Quote# 105392

Q: Don’t humans have a place in Nature?
It has been said that our environmental woes stem from being out of touch with the natural world. Perhaps this check list will help to restore our sense of place in Nature. Join the search for a human niche, and help determine where on Earth we fit.

Check off as many niches as fit us:

Evolution’s crowning achievement
Most advanced being on Earth
Integral part of the web of life
Exotic invader
Parasitic pest
Dominator, usurper of resources
Fluke of evolution, apart from nature
Spiritual unifier of heaven & earth - of divinity and Nature
Worshipper of Nature as god/goddess
Transcender of physical realm
Steward, caretaker of lesser species
Equal with all life forms
Link on the food chain
Restorer of balance, undoer of civilization
Defender of Nature
Cancer or virus
Soon-to-be-extinct altruist
Other
Many cling to the quaint notion that we are still a part of Nature, and perhaps we are, depending on how “a part of” is defined.

An established and balanced ecosystem functions in a dynamic symbiosis. All species interact with each other in three possible ways: mutualistic, communalistic, or parasitic. A mutualistic relationship helps both organisms. A communalistic relationship neither helps nor harms the interacting organisms. A parasitic relationship helps one and harms the other.

Are we a part of Nature in the same way a timber company is a part of the forest? Or the same way a farmer is part of the farm? We could be part of nature the same way, say, an otter is: eating sea urchins and being eaten by sharks.

We were once like the otter, part of the ecosystem. Then we developed agriculture, and have become parasitic, depending on exploitation of Nature for our survival, but giving nothing back.

The fossil record shows that each time Homo sapiens entered a continent, a spasm of extinctions followed. Exotic invaders typically disrupt ecosystems, and we are no exception.

On some philosophical level there is no doubt some truth feeding the myth. However, by examining our daily lives, and asking ourselves, “What part of my normal day is a part of Nature?” the sad truth is revealed.

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, VHEMT 27 Comments [12/21/2014 1:33:56 PM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: Sergeant343

Quote# 105391

Abe is the most nationalistic leader of postwar Japan. He is rebooting nuclear power, building up Japan’s military, asserting her rights in territorial disputes with China and Korea.

And he is among a host of leaders of large and emerging powers who may fairly be described as the new nationalistic strong men.

Xi Jinping is another. Staking a claim to all the islands in the South and East China seas, moving masses of Han Chinese into Tibet and Uighur lands to swamp native peoples, purging old comrades for corruption, Xi is the strongest leader China has seen in decades.

He sits astride what may now be the world’s largest economy and is asserting his own Monroe Doctrine. Hong Kong’s democracy protests were tolerated until Xi tired of them. Then they were swept off the streets.

Call it Putinism. It appears to be rising, while the New World Order of Bush I, the “global hegemony” of the neocons, and the democracy crusade of Bush II seem to belong to yesterday.

Narendra Modi, leader of the Hindu nationalist party who was denied entry into the United States for a decade for complicity in or toleration of a massacre of Muslims is now Prime Minister of India.

“Members of the rightwing Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh,” the FT reports, “the Organisation of National Volunteers that gave birth to the Bharatiya Janata party headed by Mr. Modi — have been appointed to key posts in the governing party and cultural institutions.

“Nationalists have railed in public against the introduction of ‘western’ practices such as wearing bikinis on the beach, putting candles on birthday cakes and using English in schools — all to the chagrin of fretful liberals.”

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is another such leader.

Once seen as a model of the enlightened ruler who blended his Islamic faith with a secular state, seeking friendship with all of his neighbors, he has declared cold war on Israel, aided the Islamic State in Syria, and seems to be reigniting the war with the Kurds, distancing himself from his NATO allies and the U.S., and embracing Putin’s Russia.

Not since Ataturk has Turkey had so nationalistic a leader.

And as the democracy demonstrators were routed in Hong Kong, so, too, were the Tahrir Square “Arab Spring” demonstrators in Egypt, home country to one in four Arabs.

With the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in free elections, but was then overthrown by the Egyptian Army. General Abdul Fattah al-Sisi is now president and rules as autocratically as Mubarak, or Nasser before him.

Thousands of the Muslim Brotherhood are in prison, hundreds face the death penalty. Yet, despite the military coup that brought Sisi to power, and the repression, the American aid continues to flow.

What do these leaders have in common?

All are strong men. All are nationalists. Almost all tend to a social conservatism from which Western democracies recoil. Almost none celebrate democracy or democratic values the way we do.

And almost all reject America’s claim to be the “indispensable nation” or “exceptional nation” and superpower leader.

Fareed Zakaria lists as “crucial elements of Putinism … nationalism, religion, social conservatism, state capitalism and government domination of the media. They are all, in some way or another, different from and hostile to, modern Western values of individual rights, tolerance, cosmopolitanism, and internationalism.”

Yet not every American revels in the sewer that is our popular culture. Not every American believes we should impose our democratist ideology on other nations. Nor are Big Media and Hollywood universally respected. Patriotism, religion and social conservatism guide the lives of a majority of Americans today.

As the Associated Press reports this weekend, Putinism finds echoes across Central and Western Europe. Hungary’s Viktor Orban has said he sees in Russia a model for his own “illiberal state.”

The National Front’s Marine Le Pen wants to bring France into a new Gaullist Europe, stretching “from the Atlantic to the Urals,” with France seceding from the EU superstate.

“Of the 24 right-wing populist parties that took about a quarter of the European Parliament seats in May elections, Political Capital lists 15 as ‘committed’ to Russia,” writes the AP.

These rising right-wing parties are “partners” of Russia in that they “share key views — advocacy of traditional family values, belief in authoritarian leadership, a distrust of the U.S., and support for strong law and order measures.”

