Christian Cowards and Hypocrites
John Manning
Christian Cowards: Why Don't Evangelical Leaders Condemn the Hate
Spouted by Right-Wingers?
By Frank Schaeffer, *former* Christian Right founder/activist
Since when does loving Jesus mean you have to hate our President?
Prominent Christians should denounce the violently aggressive language
right-wingers use to tear down Obama.
Excerpt:
There will always be hate-filled nuts on the fringe of any movement;
left, right, religious or secular. No one in leadership should be blamed
for their fringe -- unless they don't speak up. Post "Tea Parties",
"Obama isn't a real American", and all the rest it is strange and
disturbing to witness the silence of the evangelical leadership in the
light of so much venom directed against our President by a largely
evangelical Republican base.
This is shocking to me, given that for much of my life I was not just
the son of a famous evangelical leader (Francis Schaeffer -- "credited"
by Max Blumenthal and others as a founder of the religious right) but
for a time I was also his sidekick and a leader in the evangelical world
in my own right.
I quit over the slide of the religious right into extremism. That said
I'm still a believing Christian (non-evangelical and progressive) and to
see the name of Christ used to promote hate outrages me. To see the
Bible used as a political bumper sticker source (for whatever "side") is
an affront.
You would have thought that evangelical leaders with their oft trumpeted
respect for the Bible would have spoken out in one loud united voice
against the misappropriation of the Bible when a verse from the Psalms
(109:8) was used recently on T-shirts and bumper stickers in a way that
seemed to call for the removal (at best) and the death (at worst) of Obama.
Here�s what is in the Psalm they quote as part of a "prayer" for Obama:
"May his days be few; may another take his office!"
Here are what the other verses in that Psalm call for (in case you
didn't "get" verse 8:
Verse 9 "May his children be fatherless and his wife a widow!"
...The media need to ask tougher questions. The religious leadership
needs to be put on the spot.
Is loving Jesus about hating our President? Is "respecting the Bible"
using it as a mine from which to take prayers for death and destruction
and bandy them about in the context of lies about our government? Is
this moral leadership?
Full article at link: http://snipurl.com/tldk6 [www_alternet_org]
Logan Sacket
>Here�s what is in the Psalm they quote as part of a "prayer" for Obama:
>
>"May his days be few; may another take his office!"
>
>
>Here are what the other verses in that Psalm call for (in case you
>didn't "get" verse 8:
>
>Verse 9 "May his children be fatherless and his wife a widow!"
>
>
>...The media need to ask tougher questions. The religious leadership
>needs to be put on the spot.
>
>Is loving Jesus about hating our President? Is "respecting the Bible"
>using it as a mine from which to take prayers for death and destruction
>and bandy them about in the context of lies about our government? Is
>this moral leadership?
>
>Full article at link: http://snipurl.com/tldk6 [www_alternet_org]
I don't think that Christians hate him, they just want to stop this
Socialist crap and get him the hell out of the White House.
NefeshBarYohai
>
> - Show quoted text -
Amen
Ike E 11/23/9
"John Manning" <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote in message
news:g7KdnTlZstWfloDW...@giganews.com...
[snip]
> There will always be hate-filled nuts on the fringe of any movement; left,
> right, religious or secular. No one in leadership should be blamed for
> their fringe -- unless they don't speak up.
Barak Obama IS "the fringe," you idiot.
[snip]
Ike
Rod
He is talking about rightards like you Ike, you facist scum lapping
shitdog.
L.Roberts
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't think... - Logan Sacket
L.Roberts
Atheist
Ike E 11/23/9
"Rod" <spa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hfmoav$tff$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
LOL
Does BO come from a mainstream church?
NO. He comes from a liberation theology cult church.
Does BO come from a WORKING MAN'S BACKGROUND?
NO. He comes from a rich FOREIGN family.
Does BO come from AMERICAN ideals?
NO. He comes from A SOCIALIST/TOTALITARIAN BACKGROUND PICKED UP IN
SOCIALIST/TOTALITARIAN COUNTRIES.
Does BO come from a mainstream state?
NO. He comes from HAWAII (which is practically a foreign country).
Does BO believe in capitalism and private enterprise?
NO, HE IS A STUDENT OF MARXISM/CAPITALISM.
And so on, and so forth.
In OTHER words, BO IS THE FRINGE, you idiot.
Ike
Rod
From where I'm standing, the BO is coming from you, MORON.
Ike E 11/23/9
Notice no attempt to address the points.
Ike
Logan Sacket
We can see that.
John Manning
Ask Ike, the fundy Christian with scrambled brains, about his addiction
to porn.
haiku jones
> Rod wrote:
> > Ike E 11/23/9 wrote:
> >> "Rod" <spa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>news:hfmoav$tff$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
> >>> Ike E 11/23/9 wrote:
Porn is for the most part harmless.
However, an addiction to making up your own reality,
as we see Ike doing above...well, that can be
very serious indeed.
Haiku Jones
John Manning
It's the obvious hypocrisy of the ignorant right wing anti-gay,
abstinence-only sex police Christian Right "family values" crowd that
stands out.
Reminds me of this quote:
"Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you
and you're going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most
awful, filthy thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love."
~~ Butch Hancock
Ike E 12/10/2009
???
You making shit up again, oh, fraudulent one?
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
"haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0962a52e-05b3-4735...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 10, 10:02 am, John Manning <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> Rod wrote:
>>> Ike E 11/23/9 wrote:
[snip]
>>>> Does BO come from a mainstream church?
>
>>>> NO. He comes from a liberation theology cult church.
>
>>>> Does BO come from a WORKING MAN'S BACKGROUND?
>
>>>> NO. He comes from a rich FOREIGN family.
>
>>>> Does BO come from AMERICAN ideals?
>
>>>> NO. He comes from A SOCIALIST/TOTALITARIAN BACKGROUND PICKED UP IN
>>>> SOCIALIST/TOTALITARIAN COUNTRIES.
>
>>>> Does BO come from a mainstream state?
>
>>>> NO. He comes from HAWAII (which is practically a foreign country).
>
>>>> Does BO believe in capitalism and private enterprise?
>
>>>> NO, HE IS A STUDENT OF MARXISM/CAPITALISM.
>
>>>> And so on, and so forth.
>
>>>> In OTHER words, BO IS THE FRINGE, you idiot.
[snip]
> Porn is for the most part harmless.
> However, an addiction to making up your own reality,
> as we see Ike doing above...well, that can be
> very serious indeed.
Cite one thing above that isn't true.
THAT'S the reality.
Ike
haiku jones
wrote:
> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Oh, I'd like you to support just about
any of the above: that Obama is
a student of Marxism, that his ideals
derive from totalitarianism, that his
church taught liberation theology --
even that Hawaii (pretty much Las Vegas
with a nice ocean view) is not a
"mainstream state" -- whatever THAT
may mean.
