Quote# 83513

Brothers and Sisters , I have been seriously considering forming a ( Christian ) grassroots type of organization to be named "The Christian National Registry of Atheists" or something similar . I mean , think about it . There are already National Registrys for convicted sex offenders , ex-convicts , terrorist cells , hate groups like the KKK , skinheads , radical Islamists , etc..

Pastor Mike Stahl, Pastor Mike's Blog 106 Comments [8/31/2011 3:35:32 AM]
Fundie Index: 123
Submitted By: crisisking

Quote# 83495

The question remains: is Gov. Perry right?

What follows is a straightforward, four-step refutation of the theory of evolution. The steps are easy to remember, and make a nice little cadence when spoken with a little rhythm: First Law, Second Law, Fossils and Genes. Armed with this truth, go forth and conquer.

[later on]


Before we even start, we ought to notice that, if evolution is true, there would be no way to know it. Because evolution teaches that everything that exists is the product of the random collision of atoms, this logically includes the thoughts I am thinking about evolution. But if my thoughts are the product of the random collision of atoms, there is no reason to think that any of them are true — they just are.

No one "random collision of atoms" can be said to be truer than another, any more than one randomly generated Rorschach ink blot can be said to be more correct than another.

As J.B.S. Haldane famously observed, "If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motion of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms."

All right, here we go.

First Law of Thermodynamics. This law (note: not a theory but a scientific law) teaches us that matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In other words, an honest scientist will tell you that there is nothing in the observable universe that can explain either the origin of energy or matter. By logical extension, then, matter and energy had to come into being by some force outside the universe.

What this means, then, is that science simply has no explanation for the most basic question that could possibly be asked: why is there something rather than nothing?

Creationists and Intelligent Design advocates have an answer to this question; evolutionists do not.

When you see a turtle on a fence post, what's the one thing you know? Somebody put him there. When you see a world hanging in space, what's the one thing you know? Someone hung it there.

It's futile to resort to the big bang theory, as some evolutionists are wont to do. They say they have an explanation for the origin of the universe: it began when a ball of incredibly dense matter exploded and flung the universe into existence. Okay, fine. Now: where did that incredibly dense ball of matter come from?

Even Aristotle saw that behind the existence of the universe had to be what he called a Prime Mover or an Unmoved Mover. If everything is the result of secondary causes, nothing would ever actually happen. Some great power had to be a primary cause of life, motion, energy, and existence.

If you walk into an office and you see one of those toys with the steel balls swinging left to right, right to left, virtually endlessly, the one thing you will know for an absolute certainty is that some force outside that toy had to start the whole thing by lifting the first ball and releasing it to clack against the others. The process you observe could not possibly have started all by itself.

Creation Science and Intelligent Design theory offers a Prime Mover, evolution does not.

Bryan Fischer, Rightly Concerned 69 Comments [8/31/2011 3:18:56 AM]
Fundie Index: 69
Submitted By: anon87311

Quote# 83412

He [Richard Dawkins] claims to be a scientist yet he fails to find God through his science, which is so obvious to see, what with the Big Bang and failure of evolution and all. That is because incomplete knowledge of science makes one an atheist and complete knowledge of it makes one a Muslim.

Zaynub Zafar, Facebook 39 Comments [8/31/2011 3:17:11 AM]
Fundie Index: 82

Quote# 83503

Is heliocentricity an anti-Christian hoax and the "official" adoption of the Copernican model a slap in the face of established religion?
Astrology has for ages used the geocentric model with no problems so I think if there was a problem with it, the practitioners of astrology would have switched a long time ago.
Ptolemy came up with a good model based on what would have been good science of his day and it was used for a long time.
Most astronomers were resistant to the Copernican model when it came out.
Newtonian gravitation does not really work perfectly to describe the motions of the planets.
Galileo and the invention of the telescope are touted by the adherents of the Copernican model as the death nell to geocentrism but all it proved was that the inner planets, Mercury and Venus, orbit the sun, as can be deduced by the phases similar to what the moon experiences. Mercury is a small rock, and the large Venus is gaseous, so no great mass is required to hold them.
The earth has a very dense core and is enough to hold the sun, which is not much more than a hollow plasma field, in orbit.
Jeffrey Grupp is offering a $200 reward to someone who can prove that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around. So there must be something to this, and people may want to rethink their notions about our world and the people living on it, who are the crowning achievement of God's creation and that we were put into the center of that creation.

