. He is allowed to do that.

That is freedom of speech and assembly.

You can’t pick and choose who you like. Either everyone has rights or nobody has rights.

It sucks at time; it’s what makes us the greatest country in the world.

ImNotBlue said:
@ gasket

You make a fine point about Wright, and his “madness.” The problem, however, isn’t that he’s (as you said) mad or that he rants, it’s that he has an audience.

I can sympathize with his anger and bad memories -although when you become a multi-millionaire in the system you rail against, you think you’d change a bit- but his influence among people who do no share those memories, is the problem.

If his hate is fueled by his memories, fine. If he can’t “let go,” okay. But none of that gives him the right to warp the minds of his congregation, and create new hate and racism. He perpetuates the problems, and the future of some will suffer as a result.

I think your conclusions are sincere. But they aren’t necessarily accurate.

If you are willing to give the devil his due … acknowledging that Wright isn’t driven so much by personal evil as by his reaction to the evil he lived through … step back from that issue and ask: Is what he has preached a simple and literal promotion of black racism; or, is he exercising hyperbole in communicating a metaphor?

Don’t believe for a minute that his congregation is too ignorant to understand the deeper meaning of sermons being presented and heard as a complex message. You say — because you really believe, I am sure — that he is creating “new hate and racism.” But is there evidence of that?

If Obama is an example of Wright’s congregation, no. To the contrary. The (mostly) black audience of Wright is better-educated, more culturally evolved, and both less fearful and antagonistic toward “white” America than any generation before them. Why? Because in the process of being taught the lessons of history, they learn from them. (“Those who cannot remember the past …. ” &c. That Santayana dude was one sharp cookie.)

How best to teach and learn from the past is a debate that never will end. But forgetting it doesn’t stop it from perpetuating; it assures that it will repeat.

ImNotBlue said:
You make a fine point about Wright, and his “madness.” The problem, however, isn’t that he’s (as you said) mad or that he rants, it’s that he has an audience.

The families in Wright’s church , the children listening to his belligerence , will have a harder time of it in life trying to get along if they somehow have the same chip on their shoulder or think that they are starting out behind the eight ball because of their color . Why build animosity into a young person ? Wright is not there now , but his young replacement is not that different from him , without the excuses Wright might have had .

Persistence said:
How best to teach and learn from the past is a debate that never will end. But forgetting it doesn’t stop it from perpetuating; it assures that it will repeat.

That sound really great. Honestly.

But what does it really mean?

Dsiscokid said:
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Matthew 7:15-20

That’s exactly why I judge the person and not the label. Love, compassion, mercy, generosity, courage, honesty, are qualities I appreciate from anyone regardless of any religious label or lack of one. Christians, Muslims, Atheists, whatever, can all be wonderful people, or jerks.

That is a challenge statement on my employment form.

CosmosDan said:
That’s exactly why I judge the person and not the label.

Always, we will make you conservative.

that he is creating “new hate and racism.” But is there evidence of that?
—–

Would the cheers of his followers be considered “evidence?”

smile

That’s exactly why I judge the person and not the label.

——-

This one is giving me a nice chuckle…..

CosmosDan said:
That’s exactly why I judge the person and not the label. Love, compassion, mercy, generosity, courage, honesty, are qualities I appreciate from anyone regardless of any religious label or lack of one. Christians, Muslims, Atheists, whatever, can all be wonderful people, or jerks.

Bless your heart.

I’m with you on that.

I’m still pure blood Celtic and I’m always going to watch my back, just in case.

@CosmosDan- As far as living (Co-existing) in this country, and in this world with each other, I agree. (1 Thess. 5:14-15)

Dsiscokid said:
It takes MORE faith to NOT believe in God than to believe in Him.

That really doesn’t make sense.

@ Vicky, Gasket, and cjd ohio 1- You can know the truth for yourselves if you would use your God-given abilities of logic, reason, and critical thinking skills to test the veracity of the Bible by simpy reading it honestly, openly, Check its claims historically and archeologically. Compared to other religions. Biblical Christianity, accordding to the Scriptures, is factual. You’ll find it out! Start reading in John. ……….John 8:32

ImNotBlue said:
@ gasket

You make a fine point about Wright, and his “madness.” The problem, however, isn’t that he’s (as you said) mad or that he rants, it’s that he has an audience.

THERE, right there. that is the same argument liberals make about Beck and conservatives mock it.

Dsiscokid said:
@ Vicky, Gasket, and cjd ohio 1- You can know the truth for yourselves if you would use your God-given abilities of logic, reason, and critical thinking skills to test the veracity of the Bible by simpy reading it honestly, openly, Check its claims historically and archeologically. Compared to other religions. Biblical Christianity, accordding to the Scriptures, is factual. You’ll find it out! Start reading in John. ……….John 8:32

Every religion says the same thing and they can “prove” it as well. As far as factual accuracy goes, we technically don’t even have evidence that Jesus existed in any Roman documents or Jewish tales.

ImNotBlue said:
I don’t recall saying it was a “bad thing.” I’m a Reform Jew, one of the most (but not the most) liberal sects of the religion. I’ve had female rabbis before, and everything is/was fine. Just because I said “liberal” in referring t those groups, you can’t assume (one) that I’m talking politics, or (two) that I was saying it was a negative.

okay, point taken.

ImNotBlue said:
Well, since we were talking about Mormonism, my assumption was that you were trying to make a snarky point about them not allowing women priests. My point is that it’s not just the Mormons, so using that as a reason to denigrate the religion requires the same for many other groups.

It was a question out of curiosity not a snarky point. IMO, most religions have their flaws and it’s always amused me what insignificant points of doctrine will separate them.

@CosmoS- We live by faith everyday. God or no god. Example- I have faith that I will wake up in the morning. I may or may not. But I have faith (not of myself) that if I do or don’t, I will be alive here or in the arms of the real loving God. As for proof of His existence, look around you and look in the mirror. His fingerprints are everywhere. If only the atheist would do the same…..BTW- Check out Acts Ch. 17 when you get a chance!