Und so weiter...
Haiku Jones
ykr...@oohay.com
Yank ur crank a lot, do you Ike ??
Ike E 12/10/2009
> that his ideals
> derive from totalitarianism
Marxist REQUIRES totalitarianism, you ass.
> , that his
> church taught liberation theology --
Do you even know what Liberation Theology is, dumbass?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,256078,00.html
http://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/2007/03/obamas-marxist-liberation-theology.html
> even that Hawaii (pretty much Las Vegas
> with a nice ocean view) is not a
> "mainstream state" -- whatever THAT
> may mean.
It means Obama has nothing in common with the vast majority of Americans.
It means Obama has nothing in common with Christians.
It means Obama isn't even INTERESTED in American ideals like self-reliance
and maximum liberty.
It means Obama is barely an American.
How some people could be so blind as to not see this, I have NO idea...
...but I wouldn't be expecting it to happen again anytime soon.
There are a lot of people, especially independents, who are now asking
themselves "what the hell did we do?"
Ike
haiku jones
So? He gravitated towards a wide spectrum of political
activists according to your own post. This does not
make him a 'student of Marxism".
>
> > that his ideals
> > derive from totalitarianism
>
> Marxist REQUIRES totalitarianism, you ass.
Actually, you ass, Marx predictes a revolution
of the proletariat against the ruling class: exactly
the opposite ot totalitarianism.
>
> > , that his
> > church taught liberation theology --
>
> Do you even know what Liberation Theology is, dumbass?
Sure do, dumbass. I've been a fan of the Catholic priests in Latin
America who attempted to better the lot of the poor
against the interests of the dicatators for a long time
now. And by the way, "liberation theology" and
"Marxist liberation theology" are not synonyms;
There is more than one flavor. But the centrel
tenet is to do as Jesus commanded when it
comes to the poor.
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,256078,00.html
>
> http://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/2007/03/obamas-marxist-liberation-th...
>
> > > Does BO come from a mainstream state?
> > > NO. He comes from HAWAII (which is practically a foreign country).
> > even that Hawaii (pretty much Las Vegas
> > with a nice ocean view) is not a
> > "mainstream state" -- whatever THAT
> > may mean.
>
> It means Obama has nothing in common with the vast majority of Americans.
>
> It means Obama has nothing in common with Christians.
>
> It means Obama isn't even INTERESTED in American ideals like self-reliance
> and maximum liberty.
>
> It means Obama is barely an American.
>
> How some people could be so blind as to not see this, I have NO idea...
Damn! You're right! How could I have been so blind as
to fail to see that Hawaians are un-Christian freedom-hating
welfare-sops who are barely American?
My bad.
Haiku Jones
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:6cdb2ac0-bff2-4b5a...@u8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 10, 11:54 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>>> news:0962a52e-05b3-4735...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Dec 10, 10:02 am, John Manning <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>
>>>> Rod wrote:
>>>>>> Ike E 11/23/9 wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>>
>> Oh, I'd like you to support just about
>> any of the above: that Obama is
>> a student of Marxism,
>
>http://needsofthemany.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/obama-admits-he-sought-friendship-with-marxist-professors/
Making friends does not mean he was embracing that philosophy. Maybe
he wanted a healthy debate partner. Is this "politics makes strange
bedfellows?"
>
>> that his ideals
>> derive from totalitarianism
>
>Marxist REQUIRES totalitarianism, you ass.
Marxism may require totalitarianism but if the first point is moot
then I think the second is as well.
>
>> , that his
>> church taught liberation theology --
>
>Do you even know what Liberation Theology is, dumbass?
Who cares? JFK caused a brouhaha by being catholic.
>
>> even that Hawaii (pretty much Las Vegas
>> with a nice ocean view) is not a
>> "mainstream state" -- whatever THAT
>> may mean.
>
>It means Obama has nothing in common with the vast majority of Americans.
That is crap. He has nothing in common with you and I ever so
grateful.
You didn't vote for him. I get that. What I don't get is your
spoilsport behavior.
You lost. Get over it already.
>
>It means Obama has nothing in common with Christians.
>
That is crap too. He is not the anti-Christ.
>It means Obama isn't even INTERESTED in American ideals like self-reliance
>and maximum liberty.
You are so full of it. You want to share American outmoded ideas like
second-class citizenship for anyone who isn't male, white and
protestant?
>
>It means Obama is barely an American.
Well spoil sport. Elect your own leader then. (bin Laden is out there
somewhere.) YOu two have a lot in common.
>
>How some people could be so blind as to not see this, I have NO idea...
>
I am sure glad you are not in charge.
>...but I wouldn't be expecting it to happen again anytime soon.
>
Awwww. Sorry, McCain has too much PTSD to be effective. If it hadn't
happened that way, you would be complaining about him and crowing that
no black man is fit to be president.
>There are a lot of people, especially independents, who are now asking
>themselves "what the hell did we do?"
So change it. That is what elections are for you know.
>
>Ike
>
You can please some of the people all the time
and all of the people some of the time
but you cannot please all the people all of the time.
That means someone is always going to be unhappy.
LV
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
When the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank."
---Sympathy for the Devil-The Rolling Stones
--------------------------------------------
"Some people are only alive because it is
illegal to kill them."
---Anonymous
----------------------------------------------
How does your idiocy measure up?
My Blog http://ladyveteranslog.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------
Are you being harassed on Usenet and want to fight
back instead of leaving the net? Are you willing to
stand up to Internet bullies and stalkers?
Join my group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antiCHU
----------------------------------------------
"I am mad as hell and I will not take it anymore!"
---Network
Ike E 12/10/2009
"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:5l36i5lk386r6hkcg...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:50:06 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:6cdb2ac0-bff2-4b5a...@u8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Dec 10, 11:54 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> news:0962a52e-05b3-4735...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Dec 10, 10:02 am, John Manning <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Rod wrote:
>>>>>>> Ike E 11/23/9 wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, I'd like you to support just about
>>> any of the above: that Obama is
>>> a student of Marxism,
>>
>>http://needsofthemany.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/obama-admits-he-sought-friendship-with-marxist-professors/
>
> Making friends does not mean he was embracing that philosophy. Maybe
> he wanted a healthy debate partner. Is this "politics makes strange
> bedfellows?"
Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out Marxist
professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
>>> that his ideals
>>> derive from totalitarianism
>>
>>Marxist REQUIRES totalitarianism, you ass.
>
> Marxism may require totalitarianism but if the first point is moot
> then I think the second is as well.
And the first point WASN'T moot, so neither is the second.
>>> , that his
>>> church taught liberation theology --
>>
>>Do you even know what Liberation Theology is, dumbass?
>
> Who cares? JFK caused a brouhaha by being catholic.
You would be stupid enough to equate the two.