While the financial collapse caused Orban to turn his back on the West, says Zakaria, to the Hungarian prime minister, liberal values today embody “corruption, sex and violence,” and Western Europe has become a land of “freeloaders on the backs of welfare systems.”

If America is a better country today than she has ever been, why are so many, East and West, recoiling from what we offer now?

Pat Buchanan, VDARE 13 Comments [12/21/2014 1:33:22 PM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 105386

The Fast

In 1950, a religious Jew came to America from Safed, Israel. He went into the real estate business in the suburbs of New York City, married a Jewish woman, and set up a home. After a year, his wife gave birth to a baby girl. Through the years, the family's life followed the typical American success story.

When the young lady reached college age, she attended Columbia University, where she met a fine Protestant young man. They dated for several months and then decided to get married. Meanwhile, her father continued to think that the relationship was not serious.

One day the family and the boy went to Forest Hills Country Club to have dinner. Towards the end of the meal, the young lady turned to her father and said, "Dad, John and I plan to get married." The father looked at her intently and said softly, "Fine, but please wait until I am dead before marrying him." He then pushed his plate aside and stopped eating.

As the days passed, he continued to fast. His health began to fail and he grew pale and weak. Neither his friends, nor his family, nor his daughter could convince him to eat. He remained at home, not venturing out either to work nor to see friends.

Finally, the doctor told the man's daughter that she had her choice - she could give up the boy or she would shortly be attending her father's funeral. The young lady was under great emotional stress as she watched her father waste away due to his feelings about her decision. She initially thought that her father's fast would last only a short time and then he would accept the proposed marriage and stop this "nonsense." Thus, when she heard the doctor's words, her resolve was washed away by tears at the shocking thought of her father's death.

She went into her father's room and stood before him, sobbing as she spoke, "Daddy, I love you. I can't marry him and watch you die. I'm not going to marry him. Please, forgive me."

A totally committed parent will usually find a way to successfully prevent an intermarriage - if he is wiling to pay the price.

Rabbi Kalman Packouz, How to Prevent an Intermarriage 56 Comments [12/20/2014 4:23:32 AM]
Fundie Index: 45

Quote# 105385

These inconsistencies of US policy reveal that ideologies like feminism are not really taken seriously by those in power, but are instead just a convenient tool or an effective weapon, like a Tomahawk cruise missile that destroys American families and renders children fatherless so as to prevent them from challenging the scions of our overlords.

However, in the case of Assad and the rebels I can’t in good faith support either side. Assad has employed feminism in the same manner as our elites, while the rebels have a burning hatred for my civilization and religion. If I had to choose a side, I’d go with Assad, because at least he doesn’t burn churches and massacre Christians (BTW, whether you call yourself secular or Christian, if you’re an American you’re still a “kafir” to these rebels). And anyway, the kind of patriarchy fundamentalist jihadis support is totally alien to my people and our tradition, which has always been a lot more moderate and benevolent in that regard.

So, when the cruise missiles start raining down on Damascus, keep in mind what a fraud Western feminism is. Hell, I’ll bet even Patty Murray supports an attack on the Syrian regime.

W. F. Price, The Spearhead 25 Comments [12/20/2014 4:23:18 AM]
Fundie Index: 17

Quote# 105383

God takes the plan of salvation VERY seriously. So serious that he had a man killed merely for picking up some sticks. This short story tucked away in the Old Testament speaks swelling volumes of books concerning the free gift of eternal life. It is a gift indeed and no work may be done to have it. If you even pick up some sticks to be saved, God will put you into Hell forever to burn and be tormented. There will be NO exceptions for anyone!!!

God sentenced that man to death in the Wilderness for just picking up some sticks! That doesn't seem very fair does it? I mean, they were just some sticks! What kind of God would kill a man for just picking up some sticks? A good God, that's Who! A good God that doesn't want anyone to go to Hell. God is telling us through the death of this man that adding even the smallest amount of human effort will send us to Hell forever. 2nd Peter 3:9, “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.”

God is warning the world in Numbers 15:32-35 that He is not playing games. If you ADD anything to faith alone in Christ, you will be sentenced to the Lake of Fire for all eternity. God will, guaranteed, show no mercy and have the angels cast you into second death forever.

David J. Stewart, God Loves People 48 Comments [12/20/2014 4:22:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 19

Quote# 105381

A third means of illustrating the moral wrong of intermarriage is to say to your son [...] "We know well enough to be wary of getting involved with a dope addict, no matter how endearing and lovely she is, because we know it will hurt. How about getting involved with someone who is endearing and lovely who will hurt not only you, but your parents and your whole people? Drop her! It hurts? Morality requires a willingness to accept hurt."

Rabbi Kalman Packouz, How to Stop an Intermarriage 28 Comments [12/20/2014 4:22:08 AM]
Fundie Index: 15

Quote# 105380

If you believe that there is even a remote possibility that there is a God Who gave us the Torah and that there is reward and punishment for our actions in this world, you should reconsider intermarriage. This understanding of eternal consequences for our decisions and behavior is a very basic Jewish belief going back to the beginning of our people.

Intermarriage is an extremely serious violation of the Torah. In one sense, it is the ultimate violation - all future generations born to a non-Jewish mother will not be Jewish and will be cut off from our heritage.

If the mother is Jewish and the father is not, there is a great likelihood that the child - Jewish by birthright - will not receive a Torah education and will lead a life devoid of Torah, a life filled with inadvertent violations of the Torah.

Recent studies show that a very small percentage of such children are being raised according to any definition of being Jewish. The intermarried person is causing this tragedy.