CAconservative said:
Anyone that would set in Rev.Wrights church for 20 years is clearly NOT Christian. You’d have to have the IQ of a rock to…

type that first sentence?

Persistence said:
To the contrary. The (mostly) black audience of Wright is better-educated, more culturally evolved, and both less fearful and antagonistic toward “white” America than any generation before them

You are so funny.

@Reasonable Lib- Have you ever verified those claims yourself or just relied on someone else’s word on it? BTW- you make a valid point on GB and JWright….

Dsiscokid said:
@CosmoS- We live by faith everyday. God or no god. Example- I have faith that I will wake up in the morning. I may or may not. But I have faith (not of myself) that if I do or don’t, I will be alive here or in the arms of the real loving God. As for proof of His existence, look around you and look in the mirror. His fingerprints are everywhere. If only the atheist would do the same…..BTW- Check out Acts Ch. 17 when you get a chance!

i believe in God but i dont follow a specific organized religion, even science can only go back so far(big bang)

As I’ve heard from other fellow Americans -”Do your own research”

Dsiscokid said:
@Reasonable Lib- Have you ever verified those claims yourself or just relied on someone else’s word on it? BTW- you make a valid point on GB and JWright….

Yes I have looked into it, and there’s no actual mention of Jesus by name, there are some which we assume to be referring to him, but no ‘Jesus by Joseph of Nazareth” because as I’m sure you know peasants didn’t get last names. That still has no bearing personally I still believe…somewhat.

Persistence said:
As for the whole Reverend Wright thing, get over it. Wright grew up in the heart of Jim Crow. Seeing it first-hand myself, I forgive a man who, after serving his country for 6 years as a Marine and Navy Corpsman, obtaining graduate degrees in theology/divinity (including the University of Chicago Divinity School), and a lifetime of good works, is still a little pissed off about not being allowed to drink from the same water fountain as a white man when he was young. He didn’t grow up in the exact same America as some of us, and he’s getting a little cranky in his old age.

Those of you who whine about the economy interfering with your ability to afford a third car, or “the government” stealing your tax dollars, are frikkin’ sissies compared to the people you are abusing in print.

Exactly what I kept thinking as people beat up Wright and later, James Cone. After Obama was elected people started crying about racism after experiencing 1/1000 of what Black Americans of that generation experienced.
They seemed absolutely eager to condemn the man knowing very little about him.

cjd ohio 1 said:
i believe in God but i dont follow a specific organized religion, even science can only go back so far(big bang)

Personally i feel that the devout atheist is a bit of a fool. I find it a unfathomable that everything is here merely by coincidence and for no reason.

@ lazzz

Yes, you are correct… he is “allowed” to say what he wants to an audience. I didn’t mean “legally he can’t do it.” Rather on an human level, or personal level, he shouldn’t. I should have been more clear.

@ Reasonable

Beck offers his opinions as his own. Wright offers his opinion from the pulpit, and as religious doctrine. Additionally, Beck has never advocated outright racism or anti-Americanism like Wright.

But imagine for a moment that the comparison is apples to apples… if that’s true, why to Republicans find themselves alone in criticising Wright? Why does the left accept (or ignore) him? Why isn’t their ire raised as it is for Beck?

@cjd ohio – Which of the two would you say is a more trustworthy source of truth, knowledge, wisdom, understanding, faith, love, hope, reason or logic? The Lord Jesus Christ or man?

@cjd ohio – Which of the two would you say is a more trustworthy source of truth, knowledge, wisdom, understanding, faith, love, hope, reason or logic (according to the Bible)- The Lord Jesus Christ or man’s wisdom? The Bible, evolution,false religion or nothing at all?

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Personally i feel that the devout atheist is a bit of a fool. I find it a unfathomable that everything is here merely by coincidence and for no reason.

perfectly said sir

ImNotBlue said:
@ lazzz

Yes, you are correct… he is “allowed” to say what he wants to an audience. I didn’t mean “legally he can’t do it.” Rather on an human level, or personal level, he shouldn’t. I should have been more clear.

@ Reasonable

Beck offers his opinions as his own. Wright offers his opinion from the pulpit, and as religious doctrine. Additionally, Beck has never advocated outright racism or anti-Americanism like Wright.

But imagine for a moment that the comparison is apples to apples… if that’s true, why to Republicans find themselves alone in criticising Wright? Why does the left accept (or ignore) him? Why isn’t their ire raised as it is for Beck?

He doesn’t? How so? When he claims that God is on his side, leading and guiding him, and tells people to expect a miracle on the day of his rally? When the entire tone of his rally is about “getting back to God”? How is that not presenting his ideals as religious doctrine?
Your question can be posed back to you. Why does the right not question Beck but go after Wright? Why? Because both sides are hypocritical but some of you on the right, yourself included, don’t seem to see that and rather rely on unfounded sweeping generalizations to attack their opponents.

What sources Reasonable Lib?

ImNotBlue said:
If his hate is fueled by his memories, fine. If he can’t “let go,” okay. But none of that gives him the right to warp the minds of his congregation, and create new hate and racism. He perpetuates the problems, and the future of some will suffer as a result.

I listened to the entire sermon that one of the infamous 5 second clips was lifted from. It wasn’t about hate and he wasn’t warping the minds of his congregation any more than thousands of ministers do every Sunday.

The right has wooed conservative fundamentalists for years who have been saying controversial and hateful things for years, but it was never an issue, until they made it one.

Dsiscokid said:
What sources Reasonable Lib?

Pliny and Tacitus off the top of my head, but they never called him “Jesus” although they do mention Christ. I’m not denying he existed. Let’s face it; people in the ancient world were stupid, I mean a Roman legion killed quite possibly the most intelligent man alive. If there were no real Jesus, the secret would have got out eventually.

The name of the first century Jewish historian Josephus (I believe) write of one named Jesus dying on a Roman crucifix and believed to be risen from the dead. There is so much overwhelming evidence of Jesus Christ existence. I’ll find some links for you if you would like. Let me know….