>>> even that Hawaii (pretty much Las Vegas
>>> with a nice ocean view) is not a
>>> "mainstream state" -- whatever THAT
>>> may mean.
>>
>>It means Obama has nothing in common with the vast majority of Americans.
>
> That is crap.
Really?
Show me what BO has in common with THE MAJORITY of Americans.
> He has nothing in common with you and I ever so
> grateful.
What? An American? A Vet? A Christian?
You're right: BO DOESN'T have these things in common with me.
> You didn't vote for him. I get that. What I don't get is your
> spoilsport behavior.
"Spoilsport" has nothing to do with it, you ass.
SAVING AMERICANISM does.
> You lost. Get over it already.
Just goes to show that we're all one step away from Tyranny.
>>It means Obama has nothing in common with Christians.
>>
>
> That is crap too.
Like I asked, do you know ANYTHING about Liberation Theology?
> He is not the anti-Christ.
There are many "antichrists."
And one kind is someone who thinks he or she can sit on the fence between
the Word of Truth and the lies of the other religions of the world in the
name of false peace.
>>It means Obama isn't even INTERESTED in American ideals like self-reliance
>>and maximum liberty.
>
> You are so full of it. You want to share American outmoded ideas like
> second-class citizenship for anyone who isn't male, white and
> protestant?
Notice how the fraud has to play the race and sex cards.
Nevertheless, I don't have problems with BO's race or sex--I HAVE PROBLEMS
WITH HIM AND HIS SATANIC DOCTRINES.
And do you have a problem with Protestants?
>>It means Obama is barely an American.
>
> Well spoil sport. Elect your own leader then. (bin Laden is out there
> somewhere.) YOu two have a lot in common.
Now notice how the fraud has to draw ridiculous comparisons between
Americanism and some ridiculous extremists.
>>How some people could be so blind as to not see this, I have NO idea...
>>
> I am sure glad you are not in charge.
Why? I would have this place running like a Swiss clock in no time.
>>...but I wouldn't be expecting it to happen again anytime soon.
>>
>
> Awwww. Sorry, McCain has too much PTSD to be effective. If it hadn't
> happened that way, you would be complaining about him and crowing that
> no black man is fit to be president.
???
I about cried when Colin Powell refused to run for Vice President--a great
opportunity passed us by.
Then we got saddled with this moron.
>>There are a lot of people, especially independents, who are now asking
>>themselves "what the hell did we do?"
>
> So change it. That is what elections are for you know.
Oh, it'll be changed alright.
Question is, will it be soon enough to save America?
So, is this the best you can do? Make some false accusations? Divert to
irrelevancies? Call ME un-American when it's your boy who is the Communist.
And I would like to know what the "Protestants" comment was about.
Ike
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:5l36i5lk386r6hkcg...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:50:06 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:6cdb2ac0-bff2-4b5a...@u8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Dec 10, 11:54 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> news:0962a52e-05b3-4735...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> On Dec 10, 10:02 am, John Manning <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Rod wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ike E 11/23/9 wrote:
>>>>
>>
>> Making friends does not mean he was embracing that philosophy. Maybe
>> he wanted a healthy debate partner. Is this "politics makes strange
>> bedfellows?"
>
>Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out Marxist
>professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
Oh I don't know. You want to see fraud? Look in the mirror. Is your
life so out of order that you would rather live others?
>
>>
>> Marxism may require totalitarianism but if the first point is moot
>> then I think the second is as well.
>
>And the first point WASN'T moot, so neither is the second.
Oh yes it is. Marxism is for equality for the worker and that doesn't
happen in a totalitarian state, so both points are moot.
You are such an expert in politics that pretty soon you are going to
call me a communist Nazi....you are a babe in the woods throwing a
tantrum because your guy didn't win the election.
Get over it.
>
>>
>> Who cares? JFK caused a brouhaha by being catholic.
>
>You would be stupid enough to equate the two.
According to you? Did I call your bluff? Good!
YOu are a spoil sport and an idiot.
>
>>
>> That is crap.
>
>Really?
>
>Show me what BO has in common with THE MAJORITY of Americans.
I don't have to. Besides being a part of a black majority, nothing is
obvious to you. You are just mad that he won and blew the hell out of
the "blacks are inferior and have no power" delusion that bigots have
that makes them feel so superior.
>
>> He has nothing in common with you and I ever so
>> grateful.
>
>What? An American? A Vet? A Christian?
I am an American and a veteran and a Christian but I don't base my
esteem on bigotry like you do. Obama is not a veteran but he is an
American and a Christian, even without YOU buying into the fact.
Grow up spoil sport.
>
>You're right: BO DOESN'T have these things in common with me.
Awww. You are just mad because he isn't white.
>
>> You didn't vote for him. I get that. What I don't get is your
>> spoilsport behavior.
>
>"Spoilsport" has nothing to do with it, you ass.
It has everything to do with it, you ASS.
>
>SAVING AMERICANISM does.
Americanism that includes black people knowing their place is not the
America I know. I am a Christian and I don't like most Christians.
More stupidity, bigotry and power plays have been executed in the name
of right-wing nut Christianity than any other religion in the world.
Are you one of the wing nuts harassing Mormons, Jews and Muslims?
>
>> You lost. Get over it already.
>
>Just goes to show that we're all one step away from Tyranny.
Oh yes. the same kind of Tyranny that John Wilkes Booth thought he was
stopping when he killed Lincoln.
Do try to stop progress by bad-mouthing people trying to change things
for the better. You join a long lines of idiots that thrive on keeping
a group of people down so you can feel better about yourself.
You are a bigot, just like Booth, just like the KKK, and just like
every wing nut loser that has to make himself feel good by putting
others down.
Get therapy.
>
>> That is crap too.
>
>Like I asked, do you know ANYTHING about Liberation Theology?
Theology is a belief system and that is all I need to know. We have
already established that you don't like change.
>
>> He is not the anti-Christ.
>
>There are many "antichrists."
No, there are three Anti-Christs, but there are many people who are
anti-Christ. The two are not the same. Obama is neither.
>
>And one kind is someone who thinks he or she can sit on the fence between
>the Word of Truth and the lies of the other religions of the world in the
>name of false peace.
All religion is a lottery. All we poor mortals can do is hope we have
the right one. Most think that she/he has the right one and some use
it as an excuse to be a bigot. See Christian description above.
>
>> You are so full of it. You want to share American outmoded ideas like
>> second-class citizenship for anyone who isn't male, white and
>> protestant?
>
>Notice how the fraud has to play the race and sex cards.
the fraud in this conversation is playing the race card. You don't
have to come out and say you don't like Obama because he is black, it
is as obvious as having it written on your forehead.
>
>Nevertheless, I don't have problems with BO's race or sex--I HAVE PROBLEMS
>WITH HIM AND HIS SATANIC DOCTRINES.
