Quote# 113485

But Mr. President, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. You are the leading jihadist of our day. By definition you are a traitor because you have harboured, aided and supported “non-terrorist” organizations that seek to destroy America. That makes you an enemy of the state by any standard. The fact that you are safe-guarded by your sycophants in the media and the Democratic Party is the only reason you continue to harm America with impunity.

Based on your past behaviour, your policies and you reckless treatment of U.S. interests and tradition there is no doubt in my mind that you would do anything you could – if opportunity presented itself – to remain in power and continue your crusade against American exceptionalism.

[...]

But mark my words, there is nothing crackpotish about recognizing your designs to undo America. That is why the best remedy is not “gun control” but “nut control” and the biggest nut of them all is you, Mr. President.

Only a megalomaniac such as yourself would continually flaunt your anti-American policies in the face of Americans at a time when healing and national unity should be front and centre. Only a man with a reprobate mind like yours would consider it appropriate to use these times to chastise his opponents. Frankly, I’m really surprised that the unstable nut jobs from the looney left haven’t made hay over the repeated “no gun zone” massacres under your administration. I mean its all too coincidental that these shooting have happened under your watch. It’s really not that hard to see how these massacres have actually embolden your tirade against American’s founding documents and traditions.

Yes, its time for “nut control” and that must begin with electing a new President. And one of his first acts should be your impeachment, Mr. Obama. Even if such an impeachment is after the fact, and even if its mostly symbolic. For the sake of history, you need to be impeached.

Tristan Emmanuel, Trump The Media 20 Comments [10/9/2015 10:54:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 14

Quote# 113484

Yes, that’s right Mr. President, we do believe you would use any possible means to extend your presidency and obviously you would have to disarm the U.S. electorate to accomplish this feat. But the blatant lies and obfuscation about your long term agenda isn’t the issue in the immediate foreground – but I will address it in short order.

What is immediately problematic is your rhetoric. What America needs right now is not stricter “gun control” but stricter “nut control”. Unlike many Western countries, America’s policy towards the homeless, and those who are mentally unstable, is a sham. Unlike truly humane countries, America releases too many of these disturbed individuals back in to the populace with no nut registry, no background check of substance abuse and no safeguards in place for the innocent people that walk among them.

[...]

Of course, the political climate in Washington has its sights set on toppling the Second Amendment; not empowering the people to defend themselves. And this leads me back to the initial assertion that the President raised – the one about “crackpot theories.”

One can’t help but wonder, Mr. President, given what you have rammed through Congress or decreed by Executive Order over your tenure, if in fact your ultimate aim is to embrace your Anti-Christ destiny and seize power the way you seize every opportunity to use that bully-pulpit to berate Americans.

We know that there are “nut jobs” on the left with “crackpot theories”. They were the ones who accused the American government of orchestrating 9/11. Remember when Rosie unveiled her crackpot theories on Twitter and her personal blog? She blamed Bush and several high ranking administration people for pulling off the greatest act of terrorism on U.S. soil. Many of her looney actors and actress friends embraced the same “conspiracy” theories – I believe Matt Damon was one of them – without a shred of evidence and slandered the President. And of course the media stood by and said nothing to defend the President at that time. But then evidence is immaterial when your fuelled by seething hatred for George W. Bush.

Tristan Emmanuel, Trump The Media 13 Comments [10/9/2015 10:54:19 AM]
Fundie Index: 13

Quote# 113483

I’m going to start today by venting, and I will warn you in advance that this is going to be a sermon, but someone needs to speak the truth for a change:

Another week, another mass shooting, another press conference by the President lecturing us on the need for gun control, and now Hillary and Obama are in a race to see which of them can be the most extreme in trying to destroy the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Rinse and repeat.

But there is something missing from this discussion, and it’s a glaring omission that everyone knows deep down, but politicians are afraid to talk about.

I’m going to go ahead and talk about it, and I don’t care at all if some people don’t like it, the truth is important.

What is the root cause of all these evil acts? These people who go into classrooms and churches and murder innocent people? How did we get to this place?

These shootings are a symptom of deep and serious cultural decay in our society.

Let that sink in for a minute.

These acts of evil are a direct result of cultural rot, and it is cultural rot that we have brought upon ourselves, and then we act like we are confounded and perplexed by what is happening here.