Dsiscokid said:
@cjd ohio – Which of the two would you say is a more trustworthy source of truth, knowledge, wisdom, understanding, faith, love, hope, reason or logic? The Lord Jesus Christ or man?

lord jesus christ- but he didnt write a book

cjd ohio 1 said:
lord jesus christ- but he didnt write a book

i believe that there is a God (one). … being a good person is a basic concept, i dont understand how he created it, but i know (have faith) he did

@cjd ohio- I agree. He never wrote a book but The Book is all about him! Amazing ain’t it?

ImNotBlue said:
@ gasket

You make a fine point about Wright, and his “madness.” The problem, however, isn’t that he’s (as you said) mad or that he rants, it’s that he has an audience.

I can sympathize with his anger and bad memories -although when you become a multi-millionaire in the system you rail against, you think you’d change a bit- but his influence among people who do no share those memories, is the problem.

If his hate is fueled by his memories, fine. If he can’t “let go,” okay. But none of that gives him the right to warp the minds of his congregation, and create new hate and racism. He perpetuates the problems, and the future of some will suffer as a result.

I agree…somewhat. My understanding of his predicament is not giving him a pass. I personally don’t think he should be that incendiary — but preachers almost always are. Telling non-believers for example that they will go to hell or burn in an eternal fire-pit if they don’t believe in your God is incendiary, but from a born again Christian’s perspective, it is not. The same can be said about Wright’s methodology and his targeted audience. It’s inspired by his own journey in life. His message in a church setting should be tempered however.

Dsiscokid said:
@ Vicky, Gasket, and cjd ohio 1- You can know the truth for yourselves if you would use your God-given abilities of logic, reason, and critical thinking skills to test the veracity of the Bible by simpy reading it honestly, openly, Check its claims historically and archeologically. Compared to other religions. Biblical Christianity, accordding to the Scriptures, is factual. You’ll find it out! Start reading in John. ……….John 8:32

All Abrahamic based religions (Judaism, Islam..) could make the same claim. Nothing unique about that. Truth in a religious context is relative. That’s where faith comes in since it’s a belief in some “thing” despite the evidence, or, because of the lack of it. Much of the text in the Bible is by unknown authors and the historical purging of various “books” from the Bible and/or revisionism of present text is also troubling. Science has also challenged various aspects laid out in the Bible notwithstanding the Bible’s own contradictions. You will run into walls trying to convince anyone of the Bible’s infallibility. Even Christians can not agree on what the text means or it’s message. The reason why there are a million and one denominations.

Dsiscokid said:
@cjd ohio- I agree. He never wrote a book but The Book is all about him! Amazing ain’t it?

and faith is a good thing….. i am not trying to insult you…… and i dont think you faith is stupid. I am just stating my belief

Dsiscokid said:
You can know the truth for yourselves if you would use your God-given abilities of logic, reason, and critical thinking skills to test the veracity of the Bible by simpy reading it honestly, openly, Check its claims historically and archeologically. Compared to other religions. Biblical Christianity, accordding to the Scriptures, is factual

According to my use of logic , reason, and critical thinking, Christianity has it wrong.

Just studying Biblical writings we find they were altered repeatedly as they were copied and translated. There are just too many inconsistencies

Dsiscokid said:
@CosmoS- We live by faith everyday. God or no god. Example- I have faith that I will wake up in the morning. I may or may not. But I have faith (not of myself) that if I do or don’t, I will be alive here or in the arms of the real loving God. As for proof of His existence, look around you and look in the mirror. His fingerprints are everywhere. If only the atheist would do the same…..BTW- Check out Acts Ch. 17 when you get a chance!

I agree that faith is an element of life, but you were speaking specifically of faith in God, and your statement still doesn’t make sense.

CosmosDan said:
Dsiscokid said:
It takes MORE faith to NOT believe in God than to believe in Him.

That really doesn’t make sense.

It makes perfect sense to me.

Dsiscokid said:
The Lord Jesus Christ or man’s wisdom?

What you’re calling the wisdom of Jesus is actually man’s interpretation. Even Christian denominations don’t agree on what that is.

Dsiscokid said:
@ Vicky, Gasket, and cjd ohio 1- You can know the truth for yourselves if you would use your God-given abilities of logic, reason, and critical thinking skills to test the veracity of the Bible by simpy reading it honestly, openly, Check its claims historically and archeologically. Compared to other religions. Biblical Christianity, accordding to the Scriptures, is factual. You’ll find it out! Start reading in John. ……….John 8:32

Actually- I am a Christian and have been for 40 years. Have read and studied the Bible. So am not sure of your point. Liberation theology doesn’t resonate with me, but neither does Catholicism or Assemblies of God. But that doesn’t mean that I discount their experiences or their understanding.

Persistence @ 2:27PM said:
I think your conclusions are sincere. But they aren’t necessarily accurate.

If you are willing to give the devil his due … acknowledging that Wright isn’t driven so much by personal evil as by his reaction to the evil he lived through … step back from that issue and ask: Is what he has preached a simple and literal promotion of black racism; or, is he exercising hyperbole in communicating a metaphor?

Don’t believe for a minute that his congregation is too ignorant to understand the deeper meaning of sermons being presented and heard as a complex message. You say — because you really believe, I am sure — that he is creating “new hate and racism.” But is there evidence of that?

If Obama is an example of Wright’s congregation, no. To the contrary. The (mostly) black audience of Wright is better-educated, more culturally evolved, and both less fearful and antagonistic toward “white” America than any generation before them. Why? Because in the process of being taught the lessons of history, they learn from them. (“Those who cannot remember the past …. ” &c. That Santayana dude was one sharp cookie.)

How best to teach and learn from the past is a debate that never will end. But forgetting it doesn’t stop it from perpetuating; it assures that it will repeat.

You said “… acknowledging that Wright isn’t driven so much by personal evil as by his reaction to the evil he lived through”. I think Wright is part of the evil. He’s a Leftist like the other people who control those areas. BTW, I grew up not too far from his Church.

