Quote# 111851

The use of irreverent, sarcastic humor as a defense for Jews (along with subtle choosing of their most stereotypical professions), and parasitically aligning themselves with whites, is them. When you become aware of race, you begin to learn the subtle differences. Some of you are aware of HBD and the Dark Enlightenment, but I will refrain from posting those topics today. To understand Western Imperialism properly, you must understand Jewish history and Jewish genetics. They've written extensively on it, and they spend great efforts to catalog it.

You also become familiar with Jewish humor. It's different than white humor. Just like black humor, Redneck humor and so on all have unique flavors. And when you see rampant Jewish irreverent humor, and displayed is verbal expertise in attempts to bash Asian men with a natural level of shamelessness that is rarely found among East Asians, become aware that it's going to be Jews most of the time. Jews are referred to as "opportunistically white". A Jewish man is Jewish, unless he is trouble or facing an attack he must subvert. Then he becomes white, and vice versa since there's no end to their hypocrisy. You will see this in the media all the time. We are all taught about the horrors of white men and their role in slavery. Are you guys aware that it was Jews? Why is that never mentioned, and why aren't they bearing the costs of slavery? So to become aware of your environment, you must learn to distinguish Jews from whites.

Which academic institutions are under the most Jewish control? The answer is the one that discriminates the most severely against Asians. Which industry is best known for Jewish influence? Hollywood is the most hateful institution to use propaganda against Asians. It took me awhile to understand this, because I grew up in a society where any negative thoughts towards Jews, including those who are racists or even pedophiles, was systematically associated with antisemitism and the Holocaust. Some of you've abandoned Uncle Channery and become aware of your own race. Do not end your enlightenment at the immature stage of hating some generic white nobody who says racist things to you. White people actually do not hold disproportionate power in the US. Another group of non-whites do. Learn about the race that has used their institutions to declare Asians as their enemy. They have many times betrayed the white population of their wealth to protect themselves, including during the 2008 financial collapse. If you allow them, they will do worse to you.

Number888, Reddit 7 Comments [8/16/2015 4:27:46 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 111847

No, sin is not sin, as you are describing it. Some sins, like some crimes, are more heinious than others, and require a greater "sentence" or punishment, if you will. Your views on homosexuality are warped, to say the least. You are correct that many Christians have let down the biblical standard in many areas, which makes it hard for them to speak out against homosexuslity. Divorce, and many other things, have diminished the work of the true church. Homosexuality does more damage than divorce ever thought of. It eats at the very fiber of society as a whole, like a cancer. Jake's needs to go back to Calvary, and dip afresh and anew in the blood of Christ which he shed to purchase our souls. He is riding the fence on a clear cut biblical truth.

Pastor65, Christian News Network 14 Comments [8/15/2015 5:11:54 PM]
Fundie Index: 11

Quote# 111845

Once a gain I responded to the beginning of a posting by someone and did not rad it in its entirety. My sincerest apologizes to the "black man" to whom I wrote a rebuke. I must be more diligent in what I read and write. I now make clear that I agree with the pastor, Jesse Lee Peterson that Jakes made a colossal mistake by saying that he supports same sex marriage as decreed by the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court does not have \the final and binding word on homosexuality, Read in Leviticus 20:19 and Romans 1:20-32 and see what God has to say about it! Just because a man such as Jakes or any other, has achieved a measure of fame does not make what they say truthful. There is a far higher authority than any man--Almighty Jehovah God!--who is the source of true belief on any issue. The devil and his radical liberals spew out those evil ideas and they will one day, hopefully soon, be judged and corrected by the actions of God. Failure to believe God's Word, the Bible, and failure to believe on and receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, will lead us into all manner of ungodly thoughts and practices. I join with Reverend Peterson in giving a biblically based rebuke to T.D. Jakes who seems to have departed fro Bible based Truth. May God convict and deliver Jakes from his politically correct belief!

Rudy Tidwell, Christian News Network 10 Comments [8/15/2015 5:10:48 PM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 111843

A matter of time before judgment falls on this nation. These people will not have time to blink when it comes. The Bible warns against causing a Christian to fall.
Let their supporters mock, ridicule, wallow in their political correctness and snarky remarks... none of that will save them. Truly the blind leading the blind.

Chrissy Vee, Christian News Network 17 Comments [8/15/2015 5:10:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 111842

“My hope is the pain we experience today adds to the urgency of engaging in an open and honest discussion about this and other divisive issues at the intersection of our society and our church,” she wrote.

What is there to discuss. God COMMANDED a man to marry a woman and to have children. God later called homosexuality an ABOMINATION. Lastly, Paul reiterates the turning away of the natural purpose of the women for that which is UNSEEMLY.

Obey or be damned. It is that simple.

mcsledge, TheBlaze 12 Comments [8/15/2015 5:10:26 PM]
Fundie Index: 10

Quote# 111841

Rape victims are an entirely different case. Rape is a very horrible thing and no female should ever experience that kind of tragedy, but if a girl ends up getting raped, and she gets pregnant, why abort the baby? In doing so, it only makes the mother selfish because she would only be thinking of herself. Think about it this way: rape victims don't truly recover. Ask any woman who has had it happen to them; they tend to forget about it as the years go by, and they learn to live with the past, but in the back of their minds they are still grieving over what happened to them. Even if the mother aborts the child, she is still at risk of being traumatized for life. Having the child there would play no significant role in the mothers depression because she is still going to cry, and scream, and rant every chance they get. It's not the baby's fault so it should not suffer.