Consider the following brew of decay, and you will realize exactly what is happening here:

We glorify sick and senseless acts of violence in virtually every element of our pop culture, and we have been doing that for at least a generation.
Our movies and TV shows feature a continuous stream of grotesque killing of every kind imaginable. And this is true of virtually every genre, from horror to drama to comedy.

We celebrate and document every kind of deviant behavior and we give out awards to producers who can push the envelope as far as possible. Rape, torture, murder, mass murder, all are cinematic achievements.

Our music does the same thing, we promote evil, we promote the degradation of women, we flaunt the laws of God and common decency and we promote it all and we flood our young people with it.

We have generations of young boys who were raised on video games where they compete with other young boys around the country and the world to see who can kill the most humans. We make it so fun, so realistic, so sensational.
We devalue human life, we have no regard for the sanctity of human life in any regard, from the unborn, to the old, and to every single person in between, we devalue it and act as if we have almost no regard for humanity.

Our families are a complete mess, and we have raised tens of millions of young boys who will never become real men because they have no values whatsoever, they have no truth in their lives, and they have no regard for common decency.

Oh, we make sure that we stop them from bullying at school, but we are completely fine with them watching people get murdered and raped on the internet after school, and we are willing to let them go to the basement and join a fantasy world where they pretend they are killing people for 2 hours after school.
And who is it that generally commits these evil acts of mass murder that are becoming routine? It’s almost always young men who have either no father figure in their lives, or a broken relationship with their father. Is this just a coincidence? Of course not.

Now, let’s get really politically incorrect here and talk specifically about this horror in Oregon. This killer’s father is now lecturing us on the need for gun control and he says he has no idea how or where his son got the guns.

Of course he doesn’t know. You know why he doesn’t know? Because he is not, and has never been in his son’s life. He’s a complete failure as a father, he should be embarrassed to even show his face in public. He’s the problem here.

He brags that he has never held a gun in his life and that he had no idea that his son had any guns. Why didn’t he know? Because he failed to raise his son. He should be ashamed of himself, and he owes us all an apology.

When he was asked what his relationship was with his son, he said he hadn’t seen him in a while because he lived with his mother. Case Closed.

This mess is not nearly as complicated as we pretend.

It’s the old computer axiom – garbage in, garbage out. We fill our culture with garbage, and we reap the result.

If anyone is at all serious about changing any of this, they must address the root problems, and those are cultural decay, the glorification of evil, the devaluation of human life, the breakdown of the family, and specifically the complete abdication of fathers.

Meanwhile, the shallow and simple minded liberals will continue to blame pieces of hardware for the problem, and they will long for the days before firearms were invented.

But the simple truth is, as long as we place no value on human life, as long as we glorify senseless violence and evil, we will get the exact same result.

Bobby Jindal, Bobby Jindal For President 23 Comments [10/9/2015 10:54:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 12
Submitted By: Kevin Klawitter

Quote# 113482

[What is your take on this scenario from real life:

Someone is staying in a friend's home. They have no reason to believe the friend is sexually interested in them. The friend gets chemically incapacitated to the point of passing out on the couch. The houseguest then has sex with the unconscious person, who doesn't say no.

Is it rape? Who is to blame?]


You'd have to be a complete bastard to do it, but IMO it's not rape. No more than my carrying an incapacitated freind home is kidnap. I've done some pretty stupid things while Brahms but I never suggested that anyone else was responsible. I accept that if I'm no longer able to take acre of myself I am at risk, I take that risk.



gasopode, The Straight Dope 42 Comments [10/9/2015 8:23:16 AM]
Fundie Index: 22

Quote# 113480

(Continuing)

Still, I’d prefer that instead of continuing to wage religious war over this, we call a truce.

What if we had a law said that bakers have no obligation to actually deliver the cake to the site of the wedding; that a florist does not have to attend the wedding to make sure the flowers are arranged properly; that a photographer does not have to take pictures at the actual wedding ceremony? What if the law said, in essence, that business owners, if their religion forbids it, don’t have to set foot inside a venue where a gay wedding takes place.

But, under this compromise, the same law would say that the baker does have to simply bake the cake for the gay couple, and the florist does simply have to sell them flowers, and the photographer does simply have to take pictures at his studio – because businesses that are open to the general public must serve the general public or pay a fine.