So you are intimate terms with the devil. that is good to know. Shall
I call a priest?
>
>And do you have a problem with Protestants?
No. I have a problem with idiots who hide behind religion to prosecute
and persecute.
>
>> Well spoil sport. Elect your own leader then. (bin Laden is out there
>> somewhere.) YOu two have a lot in common.
>
>Now notice how the fraud has to draw ridiculous comparisons between
>Americanism and some ridiculous extremists.
You do not represent Americanism. Far from it. You don't even come
close to having that right.
>
>> I am sure glad you are not in charge.
>
>Why? I would have this place running like a Swiss clock in no time.
And like a Swiss clock there be no heart, no passion and no
understanding-just duty. Life is more than that.
>
>> Awwww. Sorry, McCain has too much PTSD to be effective. If it hadn't
>> happened that way, you would be complaining about him and crowing that
>> no black man is fit to be president.
>
>???
Read it again-you will figure it out.
>
>I about cried when Colin Powell refused to run for Vice President--a great
>opportunity passed us by.
>
Ex-generals to not make good presidents-see Eisenhower.
>Then we got saddled with this moron.
Yes, that poor guy that said, "You want change, I can give it to you."
No more stuffed shirts in power. No more "good old boy network."
>
>>
>> So change it. That is what elections are for you know.
>
>Oh, it'll be changed alright.
Pfffft. Goose stepping is bad for the hip joints.
>
>Question is, will it be soon enough to save America?
Like you care about anything but yourself? HAH!
>
>So, is this the best you can do? Make some false accusations? Divert to
>irrelevancies? Call ME un-American when it's your boy who is the Communist.
My boy.....go sit on your swastika.
>
>And I would like to know what the "Protestants" comment was about.
Well you can include Catholics if you want, it is just that I think
that there are more wing-nuts in the protestant part than any other
part. RIP Jerry Fallwell
>
>Ike
>
You're a bigot.
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
>>Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out Marxist
>>professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
>
> Oh I don't know. You want to see fraud? Look in the mirror.
[yawn]
Fact: BO IS "the fringe."
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snippeth]
> So? He gravitated towards a wide spectrum of political
> activists according to your own post.
So what's wrong with being AN AMERICAN if you're going to be President of
the USA?
[snippeth]
> Actually, you ass, Marx predictes a revolution
> of the proletariat against the ruling class: exactly
> the opposite ot totalitarianism.
And then what happens, asshole?
The Soviet Union, Communist China, North Korea, etc.
That's the problem with Marxism--the end result REQUIRES TOTALITARIANISM to
make every "equal."
[snippeth]
> Sure do, dumbass. I've been a fan of the Catholic priests in Latin
> America who attempted to better the lot of the poor
> against the interests of the dicatators for a long time
> now.
Oh, you're a FAN of Babylon RISING?
Moron.
"The government that governs least governs best."
It's as true today as it was when Thomas Paine wrote it...but you assholes
just don't get it.
[snippeth]
Ike
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:74m7i51irlk53e466...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:58:42 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>>Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out Marxist
>>>professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
>>
>> Oh I don't know. You want to see fraud? Look in the mirror.
>
>[yawn]
>
>Fact: BO IS "the fringe."
>
>Ike
>
<yawn>
Yer a bigoted idiot.
Ike E 12/10/2009
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 04:43:00 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>news:74m7i51irlk53e466...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:58:42 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>>Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out
>>>>Marxist
>>>>professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
>>>
>>> Oh I don't know. You want to see fraud? Look in the mirror.
>>
>>[yawn]
>>
>>Fact: BO IS "the fringe."
>>
>>Ike
>>
> <yawn>
>
> Yer a bigoted idiot.
Nope. You're a clueless moron buying into BO's socialist/communist bullshit.
Ike
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:c32ai55tn6gqjgofk...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 04:43:00 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>>news:74m7i51irlk53e466...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:58:42 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>>>Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out
>>>>>Marxist
>>>>>professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
>>>>
>>>> Oh I don't know. You want to see fraud? Look in the mirror.
>>>
>>>[yawn]
>>>
>>>Fact: BO IS "the fringe."
>>>
>>>Ike
>>>
>> <yawn>
>>
>> Yer a bigoted idiot.
>
>Nope. You're a clueless moron buying into BO's socialist/communist bullshit.
>
>Ike
>
If I am labeled that way because I care about my fellow human than
what you think doesn't really matter to me.
When I look into the mirror I have no regrets over how I contribute to
the welfare of my fellow human being.
Idiots are another matter completely.
haiku jones
wrote:
> "Lady Veteran" <army...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5l36i5lk386r6hkcg...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:50:06 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>
> >>"haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:6cdb2ac0-bff2-4b5a...@u8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> >>> On Dec 10, 11:54 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>>news:0962a52e-05b3-4735...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> >>>> On Dec 10, 10:02 am, John Manning <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> >>>>> Rod wrote:
> >>>>>>> Ike E 11/23/9 wrote:
>
> >>> [snip]
>
> >>> Oh, I'd like you to support just about
> >>> any of the above: that Obama is
> >>> a student of Marxism,
>
>
> > Making friends does not mean he was embracing that philosophy. Maybe
> > he wanted a healthy debate partner. Is this "politics makes strange
> > bedfellows?"
>
> Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out Marxist
> professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
And the notice how YOU had to change the story from
"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends
carefully. The more politically active black students.
The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors
and structural feminists."
-- in other words, Obama sought out an entire spectrum
of activist views, all over the ideological map -- to
"I sought out Marxist professors".
Haiku Jones
haiku jones
wrote:
[piggybacking]
.
>
> > You didn't vote for him. I get that. What I don't get is your
> > spoilsport behavior.
>
> "Spoilsport" has nothing to do with it, you ass.
>
> SAVING AMERICANISM does.
>
> > Well spoil sport. Elect your own leader then. (bin Laden is out there
> > somewhere.) YOu two have a lot in common.
Oh, doubtless our Ike here still hasn't gotten
over the fact that all of his hysterical pre-election
posts, in which he loudly insisted that the polls
were meaningless and that McCain was going
to walk away with the election, proved to be just
as silly as they seemed to be on first reading.
A typical example:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/456c3029ab5239c6?dmode=source
More -- assuming that your sense of humor runs to
this kind of thing -- in thie thread:
Haiku Jones
hypa...@comcast.net
> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:02:41 -0200, John Manning
>
>
>
>
>
> <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> >Christian Cowards: Why Don't Evangelical Leaders Condemn the Hate
> >Spouted by Right-Wingers?
>
> >By Frank Schaeffer, *former* Christian Right founder/activist
>
> >Since when does loving Jesus mean you have to hate our President?
> >Prominent Christians should denounce the violently aggressive language
> >right-wingers use to tear down Obama.