Wright is blaming the wrong people. He should be blaming the Liberals who control those areas. They have utterly controlled them for 50 years. About all we can say about it is that there is a lot of hopelessness, despair and death. Either you blame the people in those areas (not me) or the systems.

The liberals came in there in the early 60′s and basically told everyone they were victims and that they (the liberals) would make everything okay.

The liberals used Alinsky tactics which are designed to rile people up, generate anger and to make sure all resentments are magnified. The only people this helps are the liberals themselves.

What happened is the neighborhoods collapsed and even more anger was generated.

If Wright was good, this is what he would be complaining about.

A quick little article on some of this from Dr. Walter Williams: http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4840:

Patrick Henry said:
It makes perfect sense to me.

I rest my case

;-}

CosmosDan said:
I rest my case

Thanks, Cosmos ;)

Dan I was just going to let that go because I learned long ago on this site that there is no reason to argue or give an opinion. No minds will be changed. However, due to the snide nature of your remark, I will explain. If you look at the intricacies of life and the world itself, I think it takes more faith to believe that a “big bang” occurred and that all this just fell into place than it does to believe a Supreme Being created and orchestrated it.

Patrick Henry said:
Dan I was just going to let that go because I learned long ago on this site that there is no reason to argue or give an opinion. No minds will be changed. However, due to the snide nature of your remark, I will explain. If you look at the intricacies of life and the world itself, I think it takes more faith to believe that a “big bang” occurred and that all this just fell into place than it does to believe a Supreme Being created and orchestrated it.

not for me, i believe in the big bang and God made all things to fall into place

Patrick Henry said:
Dan I was just going to let that go because I learned long ago on this site that there is no reason to argue or give an opinion. No minds will be changed. However, due to the snide nature of your remark, I will explain. If you look at the intricacies of life and the world itself, I think it takes more faith to believe that a “big bang” occurred and that all this just fell into place than it does to believe a Supreme Being created and orchestrated it.

But what if God is the source of the big bang. we as christians believe that all is God and God is all so why is it not plausible that his creation was not the genesis of the universe itself? What if evolution is merely the answer to how but not the answer to “why”? These are the questions many Christians seem to not want to ask themselves.

the same argument could be made for Maher as not being a secular human, but an animatronic robot gone haywire batshit in the ego department.

@Reasonale “ib. Evolution teaches that species change and evolve from one species to another. One species passes away while another lives on, etc. God created Adam and Eve after He created the animals, all within perfect conditions. Everything changed after the Fall of Adam. He died spiritually and the earth and animals and everything within it fell under the sin curse. There is no place whatsoever for Darwin’s racist theory anywhere in Scripture. FWIW- species can adapt to certain conditions (ex. – I put a coat on when it’s cold outside) but never to “evolve” into another different species

4 of the most powerful words in the universe – “In the beginning God” (Gen. 1:1)

I will begin by saying I am anything but a traditionally religious person.

That said, the vast majority of those who mock religion in the name of “science” do so with no more understanding of science than those who fervently believe in the literal truths of organized religion.

There is a field much like philosophy called “metaphysics,” meaning essentially “beyond physics.” The tools of the metaphysicist are language and logic. Fools think that science (in particular, physics) will solve or explain everything. The REASON for metaphysics is that physics as we know it can only define things in terms of other things. But there is no way, as I understand physics, that physics can explain WHERE all the stuff came from, and where all the laws of physics came from.

Meaning, the mystery of creation is THE MYSTERY WHICH,

Dsiscokid said:
@Reasonale “ib. Evolution teaches that species change and evolve from one species to another. One species passes away while another lives on, etc. God created Adam and Eve after He created the animals, all within perfect conditions. Everything changed after the Fall of Adam. He died spiritually and the earth and animals and everything within it fell under the sin curse. There is no place whatsoever for Darwin’s racist theory anywhere in Scripture. FWIW- species can adapt to certain conditions (ex. – I put a coat on when it’s cold outside) but never to “evolve” into another different species

How do you explain bacteria becoming resistant to antibiotics? As they evolve and develop resistance they are no longer the same “animal”.

There are so many examples in the fossil record of animals evolving that it’s ludicrous not to believe it.

Almost all my friends are christian and none of them believe in genesis being a factual story of how things happened and all of them believe in evolution.

Oops. Hit the wrong key I think. Let me try again…

Meaning, the mystery of creation is THE MYSTERY WHICH, science as we know it CANNOT answer. It’s not a question of the science just advancing, but rather, a question that science WILL NEVER answer. Because science can only define stuff in terms of other stuff, it cannot describe NOTHINGNESS in terms of other stuff, much less how that nothingness would become somethingness.

So, by definition, no matter what one believes about God, one does well to define God, at least in part, as the answer to the unanswerable question of CREATION. (Not ‘creation’ as the ‘wave your wand and make life’ creation, but creation as the origin of matter and the laws that govern it.)

So, for all those who mock religion as nonsense and superstition, I would offer that you might want to consider the limits of what YOU UNDERSTAND about the science you advocate, and more important, about the limits about what that science even HOPES to be able to explain.

And again, I am ANYTHING BUT a traditionally religious person. And I am a great believer in science. But the single most humbling reality I have ever encountered is that those who best understand science and physics would say that these tools can NEVER explain the mystery of creation.

Which does not mean some dude in a robe with a flowing white beard made it all happen. At least, not to me. But what it does mean is that there is TRULY a mystery beyond our very comprehension, and beyond what we can ever expect to comprehend. But it DOES inspire belief in a literally AWESOME higher power than any we can comprehend.

Best I can tell, the tools of organized religion exist in part as do the tools of other philosophers who use logic and language in the study of metaphysics. They are metaphors used in an attempt to shed some light on the nature of the unknowable.

Which is not to say religion has not been co-opted for many evil and earthly purposes. But this is no reason to condemn all of religion. It is a reason to condemn the co-opting of religion. And further, the philosophy of many “secular humanists,” viewed properly in this light, is a religion like any other. The difference being it professes not to be one. But it is, nonetheless.