[Many reasons. Maybe she doesn't want to constantly be reminded of the rape every time she looks at the child. Maybe she doesn't want a child to someone who has violated her. Maybe she doesn't want to go through nine months of pain, only to give birth to a child that wasn't made through love.

If a woman is raped, then I think they have every right to be 'selfish' just for once and get rid of the baby, if they choose to. What's wrong with being selfish every once in a while?

You say that she will still go through all the pain, suffering and depression... But she will eventually get on with life. Having a baby as a constant reminder of it isn't exactly going to help with the moving on.]




You bring up some good points, but we don't live in disney. We're not all made through love. I wasn't expected, many of my friends have told me they weren't expected either. The fact of the matter is, no child should suffer because of the crimes committed by any of these sick freaks. It's like killing another human being because someone related to them broke the law. Everyone deserves to be selfish every once in a while, but not when they are deciding whether a baby should live or not. At least out it up for adoption.

[So a mother should have a child ... because life isn't like Disney? Well those rape-victim mothers can sure as hell try to make their lives a little bit happier, at least!

A child is hardly suffering if it's being aborted a few weeks into the pregnancy. Maybe if you kill the child when it's five years old for having a sick father THEN it would be cruel.
A mother IS suffering by keeping a baby she does not want.

And put it up for adoption? So she still goes through nine months of pain, only to give birth to a child that wasn't made through love, then she gives it away?
Why should a rape victim have to go through so much more worry (pregnancy, adoption, etc) when there's a much easier option?]



Again, not everyone is made through love. I don't care if the baby is 5 years old or 5 minutes old, it's still a living, breathing, developing human being. It feels pain. Inside the mother it feeds off of everything she puts in her body in order to live. Killing the baby is not going to help the mother in her depression, if anything, it would just add to it when she realizes she killed her first child.


Giving birth is a natural occurrence. Actually, a normal child birth is not considered an emergency UNLESS there presents complications. Moreover, life-threatening complications for the mother could be detected at an early stage and if they are then by all means abort the baby. We don't want the mother to die. But in the natural process of giving birth. the mother goes through pain, but it's does not affect her life-span. Your whole argument is based on solely the fact that the mother was forced into the birth, which itself is wrong and I do see your point but we're getting into something much greater when we talk about whether the baby should be aborted because you are snatching them of life. My point is simple, I've said it once and I'll say it again, the mother WILL STILL go through pain and suffering even if the child is killed. If she doesn't want to see her kid, then put it up for adoption. Don't take its life because of a crime it did not commit.

Silentscream, Neoseeker 7 Comments [8/15/2015 5:10:14 PM]
Fundie Index: 14

Quote# 111839

There are No More Calvins
It was within a very short period of time I knew that school, and teachers, were evil.

Oh laugh as you might, but I am not joking. There is no more evil institution in this country than the veritable prison we condemn our children to for a mandatory 13 year sentence. Yes we all turn a blind eye claiming it for "education" and the "future" of our children. But in the end the education system's real purpose is two fold:

1. To outsource children to a large baby sitting operation so (predominantly) women can pursue a career instead of raise their children and

2. Employ generations' worth of talentless, lazy hacks who want an easy way out, 3 months a year off, and are scared stiff of real work - teachers (and the increasing number of administrators).

This is not politics.
This is not hyperbole.
This is not me angry over a lost childhood.

It is the truth.

School is nothing more than child abuse as two distinct groups of adults are using it for ulterior purposes.

Naturally there are some "good teachers," and these teachers believe in education, try their best to educate the children, and genuinely want what's best for them. However, the remaining 98% of teachers are not "good teachers" and are there first and foremost for themselves.

This results in an environment that is toxic for children, and certainly not one that can achieve education. Year after year, children are forced to leave home and sit in buildings that are architecturally similar to prisons. The teachers (who by the way have the lowest IQ's out of most majors) are not only uninspired to teach them, but really don't care. Alas, overtime this combination results in teachers who are not just incapable of teaching, educating, and inspiring the curiosity of young children, but teachers who grow to resent the children, resulting in indifference (reading from the book), if not outright petty and indiscriminate punishment. Sure enough, over time a child goes from being wide-eyed and hopeful kindergartener, to a 4th grade zombie trying to stay awake.

Of course, children may not understand the underlying political reasons why they're sent to a prison-like institution and the country's least competent or caring individuals are chartered with educating them. But they do have genetically programmed within them self-respect and intuitively know when they're getting screwed. Alas a natural animosity forms between students and their prison guard teachers. A healthy distrust between teacher and student. And soon in a very Calvin and Hobbes like way, students and teachers fall into their natural roles of sworn enemies.




Or at least that's how it was in the 80's.

For whereas back in the day this abuse galvanized us into distrusting our teachers, even hating them, the same cannot be said of young students today. For what I see now is NOT the independent minded spirit of a Calvin, questioning why he has to be in school, giving his teachers guff, fighting them at every corner, but instead mindless, conforming lemmings who have plain had the independent thought kicked out of them.

Now this could be due to any number of things.