Putting romantic notions aside, it is not worth the punishment and loss of reward in the World to Come because of intermarriage - especially since you can find all the qualities you seek in a Jewish spouse - if you try.

Rabbi Kalman Packouz, How to Stop an Intermarriage 24 Comments [12/20/2014 4:21:57 AM]
Fundie Index: 11

Quote# 105378

[These are excerpts from "questionnaires" that are supposed to be given to children contemplating marrying non-Jews.]

Do you or your potential spouse think it is wrong to aid in the destruction of an endangered species? How do you feel about aiding in the destruction of the Jewish people?

[...]

If you are marrying a non-Jewish woman, does it bother you that your children will not be considered Jewish by the vast majority of Jews?

[...]

If there is a major tragedy such as an airplane crash, do you read the list of victims to pick out the Jewish names?

[...]

Do you realize that marrying a non-Jewish person essentially cuts you off from the Jewish people? Does that bother you?

[...]

Are you aware that children of mixed-religious parentage often have an identity crisis? How do you plan to deal with your children's identity crisis?

[...]

Do you think it is fair to create confusion in your children in an area so vital as their basic identity?

[...]

Are you aware that frequently, Jews look at children of an intermarriage as non-Jews and non-Jews look at them as Jews?

[...]

Are you aware of the higher rate of divorce amongst intermarried couples? What, in your opinion, accounts for this higher rate?

Rabbi Kalman Packouz, How to Stop an Intermarriage 26 Comments [12/20/2014 4:21:19 AM]
Fundie Index: 18

Quote# 105377

Many people insist that the Mark has to be an implant in the skin. Although the Greek word `stigma' can mean prick (as well as a reference to a mark of ownership) and although the Greek word `charagma' can mean etching (or a badge of servitude), this is not necessarily proof that the Mark has to be an implant.

The King James Version translated the Greek word "epi" to the English word "in" or "upon" for the following marks:

in their foreheads (Revelation 7:3)
his mark upon their foreheads, (Revelation 20:4)
or in their hands (Revelation 20:4)
in their right hand (Revelation 13:16)
in their foreheads (Revelation 13:16)
written in their foreheads (Revelation 14:1).

The word "epi" is usually translated as "upon" (also: come to, by, at, before and over). The King James Version translated the word 'epi' both ways in Revelation 20:4. We get our English word "epidermis" from the Greek. We also get our English word "hypodermic" from the Greek. You would never confuse the two English words. "Epi-dermis" is upon the skin, "hypo-dermic" is under the skin. In EVERY occurrence of the Beast's mark in your Bible, the Mark is "epi" (upon) the hand and forehead.

Many people claim that the Mark will be a physical mark because the English word "Mark" refers to a physical mark. Although it refers to a physical mark, it can refer to physical marks that are also designations of ownership, as in a rancher branding his cattle, or an artist signing his work. Later, I will show that a Social Security Card is indeed a certificate of ownership. The English word "Mark" can also mean a scar, as in Galatians 6:17: "... I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." This is translated from the Greek word `stigma', which is not the word "Mark" used in Revelation. "Stigma" in Strong's Concordance is defined as "a mark incised or punched for recognition of ownership, i.e. scar of service:-mark." Notice that its primary meaning of this "stigma" physical mark is as a designation of ownership. More about the word "stigma," later.

The Greek word for "Mark" in the eight occurrences in Revelation, is the Greek word `charagma' (Strong's G5480) which means an etching or a badge of servitude. The extent of God's wrath leads us to believe that this is something extraordinary. But grammatically, there is no reason to suspect that this is anything more than advanced than a badge, or an ID card. The Mark might eventually involve an etching of the skin, as a tattoo or an implant, but I don't see where Scripture requires it. A Social Security Card already fits this prophecy. A number issued by a foreign power already qualifies you to buy and sell, and as we shall see, none of the other Biblical Marks in the right hand or forehead refer to a tattoo or scar or implant.

The only other occurrence of the word `charagma' in the Bible is translated into the word `graven' in Acts 17:29.

Let's take a closer look at Revelation 13:16-17 so that you will never be lulled into waiting for a tattoo or implant.

Revelation 13:16,17 (KJV) "And he causeth (Greek "poiei" = agree, appoint, cause, commit, provide) all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive (Greek "didomi"= give, bestow, bring forth, grant, have power) a mark in their right hand (Greek "cheir" = grasping, a means of power), or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name."

I don't claim any great insight into these literal phrases. It might be as simple as making a Mark available for all to grab. We have parallel examples in our own culture: one who is appointed (poiei) to office receives power (didomi) after he raises his right hand (cheir) during the oath of office. Even today's English Dictionaries define: "a right hand man" as one who is reliable in performing his delegated duties. When you signed the Application for a SS Number, with a Perjury Oath (right hand), you received power (didomi) to buy or sell.

I find it curious that the word for "give" (didomi) is translated "receive."

Rather than speculate on the literal, let's study the symbolic and let the Bible interpret itself as much as possible. Keep in mind that John the Revelator would be familiar with all of the other Biblical references to signs, words, tokens, law, and seals upon your right hand and forehead.

The terminology "A mark in your forehead" symbolically means "to serve." And so it is to this very day; a Uniform's cap has an engraved metallic mark etched at the forehead.

The terminology "In your right hand" symbolizes "Oaths" (Genesis 14:22, Ezekiel 17:18, Ezekiel 36:7 and Daniel 12:7). And so it is to this very day; an Oath is performed with your right hand raised. Look up "Oath" in any Encyclopedia: An Oath is always a religious ritual. Your Bible prohibits taking an Oath to a pagan state god. A perjury Oath on a government Form is a religious ritual. (Your government continues to conduct their religious rituals, because they cannot have separation of their church from their state). "Foreheads" and "hands," when mentioned together, signify "loyalty and obedience." It is as simple as today's idiom "right hand man."