>
> >Excerpt:
>
> >left, right, religious or secular. No one in leadership should be blamed
The fundie Christians hate him simply because he is black. They can
deny this all they want, but their bigotry is obvious. All the
political
stuff is just repitition of what their leaders tell them. Just like
their
religion, they don't have to think about it that way.
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
>>Nope. You're a clueless moron buying into BO's socialist/communist
>>bullshit.
>>
>>Ike
>>
> If I am labeled that way because I care about my fellow human than
> what you think doesn't really matter to me.
That's the mantra of every fool who has ever turned freedom over to tyrants.
[snip]
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
>> Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out Marxist
>> professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
> And the notice how YOU had to change the story from
> "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends
> carefully. The more politically active black students.
> The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors
> and structural feminists."
Notice how the fool overlooks BO's underlying assumption that there was
something drastically wrong with system to begin with, and the type of
deviant characters he chose to associate with.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
> Oh, doubtless our Ike here still hasn't gotten
> over the fact that all of his hysterical pre-election
> posts, in which he loudly insisted that the polls
> were meaningless and that McCain was going
> to walk away with the election, proved to be just
> as silly as they seemed to be on first reading.
Yes, lesson well learned: One should never underestimate the gullibility of
foolish people and their propensity for being taken in by con men.
They're learning now, aren't they?
[snippeth]
Ike
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:8ovci5976rg4gts86...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 06:27:50 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>>Nope. You're a clueless moron buying into BO's socialist/communist
>>>bullshit.
>>>
>>>Ike
>>>
>> If I am labeled that way because I care about my fellow human than
>> what you think doesn't really matter to me.
>
>That's the mantra of every fool who has ever turned freedom over to tyrants.
>
>[snip]
>
>Ike
>
Suuuuure it is.....What history books are you reading?
Lady Veteran
Remember that today's nut is tomorrow's mighty oak tree.
You are too much of a conformist to remotely qualify.
haiku jones
wrote:
> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:01720a3d-7306-4877...@d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> [snippeth]
>
> > So? He gravitated towards a wide spectrum of political
> > activists according to your own post.
>
> So what's wrong with being AN AMERICAN i you're going to be President of
> the USA?
Excuse me? Political dissent is un-American? Political activism
is un-American? Blacks, feminists, and Chicanos aren't
Americans?
Does your denunciation of dissent and protest extend
to the Teabaggers too? Are these anti-Obama
activists un-American?
I seem to recall that this country got its start
in a rather spectacular display of political
dissent. Were the Founders un-American too?
Seems to me that your definition of what
is "AN AMERICAN" is "Smeone like me".
Reality, thankfully, is much richer than that.
Haiku Jones
Ike E 12/10/2009
> On Dec 13, 3:58 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>> news:01720a3d-7306-4877...@d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
>> [snippeth]
>>> So? He gravitated towards a wide spectrum of political
>>> activists according to your own post.
>
>> So what's wrong with being AN AMERICAN i you're going to be President of
>> the USA?
> Excuse me? Political dissent is un-American?
You're not talking about "dissent." You're talking about "overthrow."
> Political activism is un-American?
It is when the intent is to CHANGE the system to a new system ENTIRELY, not
streamline it.
> Blacks, feminists, and Chicanos aren't Americans?
Blacks, yes. Feminists, yes. With as many illegal aliens as there are in
this country, Chicanos, pretty much no.
However, BO isn't even a mainstream black, and feminist are a cult minority.
(This is pretty hilarious. I said BO IS the fringe. Now you're helping me
prove it.)
> Does your denunciation of dissent and protest extend
> to the Teabaggers too?
Nope. They're trying to turn America back into what the founders INTENDED
for it to be.
> Are these anti-Obama activists un-American?
Nope. They're trying to turn American back into what the founders INTENDED
IT TO BE.
(You really are quite daft, you know.)
> I seem to recall that this country got its start
> in a rather spectacular display of political
> dissent.
Yep. To NOT go where you fools are TRYING TO GO. They took one look at what
they left, and said "fuck that."
Now YOU idiots are trying to BRING IT HERE.
> Were the Founders un-American too?
They were Americans: "The Government that governs LEAST governs BEST."
> Seems to me that your definition of what
> is "AN AMERICAN" is "Smeone like me".
Nope. It's someone who believes in making your own stand, and NOT relying ON
GOVERNMENTS to SPOON FEED YOU.
> Reality, thankfully, is much richer than that.
Reality sucks...
1Jo 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If
any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 03:35:12 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>news:8ovci5976rg4gts86...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 06:27:50 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>>Nope. You're a clueless moron buying into BO's socialist/communist
>>>>bullshit.
>>>>
>>>>Ike
>>>>
>>> If I am labeled that way because I care about my fellow human than
>>> what you think doesn't really matter to me.
>>
>>That's the mantra of every fool who has ever turned freedom over to
>>tyrants.
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>Ike
>>
> Suuuuure it is.....What history books are you reading?
All of them.
And the greatest consistent mistake in the history of mankind is relying on
GOVERNMENTS to do folk's bidding..inevitably, the people wind up doing the
governments' bidding.
The framers knew this.
Too bad you idiots have forgotten...
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 03:37:33 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:707fcdb0-886f-4365...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>On Dec 11, 11:58 pm, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>> Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out
>>>> Marxist
>>>> professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
>>
>>> And the notice how YOU had to change the story from
>>
>>> "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends
>>> carefully. The more politically active black students.
>>> The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors
>>> and structural feminists."
>>
>>Notice how the fool overlooks BO's underlying assumption that there was
>>something drastically wrong with system to begin with, and the type of
>>deviant characters he chose to associate with.
>>
>>Ike
>>
> Remember that today's nut is tomorrow's mighty oak tree.
More like tomorrow's tyrant.
> You are too much of a conformist to remotely qualify.
LOL
What an idiot. The "conformists" are the morons trying to RE-ESTABLISH the
intrusive government that the founders WERE TRYING TO AVOID.
America was BORN of "non-conformity," i.e. DON'T LET GOVERNMENT DO YOUR
BIDDING...IT'LL TURN BACK ON YOUR HEAD.
Now comes the morons trying to re-establish what the framers were trying to
CUT OFF.
Ike
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
So why is it that either government cares too much or doesn't care at
all. Why can't there be a medium here?
So like, you like Darwin?
Survival of the fittest and if people cannot cut it-too bad.
Why does civil rights have to be legislated. Why not rely on the
innate good in humankind to get along and let all have a slice of what
they are due?
I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long as
there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other people
from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:drcfi51b6gh1v7epl...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 03:37:33 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:707fcdb0-886f-4365...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>>On Dec 11, 11:58 pm, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>>> Notice how the frauds have to change the story from "I sought out
>>>>> Marxist
>>>>> professors" to "I made some Marxist friends."
>>>
>>>> And the notice how YOU had to change the story from
>>>
>>>> "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends
>>>> carefully. The more politically active black students.