jmdewey60, Above Top Secret 86 Comments [8/30/2011 3:39:03 AM]
Fundie Index: 120

Quote# 83496

[The rest of the brochure is equally disturbing]

Homosexuality, Islam, and abortion have
something in common. They are three
different colored gloves covering the same
fist. Abortion is a crimson glove (stained
with the blood of our pre-born children).
Homosexuality is a pink glove (stained with
the blood of young men and women given
over to their own lust, and stained with the
blood of nations that approve of such
behavior). Islam is a black glove (stained
with the blood of Christians, Jews, and
anyone else who dares disagree with the false
“god” Allah and his demon possessed
prophet Mohammed). Three different
colored gloves, yet the same fist. It is the fist
of him who robs, kills, and destroys. That’s
right, I’m talking about the devil himself!
We are not unaware of his schemes.

Operation Save America, Operation Save America 78 Comments [8/30/2011 3:37:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 87
Submitted By: Evelyn

Quote# 83488

Science has no moral value, so in science there is no such thing as evil. If we are going to hand our Nation over to science as our God, abandoning our roots in the Bible we are going to end up with something that no good man can stand to live in, as no innocence or possesion will not be exploited and destroyed for anothers mans pleasure.

Science does not believe in innocence, love, joy, peace or God.

Those things are not scientific, and cannot be measured. However science, and our government is interested in the levels of attraction gay men have for what lengths of penis. That is measureable and is worth spending millions of tax dollars on.

Like Bob Dillon said, “You gotta serve somebody, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord, but your gonna have to serve somebody.

We better decide who we really want to serve. As another singer said, “When people decide to come out of the Closet rather than clean it, its a sign the judgement of God is going to fall.”

Lets clean up our acts guys, freedom is not more vauable than morality. If there is no morality, nobody is free.

American in Israel, Free Republic 69 Comments [8/29/2011 1:10:04 PM]
Fundie Index: 81

Quote# 83487

Anyone with half a brain knew that once the homos defeated marriage and parental influence on their children’s morals and values to embrace adult homosexual indoctrination (in the name of comprehensive sex education), the “right” to an adult/child sexual oreintation was coming up next.

Homos are absoultely sexually obsessed with the young and beautiful bodies of children and they get excited over imposing themselves on other people’s children where they can’t do anything, legally, about it. Engineering legal sexual dominance over heterosexual adults is a sexual thrill.

SaraJohnson, Free Republic 69 Comments [8/29/2011 1:07:36 PM]
Fundie Index: 83
Submitted By: Rabbit of Caerbannog

Quote# 83483

There are numerous evidences of and for creation. Take the Bible for instance. Take creation itself for instance.
If evolution were true, vampires, werewolves would exist. They don't. How do you account for that?

Knightmare, Topix: Evolution vs. Creation 130 Comments [8/28/2011 5:21:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 217
Submitted By: Kong

Quote# 83477

(From a man who attempted to set fire to a mosque)

"You look like Obama. You are a Muslim like him," a court document quotes Crawford as telling an officer after he was arrested on Dec. 14 for a charge unrelated to the firebombing. "Jihad goes both ways. Christians can jihad too."

Cody Crawford, TPM 51 Comments [8/28/2011 5:17:42 AM]
Fundie Index: 81
Submitted By: Stormwarden

Quote# 83461

[Discussing special relativity, one user argues that the speed of light is constant, because otherwise the light-year would not be a consistently defined unit of distance.]

Empirical data suggest that the speed of light has changed over time, and as recently as 1/6th of the universe's lifetime.

You comments, like "distances were measured in ... light-years, and that only makes sense if the speed is constant," is a political statement, not a scientific one. Likewise for stating that "finding a variable c would now violate so much physics ...." Is this what university science has become - ignoring the data to preserve the reputation of some current and past professors?