Teachers becoming BFF's with their students instead of actually teaching (not that they could in the first place anyway)
Ritalin and other drugs destroying the Calvin's of the world making them docile and compliant.
Emasculated husbands breeding emasculated, testosterone deficient boys.
Or the forcing of young female behavior on young boys, turning today's classrooms into compliant, obedient classrooms full of sheeple (and consequently no independent, self-respecting thinkers).

But whatever the cause, there are no more Calvins. There are no more rebels. There are no more independent minded thinkers. And it is a devastation to society.

The reason can be amply seen in what I deem to be the first fully and completely brainwashed generation - The Millennials.

Nowhere can you find a group of people who adamantly insist they are independent minded, but are the epitome of conformist at the same time.

The Millennials all rush to sport hipster fashion to prove their independence...only to look like uniformly interchangeable cattle in the coffee shop.

They all claim to be smart, going to college, getting even MORE education...only to major in the same worthless liberal arts drivel, obviously unable to the 4th grade math that would have avoided this consequential financial fate of such stupidity.

Hey, those tattoos and earplugs are like TOTALLY you giving the bird to the system man! Only to sheepishly get the surgery done to remove them.

And oh yes, politics. The most "independent minded" and "educated" generation ALL, like lemmings, voted TWICE for a man who just mortgaged their futures with incredible peacetime deficit spending. And they were either too stupid, or too lazy to know it.

There are other examples (global warming, privilege, triggers, white males, and "evil corporations maaaan") and CERTAINLY the Millennials are not the only generation to be duped into conformity (grunge in the 90's anyone?), but the larger point is the one thing they claim to be is what they are precisely not.

Independent thinkers.

For while people may claim to be "rebels" or "Calvins" or "SJW/OWS Warriors" fighting against the "system" they don't realize they are 100%, completely owned, programmed, duped and operated by the system.

They actually BELIEVED their teachers.
They actually are BFF's with their teachers.
They not only have no problems going to a veritable prison from 5-18, but then are so hopelessly conformist, they consciously BORROW life-crippling levels of debt to to attend an additional 4-6 years more of the same educational-indoctrinist slop.

They swallowed whole what their government-sponsored teacher-indoctrinators told them and are just too stupid (or brainwashed) to realize it.

Sadly, this has serious costs and consequences to society because without independent thinkers, without genuine Calvins, there are no innovators. There are no creators. There are no geniuses who can look outside the box and come up the next cure for cancer. Technological advancement and economic growth will slow, resulting in lower standards of living than what we could have had. But worse, with nothing but a bunch of conforming sheeple, the "system" can easily manipulate, control, and own society. And that has always been the goal of the leftist education system.

Of course, try telling that to the "independent minded" tatted up, earloop wearing, liberal-arts-majoring "intellectual giants" who vote to mortgage their own futures while all claiming to be Calvins.

Aaron Clarey, Captain Capitalism 20 Comments [8/15/2015 5:09:19 PM]
Fundie Index: 19
Submitted By: Yuu

Quote# 111837

My name is Kelly Lynn. I was raised in a Masonic/Mormon/Illuminati Satanic Cult since birth. I was subjugated to torture, programming, child pornography, child prostitution, snuff films, Satanic Rituals including cannibalism, blood drinking, sacrificing of babies, children, animals, the homeless etc... I spent the last 12 years in therapy and being deprogrammed. Now my mission is to expose the dark side of human nature so that the Truth of the Love of God can be revealed. If there is any way that I may be assistance to further our work in bringing the hidden to the light,

Kelly Lynn, Ritual Abuse Free 33 Comments [8/15/2015 5:08:22 PM]
Fundie Index: 15

Quote# 111836

I (Donna Carrico) heard a group of children saying over and over, "out of the darkness, into the light", "out of the darkness, into the light", "out of the darkness, into the light." Then there was a silent pause and I heard, "Peek a Boo!"

As I recoiled in shock, I fully understood what this meant. Almost every Parent or Grandparent has played "Peek a Boo" with their babies. I, too, was guilty of that game that I thought was harmless. Not so!

In Freemasonry, they do this in the first three degree rituals. The candidate is paraded around the room with his eyes blindfolded and beat on the head with a setting maul, dropped on the floor for dead, and the blindfold jerked off to reveal the Worshipful Master; all done to initiate them. The same type of ritual is done in witchcraft and Satanic rituals and other cults.

So, here we are as unsuspecting adults, scaring our child by putting them under a blanket in the dark and jerk off the blanket so they can see us (their savior) and get rescued. This accomplishes the same thing in both the Freemasonry and cult rituals. A person (candidate or baby) is put into fear, or an altered state and then rescued by someone to whom they are to worship or be thankful to.

Perhaps you think I am over-reacting, but if you truly pray about it, we have participated in de-sensitizing our child to this ritual. The door has been opened to the occult and it continues as the child watches all the Disney cartoons, listens to the latest music, TV, and Videos, etc. The Devil is truly evil and is our to devour us all from birth! All to open the door for Evil to walk in. I praise God for revealing this to me so I can warn others.

donna carrico, Ritual Abuse Free 14 Comments [8/15/2015 5:08:08 PM]
Fundie Index: 15
Submitted By: Tony

Quote# 111832

I think its the NWO agenda.
Like stop people from reading the bible night with your own bedside lamp because the lightbulb causes pollution.