There was a comment posted on Snopes.com by someone called “Solandri” that asked for give on both sides. “This [Oregon] case should never have gotten this far. It should have been resolved privately with the company baking the cake but not decorating it, and the lesbian couple decorating it themselves or hiring someone else to decorate it. Coexistence only works if all parties try to figure out a way to coexist with minimal disruption to each other, instead of immediately trying to inflict the maximum possible harm upon each other just because they disagree.”

I understand that some people of faith don’t want any part of gay weddings – even if that part is a small one, such as only baking the cake (and not being required to so much as show up in the same zip code as the wedding). But I worry about the slippery slope.

If bakers can refuse to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple because doing so would violate their religious beliefs, why can’t they refuse to serve openly gay people – period?

Why can’t the florist refuse to sell flowers to gay people – who simply want flowers?

Why can’t these business owners of faith say that homosexuality, in their view, is a sin and they can’t do business with sinful people?

In the ruling against the Christian bakers, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian said that, “This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage. It is about a business’s refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.”

He’s right.

Still, I don’t want to see those Christian bakers in Portland lose their business over this. But let’s not forget that they did make a decision to operate in a civil society. They did open their shop on Main Street. It’s one thing to say on Facebook, “We are here to obey God not man, and we will not conform to this world,” but if you really believe that, don’t open a bakery on a city street. Open it in your church.

Permit me a brief detour: In San Francisco the liberal establishment welcomes all immigrants, legal or otherwise. The mayor and city council have declared San Francisco a “Sanctuary City” and like the 300 or so other sanctuary cities in the United States, they don’t always co-operate with federal immigration officers on matters involving illegal aliens. In the wake of the tragic murder of that young woman in San Francisco, by an illegal immigrant who had been deported five times and had many felony convictions, the city’s policy has left many decent people furious — though liberals, in general, still like the idea of sanctuary cities.

But should the city of San Francisco be the judge and jury on what laws it will embrace and which ones it won’t.

And should the Christian bakers in Portland, Oregon be the arbiter of what laws they will follow and which one’s they won’t.

The sanctimony of true believers is understandable. But at times it is also exhausting.



bernard goldberg, bernard goldberg 14 Comments [10/9/2015 8:22:52 AM]
Fundie Index: -8
Submitted By: undie not fundie

Quote# 113479

Did you hear about the gay bakery in Greenwich Village – Sweetie Pies, Cupcakes and More — that refused to bake a wedding cake for a straight couple? Can you imagine?

When asked why they refused, the two gay bakers – Adam and Steve – said, “While we have nothing against straight people – some of our best friends are heteros – we don’t think straight people should fall into some ‘protected class.’ In other words, it’s our bakery and we can do whatever we want.”

City officials didn’t see it that way. They fined Adam and Steve over $100,000 because according to local law, a business open to the public must serve the public and can’t refuse service based on sexual orientation.



So whose side are you on? Do the gay bakers have a right to refuse to bake a wedding cake for a heterosexual couple? It is their business, after all. Or was the government right in fining them?

In case you hadn’t heard about the Greenwich Village case, it’s because I made it up. But I suspect you knew that. And I understand that the Oregon case, which is in the news – where Christian bakers were fined $135,000 for refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple – isn’t exactly the same.

In the Oregon case, the bakers claimed it was against their religious beliefs to bake the cake. To do so would violate their fundamental values.

The state didn’t see it that way, ruling that, “Under Oregon law, businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot turn customers away because of race, sex, disability, age or religion.”

(Before you ask, Should a Jewish baker be forced to cater a Nazi wedding, let’s be clear: Nazis are not a protected class. In many states — Oregon being one — gays are. So no on the Nazi wedding.)

Melissa Klein, the owner along with her husband of the bakery that was penalized, Sweet Cakes, in Portland, said this on her Facebook page: “We are here to obey God not man, and we will not conform to this world. If we were to lose everything it would be totally worth it for our Lord who gave his one and only son, Jesus, for us! God will win this fight!”

Fair enough. If they’re willing to lose their business by not baking a wedding cake for a gay couple, maybe that’s how God wants it, though I have a tough time believing that God gave even a second of his precious time to the question of whether Christian bakers should make a wedding cake for a couple of gays.



bernard goldberg, bernard goldberg 21 Comments [10/9/2015 6:33:42 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: undie not fundie

Quote# 113478

But since the female is not the source, she is helpless and lost without the male. Likewise the male is alone and has no means of expression without the female (see 1 Cor 11:11). The two aspects are incomplete without one another.