>>>> The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors
>>>> and structural feminists."
>>>
>>>Notice how the fool overlooks BO's underlying assumption that there was
>>>something drastically wrong with system to begin with, and the type of
>>>deviant characters he chose to associate with.
>>>
>>>Ike
>>>
>> Remember that today's nut is tomorrow's mighty oak tree.
>
>More like tomorrow's tyrant.
I serious doubt that.
>
>> You are too much of a conformist to remotely qualify.
>
>LOL
You don't like being told what to do? Can you be depended on to do the
right thing by other people.
>
>What an idiot. The "conformists" are the morons trying to RE-ESTABLISH the
>intrusive government that the founders WERE TRYING TO AVOID.
The founders were a product of their times. They were flawed,
hard-working Christian racists because every male was. the women were
not considered because they were property.
Don't tell me they had some sort of foresight. They didn't.
>
>America was BORN of "non-conformity," i.e. DON'T LET GOVERNMENT DO YOUR
>BIDDING...IT'LL TURN BACK ON YOUR HEAD.
I believe the intent to that end was there.
>
>Now comes the morons trying to re-establish what the framers were trying to
>CUT OFF.
Yes-most Americans were and are non-conformist. That doesn't mean that
some rules had to be developed.
>
>Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
Because it is NOT the job of governments to "care."
It's YOUR job...
Mr 10:42-43
But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they
which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them;
and their great ones exercise authority upon them: But so shall it not be
among you; but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister;
and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all.
> So like, you like Darwin?
>
> Survival of the fittest and if people cannot cut it-too bad.
I didn't say anything even CLOSE to this...
> Why does civil rights have to be legislated. Why not rely on the
> innate good in humankind to get along and let all have a slice of what
> they are due?
Gee, I believe that's precisely what JESUS SAID, GOVERNMENTS BE DAMNED.
You MISTAKE is thinking that GOVERNMENTS can do the job PEOPLE ARE SUPPOSED
TO BE DOING.
> I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long as
> there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other people
> from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
Great: That's the path to SATAN, i.e. power mongering.
Whatever happened to "live free or die?"
Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs best?"
I'll tell you what happened: The POWER BROKERS STOLE IT FROM US.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
Of course you do: You ignore history.
>>> You are too much of a conformist to remotely qualify.
>>
>>LOL
>
> You don't like being told what to do? Can you be depended on to do the
> right thing by other people.
No, I laugh because it's the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I've been saying.
>>What an idiot. The "conformists" are the morons trying to RE-ESTABLISH the
>>intrusive government that the founders WERE TRYING TO AVOID.
>
> The founders were a product of their times.
The founders were WISE BEYOND THEIR TIMES, you blithering idiot.
KEEP GOVERNMENT DOWN, or IT'LL RUIN YOUR LIFE.
But you silly people just don't pay attention to history, whereas THEY LIVED
IT, and KNEW the miseries of OVERLORDS.
> They were flawed,
> hard-working Christian racists because every male was. the women were
> not considered because they were property.
>
> Don't tell me they had some sort of foresight. They didn't.
The hell they didn't: They SAW the results of tyranny, and rejected it.
Now YOU morons want to re-establish it.
>>America was BORN of "non-conformity," i.e. DON'T LET GOVERNMENT DO YOUR
>>BIDDING...IT'LL TURN BACK ON YOUR HEAD.
>
> I believe the intent to that end was there.
I believe you're just another silly woman who is foolish enough to think
that anything good can come from human governments.
>>Now comes the morons trying to re-establish what the framers were trying
>>to
>>CUT OFF.
>
>
> Yes-most Americans were and are non-conformist. That doesn't mean that
> some rules had to be developed.
As few as possible: Too bad you goofballs forgot that.
Ike
Mitchell Holman
news:hgcqaj$ih5$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>
> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs best?"
It dies everytime a conservative demands that government solve
a problem (immigration, crime, abortion, pornography, flag
burning, etc.)
Mitchell Holman
news:hgcqaj$ih5$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> "Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:83dji5piuv6vbnlte...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:20:00 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>> So why is it that either government cares too much or doesn't care at
>> all. Why can't there be a medium here?
>
> Because it is NOT the job of governments to "care."
>
> It's YOUR job...
>
> Mr 10:42-43
>
> But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that
> they
> which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over
> them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them: But so shall
> it not be among you; but whosoever will be great among you, shall be
> your minister; and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be
> servant of all.
>
>> So like, you like Darwin?
>>
>> Survival of the fittest and if people cannot cut it-too bad.
>
> I didn't say anything even CLOSE to this...
>
>> Why does civil rights have to be legislated. Why not rely on the
>> innate good in humankind to get along and let all have a slice of
>> what they are due?
>
> Gee, I believe that's precisely what JESUS SAID, GOVERNMENTS BE
> DAMNED.
What did Jesus say on that point?
>
> You MISTAKE is thinking that GOVERNMENTS can do the job PEOPLE ARE
> SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
Government is not the people?
>
>> I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long as
>> there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other people
>> from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
>
> Great: That's the path to SATAN, i.e. power mongering.
>
There is no Satan.
> Whatever happened to "live free or die?"
>
> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs best?"
By that standard the best government in the world is
Sudan, which has no government at all. Is that your idea
of an objectivist paradise?
Mitchell Holman
news:hgcqip$kc7$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>
>
> I believe you're just another silly woman who is foolish enough to
> think that anything good can come from human governments.
If nothing good comes from government why are you
posting on a government built network?
Ike E 12/10/2009
"Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE4515EECD19...@216.196.97.130...
Uh, that IS Government's job, duffus--make laws for the protection of the
state and enforce them.
What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements, social
engineering, micromanaging people's personal affairs, interfering in family
and religious beliefs, etc. (especially when it's as unholy as the world's
governments are doing it): That's the path to "antichrist."
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
You didn't read it above?
>> You MISTAKE is thinking that GOVERNMENTS can do the job PEOPLE ARE
>> SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
>
> Government is not the people?
Nope. Government is "the beast: Everyone has to have one, but you keep it on
a SHORT chain.
>>> I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long as
>>> there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other people
>>> from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
>>
>> Great: That's the path to SATAN, i.e. power mongering.
>
> There is no Satan.
"You say."
>> Whatever happened to "live free or die?"
>>
>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs best?"
>
>
> By that standard the best government in the world is
> Sudan, which has no government at all. Is that your idea
> of an objectivist paradise?
Notice how the fraud has to make a case where there is none: I didn't say
"at all." Neither did they. We said "least."
Ike
haiku jones
wrote:
> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Ah, you're a fan of Mr. Paine too? A wise man.
Here's some more of his wisdom:
.. Whenever we read the obscene stories, the
voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous
executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with
which more than half the Bible is filled, it would
be more consistant that we call it the word of a
demon than the word of God. It is a history of
wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize
mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it,
as I detest everything that is cruel.