Goodbook, Christian Forums 13 Comments [8/15/2015 5:06:13 PM]
Fundie Index: 14

Quote# 111831

This thread is fucking hilarious. 80% of the replies are just proof of the OP's comments on how asian guys get the shit end of the stick of double standards when it comes to professing our preferences. Also, for those people who say we should treat asian men and women equally and it's only fair that we "don't put white women on a pedestal" just like we don't want asian women to do the same for white men, I say FUCK THAT. Keep in mind, at end of the day, we are men! We proclaim what we want and we take what we want. Ideals of egalitarianism between the genders will only serve to keep you from your full potential. Despite the fact, machiavellianism was created by the hand of a white man, the members of this sub-reddit are sorely in need of adopting some of this philosophy towards life...

CalgaryAsianGuy, r/AsianMasculinity/ 7 Comments [8/15/2015 5:05:53 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 111829

One thing that has been brought up over and again here is is that it isn’t all that difficult to keep house these days, what with modern appliances and all. This is true — without children keeping house is a pretty simple affair. Even with them it isn’t anywhere near as difficult as it used to be. Still, a lot of guys can’t be bothered, and a lot of these men are single. However, an amazing fact is that most maids are employed by wives (or so they call themselves) who simply can’t be bothered. Not all that many men actually contract housekeeping services because they simply haven’t grown accustomed to the idea.

This is an opportunity that is ripe for the picking. When men go into any business that is traditionally the provenance of women, they generally clean up. Think of the wholesale replacement of wifely industry by the industrialization of spinning, weaving, etc. There are legions of men who have made fortunes by taking advantage of the inefficiency of the housewife of yore. Wives no longer sew, mend or spin, but rather shop and enrich the men who have made their jobs redundant. These days, wives don’t even cook, instead simply opening boxes and reading instructions written at the elementary school level. Put two cups of mix in bowl, add egg and milk, stir with fork… That’s it.

Given modern social norms, it’s time to eliminate the wife from the household picture altogether. And considering the fact that modern appliances make a good scrubdown little more than an afterthought, the amount of labor required to keep a place in good shape is minimal. So, even paying a higher than average hourly fee – say $20/hr – for low-skill work such as housekeeping is reasonable. For your typical childless man, two hours a week is probably more than enough to take care of the details he’d rather not bother with. Add ten bucks for transportation/gas money and that comes out to only $50/week. For that, a man could have a thoroughly clean domicile without any of the trouble that comes along with a girlfriend/wife performing such basic labor, who would surely complain and make compensatory demands anyway. Sure, he’d have to wash his dishes and buy groceries, but scrubbing the bathroom and kitchen, doing the windows and mopping and vacuuming would all be taken care of. Also, the woman (or man) doing the work would be discreet, respectful and fast.

If I were to start this kind of business, I would market exclusively to men — women are always intrigued by what men are doing and would find it on their own, so female clients would appear without any extra effort. I would treat employees with the humanity and consideration that men generally bring to the table regarding employees, and exercise quality control based on my male clients’ feedback (women are prone to complaining and petty retribution, so I’d place less weight on their opinions). Furthermore, I’d challenge the female-run maid services, which comprise the majority, head-on and beat them badly and without mercy.

W. F. Price, The Spearhead 10 Comments [8/15/2015 5:02:39 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 111828

A cancer has cancer. Oops, I mean, Jimmy Carter has cancer. Same diff. #tcot #gop #JimmyCarter #ACancerwithCancer

Debbie Schlussel, Twitter 14 Comments [8/15/2015 5:01:46 PM]
Fundie Index: 14
Submitted By: Ibuki Mioda

Quote# 111827

Even science agrees that most of todays species were not yet evident in Noahs day. They were still in the master genomes awaiting eventual assembly.

Ryan, Y! answers 13 Comments [8/15/2015 5:01:39 PM]
Fundie Index: 15

Quote# 111824

It's not that no one listens...it's why they don't listen. On matters of moral behavior, we live in a most decadent time and those for whom sexual self-gratification is everything are not likely to listen to any talk of denying or delaying self-gratification. Those who believe in this way are truly the mentally suspect as they put their masturbatory world-view above common sense and logic. Our culture suffers the negative consequences of this "sex at any costs" attitude and the defense of homosexual behavior (and "marriage") is just another example of it.

Art Casper, Newsweek 8 Comments [8/15/2015 4:59:49 PM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Yuu

Quote# 111822

There are only two groups of people in our churches today: 1) Those who believe that the King James Bible is God's inerrant, perfect, infallible, inspired and preserved words; and 2) Those who don't believe that we have God's pure words today!

Only the King James Bible only crowd believes that God has preserved His pure holy words perfectly!!! Every church that uses other Bible versions than (or in addition to) the King James Bible are supportive of multiple modern Bible versions. You'll never find a pastor who says that the New International Version (NIV) is God's holy, inspired, perfect, infallible, inerrant and preserved words! NEVER!!! You'll never heard a preacher say that the Revised Standard Version (RSV) is the only pure Bible version! You'll never hear a pastor proclaim that the Contemporary English Version (CEV) is the trustworthy Word of God and there are no others! NEVER!!! You'll never hear any theologian or seminary professor say that the American Standard Version (ASV) is God's pure and perfect words for the Church. Only the faithful King James Bible only crowd have the confidence, courage and Holy-Spirit led conviction to testify that we have God's perfect, inerrant, infallible, pure, preserved, holy words in the Authorized King James Bible!!!!!!!