Del Washburn, Angelfall 16 Comments [10/9/2015 6:33:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 113477

For a woman to have long hair (obeying the “letter” of the law), but to then put it all up in a bun (disobeying the “spirit” of the law), is to disobey the reason for the law (to produce a certain “look”).

The same principle is seen in the wedding “veil” and “train.” The longer the veil and train, the more “glorious” it is, but the glory only comes through “seeing” the length and fullness if it. What would be the point of having a six foot train on the wedding dress, if it was all pinned up in the back? During the wedding, the train is allowed to fully flow behind the bride as she walks. The longer the train, the more glorious is the dress. But when it comes to the reception time, the train is often pinned up in the back. The train then loses it glory for the time, because of practicality. The bride has to be able to greet and talk to guests, without everyone walking all over her train.

Such is the case with long hair. There may be times when the long hair has to lose its glory for a short time — such as during food preparation. The long hair may be pulled back in a pony tail, or put up in a bun, so that the long hair does not brush through the food or even catch on fire when working around the stove. But that is for a short time, and then the hair is let back down for the glory to be seen.

If the length and the fullness of the hair is not “seen,” then it is not “glorious.” That means that putting the long hair up in a “bun” takes away the glory of it (no one is seeing the length of it; and it is surprising how much hair can be placed on the top of the head in a bun, and people not even be aware that that woman has long hair).

unknown, Liberty gospel tracts 30 Comments [10/9/2015 6:14:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 11
Submitted By: undie not fundie

Quote# 113475

Do you fear God? I've heard some Bible teachers wrongly say that fearing God does not mean to be afraid of; but rather, to respect. No, to fear God literally means to FEAR GOD! We read in 2nd Corinthians 5:11, “Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.” The “TERROR OF THE LORD” means exactly what it says. If a child disobeys their parents, they fear that sting of the belt from a spanking. Likewise, Hebrews 12:6-8 teaches that God chastises (disciplines) and scourges (whips) His children in love. Once you've been whooped by God, you don't want to go through it again. Ask Jonah! Ask David! Ask Samson!

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Precious 28 Comments [10/9/2015 6:13:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 13

Quote# 113474

Local Officials Voting To Ask God To Bypass County 'In His Coming Wrath' Because, Gay Marriage

Now a member of the Blount County Board of Commissioners, Miller has a bit of a different stance on the First Amendment.

Tuesday evening, the Board will vote on her proposal urging God to bypass Blount County as he destroys America in response to same-sex marriage now being the law of the land.

Miller’s “Resolution Condemning Judicial Tyranny And Petitioning God’s Mercy” asks God to “pass us by in His Coming Wrath and not destroy our County as He did Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring cities.”

The resolution also says the county is “begging His favor in light of the fact that we have been forced to comply and recognize that the State of Tennessee, like so many other God-fearing States, MAY have fallen prey to a lawless judiciary in legalizing what God and the Bible expressly forbids."

It also notes their “a firm reliance upon the providence of Almighty God” as they “call upon all of the Officers of the State of Tennessee, the Governor, the Attorney General, and the members of the Tennessee Legislature, to join US, and utilize all authority within their power to protect Natural Marriage, from lawless court opinions, AND THE financial schemes of the enemies of righteousness wherever the source AND defend the Moral Standards of Tennessee.”

The “Moral Standards of Tennessee” are not written anywhere, nor could we find the phrase published anywhere except in relation to Miller’s proposal.


Karen Miller, The New Civil Rights Movement 24 Comments [10/9/2015 6:12:44 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Mister Spak

Quote# 113473

They had the equal right to go elsewhere and not trample on the equal rights of the bakery. I can tell by your whiney comment you are one of those who believe they are born that way, they are not, it is a result of a mental defect. Why else does one almost always take the male role and the other the female.