Religion is an institution created by man. By it’s very nature, it’s corrupted. The unavailability of a current plausible scientific explanation does not mean the explanation is non-existent. For centuries, people thought the earth was flat and the sun was God. The reality of those phenomena didn’t change. The attitude, perspective and knowledge of man did change. Secondly, why not question the premise of the genesis of existence? Why assume there is a beginning and an end of the universe? What if neither is true? We do not even know the size of the universe. If there’s a God, where did he/she come from? You can not disabuse the scientist’s perspective without having rational answers to these questions.

Gasket said:
Religion is an institution created by man. By it’s very nature, it’s corrupted. The unavailability of a current plausible scientific explanation does not mean the explanation is non-existent. For centuries, people thought the earth was flat and the sun was God. The reality of those phenomena didn’t change. The attitude, perspective and knowledge of man did change. Secondly, why not question the premise of the genesis of existence? Why assume there is a beginning and an end of the universe? What if neither is true? We do not even know the size of the universe. If there’s a God, where did he/she come from? You can not disabuse the scientist’s perspective without having rational answers to these questions.

I haven’t dismissed the scientist’s perspective at all. I am a great believer in science. But I have been discussing the limits of what the most knowledgeable scientist would say science may answer.

From your note, I think it is clear you are not grasping the nature of the difference between what science may find, versus what it CAN EVER find, by its own nature. Science, best I have heard it described, can never explain how nothingness turned into somethingness. Nor can it explain how somethingness has ALWAYS existed with no beginning. This mystery is truly awesome. To say that “science will figure it out someday” is, best we can tell, prima facie evidence that you don’t understand what science can and cannot do.

I see Bill Maher is drumming up business again and judging from the number of comments and viewers and potential fans that he will walk off with over this, he is doing himself proud and bringing in the bacon for his bosses. Comedians and political pundits have to be slick and must churn up as much publicity for their shows as Bill so deftly achieved when he made a mockery of a young aspiring actress who would say anything the producers told her to say. Bill and his handlers didn’t realize that thanks to what they did she is really rich now and walking down some bossa nova beach with the significant other they denied could ever exist. Here’s what is important to me about Obama. Bill’s story may fly with many but I want food on my table, I want to take my family on a vacation and even out to dinner. I have worked two jobs for 43 years, then retired looking forward to a nice time and now at 60 years old I may have to go back to work. I want a better economy, less global strife, lower food and gas prices, less unemployment among my friends and more. You see Bill is the comedian, I am the nuts and bolts American. Where Mr. Obama worships and who he believes he represents ethnically is hisbusiness, not mine and when I vote in 2012 his personal life will not have any affect on my decision.

Just_MC said:
I haven’t dismissed the scientist’s perspective at all. I am a great believer in science. But I have been discussing the limits of what the most knowledgeable scientist would say science may answer.

From your note, I think it is clear you are not grasping the nature of the difference between what science may find, versus what it CAN EVER find, by its own nature. Science, best I have heard it described, can never explain how nothingness turned into somethingness. Nor can it explain how somethingness has ALWAYS existed with no beginning. This mystery is truly awesome. To say that “science will figure it out someday” is, best we can tell, prima facie evidence that you don’t understand what science can and cannot do.

Nonsense. I’m simply saying that it’s intellectual laziness to dismiss something(s) because you have no capacity to comprehend it at the present. It’s you making suppositions by being certain on the scope of scientific knowledge. I am not. You do not know what science will be able to explain in 500 years. Not too long ago “scientists” were drilling holes into people’s skulls to cure insanity. It’s disingenuous to postulate that the sphere of knowledge as we humans know it today is finite. That’s what you infer by saying that certain ideas or concepts are beyond science or scientific explanation. Reducing something to a “mystery” is just an excuse or a cop out to NOT think about it’s inception. You may as well have faith. A reincarnated Benjamin Franklin today would be amazed at what science can do a mere 200-250 years after his time. Never say never.

Gasket said:
Nonsense. I’m simply saying that it’s intellectual laziness to dismiss something(s) because you have no capacity to comprehend it at the present. It’s you making suppositions by being certain on the scope of scientific knowledge. I am not. You do not know what science will be able to explain in 500 years. Not too long ago “scientists” were drilling holes into people’s skulls to cure insanity. It’s disingenuous to postulate that the sphere of knowledge as we humans know it today is finite. That’s what you infer by saying that certain ideas or concepts are beyond science or scientific explanation. Reducing something to a “mystery” is just an excuse or a cop out to NOT think about it’s inception. You may as well have faith. A reincarnated Benjamin Franklin today would be amazed at what science can do a mere 200-250 years after his time. Never say never.

You literally do not follow the specifics of my point. I explained it precisely. The cop-out is yours, simply assuming “aww, them clever sine-tists’ll figur it out, somhow’s I reckon.” I have discussed real limits of what science CAN do, per scientists. There are some mysteries that science will never unravel.

Have you ever heard of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle? It is a theory in physics, widely accepted, that one CANNOT know precisely the position AND momentum of a particle. This is a place where the SCIENCE says the SCIENCE CANNOT figure both out. Your blunt and myopic argument says “aww, shucks, givem nuff time and RE-search money and ‘em ‘ol SINE-tists, they’ll figger it out.” This is crap. Not according to me, but according to the best of the scientists themselves.

Now, along those lines,

If y = mx + b, how do you express x in terms of y? Answer: you solve for x, yielding: x = (y – b) / m

But if y = mx + b, how do you express x in terms of the null set? Write down the equation that describes x in terms of absolute nothingness. Have a field day.

Science DEFINES things in terms of other things. How does science express SOMETHINGNESS in terms of NOTHINGNESS? Or vice versa?

And if you ASSUME the existence of the laws of physics and the existence of all matter, and say there is no beginning, you still have a mystery of HOW or WHY that which exists, exists. Why doesn’t something else exist? And why aren’t the laws of physics different?