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
..but the Bible is such a book of lies and
contradictions there is no knowing which part to
believe or whether any...
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
I do not believe in the creed professed by the
Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek
Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant
Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own
mind is my own Church.
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
..we must be compelled to hold this doctrine to be
false, and the old and new law called the Old and
New Testament, to be impositions, fables and
forgeries.
Haiku Jones
>
> [snippeth]
>
> Ike
John Manning
Great quotes. Thanks HJ.
archie dux
wrote:
> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ffba9cc5-823f-40e0...@h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> [snip]
>
> > Oh, doubtless our Ike here still hasn't gotten
> > over the fact that all of his hysterical pre-election
> > posts, in which he loudly insisted that the polls
> > were meaningless and that McCain was going
> > to walk away with the election, proved to be just
> > as silly as they seemed to be on first reading.
>
> Yes, lesson well learned:
Hmmm...looking over the thread mentioned --
the one where you repeatedly, shrilly,
and with LOTS of CAPITAL LETTERS
kept insisting that all the polls were wrong
and all the commentators were wrong and
that we'd all see in the end that only you,
Ike, had The Truth -- looking over that,
it seems to me that the "lesson learned"
is that you live in your own rather colorful
world of your own devising, one only loosely
connected to the one the rest of us inhabit.
archie
archie dux
wrote:
> "Lady Veteran" <army...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1ddji59dmil1i8vgl...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:22:48 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>
> >>"Lady Veteran" <army...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> >>news:drcfi51b6gh1v7epl...@4ax.com...
> >>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 03:37:33 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>
> >>>>"haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Oh, don't be such a drama queen.
The British had one of the more democratic and
responsive governments in the world at that time.
They had the history of the Magna Carta,
they had a House of Commons determined
by popular election, they had a Parliament
which was fully capable of defying the King,
they had a long and deep history of common
law which protected the common man.
Our democratic institutions did not appear
out of thin air, they grew from English tradition.
The Founders were not freeing themselves
from some kind of Soviet-style dictatorship
when they rebelled; they had simply come
to the point where they could set up their
own government, and there wasn't, in the long
run, a whole lot England could do about it.
Pol Pot was an "OVERLORD". Stalin
was an "OVERLORD". Hitler was an
"OVERLORD". King Charles, and the
Parliament, were nothing of the sort.
archie
SkyEyes
> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote innews:hgcqaj$ih5$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>
>
> > Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs best?"
>
> It dies everytime a conservative demands that government solve
> a problem (immigration, crime, abortion, pornography, flag
> burning, etc.)
...or whenever a godbod demands that the government support (or render
into law) their religion with privileged status.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
SkyEyes
wrote:
> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
Like giving religious tax-free status?
> social engineering,
Like making sure that bigots *can't* discriminate against people they
don't like?
> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
Like making sure that women, in concert with their doctors, can make
their own medical decisions and reproductive choices?
> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
Like the way that Congress tried to do when Terri Schiavo's husband
wanted to take her off the ventilator and let the meat die?
> (especially when it's as unholy as the world's
> governments are doing it): That's the path to "antichrist."
Horsepucky.
Reality is a *very* plastic thing for you fascist godbots, isn't it?
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
So tell me why every decent society action has had to be legislated?
Civil rights, women voting, segregation of the armed forces. All is
legislated and people have been forced to accept these decent acts.
>
>It's YOUR job...
Yeah? Well no one hears me.
>
>Mr 10:42-43
>
> But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they
>which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them;
>and their great ones exercise authority upon them: But so shall it not be
>among you; but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister;
>and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all.
Yeah-that went well when bigots were lynching black people who wanted
to vote.
>
>> So like, you like Darwin?
>>
>> Survival of the fittest and if people cannot cut it-too bad.
>
>I didn't say anything even CLOSE to this...
Well I would not want to depend on the kindness of my fellow man
because I am not sure he has any. I do admit there are exceptions and
that is what they are-exceptions.
>
>> Why does civil rights have to be legislated. Why not rely on the
>> innate good in humankind to get along and let all have a slice of what
>> they are due?
>
>Gee, I believe that's precisely what JESUS SAID, GOVERNMENTS BE DAMNED.
It is a great theory but practice? Not so much.
>
>You MISTAKE is thinking that GOVERNMENTS can do the job PEOPLE ARE SUPPOSED
>TO BE DOING.
>
No. I am saying that government has had to force decency on people to
make them behave.
>> I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long as
>> there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other people
>> from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
>
>Great: That's the path to SATAN, i.e. power mongering.
Making people behave is not Satan's work.
>
>Whatever happened to "live free or die?"
It is alive and well in places that have anarchy.
>
>Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs best?"
>
I don't know who came up with that-probably Herbert Hoover.
>I'll tell you what happened: The POWER BROKERS STOLE IT FROM US.
and who are they?
>
>Ike
Lady Veteran
That is a cop-out. Big brother is not a left wing concept. These are
the same people who say they are Protecting states rights.
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think ROME was the BEAST and NERO is 666.
>
>>
>> There is no Satan.
>
>"You say."
>
>>
>>
>> By that standard the best government in the world is
>> Sudan, which has no government at all. Is that your idea
>> of an objectivist paradise?
>
>Notice how the fraud has to make a case where there is none: I didn't say
>"at all." Neither did they. We said "least."
>
>Ike
OOOOOOOO!!! I am "the fraud..." wow. I have been called many thing but
that is new to me. I guess better the fraud than the fool :-)
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes I know. Answer the question. Can you be depended up to do the
right thing without legislation?
>
>>>What an idiot. The "conformists" are the morons trying to RE-ESTABLISH the
>>>intrusive government that the founders WERE TRYING TO AVOID.
>>
>> The founders were a product of their times.
>
>The founders were WISE BEYOND THEIR TIMES, you blithering idiot.
>
They were a product of their times. Women were property and black
people were property. They never intended for either of these groups
to share in the dreams they were founding. Their descendants had to be
forced to accept the fact that women and people of color were citizens
too and were entitled to the same dream as they.
>KEEP GOVERNMENT DOWN, or IT'LL RUIN YOUR LIFE.
Good luck with that.
>
>But you silly people just don't pay attention to history, whereas THEY LIVED
>IT, and KNEW the miseries of OVERLORDS.
Well I know Operation Overlord and Operation Torch and the Ultra
Secret. Do I get my decoder ring now?
>
>> They were flawed,
>> hard-working Christian racists because every male was. the women were
>> not considered because they were property.
>>
>> Don't tell me they had some sort of foresight. They didn't.
>
>The hell they didn't: They SAW the results of tyranny, and rejected it.
They didn't want to be subjects of a King. I get that. Don't make them
out to be more than the men they were.