Oboehner, Christian News Network 23 Comments [10/9/2015 6:04:01 AM]
Fundie Index: 10

Quote# 113472

The cry of Obama and others is “tolerance,” and for Christians to “catch up” with the majority that embraces same-sex unions. But, really, Obama and other gay “marriage” supporters aren’t being tolerant. They are being very intolerant of those who dare to disagree with them. This is not real tolerance at all! It’s intolerance and sometimes hatred of anyone who stands on the authority of God’s Word and calls sin what it is. Of course, this is exactly what Christians should expect since we are fighting a spiritual battle:

For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. (Ephesians 6:12)

People are intolerant of Christians because “men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil” (John 3:19). Christ Himself warned us that we would be hated because of Him:

If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. (John 15:18–19)

So it should come as no surprise to Christians that the world is utterly opposed to and intolerant of Christians, even while they proclaim a message of supposed tolerance.

As believers, we need to be salt and light in a culture that is dying. We live in a very post-Christian nation. America as a whole—as evidenced by our President’s statements—does not base its thinking on God’s Word but on man’s ideas. This has resulted in a nation where “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25). And this nation desperately needs to hear the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the gospel that changes hearts and minds for now and eternity. I encourage you to be salt and light among your friends, family, coworkers, and even among those you don’t know, pointing them towards Jesus Christ and the hope He offers.

How far will President Obama continue to “move the line” regarding what is morally right and wrong? He denies the origin of marriage in Genesis, but what about clothing? There is a growing movement across this nation of groups of women demanding the right to take their tops off in public because men can take their shirts off. And why should the President not approve of that “liberty”? Would he say that the origin of clothing is found in Genesis, and thus say that such nudity is wrong?

Just like the teaching of marriage is found in Genesis, so is clothing. God gave clothes because of sin (Genesis 3:21). And if the only authority to determine the meaning of marriage is fallible humans like President Obama, then why shouldn’t polygamy also be legalized?* Ultimately, anything goes, and so why shouldn’t people be allow to take their clothes off in public and have multiple spouses?

As we read in the book of Judges, “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25). It’s an apt verse to describe our increasingly secularized culture as well as the actions of President Obama.

President Obama needs to take heed of the warning God gives concerning those who do not walk in His light, but walk in their own light:

Who among you fears the Lord? Who obeys the voice of His Servant? Who walks in darkness and has no light? Let him trust in the name of the Lord and rely upon his God. Look, all you who kindle a fire, who encircle yourselves with sparks: Walk in the light of your fire and in the sparks you have kindled—This you shall have from My hand: You shall lie down in torment. (Isaiah 50:10–11)

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,
Ken

This item was written with the assistance of AiG’s research team.

*Read our article on polygamy and the Bible.

Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis 20 Comments [10/9/2015 6:03:48 AM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: Chris

Quote# 113471

The difference between non-player characters (NPCs)in video games and animals in real life is a matter of degree rather than kind. NPCs and animals are both fundamentally agents that emerge from a complicated collection of simple physical operations, and the main distinction between NPCs and animals is one of cognitive and affective complexity. Thus, if we care a lot about animals, we may care a tiny bit about game NPCs, at least the more elaborate versions. I think even present-day NPCs collectively have some ethical significance, though they don't rank near the top of ethical issues in our current world. However, as the sophistication and number of NPCs grow, our ethical obligations toward video-game characters may become an urgent moral topic.

...

If video games can be seen as "real" in a similar way as our own world, what distinguishes video-game characters from real people and animals? I think it comes down to differences in complexity, especially with regard to specific algorithms that we associate with "sentience." As I've argued elsewhere, sentience is not a binary property but can be seen with varying degrees of clarity in a variety of systems. We can interpret video-game characters as having the barest rudiments of consciousness, such as when they reflect on their own state variables ("self-awareness"), report on state variables to make decisions in other parts of their program ("information broadcasting"), and select among possible actions to best achieve a goal ("imagination, planning, and decision making"). Granted, these procedures are vastly simpler than what happens in animals, but a faint outline is there. If human sentience is a boulder, present-day video-game characters might be a grain of sand.

Digital agents using biologically plausible cognitive algorithms seem most likely to warrant ethical consideration. This is especially true if they use reinforcement learning, have a way of representing positive and negative valence for different experiences, and broadcast this information in a manner that unifies different parts of their brains into a conscious collective. Yet, I find it plausible that other attributes of an organism matter at least a little bit as well, such as engaging in apparently goal-directed behavior, having a metric for "betterness vs. worseness" of its condition, and executing complex operations in response to environmental situations. Many NPCs in video games have some of these attributes, at least to a vanishing degree, even if most (thankfully) don't yet have frameworks for reinforcement learning or sophisticated emotion.

...