This fact evidences three things: 1) The King James Bible is the trustworthy Word of God; 2) All of the modern Bible versions are imposters, counterfeit Bible versions corrupted by the Devil to deceive people; 3) Preachers who use the modern corrupt Bible versions ought not be trusted, because they don't believe we have God's pure words!

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Precious 13 Comments [8/15/2015 4:56:06 PM]
Fundie Index: 15

Quote# 111816

(on being accused of anti-gay bigotry)

It is not possible to be bigoted against a lifestyle CHOICE, so apparently you don't get it. (Homosexuality) is a choice plain and simple. The truth existed once before it was removed through heavy coercion by the very deviants it referred to. Gay is a mental disorder, based on an addiction or negative influences as a child or both. It's learned behavior exactly like Pavlov's dog, or do you think the dog ate the bell?
But do explain why the vast majority of "same sex" couples have one playing the female role and one the male.

Oboehner, Christian News Network 17 Comments [8/15/2015 4:50:09 PM]
Fundie Index: 12

Quote# 111815

Two recent reports spark this reflection that America is sinking into darkness. First, in an August 7, 2015, advisory opinion, the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct served notice to any judge with authority to perform marriages who has deeply held religious beliefs that prohibit him or her from participating in a same-sex “marriage” ceremony that they must either violate their conscience or polish their resumé and find a new line of work. Here is what they wrote:

A judge who exercises the authority to perform civil marriages may not refuse to perform same-sex marriages while continuing to perform opposite-sex marriages. A judge may not decline to perform all marriages in order to avoid marrying same-sex couples based on his or her personal, moral, or religious beliefs.

Apparently, “Christians need not apply,” must be the first line of the job description for Ohio judges from now on.

Second, as Todd Starnes of Fox News reported this week, the Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice revoked Chaplain David Wells’ volunteer credentials as an ordained minister because he could not sign a document promising he would “not imply or tell LGBTQI juveniles that they are abnormal, deviant, sinful, or that they can or should change their sexual orientation or gender identity.” To reiterate, according to the government of Kentucky, a Christian minister cannot read the passages in the Bible that say homosexual conduct is a sin for they would be in violation of the state’s “sexual orientation” and gender identity policy.

So, Christians need not apply to help young men in prison, either. All in order to appease a few radical homosexual activists and in clear violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. How twisted is that?

We can add judge and prison chaplain to the growing list of professional areas that Christians with a traditional view of marriage are being forced to abandon in the new and improved USA: photographers, wedding caterers, bakers, t-shirt makers, adoption agencies or health care providers, fire chiefs, etc. The list grows daily.

Mario Diaz, BarbWire 6 Comments [8/15/2015 4:48:43 PM]
Fundie Index: 12
Submitted By: AJ Williams

Quote# 111814

I realize I’m entering dream-world here, but there are so many other important “social issues” questions the Fox News team could have been asked at the Fox debates, for example:

Do you think it’s right that the votes of millions of Americans to preserve natural man-woman marriage–in some red states by landslide margins as high as 75-80 percent—were cast aside by five Supreme Court justices? Don’t the votes of “We the People” matter?
What will you do to reign in SCOTUS power and what sort of judges will you appoint as president?
What do you think about the Boy Scouts’ recent decision to allow adult homosexual Scoutmasters—even though the Scouts have been sued by victims from the numerous predator “perversion” scandals in which adult male Scout leaders molested boys in their care?
To Chris Christie: are you concerned that the bill you signed into law in New Jersey banning ex-”gay” “Reparative Therapy” for minors abridges individual freedom and parental rights?
What will you do to make it more difficult for American youth to access pornography, which is ravaging our nation, corrupting our souls and putting young women (and men) at risk?
Should God bless America when Americans cavalierly ignore the Creator’s moral law and embrace sins (e.g., homosexuality, pornography, fornication and abortion) in the name of civil- and constitutional “rights”?


Peter Labarbera, BarbWire 10 Comments [8/15/2015 4:48:26 PM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: AJ Williams

Quote# 111813

According to a Pew Research study in 2013, Fox News ran more stories that were biased towards homosexual “marriage” rather than against it (see Page 2). And Fox News also funds the advocacy-oriented National and Lesbian Journalists Association (NLGJA) every year; Kelly and other Fox journalists have attended NLGJA fund-raisers in support of the homosexual organization.

In the days leading up to Thursday’s prime time debate in Cleveland, Fox News anchors had been telling us how hard they were laboring to prepare penetrating, specific questions that would prevent their GOP targets from being evasive.

Electoral politics led by media pundits is pretty much a “biblical morality-free zone”–at least on the issue of homosexuality–as journalists obsess over the political “horse-race” rather than right versus wrong. Many journalists and even some conservatives have become cheerleaders for the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender) cause, while others simply bow to the prevailing political correctness.

So I was prepared for the worst as I sat down Thursday night to watch the main Fox News GOP debate, and, well…here is an excerpt of the key prime time exchange on same-sex “marriage,” posed to Ohio Gov. John Kasich by Kelly:

KELLY: Governor Kasich, if you had a son or daughter who was gay or lesbian, how would you explain to them your opposition to same-sex marriage?