Andrew Schlafly, Conservapedia 50 Comments [8/28/2011 5:07:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 79
Submitted By: Wehpudicabok

Quote# 83450

It is past time to admit a very hard truth: America’s poverty problem is also a depravity problem[...]

For many, many years I spent time “in the trenches” reaching out to at-risk youth. At first I was the stereotypical naive idealist. ”All they need is love and a chance,” I thought. Working in mentoring programs, I spent untold hours playing catch, going to little league games, going to parks, and just hanging out with at-risk kids as part of a variety of programs. Seeing ragged clothes, I’d buy new clothes. Hearing that a mother couldn’t pay the light bill, I’d kick in and help. I spent night after night sleeping in homeless shelters, cooking dinners in the evening, pancake breakfasts in the morning, and fixing snack lunches for hard days on the streets.

I can’t remember when I first realized that I was accomplishing nothing of substance. A few car break-ins taught me that some guys saw me as an easy mark. A few pot purchases with the “gas bill money” taught me that others saw me as an ATM. Admonitions to “stay in school” had little appeal compared to drug-fueled orgies for kids as young as fifteen years old. I tried. God knows I tried. But it was all for naught.

Only one thing really worked. The Cross. There are kids today that Nancy and I worked with who are doing well, who are happily married, and who are pillars of their community. What made the difference for them? The Cross. It wasn’t about my words. It wasn’t about my effort. (After all, I tried just as hard or harder with other kids — who are now in prison or “baby-daddies” or both.) The kids who made it heard the Gospel, repented of sin, and were transformed through the renewing work of the Holy Spirit.

It’s trendy now for churches to put less emphasis on the Gospel and more emphasis on service. I’ve even heard Christians almost brag that their outreach efforts don’t include any proselytizing at all. This is tragic. Billions of dollars of “service” won’t change hearts and lives. We know that now. In fact, those very billions may very well numb the human heart to the gravity of its sin.

So, yes, let’s do “more,” but let’s make sure that “more” is aimed at the real source of American poverty — our depravity.

David French, patheos 42 Comments [8/28/2011 5:02:19 AM]
Fundie Index: 54

Quote# 83436

Virtually every day, Barack Hussein Obama is committing multiple treasons and high treasons against the United States of America. And STILL he is allowed to do so with nary a scolding...or a whimper. Nothing is ever done to stop him. Isn't it time for us to do so? Isn't it?

Who or what group might be willing to organize a few massive marches on D.C., and especially Congress, to stop this insanity and destruction of our country, our lives, and everything that — by the grace of God — we Americans have built or hold dear? Otherwise, there seems to be no other solution except violent civil unrest.

Even dyed-in-the-wool Democrat James Carville has said: "You know, look...you're smart enough to see this. People, you know, if it continues, we're going to start to see civil unrest in this country. I hate to say that, but I think it's imminently possible."

"And all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?" (Revelation 13:3-5).

Sher Zieve, Renew America 90 Comments [8/26/2011 4:00:54 PM]
Fundie Index: 85
Submitted By: Rabbit of Caerbannog

Quote# 83426

(RE: Divorce, in response the question, "What if one spouse is abusive? Towards the other spouse AND the kids?")

1 Cor. 7:10-11 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

What can I say? We do not have to be treated kindly to stay with our spouse. We can endure some hardship. But if you or the children are really in danger, find another place to stay until things can be worked out. You are not to leave your husband, and if you must be apart for a time, always be ready for reconciliation. Living apart because of danger is not necessarily Leaving your husband, I don't think. But again, we can meekly endure some things, we don't need to seek escape simply because he is unkind in speech or action.

I hope I was clear here. There is an epidemic of wives leaving their husbands when the Bible plainly says, Let not the wife depart from her husband. Put your full trust in Jesus, surrender everything and every situation to him and let him teach you. If you want to obey Jesus, he will make a way for you, If you want a loophole, well, there are plenty.