Especially in RPGs, some NPCs have explicit representations of their "welfare level" in the form of hit points (HP), and the NPCs implement at least crude rule-based actions aiming to preserve their HP. In some turn-based RPGs like Super Mario RPG or Pokémon, an NPC may even choose an action whose sole purpose is to bolster its defenses against damage in subsequent rounds of the battle. The extent of damage may affect action selection. For example, in Revenge of the Titans (source code), drones select a building to target based on a rating formula that incorporates HP damage:

rating = cost * (damage / newTarget.getMaxHitPoints()) * factor * distanceModifier;

Even NPCs without explicit HP levels have an implicit degree of welfare, such as a binary flag for whether they've been killed. NPCs that require multiple strikes to be slain -- for instance, a boss who needs to be struck with a sword three times to die -- carry HP state information not exposed to the user. They also display scripted aversive reactions in response to damage.

And maybe representations of valuation could be seen more abstractly than in an explicit number like HP. In animal brains, values seem to be encoded by firing patterns of output nodes of certain neural networks. Why couldn't we also say that the patterns of state variables in an NPC encode its valuation? Animal stimulus valuation exists because of the flow-on effects that such valuation operations have on other parts of the brain. So why not regard variables or algorithms that trigger flow-on effects in NPCs as being a kind of at least implicit valuation?

Brian Tomasik , Essays on Reducing Suffering 23 Comments [10/9/2015 5:56:33 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Ivurm

Quote# 113469

If you recall, earlier this year, I did a series called 'Rebuttal to JVT,' and I mocked their promulgation of so called prophetic “blood moons,” the last of which was Monday morning on the 28th of September (2015). And what spectacular event fulfilled all the hoopla we've been hearing from prophecy experts for the last couple of years? Nothing, zip, zero, zilch. The Pope came to America and made a big Jesuit ass out of himself, addressing Congress for the first time ever and not once did he mention Jesus Christ! There is nothing in the prophets about the rank of Pope. Russia and China have vowed to fight ISIS, because they know Obongo is Commander in Chief of ISIS. There is nothing in the prophets allowing strangers, who are not our kin, to rule over us, unless the wrath of God is kindled and we get somebody like Barry Sotero as punishment. Maybe the Apocalypse has been canceled until the next blood moons in 2033. John Hagee, one of the most celebrated jewish stooges of the century, has milked this cash cow with his bestselling book rattling the cages of his followers, with the premise that “The coming four blood moons points to a world-shaking event that will happen between April 2014 and October 2015,” told reporters the day after the lunar lunacy, it meant, “an event of historical significance to the Jewish people is occurring or will occur.” Do you think he could be a little bit more generalized with egg on his face, in saving face? It's ironic that these prophecy teachers contend that it's the end of the world, when no such thing is taught in the Bible. Nothing in the prophets indicates the planet earth will cease to exist. Do you think he cares about God's Law for false prophets? And why are so many people fooled by fools? The blind lead the blind. The prophets were never respected because they went against the status quo. -

Pastor Mark Downey, Kinsman Redeemer Ministries 16 Comments [10/9/2015 5:55:59 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: Lucifer's Penis

Quote# 113468

[Why does nature produce homosexuality in animals?]

Demonic possession! The demons are known to infect animals they will infect people too!

ari, Y! answers 30 Comments [10/8/2015 6:10:18 PM]
Fundie Index: 23

Quote# 113467

I would like to see more guns in the hands of honest citizens! When good guys are armed the bad guys will be a little slower to act out their hostility. When a shooting took place in a Mississippi school a few years ago, the assistant principle ran to his car, grabbed his gun (good thing the gun-grabbers didn’t get there first) and stopped a massacre. He should be commended, not criticized!

Now, a question for the gun-grabbers: Would it not have been desirable for one of the teachers in Oregon to pull his or her gun and drop the killer before so many innocent victims were killed? I wait for an answer.

All sane, sensible people would agree that fewer deaths would be preferable, but no one says the gun-grabbers are sane, sensible people. At least, I don’t. They are fallacious, frivolous, fruity, foggy, fluttery, flimflamming, feverish, frightful, frenzied, fraudulent, foolish fascists. For those educated in public schools, I am saying that gun-grabbers are irresponsible, dishonest fanatics.