KASICH: Well, look, I’m an old-fashioned person here, and I happen to believe in traditional marriage. But I’ve also said the court has ruled —

KELLY: How would you — how would you explain it to a child?

KASICH: Wait, Megyn, the court has ruled, and I said we’ll accept it. And guess what, I just went to a wedding of a friend of mine who happens to be gay. Because somebody doesn’t think the way I do, doesn’t mean that I can’t care about them or can’t love them. So if one of my daughters happened to be that, of course I would love them and I would accept them.

Who knew that the toughest question that the Fox News brain trust could come up with on homosexual “marriage” could have been penned by the Media Department of the Human Rights Campaign?! Some LGBT activists and liberals must have been checking their TV remotes to make sure they weren’t watching MSNBC.

It was telling that the Fox team directed its “gay’-sympathetic query not to a strong social conservative candidate like Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee, or Dr. Ben Carson–who likely would have vigorously defended traditional marriage and religious freedom, and assailed the SCOTUS Obergefell ruling—but to “moderate” Kasich, who pathetically boasted about attending a friend’s “marriage” ceremony based on a sexual sin. Coincidentally (or not), Ohio’s U.S. Senator, Rob Portman, a Republican, changed his position in 2013 and backed homosexual “marriage” to support his homosexual son–a theme echoed in Kelly’s debate query to Gov. Kasich.

Now, it goes without saying that parents should love their children unconditionally–Kasich got that part right. But the governor offered no reasons behind his stated opposition to homosexual “marriage”–typical of GOP politicians who avoid discussing immoral homosexual behavior like the plague.

Peter Labarbera, BarbWire 9 Comments [8/15/2015 4:48:16 PM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 111812

the only real practical action white people is to stay away from black people.They will be happier an we will be safer-a win/win. We are putting way too much effort in trying to get along-and it is wasted effort from all evidence available. Instead of butting heads lets all back away from each other and live our lives separately.
bama is trying to put black people with white people precisely to keep people from calming down and living decent lives.

omni, WND 16 Comments [8/15/2015 10:24:39 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 111810

QADIYA, Iraq — In the moments before he raped the 12-year-old girl, the Islamic State fighter took the time to explain that what he was about to do was not a sin. Because the preteen girl practiced a religion other than Islam, the Quran not only gave him the right to rape her — it condoned and encouraged it, he insisted.

He bound her hands and gagged her. Then he knelt beside the bed and prostrated himself in prayer before getting on top of her.

When it was over, he knelt to pray again, bookending the rape with acts of religious devotion.

“I kept telling him it hurts — please stop,” said the girl, whose body is so small an adult could circle her waist with two hands. “He told me that according to Islam he is allowed to rape an unbeliever. He said that by raping me, he is drawing closer to God,” she said in an interview alongside her family in a refugee camp here, to which she escaped after 11 months of captivity.

The systematic rape of women and girls from the Yazidi religious minority has become deeply enmeshed in the organization and the radical theology of the Islamic State in the year since the group announced it was reviving slavery as an institution. Interviews with 21 women and girls who recently escaped the Islamic State, as well as an examination of the group’s official communications, illuminate how the practice has been enshrined in the group’s core tenets.

Unnamed Islamic State member, New York Times 47 Comments [8/15/2015 10:24:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 28
Submitted By: JeanP

Quote# 111809

[In response to: "Christians, my unsaved grandmother passed away. I'm scared she is burning alive in hell. What can I do to help her? I'm 14."]

You can do nothing for her. What you can do is always seek God the Father through His Son, Jesus, to be your Lord and Savior.

Read about Lazarus and the rich man in Luke.
Luke 16:20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores
Luke 16:21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
Luke 16:22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried.
Luke 16:23 In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.
Luke 16:24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
Luke 16:25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony.
Luke 16:26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
Luke 16:27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house,
Luke 16:28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
Luke 16:29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
Luke 16:30 “ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
Luke 16:31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ” NIV

I am sorry your grandmother was unsaved. I know many that passed away that I am afraid are in the same situation.

May God Guide You and Comfort You and Strengthen You Always

God Bless

travelingwithwife, Yahoo Answers 15 Comments [8/15/2015 9:50:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 13

Quote# 111807

Just last week an article turned up at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, “The bacterial flagellar motor: brilliant evolution or intelligent design?,” by a biophysicist named Matt Baker, claiming to refute irreducible complexity. Has Baker finally solved the riddle of answering Behe’s challenge to Darwinian evolution? No, it’s pretty much the same stuff we’ve heard before, with maybe a variation or two that are original to Matt Baker.

Well, since these perennial objections are indeed perennial, I would like to answer them again, using Dr. Baker as my example. We’ll see that IC remains as potent a weapon in ID’s arsenal as it was in 1996.

The article purports to explain how the bacterial flagellum is the result of Darwinian evolution rather than intelligent design. But the author badly misunderstands both how we test for irreducible complexity and what it means to provide a Darwinian explanation. He is also apparently unaware of the many reasons why the Type III Secretory System could not have been a precursor to the flagellum.

The article’s first error comes in the sub-headline, which states:

"Luckily, individual components of the bacterial flagellar motor have indeed been found elsewhere. And they work. So the motor is ‘reducible’, and certainly not ‘irreducibly complex’."