These are questions which, given my understanding from physicists, CANNOT, by definition, be answered by physics. That’s why there is such a thing as metaphysics.

And none of what I am saying is intended to PROVE any literal teachings of ANY religion. Far from it. None of it claims to prove that anybody who walked the Earth was God, or the son of God. Or what God looks like. And nothing I am saying says evolution is false, or “creationism” as the source of terrestrial life is valid in ANY way, or that any literal teaching of any religion is anything more than a useful metaphor or a myth. Not anythiing of the sort.

The point is there are, and will always be, some fundamental mysteries that CANNOT be explained. You don’t even seem to be able to comprehend an asymptotic limit from High School calculus. Where you could theoretically walk forever, always making progress, but still not reaching a defined, finite bound.

What is so ironic is that without direct knowledge of the details of the science, you have a blind faith that science can accomplish anything. THAT is intellectual laziness of the first order. So, for starters, are you expecting the scientists are wrong, and that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle will be overturned?

Gasket,

One last thought in trying to get this across. I am not talking about the limits of today’s science. I am talking about the limit of what science itself IS, and DOES. I expect science will progress as long as there is anyone to continue it. But that there are some things that no amount of progress CAN answer in terms of science.

Patrick Henry said:
Dan I was just going to let that go because I learned long ago on this site that there is no reason to argue or give an opinion. No minds will be changed. However, due to the snide nature of your remark, I will explain. If you look at the intricacies of life and the world itself, I think it takes more faith to believe that a “big bang” occurred and that all this just fell into place than it does to believe a Supreme Being created and orchestrated it.

I appreciate the explanation. I hope you knew I was just kidding. That’s why I put the ;-} there
I know a lot of people feel that way and I get it. Creation is a marvelous thing. For me, even as young man in High School, the intricacies of the mind amazed me. The fact that when we sleep our mind can create dreams still amazes me.

It’s just that the statement , “It’s takes more faith to NOT to believe in God than to believe in him” doesn’t really express what you just explained IMO.
You look at the world and it’s wonder and think of a creator being, God. Lot’s of people feel wonder and awe but don’t think of God. It’s not a matter of faith or more faith. It’s a matter of perspective I suppose.
I’ve had long discussions with atheists on another boards and they have various reasons for not believing in God, but it’s not a matter of more faith. It’s more that they see no need for that kind of faith.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
But what if God is the source of the big bang. we as christians believe that all is God and God is all so why is it not plausible that his creation was not the genesis of the universe itself? What if evolution is merely the answer to how but not the answer to “why”? These are the questions many Christians seem to not want to ask themselves.

Right. It’s even okay not to know. We don’t have to have all the answers to strive to be a better person and have a positive influence. IMO the real value of religion is the teachings of how we relate to each other and the world. The development of the inner person. As we change on the inside the world around us will be better.
We could do away with welfare and all kinds of things if people actually lived the teachings.

Dsiscokid said:
@Reasonale “ib. Evolution teaches that species change and evolve from one species to another. One species passes away while another lives on, etc. God created Adam and Eve after He created the animals, all within perfect conditions. Everything changed after the Fall of Adam. He died spiritually and the earth and animals and everything within it fell under the sin curse. There is no place whatsoever for Darwin’s racist theory anywhere in Scripture. FWIW- species can adapt to certain conditions (ex. – I put a coat on when it’s cold outside) but never to “evolve” into another different species

At some point science and religion have to come together if there is one truth. Hanging on to religious myth isn’t necessary and does no good for anyone.

This is the first time in my life that I have agreed with Bill Maher. Obama is a phoney.

BFD said:
Bill Maher is a national treasure and he puts on a great show.

It’s like Redeye only it’s funny.

I missed his show on Friday, the only reason I subscribe to HBO.

Just_MC said:
So, for all those who mock religion as nonsense and superstition, I would offer that you might want to consider the limits of what YOU UNDERSTAND about the science you advocate, and more important, about the limits about what that science even HOPES to be able to explain.

Keep in mind that a lot of people who may mock religion don’t necessarily mock simple God belief which is something we can’t know. Science at least is reasonably honest in what it knows and what it doesn’t know. I have no issues with religion as part of mankind’s ongoing search for meaning. The issue is that a lot of it is clinging to superstition and myth , often in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary and passing on that superstition as fact. Religion, spirituality, should be working with science to improve mankind. As science increases our knowledge of the physical world religion should be exploring the inner person. Clinging to myth and superstition doesn’t help hat process.

CosmosDan said:
I appreciate the explanation. I hope you knew I was just kidding. That’s why I put the ;-}

Dan, I thought you were kidding because you are usually a very genial person. I wasn’t sure this time, but please accept my apology for referring to your remark as “snide.”

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
But what if God is the source of the big bang. we as christians believe that all is God and God is all so why is it not plausible that his creation was not the genesis of the universe itself? What if evolution is merely the answer to how but not the answer to “why”? These are the questions many Christians seem to not want to ask themselves.

Good points and I would not argue that could be a possibility.

Gasket said:
Religion is an institution created by man. By it’s very nature, it’s corrupted.

Gasket, I agree with you there. I consider myself a Christian, but not necessarily religious.

I’ve always found it the height of hypocrisy for journalists to insist that Obama is a Christian.

That’s not to say there’s proof that Obama is not a Christian, but the point is that no one but Obama knows who, or what — if anything — he prays to.

The current mainstream media orthodoxy, that Obama is a Christian, is based on nothing more than Obama’s say-so.

Wow. Is that the new standard for journalistic accuracy in this country — “if a politician says so, it must be true”? If so, then I guess the media should have trusted John Edwards once and for all when he denied having an affair.

Gasket said:
Religion is an institution created by man. By it’s very nature, it’s corrupted.