If common sense is ever resuscitated, guns will be prevalent in the schools and those determined to do harm to innocent ones will be blown away before they blow away helpless people. Start awarding gun permits to teachers and school officials before more innocent kids are killed! We need more guns in schools and society, not fewer!

Don Boys, BarbWire 46 Comments [10/8/2015 6:10:13 PM]
Fundie Index: 15

Quote# 113462

I was struggling for a while to fully believe in a flat earth because of several technical problems with the model even though the heliocentric ball earth model also has technical problems. I've decided to just trust in God's word. God means what He says and says what He means. Let God be true and every man found a liar.

Come join The Biblical Circle Earth https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/110948746616556574259

CryToTheAlmightyJesus, IMDB 27 Comments [10/8/2015 6:08:44 PM]
Fundie Index: 21

Quote# 113460

"But there was none like unto Ahab, which did sell himself to work wickedness in the sight of the LORD, whom Jezebel his wife stirred up." -1st Kings 21:25

Jezebel was a feminist, she wore the pants in the home. Ahab was henpecked for sure. Jezebel was the epitome of what every wife should NOT be. Holy women who trust in God WILL submit to their own husbands, rebels won't. Unfortunately, most women are more Hollywood than holy

David J. Stewart, JESUS IS SAVIOR 16 Comments [10/8/2015 6:08:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 16

Quote# 113457

[OP of the thread "was Hitler too soft on jews ?" - All formatting in the original source]

We know that jews in occupied Palestine do not shy away from ultra harsh punishment for minimal "offenses" or whatever excuse jews quote for their mass murder of the Arab man.

Now Hitler in 1933 was very restrained in his measures to stop jew crime inside of Germany proper.

When Hitler started the boycott of jews on April 1st 1933, Judea had already declared war on Germany weeks earlier.

Should Hitler have been stricter with jews to make them understand that there would be zero tolerance on jew crime & terrorism?

Some historians argue that Germany would have been better off with a zero tolerance policy against jew crime.

It does make sense in the light of events in Palestine!

* What you think?

von Ribbentropp, Stormfront 32 Comments [10/8/2015 4:50:45 AM]
Fundie Index: 26
Submitted By: JeanP

Quote# 113455

Dress her like a girl. Let her have long hair. Let her wear lace and ribbons. Do not let her wear that which pertaineth to a man. Deuteronomy 22:5 says, "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God." The parent who wants to make a young lady of a daughter should see to it that she does not wear revealing clothes, but that she dresses modestly. I Timothy 2:9 and 10 says, "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety: not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."

This must be started early in the life of a girl. If she never wears pants for the first time, she will always wear skirts. If she never wears mini-skirts for the first time, she will always wear skirts of a modest length. In these days of hot pants, mini-skirts, and pant suits, may God give us some old-fashioned mothers and dads who well rear some sweet, feminine ladies for our boys and dress them accordingly.

jack hyles, JESUS IS SAVIOR 47 Comments [10/8/2015 3:54:53 AM]
Fundie Index: 18

Quote# 113454

Women who wear pants do not love their neighbour, because they are selfishly causing men to struggle with lust (and thus causing marriage problems for other women).

David J. Stewart, JESUS IS PRECIOUS 48 Comments [10/8/2015 3:50:35 AM]
Fundie Index: 21

Quote# 113453

If you don't care how you dress and don't see the harm in wearing pants as a woman, then you are a part of the problem.

David J. Stewart, JESUS IS PRECIOUS 21 Comments [10/8/2015 3:50:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 17

Quote# 113452

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 2 Timothy 4

"The purpose of this paper is to address a few of the many theological implications surrounding transhumanism, especially in regard to its consistency with a Christian worldview. Transhumanism is an international movement that seeks to break through human biological limitations to radically redesign humanity. The topic is so broad that it can be best addressed paradigmatically by examining its foundational technologies and philosophies. This presentation will first give a brief summary of the topic and then a broad overview of the technologies involved. As the technologies are discussed a few specific criticisms will be raised and Christian responses offered. Then it will turn to theological matters. First it will analyze the philosophical underpinnings of the movement and then interact specifically with the more visible proponents who attempt to reconcile it theologically with Christianity. The main points offered in defense of the thesis are that promoters of Christian transhumanism are driven by an unbiblical anthropology, a Pelegian view of sin, and a profound misunderstanding of the Christian life characteristic of theological liberalism. The first point of analysis will be anthropology which naturally leads to one’s position on the biblical creation account and original sin. The denial of scriptural authority on the issues of origins and sin results in an embrace of the naturalistic worldview and leads one open to ideas like Christian transhumanism. This will be revealed as initially hubris and potentially grave sin. Finally, some suggestions will be offered as a Christian response. This paper will demonstrate that while there are some who claim to be Christian transhumanists, transhumanism is an anthropocentric worldview based on naturalistic presuppositions that is incompatible with orthodox biblical Christianity."