First of all, it’s not the case that all “individual components” of the flagellum have been found elsewhere. But even if they had, that would not necessarily mean that the motor is “reducible” and “not ‘irreducibly complex.'” In any case, Baker goes on to state:

"A central tenet of this theory is the notion of ‘irreducible complexity’. This asserts that some biological machines — like the flagellar motor — must be the product of design, because if you were to remove one or two components from the motor it would not function properly, or at all. The logic being, this motor was designed as a whole construction — it didn’t evolve through a series of steps, so the individual parts of the motor would serve no purpose on their own.So the creationist argument relies on us finding no evidence of individual parts of the motor having a role outside of bacterial flagella."

Ignoring the gratuitous “creationist” jab, his argument is self-contradictory. On the one hand he says (correctly) that irreducible complexity means that a system “didn’t evolve through a series of steps.” But he then wrongly claims that this implies “the individual parts of the motor would serve no purpose on their own” or that irreducible complexity “relies on us finding no evidence of individual parts of the motor having a role outside.”

The former claim is a great description of irreducible complexity; the latter is a straw man test, which has nothing to do whatsoever with the concept. Dr. Baker should read my article “Do Car Engines Run on Lugnuts? A Response to Ken Miller & Judge Jones’s Straw Tests of Irreducible Complexity for the Bacterial Flagellum,” which addresses this common misconception. I explain there that Michael Behe formulates irreducible complexity as a test of building an entire system in a stepwise manner. IC relates to the functionality of a collection of parts, not the function (or possible functions) of each individual part. Even if a separate function could be found for a sub-system or sub-part, that would not refute the irreducible complexity of the whole, nor would it demonstrate the evolvability of that entire system. Here’s how Behe defines IC:

"In The Origin of Species Darwin stated:

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

A system which meets Darwin’s criterion is one which exhibits irreducible complexity. By irreducible complexity I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.(Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, pg. 39 (Free Press, 1996).)"

According to Darwin himself, Darwinian evolution requires that a system be functional along each small step of its evolution. One could find a sub-part that could be useful outside of the final system, yet the total system would still face many points over its “evolutionary pathway” where it could not remain functional through “numerous, successive, slight modifications.” Thus, Baker mischaracterizes Behe’s argument as one that focuses on the non-functionality of sub-parts, when in fact, Behe actually focuses on the ability of the entire system to assemble in a stepwise fashion, even if sub-parts can have functions outside of the final system.To further understand how Baker’s test fails, consider the example of a car engine with its nuts and bolts. Car engines use many kinds of bolts, and a nut or a bolt could be seen as a small “sub-part” or “sub-system” of a car engine. Under this logic, if a vital nut in my car’s engine might also perform some other function — perhaps as a lug nut — then it follows that my car’s whole engine system is not irreducibly complex. Such an argument is obviously fallacious.

In assessing whether an engine is irreducibly complex, one must focus on the function of the engine itself and whether it can be built in a stepwise fashion, not on a possible function that one particular sub-part could have elsewhere. Of course a nut or bolt could serve some other purpose in my car. It could probably serve many purposes. But this does not explain how a variety of complex parts such as pistons, cylinders, the camshaft, valves, the crankshaft, sparkplugs, the distributor cap, and wiring came together in the appropriate configuration to make a functional engine. Even if all of these parts could perform other functions in the car (which is doubtful), how were they all assembled properly to construct a functional engine? The answer must be intelligent design.

To offer another analogy, consider how you would build an irreducibly complex arch (Figure A):


Figure A: An arch is irreducibly complex: If one removes a piece, the remaining pieces will fall down.

According to Baker, if we can find a function for some sub-piece, then a system is not irreducibly complex. Now, let’s now break this arch into sub-pieces:


Figure B: Here an arch has been broken up into sub-pieces.

Baker has apparently found a flagellar sub-piece (the T3SS) that can perform some other function. The T3SS comprises no more than a quarter of the total flagellar parts. Similarly, in this arch, there is one large sub-section (labeled “S”) that comprises approximately a quarter of the total arch. Sub-section S can have a function outside of the arch (i.e., it can stand on its own). However, this exposes the fallacy of Baker’s test: the ability of sub-section S to stand on its own does not therefore dictate that the arch is not irreducibly complex. If one were to remove the top piece (t), the arch crumbles, even if sub-section S remains standing (Figure C):


Figure C: Even if sub-section S can have a function (i.e., if it can stand) outside of the arch, this does not imply that the arch as a whole is not irreducibly complex — capable of being built in a step-by-step manner.

Thus, we see that a system does not become “reducibly complex” simply because one part remains functional outside of the final system, and Baker has followed many others in proffering a straw-man test of irreducible complexity.

So can we properly test the flagellum to show that it is irreducibly complex? Yes, we can. Scott Minnich’s genetic knockout experiments on the E. coli flagellum have shown that it fails to assemble or function properly if any one of its approximately 35 structural parts are missing. That’s prima facie evidence that it’s irreducibly complex, and it’s a proper test of the model.

Power Point Paradise, Power Point Paradise 12 Comments [8/15/2015 9:49:38 AM]
Fundie Index: 15

Quote# 111806

Nazism & Gay Rights: Key Parallels

In 1939, a young German exile wrote a book about how the Nazis took over his country. The manuscript was placed in a drawer and forgotten until his death 60 years later, when it was found by his son and became a best-seller under the title Defying Hitler.