As we study all the Biblical references to the right-hand-and-forehead, keep in mind that there are different messages being conveyed:

A reminder that your sovereign will protect you and provide for your security
In Deuteronomy 11, it seems to be a warning that your sovereign must be worshiped, and if forgotten, the sovereign will punish you and your children. (In other words: John could be saying that from the Beast's point of view, you will be punished if you will not give out your number).
It refers to the use of force to deliver your Nation from oppressors (as in Exodus 13, Deuteronomy 11, Revelation 7). From the Beast's point of view, "Christians" are the oppressors of the degenerate political majority.
It always seems to imply memorizing precepts about your sovereign's authority, and obeying the sovereign's law.

Although "hands" mentioned without foreheads refer to Oaths, notice that "hands," when mentioned with "foreheads," refer to "loyalty" rather than to Oaths. Also notice that your forehead is reserved for Christ's Mark in Revelation 7 and 14.

Here are the Biblical examples where both forehead and hand terminology are used together. It is important to notice that none of these refer to physical marks, implants, or tattoos, and notice that every instance also mentions "children:"


Exodus 13:8-9 (KJV): And thou shalt shew thy son in that day, saying, This is done because of that which the LORD did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt. And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the Lord's law may be in thy mouth: for with a strong hand hath the LORD brought thee out of Egypt.
Exodus 13:15-16 (KJV): And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem. And it shall be for a token upon thine hand, and for frontlets between thine eyes: for by strength of hand the LORD brought us forth out of Egypt.
Deuteronomy 6:6-9 (KJV): And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.
Deuteronomy 11:16-23 (KJV): Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, [Note: this word "gods" is the Hebrew word 'elohiym' which can mean magistrates or judges] and worship them; And then the LORD'S wrath be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain, and that the land yield not her fruit; and lest ye perish quickly from off the good land which the LORD giveth you. Therefore shall ye lay up these my words in your heart and in your soul, and bind them for a sign upon your hand, that they may be as frontlets between your eyes. And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt write them upon the door posts of thine house, and upon thy gates: That your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, in the land which the LORD sware unto your fathers to give them, as the days of heaven upon the earth. For if ye shall diligently keep all these commandments which I command you, to do them, to love the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, and to cleave unto him; Then will the LORD drive out all these nations from before you, and ye shall possess greater nations and mightier than yourselves.
Proverbs 7:1-3 (KJV): My son, keep my words, and lay up my commandments with thee. Keep my commandments, and live; and my law as the apple of thine eye. Bind them upon thy fingers, write them upon the table of thine heart.
Revelation 7:2-3 (KJV): And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. Revelation 14:1 (KJV): And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.
The word "Mark" in Revelation's "the Mark of the Beast" is the Greek word "charagma" (Strong's G5480). "Charagma" is a badge of service, or an etching, such as an etched metallic badge (or perhaps an ID card). Throughout the history of mankind, A BADGE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A SYMBOL OF SERVITUDE. If you've been brainwashed into thinking of a badge as a symbol of authority, you have it backwards. A Mark/Badge on your forehead has your master's name (= authority). If you are off the feudal manor while wearing your master's badge, everyone knows you are conducting business in your master's authority. This was necessary as a public notice that your master would pay for any transactions conducted in his name and he would pay for any damage that you cause. Aaron wore a metal badge at his turban's forehead, as a badge of servitude. It was the part of his Uniform (Exodus 28:36-38) which marks it as God's Uniform. While he is in Uniform, he represents his Master's authority. And so it is to this very day: Uniforms' Caps, Helmets, Berets, or Turbans have a metal Badge of Servitude at the forehead. Also, Ezekiel 9:4 refers to physical marks on the forehead as an outward symbol of inward attitudes.
Just as you cannot wear two caps at once, You cannot have both a Mark of a Beast and Christ's Mark (as in Rev 14:1) on your forehead. Your forehead is reserved for Christ's Mark. If you belong to a Beast, then serve your Beast. If you belong to Christ, serve Christ.

Gordon Epperly, U.S.A. The Republic 28 Comments [12/20/2014 4:21:06 AM]
Fundie Index: 12

Quote# 105374

[Cathy] Brennan puts her neck out and takes a lot of heat for being a vocal woman with an unpopular view that is held by many, many women. There is an obsession with Brennan in the pro-trans community, as though she invented the critique of gender and is the only person with the perspective she holds. This is not the case. As the trans community has demonstrated (http://feministninja.tumblr.com/post/48756677256/what-trans-activists-regularly-say-to-radfems) time and again (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPayTWlAQ0k), with Cathy being a prime example among many, expression of an unpopular opinion (within patriarchy, this is an opinion not sanctioned by males, including transwomen) makes a woman a target for aggression and abuse. The trans community has demonstrated this by threatening to kill, dismember, beat, and rape Cathy and countless other women who have spoken out against trans politics. I haven’t seen a single death or rape threat, ever, from a radical feminist to a pro-trans individual, and I have looked for them, while those coming from pro-trans people are literally innumerable to count. The accusations that we are hateful are projections. Those who threaten to rape and kill people are hateful (and probably male), not those who disagree with someone’s philosophy on life. As someone who knows Cathy a whole heck of a lot better than the writer of this original post, I attest that your “theory one” is incorrect. Her aim is to bring attention to the issue at hand. That’s a primary goal of activism. It’s not all about Cathy. The trans community has made it all about Cathy to deflect attention away from the content of what she is actually saying, a typical move made in patriarchal society when a woman speaks up at a volume unbecoming of “ladies.”