Joanna, Obedient to my Husband 88 Comments [8/26/2011 3:59:34 PM]
Fundie Index: 114

Quote# 83418

[East Coast of US has moderate earthquake]
I'm late to the game, but it's a gorgeous day here in Northern VA, had the windows open, fan going, and I'd just nodded off for a little nap when the earth started shaking. The dishes in the china cabinet rattled a bit, a box of cereal fell off the top of the fridge, and a kitchen drawer was opened a little. Other than that it was business as usual. Wasn't frightened at all, in fact, I was hoping it had something to do with the "dead in Christ rising first" and we were going Home. Unfortunately, it wasn't. But, I think it's another sign that Jesus pointed to that would be happening in the last days - earthquakes in divers places because when you think of earthquakes, you don't immediately think of VA.


SummerSailing81, Rapture Ready 102 Comments [8/25/2011 3:24:54 AM]
Fundie Index: 83

Quote# 83409

Every Christian since the dawn of time has always known that God has a Penis. I tried to clarify that fact for ignorant atheists who mis-stated the fact, and falsely claimed that I said God was biological, which is something that I never said.

You and your cabal of atheist pals - most of whom are thieves and stalkers - may laugh it up because you are immature, but that's the truth and that's what the Bible says. If you were mature than you would not find it hilarious every time someone says "Penis," and you would not mock God's Word. But as a Bible denialist who serves mammon rather than God, that is of course not what you do.

Navaros, IMDB 134 Comments [8/24/2011 3:56:44 PM]
Fundie Index: 155
Submitted By: Dr. Flibble

Quote# 83406

If we were to write down all the sexual arrangements — excuse me, "lifestyles" — that could be named, and then organize them by similarity, marriage and homosexual behavior would be about as far apart on the paper as we could place them. On the left side of the page would be sodomy, lesbianism, bestiality, pedophilia, orgies and casual "hookups." Way over on the right side all by themselves would be celibacy and marriage.

On this continuum, polygamy would be closer to monogamous marriage than homosexual behavior would be. And I suppose I need to say here that I am not endorsing polygamy in the slightest. God created Adam, then formed Eve — not Eve, Rita, Mabel and Betty. Yes, polygamy was condoned in the Old Testament, but if we take time to read the narratives we'll learn that it invariably brought alarming consequences. The point is that, even when our Creator allowed polygamy, He condemned same-sex sex.

One objection to "gay marriage" is that, if homosexual commitments are to be called marriage, then there's no reason to deny marriage to any collection of people, animals, or other beings. Once the paradigm is about "rights" being "denied," rather than qualifications being recognized, there is no logical limit to the differences that can be declared "equal."

This has been dismissed as a "slippery slope" argument, but it isn't. On a slippery slope, polygamy would be much higher on the hill than the matrimony of two persons of the same sex. A slippery slope argument would be, If we allow one man to marry several women, it won't be long before one woman wants to marry several men. And if both of those are OK, what is to prevent two men from marrying two women? In that case, the two men are married to each other (as well as to the women), and we will have arrived at homosexual marriage. Going from "gay marriage" to polygamy would be moving up the moral slope. That is not this argument. This argument is that if the term "marriage" has no fixed meaning, then it has no fixed meaning. If you may revise the English language to suit your lusts, then on what basis can you say that others may not do the same? If a tail is henceforth to be called a leg, then a tongue surely is a kind of tail, and an ear will be discovered to be a tongue, and a dog is of course a rhinoceros.

But making nonsense of the language won't magically legitimize immorality.

Dan Popp, Renew America 81 Comments [8/24/2011 3:53:57 PM]
Fundie Index: 89
Submitted By: Rabbit of Caerbannog

Quote# 83388

For 40 years, this country has endured a social movement that has been relentless in its goals. Women on the left believe the feminist movement is responsible for liberating women from constricted lives; women on the right see things differently. Feminists are consumed with their place in society; conservative women are not. They are especially uninterested in fighting a gender war. That's why the Submission Question could be asked only of a conservative female candidate. It's women on the right, we're told, who want to keep women in their place. Conservative women are anti-woman.

So what to do when faced with a female candidate who's conservative and popular? Why, portray her as a religious nut and a doormat, of course! Indeed, feminists know most women won't identify with that kind of woman. And they're right: they won't. Women on the left don't appreciate that traditional values, even Biblical values, are not at odds with female empowerment. No matter what you think of Bachmann or Sarah Palin, these women have proved this in spades. No one gets to their position by being oppressed or mousy.