It was an amazing discovery because the author, Sebastian Haffner, had by then grown into one of Germany's most popular journalists. The narrative is also a gem of social commentary, showing how historical circumstance, political inertia and moral cowardice combined to produce one of humanity's greatest disasters. This article will follow his work, using Haffner's insights as a roadmap for the rise of homofascism in the United States. There are at least seven key parallels between the two eras.

1) The first similarity between our current times and Germany in the 1930s is an agenda-driven use of the media. Propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels had a dark genius for supporting films, radio programs, books and newspapers favorable to the Nazi cause. He also was a master at making Hitler's support look larger than life, scheduling him to speak in small venues that would result in dense crowds. The pro-gay forces have done the same thing in the United States by quietly promoting sodomy in countless movies and television shows for the last 20–30 years (Philadelphia, Will & Grace, Brokeback Mountain, to name a few). Like the Nazis, modern gays have overrepresented the size and popular support of their subculture.

2) Hitler and the homofascists also benefited from a collapse of opposition to their evil. Haffner describes this situation in March 1933, when the Third Reich came into being:

There was a League of Communist Front-Line Veterans and a centrist association called Reischbanner with a black, red and gold flag, the colors of the Weimar Republic. It was organized on military lines by a coalition of parties including the Social Democrats, had arms and millions of members, and was explicitly intended to hold the SA (Nazis) in check. During the whole period this association remained completely invisible, not a glimmer. It disappeared without a trace, as though it had never existed … .

The officers of the Reischbanner showed not the slightest opposition when their facilities were taken over by the SA. The Stahlhelm, the army of German nationalists, permitted itself to be absorbed and then dissolved, bit by bit. They grumbled but offered no resistance. There was not one single example of energetic defense, of courage or principle. There was only panic, flight and desertion. In March 1933 millions were ready to fight the Nazis. Overnight they found themselves without leaders... .

This terrible moral bankruptcy of the opposition leadership is a fundamental characteristic of the March "revolution" of 1933. It made the Nazi victory exceedingly easy. (pp. 132–33)

Replace these Germans with Americans like Indiana governor Mike Pence, Washington archbishop Cardinal Wuerl, New York archbishop cardinal Egan, or Knights of Columbus supreme knight Carl Anderson. Our leaders have also been missing in action on issue after issue — divorce, contraception, abortion, civil unions, same-sex marriage — making the victory of evil in this country exceedingly easy as well. Their cowardice was even worse because Nazis had guns and killed people, while our leaders retreated without even a whiff of physical danger.

3) Another similarity between the German fascists and homofascists is restriction on speech to hide the nature of their evil. This passage is relevant to our times:

While they [Nazis] were systematically torturing and murdering their defenseless victims, they daily declared in fine, noble words that not a single hair on anyone's head would be harmed. … Indeed, only a few weeks after the atrocities began, a law was passed that forbade anyone, under pain of several penalties, to claim, even in the privacy of his own home, that atrocities were taking place. (p. 127)

Of course, homofascists seldom use violence in our times. But they're quick to destroy a person's career or reputation. And they're perfectly willing to use laws to restrict criticism as hate speech. They also want to ban conversion therapy, keeping individuals from receiving treatment for same-sex attraction. Just like the Nazis, today's homosexualists want to shut down opposition speech.

4) The forces of sodomy resemble their anti-semitic cousins in the ability of a small, well-organized minority to control a malleable but disorganized majority. The Nazi party, after all, never won more than 40 percent of the national vote in Germany. In this way it resembles gay marriage, which has become the law of our land despite losing referendum after referendum. Knowing they cannot win in honest debates, they advance their agenda using any means necessary.

5) There's also a peculiar combination of rule-breaking with normalcy. In Germany, for instance, Nazi street violence was explained away as "revolutionary excess" but occurred with the blessing of the state. As Haffner says:

[The Nazis] acted from a position of complete security, under orders and with strict discipline. The external picture was one of revolutionary terror: a wild unkempt mob breaking into homes at night and dragging defenseless victims to the torture chambers. The internal process was repressive terror: cold, calculated, offical orders, directed by the state and carried out under the full protection of the police and the armed forces. ... [W]hat happened was a nightmarish reversal of normal circumstances: robbers and murderers acting as the police force, enjoying the full panoply of state power, their victims treated as criminals, proscribed and condemned to death in advance. (pp. 125–26)

Killing defenseless people was technically a crime in Germany, just as sodomy once was illegal in most of the United States. But violators of the law went unpunished over time, and soon the criminals ran the country.

Meanwhile, innocent people are attacked as if they were felons. In Germany, they were Jews and opposition leaders like the Social Democrats. Today, they're bakers, florists and owners of bed-and-breakfasts.

And, just as street thugs became the new law and order in Nazi Germany, we have pedophiles in the United States writing sex ed curricula and gay judges like Elena Kagan and Vaughn Walker ruling on marriage cases.

6) It's also interesting that homosexuals continue their pride marches after gaining acceptance. This resembles the Nazis, who marched with uniforms, flags and torches well after 1933. In both cases, the demonstrations serve to intimidate opposition and to rally their own numbers. They're totally different from protests to achieve a specific outcome, like ending segregation, war or abortion.

Church Militant, Church Militant. 15 Comments [8/15/2015 9:49:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 12
Submitted By: Ivurm