By man’s very nature religion is corrupted. Just a small correction. If Obama is muslim he is allowed to lie to infidels (saying he’s a Christian for example), so he’s covered there. If he’s a secular humanist/ communist there is no God and therefore no ultimate consiquence to lying, so he’s covered there. If he says he a true Christian and slips and referrs to his Moslem faith (to Stephanopholos..) He’s not- so- covered there. A Christian is not going to slip up and mention his non existent Moslem faith. It’d never happen. Never. I don’t believe he is a Moslem even though he slipped up and said he was. The best evidence is that of atheism. I don’t want to be cynical and think he is Moslem lying to infidels and honoring ALLAH. More likely he has no faith, but makes as practical of decisions as needed lying to achieve desired ends. some people consider this quite an admirable trait. Bill Clinton has those admirable traits. You Democrats really know how to pick ‘em.

CosmosDan said:
Keep in mind that a lot of people who may mock religion don’t necessarily mock simple God belief which is something we can’t know. Science at least is reasonably honest in what it knows and what it doesn’t know. I have no issues with religion as part of mankind’s ongoing search for meaning. The issue is that a lot of it is clinging to superstition and myth , often in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary and passing on that superstition as fact. Religion, spirituality, should be working with science to improve mankind. As science increases our knowledge of the physical world religion should be exploring the inner person. Clinging to myth and superstition doesn’t help hat process.

Absolutely, I’m with you entirely.

And for the record, I have not posted anything to the contrary. My points about the answers to the unknowable are 100% consistent with your post. A lot of people confuse what I described, the unanswerable mystery of creation (where all the stuff came from) with CREATIONISM (God waved his hands and made all the plants and animals in their current form).

Just_MC said:
You literally do not follow the specifics of my point. I explained it precisely. The cop-out is yours, simply assuming “aww, them clever sine-tists’ll figur it out, somhow’s I reckon.” I have discussed real limits of what science CAN do, per scientists. There are some mysteries that science will never unravel.

Have you ever heard of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle? It is a theory in physics, widely accepted, that one CANNOT know precisely the position AND momentum of a particle. This is a place where the SCIENCE says the SCIENCE CANNOT figure both out. Your blunt and myopic argument says “aww, shucks, givem nuff time and RE-search money and ‘em ‘ol SINE-tists, they’ll figger it out.” This is crap. Not according to me, but according to the best of the scientists themselves.

Now, along those lines,

If y = mx + b, how do you express x in terms of y? Answer: you solve for x, yielding: x = (y – b) / m

But if y = mx + b, how do you express x in terms of the null set? Write down the equation that describes x in terms of absolute nothingness. Have a field day.

Science DEFINES things in terms of other things. How does science express SOMETHINGNESS in terms of NOTHINGNESS? Or vice versa?

And if you ASSUME the existence of the laws of physics and the existence of all matter, and say there is no beginning, you still have a mystery of HOW or WHY that which exists, exists. Why doesn’t something else exist? And why aren’t the laws of physics different?

These are questions which, given my understanding from physicists, CANNOT, by definition, be answered by physics. That’s why there is such a thing as metaphysics.

And none of what I am saying is intended to PROVE any literal teachings of ANY religion. Far from it. None of it claims to prove that anybody who walked the Earth was God, or the son of God. Or what God looks like. And nothing I am saying says evolution is false, or “creationism” as the source of terrestrial life is valid in ANY way, or that any literal teaching of any religion is anything more than a useful metaphor or a myth. Not anythiing of the sort.

The point is there are, and will always be, some fundamental mysteries that CANNOT be explained. You don’t even seem to be able to comprehend an asymptotic limit from High School calculus. Where you could theoretically walk forever, always making progress, but still not reaching a defined, finite bound.

What is so ironic is that without direct knowledge of the details of the science, you have a blind faith that science can accomplish anything. THAT is intellectual laziness of the first order. So, for starters, are you expecting the scientists are wrong, and that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle will be overturned?

I do not agree with your opinion. No matter how you re-phrase it, you are saying the SAME thing. You are putting a limit to the scope of science as we know it TODAY to judge the discoveries of tomorrow! This is a flawed premise that you simply can not undo with semantics. You (and nobody else) simply do NOT know what will be known centuries from now. Our knowledge and intelligence keeps evolving. With your mindset, we would never have known about the theory of relativity. I personally like Einstein’s quote about the notion of fringe ideas. If at first it doesn’t sound crazy, then it has no chance. The myopia is on your end, not mine. Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree.

Cher said:
This is the first time in my life that I have agreed with Bill Maher. Obama is a phoney.

Confirmation bias.

Upon Further Review said:
I’ve always found it the height of hypocrisy for journalists to insist that Obama is a Christian.

That’s not to say there’s proof that Obama is not a Christian, but the point is that no one but Obama knows who, or what — if anything — he prays to.

The current mainstream media orthodoxy, that Obama is a Christian, is based on nothing more than Obama’s say-so.

Wow. Is that the new standard for journalistic accuracy in this country — “if a politician says so, it must be true”? If so, then I guess the media should have trusted John Edwards once and for all when he denied having an affair.

How else do you determine a person’s faith other than input from said person? Whether Edwards had an affair or not is something that can be demonstrably proven.

CosmosDan said:
Keep in mind that a lot of people who may mock religion don’t necessarily mock simple God belief which is something we can’t know. Science at least is reasonably honest in what it knows and what it doesn’t know. I have no issues with religion as part of mankind’s ongoing search for meaning. The issue is that a lot of it is clinging to superstition and myth , often in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary and passing on that superstition as fact. Religion, spirituality, should be working with science to improve mankind. As science increases our knowledge of the physical world religion should be exploring the inner person. Clinging to myth and superstition doesn’t help hat process.

I’m slightly different. I am openly hostile towards religion, but, not towards individual spirituality. We need more of the latter and less of the former. The world would be a better place. I classify myself as agnostic.

“@Reasonale “ib. Evolution teaches that species change and evolve from one species to another. One species passes away while another lives on, etc. God created Adam and Eve after He created the animals, all within perfect conditions. Everything changed after the Fall of Adam. He died spiritually and the earth and animals and everything within it fell under the sin curse. There is no place whatsoever for Darwin’s racist theory anywhere in Scripture. FWIW- species can adapt to certain conditions (ex. – I put a coat on when it’s cold outside) but never to “evolve” into another different species”

What racist theory?