For the first time in decades, the liberal feminist establishment is up against something new: outspoken conservative women who undermine the feminist agenda. Conservative women are supposed to stay home! Conservative women are supposed to lead nice, traditional lives: raise a gaggle of children, be subordinate to their husbands and stay out of the public sphere. Why are they asserting their independent minds?

…

The implication that Michele Bachmann is a Stepford wife in disguise was a pitiful attempt to bring down a female conservative candidate who has sinned in the worst way possible: She does not carry the feminist torch. And, yet, she still won the Iowa straw poll.

Perhaps feminism really is dead.

Suzanne Venker, Real Clear Politics 68 Comments [8/24/2011 3:23:01 AM]
Fundie Index: 53

Quote# 83368

Ellettsville gun seller arrested after tipoff, 7 month investigation

. . .

Law enforcement received a tip in January that Donald Mullendore, 61 of Ellettsville, might be selling firearms in violation of federal law.

. . .

An informant and undercover police officers purchased seven guns illegally between January and July of this year, including a machine gun, according to the release.

No criminal background checks were issued on the purchases, as is required by federal law.

Four of the firearms were sold directly to the informant even after the informant told Mullendore that he was a convicted felon, which is against federal law.

"I destroyed all my paper and I just don’t care, I’m going to give people the guns they need. This is God’s shop and what he wants to do with it is going to happen," Mullendore said..."God always gives us the guns to sell and people who need them."

Donald Mullendore, Indiana Daily Student 69 Comments [8/23/2011 3:24:08 AM]
Fundie Index: 102
Submitted By: Burning Stake

Quote# 83365

Some might wonder which of these so called “anti-social” personality types are the most dangerous. In my opinion it is the narcissist psychopath. This is because people in general are attracted to positivity, and due to Satan blinding the world’s ability to reason morally logically and manipulating their emotions in general, they confuse good with evil, and so will even accept something hurtful that merely seems positive. A good example of how people fall into this trap to no end is how the world keeps electing clearly immoral and moronic leaders over them, for example ones who openly endorse murdering babies of all things. It’s bad to murder anyone, even an middle-aged evil person without a mental disorder, because such people can potentially be changed, and saying, “You do what you have to do,” is a bad justification, but to ENDORSE murdering a baby as acceptable, that is extremely evil. It’s usually never the end of someone’s life to have a baby. It is the duty of the mother to try and keep her baby alive, it is her child, even if forced on her. It’s also the duty of someone to care for their neighbor when their neighbor truly needs help and is not a danger to their life. Even if the neighbor may use up food that may help them to live longer, you still have a duty to feed your neighbor when they need food. Narcissist psychopaths are also a danger because of the spread of Christianity, and Christians are required to be humble (and that’s not a bad thing even to the extreme) and not to resist people who lay hands on them (except in my opinion if someone is trying to rape them). Millions of Christians would not resist a person who captures them. There are military leaders in this world who are narcopaths, who obtain an army and grow stronger by robbing and enslaving others. It’s happening now in America, which is mainly made up of Christians. Even though Catholics can be lead by their pope to be violent, they are instead being lead to be humble, in a twisted way.

So, what will happen if these corrupt forms of humans continue to grow in power and warp the minds of children? Obviously it will result in the destruction of all humans, if not all the life on the planet. If a bad enough narcopath obtains control over many nuclear missiles, and obtains dictatorship status, there is a high possibility that he or she will destroy this planet.

knight, Knight's Christian Commentaries and Worldwide News 52 Comments [8/23/2011 3:07:40 AM]
Fundie Index: 72

Quote# 83360

Evolution of WOOD
Can an evolutionist please explain to me how and why WOOD evolved????

FACT: Plants are made of leaves and stems and do not contain any wood.

Evolutionists claim that trees did not evolve for 15 million years after the first plants appeared.

So why did it take so long for wood to evolve why plants would have benefited from having a height advantage over their competitors from the moment they first appeared???