When Women Were Warriors, When Women Were Warriors 32 Comments [12/19/2014 4:40:16 AM]
Fundie Index: 17
Submitted By: What?

Quote# 105368

["However, a cat is a natural carnivore"]

This line of argumentation is known as the "appeal to nature". It basically assumes that natural=good (and sometimes that unnatural=bad/inferior). Unfortunately, this argument cannot be applied consistently because there are many natural things which are bad (starvation, disease, etc).

So basically, as a rational argument anything that starts with "this is okay because it's natural" is pretty much a non-starter.

["and needs to eat meat."]

That's certainly debatable. There are nutritionally complete vegan cat foods as well as steps you can take to identify and avoid problems as you transition. Also, in the interests of harm reduction it's not necessarily a black and white thing. Even if you could substitute 25% of your meat-based cat for for an alternative that doesn't require other animals to suffer and be killed that would be an improvement over doing nothing.

["As a human, I can morally decide not to eat animal products."]

Don't you have a responsibility for your cat's actions and your own actions in the course of taking care of the cat?

["A lot of times I talk about this, I get people telling me I am not a "real" vegan because I feed my cat meat."]

Just to be clear, I am not saying that. Although, I would argue that it's not really consistent with "a way of living that seeks to exclude, as far as possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing and any other purpose" to reject out of hand an alternative that can reduce cruelty and exploitation.

Vulpyne, Reddit: /r/Vegan/ 45 Comments [12/19/2014 4:37:45 AM]
Fundie Index: 19

Quote# 105367

If you feed your cat a vegan diet it may not be optimal and your cat may suffer and/or die as a result. If you feed your cat a non-vegan diet we know that many animals will be killed after living lives of terrible misery in order to be turned into cat food.

The worst case vegan cat scenario causes less harm to animals than the best case non-vegan scenario. If you are concerned about causing the least harm to animals then feeding your cat a vegan diet is the right choice.

lnfinity, Reddit: /r/Vegan/ 42 Comments [12/19/2014 4:37:38 AM]
Fundie Index: 21

Quote# 105359

Who would Jesus waterboard?

Fischer argued on his radio program today that the Bible makes certain things permissible during times of war that would not be permissible during times of peace, adding that Jesus is a "warrior" who would probably approve of torture. "Christianity is not a pacifist religion," Fischer said. "The God that we serve is described in Exodus 15 as a 'man of war.' Now we often think of gentle Jesus, meek and mild, but let's not forget, according to Romans 19:13, when he comes back ... he will be riding a white horse and wearing his own robe, dipped in blood. That is a robe that is worn by a warrior who is inflicting casualties on the foe. So this is gentle Jesus, meek and mild; when we comes back, his robe is going to be dipped in blood because he too is a warrior":

http://www.afa.net/the-stand/the-culture-war/liberals-would-turn-bibles-heroes-into-war-criminals/

Bryan Fischer, right wing watch 38 Comments [12/19/2014 4:19:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 13
Submitted By: Mister Spak

Quote# 105357

Women trying to get an abortion in Albury, New South Wales, have ended up self harming or even attempting suicide because of harassment from protesters outside the only clinic offering the procedure in the area, health workers have said.

[...]

A social worker, who did not want to be named because she has been frequently targeted by protesters, said women had been intimidated about attending the clinic for too long.

“Many women end up travelling to Melbourne or Sydney for the procedure because they can’t face the protesters,” she told Guardian Australia.

“Some teenage girls do self harm because they don’t feel safe going to the clinic here, or they’re worried they will be identified by the protesters and the whole city will know about it.

“They don’t have the resources to go to Melbourne or Sydney, their parents may not know, and they are so stressed and traumatised, they attempt suicide.”

[...]

One woman described how she panicked as the protesters began to approach. “I couldn’t take a step forward,” the woman, who did not want to be identified, said.

“I panicked very badly; my anxiety was so heightened I hyperventilated. I was so distressed knowing they were going to race at me.”

She said the group surrounded her and blocked her entrance to the clinic, telling her she was making the wrong decision and holding up graphic images of dead babies.

“I finally responded that I had no choice, that my foetus was likely both deformed and brain damaged, and that if I continued with the pregnancy that I’d likely leave four children motherless,” she said. “I was told that I should choose death. This ... made me hysterical.”

[...]

[W]omen were being filmed by protesters and that their names were being recorded, shattering their privacy.

[...]

A study conducted by a fertility clinic in East Melbourne found 78% of their patients were more traumatised by anti-abortion protesters than getting a termination.

Anna von Marburg, the co-ordinator for Albury Helpers of God’s Precious Infants, did not directly answer questions from Guardian Australia about claims women were being driven to self harm or being psychologically traumatised.

But she said the group had displayed “exemplary behaviour and incredible courage in the face of very aggressive tactics by abortion advocates”.

“The abortion clinic, abortion activists, police and pedestrians have hundreds of hours of footage of the [group] and have never been able to show evidence of any harassment, blocking, or violence,” she said.

She also dismissed Mourik’s assessment that staff were stressed as a result of the protests.

“Society should feel stress and anxiety that doctors and nurses are using surgical means to solve a largely psychosocial problem,” Von Marburg, who also runs the local Catholic bookstore, said.

“We believe that we can offer a solution that does not involve the destruction of human life.”

When asked why her group could not compromise and carry out protests down the street from the clinic, Von Marburg replied: “Why doesn’t Occupy Wall Street move to Kansas?”