Bill, God luv ya!  You little self hating Jew.  When you call Obama a fake Christian and a fraud the world smiles down on you and forgives some of your many transgressions.  Shalom!!!

Gasket said:
I do not agree with your opinion. No matter how you re-phrase it, you are saying the SAME thing. You are putting a limit to the scope of science as we know it TODAY to judge the discoveries of tomorrow! This is a flawed premise that you simply can not undo with semantics. You (and nobody else) simply do NOT know what will be known centuries from now. Our knowledge and intelligence keeps evolving. With your mindset, we would never have known about the theory of relativity. I personally like Einstein’s quote about the notion of fringe ideas. If at first it doesn’t sound crazy, then it has no chance. The myopia is on your end, not mine. Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree. Confirmation bias. How else do you determine a person’s faith other than input from said person? Whether Edwards had an affair or not is something that can be demonstrably proven. I’m slightly different. I am openly hostile towards religion, but, not towards individual spirituality. We need more of the latter and less of the former. The world would be a better place. I classify myself as agnostic.

Okay, just answer this one question then.

Do you believe the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle will be overturned by more advanced science? (The theory/law of quantum physics that says that the more is known about the positon of a particle, the less that CAN be known about its momentum.)

A simple “yes, it will be overturned” or “no, it will not be overturned” is all that’s needed so I can understand your position.

Gasket said:
With your mindset, we would never have known about the theory of relativity.

BTW, this statement is COMPLETELY wrong. Just as with Newtonian mechanics (and every other bit of science we have ever seen in the evolution of science), ***Relativity, as all science, defines things in terms of other things.*** Even if I were wrong in my proposition about whether somethingness could ever be defined in terms of absolute nothingness, your statement above about is hopelessly incorrect.

Gasket said:
I’m slightly different. I am openly hostile towards religion, but, not towards individual spirituality. We need more of the latter and less of the former. The world would be a better place. I classify myself as agnostic.

I very much favor individual spirituality over organized religion , but I do see the positive side of a spiritual community where people come together for a little group encouragement and inspiration. It’s just hard to find one that isn’t to entrenched in dogma. The Bahai are pretty cool that way. I guess Unitarian Universalists are pretty loose, focusing on the spiritual search rather than dogma.

Norah O’Donnell HOT Megyn Kelly NOT!

Just_MC said:
Absolutely, I’m with you entirely.

And for the record, I have not posted anything to the contrary. My points about the answers to the unknowable are 100% consistent with your post. A lot of people confuse what I described, the unanswerable mystery of creation (where all the stuff came from) with CREATIONISM (God waved his hands and made all the plants and animals in their current form).

Fine. I just commented because you said something about mocking religion. I think many people who mock religion are mocking the mythology that people need to cling to.
If religious folks were willing to say, “we really don’t know either, but we have certain traditions” that would be fine. Instead they insist that things they can’t know are factual, that God wrote books for them, and there dogma is the only correct one for every human. As much as this mindset has dominated and affected mankind, it deserves a little mocking.

beavoux said:
Megyn Kelly NOT!

Now that’s just crazy talk.

Just_MC, petitio principii. Not going to continue with that argument.

beavoux said:
Norah O’Donnell HOT Megyn Kelly NOT!

I LOVE her eyes.

CosmosDan said:
Now that’s just crazy talk.

She’s ok although I think Margaret Hoover, McCallum (sic) and the Latina lady Banderas (my favorite) are way hotter. I remember when I started watching FNC back in the day and was always gawking at Laurie Dhue. She was DROP DEAD GORGEOUS! I hardly paid attention to what she was saying.

CosmosDan said:
I very much favor individual spirituality over organized religion , but I do see the positive side of a spiritual community where people come together for a little group encouragement and inspiration. It’s just hard to find one that isn’t to entrenched in dogma. The Bahai are pretty cool that way. I guess Unitarian Universalists are pretty loose, focusing on the spiritual search rather than dogma.

Agreed!

Gasket said:
She’s ok although I think Margaret Hoover, McCallum (sic) and the Latina lady Banderas (my favorite) are way hotter. I remember when I started watching FNC back in the day and was always gawking at Laurie Dhue. She was DROP DEAD GORGEOUS! I hardly paid attention to what she was saying.

So, their strategy is working.

Gasket said:
I do not agree with your opinion. No matter how you re-phrase it, you are saying the SAME thing. You are putting a limit to the scope of science as we know it TODAY to judge the discoveries of tomorrow! This is a flawed premise that you simply can not undo with semantics. You (and nobody else) simply do NOT know what will be known centuries from now. Our knowledge and intelligence keeps evolving. With your mindset, we would never have known about the theory of relativity. I personally like Einstein’s quote about the notion of fringe ideas. If at first it doesn’t sound crazy, then it has no chance. The myopia is on your end, not mine. Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree.

I have to agree here. (Now I need a shower) What we know now was considered science fiction just 50 years ago. Impossible was what certain things were called.

If you want an interesting and somewhat whimsical reading of how things are seemingly constantly in flux with regard to scientific understanding……google “phlogiston” and enjoy how folks just a few years ago tried to explain oxidation.

In one of my undergrad thermodynamics texts, they had a picture of a tiny imp with a costume on with a big P on it’s chest seemingly hopping around in a fire.

Funny stuff.

Cher said:
This is the first time in my life that I have agreed with Bill Maher. Obama is a phoney.

You’re just sad, but that’s your right and I’ll back you on it.

So Bill agrees with me about something. ‘Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while’.

espo222 said:
So Maher thinks that Obama is really agnostic, but plays the Christian card to appeal to more people and yet he thinks that he is an honest guy and not someone who would tell people whatever they want to hear, just to get elected. Hmmm…interesting.

He’s the Democrat kind of an honest guy. Like Clinton.