Garvan Elison, http://garvanellison.blogspot.com/ 109 Comments [8/22/2011 3:16:49 AM]
Fundie Index: 148

Quote# 83170

"In my own life as a black youth growing up in the segregated South, I understand their frustration with stereotypes. Those in attendance, like most Muslim Americans, are peaceful Muslims and patriotic Americans whose good will is often drowned out by the reprehensible actions of jihadists."

So said presidential candidate Herman Cain, as he apologized for speaking the truth.

He spoke out against Shariah. He said that local people could and should resist the construction of Islamic supremacist mega-mosques. And it's true: It is not an infringement of the freedom of religion to resist a Muslim Brotherhood beachhead in your neighborhood.

…

So we thought Cain knew and understood the jihad threat. But now it turns out that his seemingly strong stance was just knee-jerk political opportunism.

…

What Cain doesn't understand is that his lack of spine and political will and conviction has done more to hurt the counter-jihad movement than had he not said anything at all. Muslims like blacks in the segregated South? Please. Muslims face no discrimination in the United States, and black in the segregated South were not plotting terror attacks and boasting about "eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within," as a captured internal Muslim Brotherhood document describes its strategy in America.

Who exactly is whispering in his ear? I'd love to know. Who got to him? Obviously, the ADAMS Center connection shows that the Muslim Brotherhood got to him. But it's a good thing we found out how weak he was. Because the only thing Herman Cain had going for him as a candidate was his apparent courage in facing the real enemy within and without. In issuing this apology, he thought he saved his candidacy; in fact, he killed it.

Pamela Geller, WND 51 Comments [8/21/2011 7:46:18 AM]
Fundie Index: 73

Quote# 83338



Tony Perkins, Joe. My. God. 82 Comments [8/21/2011 7:41:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 153
Submitted By: Aspergus

Quote# 83310

If I am shopping and the Clerk is LGBST. I find the manager and tell them “ Sorry but due to the fact you hire LGBST, I will no longer shop here.

It will just take a few people to stand up against the LGBST and say we will not spend our money to support thier life style and the stores will get the message.

troy McClure, Free Republic 126 Comments [8/20/2011 6:31:10 AM]
Fundie Index: 167
Submitted By: slyguy

Quote# 83300

The innocence of a child should not be required to wrestle with the complexities involving same-sex orientation. Nor should a parent be forced to educate their child on these issues before that child is mature enough to understand and cope with those complexities. Unfortunately, the current culture is going to force parents and church leaders to address the issues surrounding homosexuality and same-sex marriage with younger and younger kids. When Tommy comes home from preschool and asks, “Why does my friend Jennifer have two daddies?” we must be ready to provide sound answers grounded in compassion and truth. Theirs will be a generation that must face an assault upon their innocence unlike any generation before.

Jeff Buchanan, Joe. My. God. 82 Comments [8/20/2011 5:24:28 AM]
Fundie Index: 58
Submitted By: Aspergus

Quote# 83288

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has suggested gay marriage is to blame for America's economic woes.

In a radio interview on Catholic Radio San Diego to pitch his book A Nation Like No Other, his short film Nine Days that Changed the World, and his wife Callista Gingrich's upcoming children's book Sweet Land of Liberty, host Charles Limandri asked Gingrich why he believed “radical secularists” are attacking the family.

“The concept of family being between man and woman and the concept of all these core values that grow out of 3,000 years of Judeo-Christian tradition,” Gingrich answered. “This is a direct threat to the entire secular world.”

“We're becoming increasingly secular, the family is under attack and economically we're experiencing woes like we've never known in our history it seems. So what is the connection here?” Limandri asked.

“You have to recognize that free enterprise is based on free people and … free people are based on faith,” Gingrich replied. “The very basis of our belief and freedom is that we believe we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights. The very source of our strength is that we believe these are truths – not theories, not ideologies, not gimmicks, not political consultants, powerpoints – truths, and so there's a core absolute overlap between free enterprise, freedom and freedom of faith. And if you don't have freedom of faith in the end you're not going to have free enterprise because there's no moral force that defends and protects you.”

Newt Gingrich, On Top Magazine 76 Comments [8/20/2011 5:22:40 AM]
Fundie Index: 80