Helpers of God's Precious Infants, The Guardian 30 Comments [12/19/2014 4:18:39 AM]
Fundie Index: 40

Quote# 105356

I am more than a presumably rational individual, I am a champion of atheism who gave arguments in favor of atheism so convincing that three of my friends gave up their religious belief due to my persuasive reasoning powers, and my father stopped going to church.

Upon concluding through a torturous and decades-long and remorseless process of logic that all my fellow atheists were horribly comically wrong about every basic point of philosophy, ethics and logic, and my hated enemies the Christians were right, I wondered how this could be. The data did not match the model.

Being a philosopher and not a poseur, I put the matter to an empirical test.

For the first time in my life, I prayed, and said. “Dear God. There is no logical way you could possibly exist, and even if you appeared before me in the flesh, I would call it an hallucination. So I can think of no possible way, no matter what the evidence and no matter how clear it was, that you could prove your existence to me. But the Christians claim you are benevolent, and that my failure to believe in you inevitably will damn me. If, as they claim, you care whether or not I am damned, and if, as they claim, you are all wise and all powerful, you can prove to me that you exist even though I am confident such a thing is logically impossible. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation in this matter, John C. Wright.” — and then my mind was at rest. I had done all I needed to do honestly to maintain my stature as someone, not who claimed to be logical, objective and openminded, but who was logical, objective, and openminded.

Three days later, with no warning, I had a heart attack, and was lying on the floor, screaming and dying.

-Then I was saved from certain death by faith-healing, after which–

-I felt the Holy Spirit enter my body, after which–

[description of ecstatic visions and personal encounter with Jesus edited for space]

I was converted.

So I was prepared to say adieu to logic and reason and just take things on faith, when I then found out that the only people who think you have to say adieu to logic and reason in order to take things on faith are crackpots both Christian and atheistic.

Every non-crackpot thinks faith is that on which you rely when unreasonable fears tempt you to disbelieve that to which your reason has consented. If your father says you can dive off the high dive with no risk of death, and he has never lied in the past, and your reason tells you to trust him, it is rational to take his word on faith and jump, and it is irrational to let your eyes overestimate the danger poised by the height.

I then discovered that the Christian world view makes sense of much that the atheistic or agnostic worldview cannot make sense of, and even on its own philosophical terms, is a more robust explanation of the cosmos and man’s place in it, answering many questions successfully that atheists both claim cannot be answered, and then, without admitting it, act in their lives as if the question were answered, such as how to account for the rational faculties of man, the universality of moral principles, the order of the cosmos, how best to live, etc.

Turning to my atheist friends, I then discovered none of them, not one, could give me even so reasonable an argument as I was expert in giving in favor of atheism.

They reasoned as follows: “God cannot possibly exist. Therefore any evidence that you encountered that God exists must be hallucination, mis-perception, faulty memory, self-deception, coincidence, or anything else no matter how farfetched and absurd. Since any evidence that you encountered that God exists must be hallucination, mis-perception, faulty memory, self-deception, coincidence, or anything else no matter how farfetched and absurd, therefore none of your evidence proves God exists.”

I found their perfect, childlike faith touching.

No matter what they saw, no matter what they heard, no matter how the world was against them, they would go to the lions rather than look at the evidence, lest their faith in their faithlessness be shaken.



John C. Wright, John C. Wright's Journal 66 Comments [12/18/2014 4:42:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 27

Quote# 105355

governmental authorities should stop excessively taxing their citizens to fund programs that God has not authorized. It is a sign of apostasy when a government takes more in taxes than God has us tithe (e.g. 10%)

Jason Lisle, Jason Lisle's blog 45 Comments [12/18/2014 4:22:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 27
Submitted By: Tony

Quote# 105340

The Islamic terrorist group, the Taliban, which claimed responsibility for shooting 14-year-old Malala Yousafzai in the head said in a statement recently released that they did not shoot her because she wanted education for girls and women, but because "of her pioneer role in preaching secularism and so called enlightened moderation."
To prove that their vicious ungodly act was in agreement with Islam, they used the story from the Quran found at Surah 18:74-81. This repulsive and foolish story is of the Islamic hero and "righteous servant of God," Khidr. As this nonsensical story goes, Khidr and Moses were traveling and encountered a young boy. Khidr murdered the innocent boy. He explained the reason for murdering him was because the boy had parents who were "believers" and the boy could possibly cause trouble for them when he got older. (This is actually in the "holy" scriptures of Islam! People actually believe and accept this tripe as being the word of God – very sad and dangerous.) The Taliban statement stated, "If anyone argues about her (Malala's) young age, then the story of Hazrat Khizar in the Quran (states that) while traveling with Prophet Musa (AS), (he) killed a child. Arguing about the reason of his killing, he said that the parents of this child were pious and in the future he (the child) would cause a bad name for them." (This is the same "revealed" religious line of thinking that was a key motivator for the Christian mom from Texas, Andrea Yates, who murdered her five children to save them from getting possessed by Satan.) [pullquote]Top Image Caption: The hero for enlightenment Malala Yousafzai after surgery to remove a bullet from her head after she was shot by the Taliban for bringing enlightenment to Pakistan.[/pullquote]
The Taliban statement also said that they do not believe in attacking women but that Islamic Shariah law demands that Malala be killed for her actions of trying to bring enlightenment to Pakistan. This part of their statement made clear that, "whom so ever leads a campaign against Islam and Shariah is ordered to be killed by Shariah."
What do you think would happen if these sincere Muslims who make-up the rank and file of the Taliban were educated to the fact that yes, God is great, but that also the greatest gift God has given us, other than life itself, is reason and that if we do not value and use our God-given reason in all aspects of our lives we are turning our backs to God? Personally, I strongly believe that the majority of them would at the very least start to question Islam and many of them would leave Islam behind for Deism. This holds true with Christians, Jews, Hindus and everyone who is currently in the rank and file of a "revealed"/hearsay unreasonable religion.