The Doctrine of Man: A Critique of Christian Transhumanism By Cris D. Putnam
http://www.isca-apologetics.org/papers/isca-2011/doctrine-man-critique-christian-transhumanism
"A future where all mankind’s problems are solved (no tears, no pain, no struggle for existence, no conflict between each other), new, perfect bodies and minds, eternal life. Sounds great doesn’t it!? The only problem is that transhumanism is based on a lie; evolution. All transhumanist’s hopes and dreams are built on a foundation believing “molecules to man” evolution being a real thing.

Just like the Technocrat Thorstein Veblen, they have designed their theories around the “positivist science” of Darwinian evolution. (Positivism is the philosophy that the only authentic knowledge is knowledge that is based on actual sense experience. Since Darwinian evolution has not been observed (so isn’t scientific in the sense of being repeatable) and that positivism itself is not derived from a sensory experience, these ideas are based on a completely false foundations to begin with. It is the same old deception from Satan saying “ … you will be like God … ” back in the Garden of Eden.

Have you been assimilated?

The concept of evolution is being constantly implanted into the consciousness of mankind. Similar to the victims of the Borg in Star Trek where the truth of who the victim was rewritten over the individuals true identity, once someone has been implanted with the concept of evolution, they can quickly get assimilated into an anti-God philosophy and be hard to lead back to truth.

Mankind’s greatest hopes and dreams can indeed be achieved, but not by himself. People can be free one day of all tears, pain, mourning and even death. They will have a new incorruptible body and will live in paradise, but not because of what we will have done, but because of what our Savior Jesus Christ has done.

But this promise will not be given to everyone. It will only be extended to those that have repented of their sin and put their faith in Jesus Christ, the Creator, Sustainer and Redeemer of the Universe."

Transhumanism—mankind’s next step forward? Will mankind evolve into a perfect being? by Calvin Smith
http://creation.com/transhumanism

beccaj, The Christian Post 21 Comments [10/8/2015 3:46:08 AM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 113451

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork. Day unto day utters speech, And night unto night reveals knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard. Their line has gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world." (Psalm 19)

It's been only about 100 years since mankind found out that there are numerous number of galaxies in the space. Thank God the Earth (the solar system) is located in such a part of the Milky Way Galaxy where outside view is possible. Otherwise, we'd not know the existence of other galaxies or even survive if located in gassy parts on Milky Way. Micro worlds are another universe mankind cannot reach in tangible ways. There are no exactly same sand grains or exactly the same snow flakes. The number is truly staggering in our world which God created for us.

As amazing as the universes are around us, more profound and vital and eternal is the Holy Bible, the word of God. Why does Earth's mankind have it? We could have only myths that we can dismiss, but the Holy Bible and Israel stand forever on Planet Earth and none of them comply with the atheists or sugar (false gospels) lovers. In that sense, both behave like God's physical worlds. What is made by God never submits to natural men. And wonderous things happen here through the Church on Planet Earth. The Son of God was upon the Earth once before, He will do that again, changing the structure of all the universes including the Heaven.

Grace Kim Kwon, The Christian Post 29 Comments [10/8/2015 3:45:44 AM]
Fundie Index: 11

Quote# 113450

Pastor James McConnell shouldn't have been singled out. So many people do far more horrible things against Christianity in the West. The Western nations have double standards against the Christians. They think it's okay to single out the gentle harmless all-time-loving Christians for bullying but protect others as if such gross partiality is something noble, although they are being far better-off on earth only because of what their Christian ancestors had created. People desire Europe and America only because the European Christians have created superb nations for everyone to live in. Children who are bad to their own good parents are actually not being good to anyone. UK should stop taking advantage of Christianity but show more respect to the Christians

Grace Kim Kwon, The Christian Post 13 Comments [10/8/2015 3:45:05 AM]
Fundie Index: 8