(no name given), God Discussion 21 Comments [12/18/2014 4:14:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 105338

Chief Tango sends us a link to the Washington Post which reports that Deborah Lee James, the Secretary of the Air Force, thinks shes ready to lift the ban on transgendered airmen;

“From my point of view, anyone who is capable of accomplishing the job should be able to serve,” James told USA Today’s Susan Page.

It’s a crying-ass shame that she doesn’t feel the same way about the A-10 Thunderbolt.

The Williams Institute, a think tank that studies the gay community, estimates that there are 15,500 transgender members of the military. Over the past two years, advocates say about two dozen people have been dismissed for being transgender. At the same time, many military members say they have noticed a greater openness within their ranks, with some transgender people serving with the knowledge of their peers, superiors and doctors.

Yep, at a time when the Defense Department is cut to the bone, let’s add some unforeseen expenses that it will cost pandering to yet another special group of Americans. But, as with the release of the “torture report” this week, you know this is a done deal before the elections in 2016 to buy some more votes. Since the beginning of this administration, despite the fact that the Department of Defense should be focused on fighting the myriad wars with which they are faced, the objective has been to destroy the only governmental institution that the American people could always count upon. Brick-by-brick.


Jonn Lilyea, This Ain't Hell 22 Comments [12/18/2014 4:12:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 13
Submitted By: tipsyGnostalgic

Quote# 105334

A number of people have asked for my thoughts on Spurgeon's, "I do not know why ridicule is to be given up to Satan as a weapon to be used against us, and not to be employed as a weapon against him."

Those who have studied Spurgeon's amazing sermons will know that he often used sanctified humor and sarcasm to drive home powerful truths.

His suggestion that ridicule be used "against him" is probably used in the same way someone might ask, "Why should the devil have all the good music?" It is a general reference to the sinful world...those scripture says are blinded by the god of this world and are taken captive to do his will.

For example, I believe that atheism is "ridiculous" in the truest sense of the word. It should be ridiculed. This is because the belief that "there is no evidence for a god" is indeed intellectual suicide, a deliberate and willful ignorance of God-given common sense.

To call atheism "intellectual" (when the Bible calls the professing atheist nothing but a "fool") or to refer to Darwinian evolution as "scientific," is to heap fuel on their smoldering fires of conceit.

It is like saying a man is intelligent, who puts his precious life in jeopardy by injecting an illicit drug into his bloodstream. He is a fool of the worst kind, and you would do him a favor by saying such to his unthinking face. That may bring him to his senses.

Ray Comfort, Facebook 47 Comments [12/18/2014 4:09:29 AM]
Fundie Index: 15
Submitted By: Chris

Quote# 105333

While many American Jews have been big backers of public schools, our current system discriminates against traditionally religious Americans through what I call "the frum tax." (Frum is Yiddish for observant.)

Here's how the frum tax works: If you're secular and want to educate your children with your own values, it's free. But if you're frum, it costs tens of thousands of dollars to do the same thing. That's discrimination.

[...]

And no, the public schools are not "values-neutral." Public schools take strong stances on issues about which Americans differ. A version of American history built around the themes of race, class, and gender is not "neutral." There are many ways to teach our nation's history, such as focusing on the growth of capitalism, or on the contributions of great men. Jews from Orthodox sects that believe the Earth is less than 6,000 years old don't want to pay both for (public) schools that reject that view - and for (religious) schools that support it.

It's not the government's business to decide which historiographical or cosmological ideas are correct - and to confiscate money from citizens who have the "wrong" views in order to promulgate the "right" ones.

[...]

Three years ago, the school district of Ramapo, New York, elected a school board with a Hasidic majority. Ramapo includes cities such as Monsey and New Square that are heavily populated by Orthodox Jews. Since the state's educational structure massively discriminates against such voters - taking their money while barely helping their children's education - the board began to make cuts to security staff, sports teams, AP classes, and more.

The school board has been attacked for its "selfishness" and lack of community-mindedness. But if secular students in the district are now being treated unfairly, the frum majority living there has suffered too - and for a much longer time. Good for the Orthodox voters in the area for upholding America's founding principles of "No taxation without representation."

I hope frum people and their equivalents in other faiths will start following the Ramapo model. Join me in voting against any increased taxes for public schools, and in electing school board members who support spending only for the bare minimum (math, science, language arts, and social studies) - until the system stops discriminating against us. And since the idea of a "neutral" public school is a myth, we should pressure elected officials to choose textbooks spreading our beliefs, not those of our ideological opponents.

David Benkof, The Times of Israel 26 Comments [12/18/2014 4:08:57 AM]
Fundie Index: 12

Quote# 105332

[This is part of a response to Rabbi Gil Steinlauf, senior rabbi of the largest Conservative synagogue in DC, who came out as gay and divorced his wife.]

Steps like yours no doubt feel like the right thing to do for gay men in loveless marriages. But you’re not just any gay man. You’re one of the most important Jewish leaders in your city. Part of your job is to help model a loving Jewish family.

Leave aside homosexuality. What does your announcement say to the many men in your synagogue who are more sexually attracted to younger women than to their wives? I doubt you’d approve of a congregant breaking up his family to chase after his 28-year-old secretary.

Oh, but you say being attracted to men is “who you are.” Well, for a lot of heterosexual males, being attracted to younger women is “who they are” too, but we don’t give them dispensation to seek – casualties be damned – self-actualization.

I’m not telling you this as an Orthodox Jew to a Conservative one – or as a celibate gay man to one who wants to explore same-sex relationships. I speak as a coreligionist who is concerned about the impact your decision will inevitably have on the people around you.

Yes, you came out yesterday. That doesn’t mean you can’t “go back in” today. If you don’t, I recommend that Adas Israel start looking for a new senior rabbi.


David Benkof, The Times of Israel 21 Comments [12/18/2014 4:08:48 AM]
Fundie Index: 10

Quote# 105327

this week, while he awaited his fate at his crimes against humanity trial, Lively told Trunews that homosexuality should be considered “more offensive” than mass killings, because gay people caused the Great Flood that wiped out the human race.

“Homosexuality is not just another sin,” he said according to Right Wing Watch, “it is the sin that defines rebellion against God, the outer edge of rebellion against God and it is the harbinger of God’s wrath, that’s why the Scripture gives the warning, ‘as in the days of Noah.’”

Scott Lively, Addicting Info 52 Comments [12/17/2014 4:37:19 AM]
Fundie Index: 31
Submitted By: Skybison

Quote# 105324

What “Americans” or “New Yorkers” are left are truly disappearing persons, persons who have lost their eyes. I see no glimmer of life in their eyes.

They are walking zombies whose souls are an empty shell of what once possessed a “Christian” spark. I’m talking about some vestige of the LIFE OF CHRIST either carried in the recesses of a person’s spirit or at least in the blood of inherited Christian genes.

It’s all gone now. I’m a novelty, a spectacle, and nothing more than a figure for a few snap shots.

What does remain in my Street Evangelism and endures is the image of the demon-annihilating Cross I hold high that crushes the adversaries of Christ: Jews who run our media, our academia, our public schools, our cultural discourse.

I’ll die the death of Samson if I can bring a few thousand of them down with me.

Brother Nathanael Kapner, Real Jew News 39 Comments [12/17/2014 4:36:15 AM]
Fundie Index: 27
Submitted By: Wykked Wytch

Quote# 105320

James Dobson recently sat down with Billy Hallowell, the Faith and culture editor at Glenn Beck's "The Blaze" website, to discuss Dobson's most recent book, "Your Legacy: The Greatest Gift."

During the discussion, Hallowell asked Dobson about the role that Christianity should play in society today, to which Dobson responded by warning that if the definition of marriage is changed, it will spell doom for our entire society.

"When you start to weaken" the institution of marriage and the family, Dobson warned, "it influences the entire culture and, in fact, the entire superstructure of culture can come crashing down. That's happened in Rome, it happened in Greece, it's happened throughout history and I don't think that America can survive in the form we have known ... if we allow the family to disintegrate. And that is, in fact, what's happening"

James Dobson, Right Wing Watch 39 Comments [12/17/2014 4:33:02 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
Submitted By: Scolipendra

Quote# 105319

I am amazed by the number of liberals who understand how the natural environment is interconnected and that all events have innumerable repercussions, most of them impossible to predict, and who appear completely unable to understand that the same principles apply to the social environment. If the social environment is radically altered, as it will be with the acceptance of the idea that homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality, widespread and fundamental changes with unpredictable repercussions will follow, yet so many rush heedlessly ahead. As with emitting CO2 in the natural environment, often the act that will radically alter the environment appears harmless at first glance. But unlike the situation with CO2, no one in academia, Hollywood, or mainstream journalism will alert the public of the dangers, lest they be blackballed. 

Since humans evolved in small groups, the construction of large, self-sustaining societies that provided well for the welfare of the members has been difficult and has quite often led to failure. Any large society we construct will likely be quite fragile, like a house of cards. The adoption of same-sex marriage throughout a society would be akin to simultaneously pulling out a great many cards in this fragile structure. 
One of the key elements in this fragile structure is the duty to protect or care for other members of the society. This obligation originates with the duty that all men have had historically to protect all women in the society and the corresponding duty of women to nurture all men. This has always made men feel obligated to and connected to all the women in the society and the women to the men. Reducing traditional gender roles has eroded the strength of this feeling of duty, but it can still persist as long as men feel an attraction to women and women to men. However, with equating homosexuality with heterosexuality, the universality of opposite sex attraction is eliminated, this duty vanishes, and the society is atomized. 

Liberals often claim that preferences for gender roles and heterosexuality are socially constructed, when it appears clear that biological differences developed from millions of years of evolution across the great majority of species explain the gender roles and the predominance of heterosexuality, while the beliefs that the genders are the same and that homosexuality is the equal of heterosexuality are completely socially constructed, in a somewhat Orwellian fashion. This Orwellian crusade resembles the efforts of alchemists of a bygone era who tried to alter what they did not understand. These modern crusaders will likely be about as successful as alchemists, but with far more tragic consequences. This crusade also brings to mind Mao’s Cultural Revolution, where people were deemed to be equal in ability and suitability to tasks regardless of their actual situation, and retribution was swift toward anyone who questioned this.

Given that lesbianism is rising rapidly among the lower socioeconomic classes, it’s probable that life will soon become hellish for most non-elite men, who will be lonely and lost, and that the middle class will disappear among a rising tide of violence, crime, poverty, and homelessness. This will terminate the social contract for young men, as they will no longer be assured of love, marriage, and children even if they work hard and follow all the rules, and many of them are likely to feel isolated and become alienated. I wouldn’t be surprised if a great many become antisocial and even violent, and I suspect that more than a few will go on shooting sprees. 

Political/legal systems are mostly arbitrary, while the laws of nature are not, implying that a political system delegitimizes itself, not nature, when it arbitrarily imposes an unhealthy and unnatural form of equality.


John, Yahoo News 35 Comments [12/17/2014 4:32:46 AM]
Fundie Index: 15