>
>Now YOU morons want to re-establish it.
No. People want to refine it and allow the people they left out to
have a piece of the American dream.
>
>>>America was BORN of "non-conformity," i.e. DON'T LET GOVERNMENT DO YOUR
>>>BIDDING...IT'LL TURN BACK ON YOUR HEAD.
>>
>> I believe the intent to that end was there.
>
>I believe you're just another silly woman who is foolish enough to think
>that anything good can come from human governments.
And you are a sill man who thinks that a person's gender dictates
their approach to politics. You proved my point for me. If it weren't
for legislation, I would not even have a chance for anything but life
as a house Frau with 10 rug rats hanging on my skirt.
>
>>
>>
>> Yes-most Americans were and are non-conformist. That doesn't mean that
>> some rules had to be developed.
>
>As few as possible: Too bad you goofballs forgot that.
Well tell me if you can behavior civilly without being forced to.
Lady Veteran
LOKLOLOL! Good question!
Mitchell Holman
>
> "Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9CE4515EECD19...@216.196.97.130...
>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:hgcqaj$ih5$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs
>>> best?"
>>
>>
>> It dies everytime a conservative demands that government solve
>> a problem (immigration, crime, abortion, pornography, flag
>> burning, etc.)
>
> Uh, that IS Government's job, duffus--make laws for the protection of
> the state and enforce them.
>
So government is right in creating and enforcing the
laws that we all live under.
What are you complaining about then?
> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
Does that mean you won't be cashing your Social Security check?
> social engineering,
Read: Civil Rights.
> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
Unless they are pregnant, right?
> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
Polygamy is OK then?
> (especially when
> it's as unholy as the world's governments are doing it): That's the
> path to "antichrist."
What is "antichrist"?
Mitchell Holman
Jesus didn't even mention government above.
>
>>> You MISTAKE is thinking that GOVERNMENTS can do the job PEOPLE ARE
>>> SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
>>
>> Government is not the people?
>
> Nope. Government is "the beast: Everyone has to have one, but you keep
> it on a SHORT chain.
Until you need something from it.
>
>>>> I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long as
>>>> there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other people
>>>> from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
>>>
>>> Great: That's the path to SATAN, i.e. power mongering.
>>
>> There is no Satan.
>
> "You say."
>
And your contrary proof is......?
>>> Whatever happened to "live free or die?"
>>>
>>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs
>>> best?"
>>
>>
>> By that standard the best government in the world is
>> Sudan, which has no government at all. Is that your idea
>> of an objectivist paradise?
>
> Notice how the fraud has to make a case where there is none: I didn't
> say "at all." Neither did they. We said "least."
Name for us the country whose government you admire most.
Mitchell Holman
Actually a lot of our rights come not from legislation
but from the courts. Civil rights, womens rights, privacy
rights, marriage rights, gay rights. Sometimes Congress
follows suit, as in civil rights, and sometimes they just
quietly acknowledge the new status quo, as in miscegination
laws and voting rights. But conservatives are quick to
appoint judges who will reflect their core beliefs and block
nominees who don't.
"A wife is to subordinate herself to her husband."
"The woman is to place herself under the authority of the man."
James Leon Holmes, nominated to a federal judgeship by the
Bush administration and confirmed by the Republican Senate.
Mitchell Holman
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 02:36:39 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>I believe you're just another silly woman who is foolish enough to
>>think that anything good can come from human governments.
>
> And you are a sill man who thinks that a person's gender dictates
> their approach to politics.
It is not just men who think that way, by a long shot.
"It would be a much better country if women did
not vote. That is simply a fact".
Ann Coulter, May 17, 2003.
"I think women should be armed but should not vote"
Ann Coulter, February 26, 2001.
"I'm an old-fashioned woman. Men should take care of
women, and if men were taking care of women we wouldn't
have to vote."
Senator. Kay O�Connor, Kansas, Sept 2001
Ike E 12/10/2009
It's not.
It started out as a group of different systems--Arpanet, Bitnet, private
commercial operations like CompuServe and AOL, etc--which eventually melded.
So everyone who participated (including me) built the system, NOT "the
government."
(I was doing this on mainframes and bulletin board systems using UNIX and
PASCAL before there was ever such a thing as "the World Wide Web," back when
everything was separated, i.e. email, fetch, LISTServers, etc, etc.)
Ike
Mitchell Holman
>
> "Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9CE4528EB1222...@216.196.97.130...
>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:hgcqip$kc7$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>
>>> I believe you're just another silly woman who is foolish enough to
>>> think that anything good can come from human governments.
>>
>>
>> If nothing good comes from government why are you
>> posting on a government built network?
>
> It's not.
>
> It started out as a group of different systems--Arpanet, Bitnet,
> private commercial operations like CompuServe and AOL, etc--which
> eventually melded.
>
"ARPA established the IPTO in 1962 with a mandate to build
a survivable computer network to interconnect the DoD's main
computers at the Pentagon, Cheyenne Mountain, and SAC HQ. As
described in the following pages, this initiative led to the
development of the ARPANET seven years later, and then to
the NSFNET and the Internet we know today."
http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_darpa.htm
> So everyone who participated (including me) built the system, NOT "the
> government."
>
Arpanet - government.
USLA - government.
Rand - government.
Darpa - government.
ARPA - government.
Ike E 12/10/2009
> One should never underestimate the gullibility of
> foolish people and their propensity for being taken in by con men.
>
> They're learning now, aren't they?
As Obama's Approval Rating Sinks, His Hubris Grows
Idiots.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
"archie dux" <architeu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b187a3cb-c2a7-4589...@v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
>> The founders were WISE BEYOND THEIR TIMES, you blithering idiot.
>
>> KEEP GOVERNMENT DOWN, or IT'LL RUIN YOUR LIFE.
>
>> But you silly people just don't pay attention to history, whereas THEY
>> LIVED
>> IT, and KNEW the miseries of OVERLORDS.
> Oh, don't be such a drama queen.
> The British...
As if the British are any sterling example of anything. (Pun fully
intended.)
Nice attempt at revisionist history, though.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
"SkyEyes" <skye...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:0f435f05-9f0e-420d...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
> Like giving religious tax-free status?
As opposed to every other kind of 501(c)(3) organization?
A non-profit organization is non-profit organization: You can't tax profits
when there aren't any.
>> social engineering,
> Like making sure that bigots *can't* discriminate against people they
> don't like?
Yep.
Private property is private property. What people do with it is THEIR
business.
>> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
> Like making sure that women, in concert with their doctors, can make
> their own medical decisions and reproductive choices?
How about the "reproductive choice" of not violating the law in the first
place?
>> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
> Like the way that Congress tried to do when Terri Schiavo's husband
> wanted to take her off the ventilator and let the meat die?
Who said I agreed with that? Who said the majority of Christians agreed with
that?
>> (especially when it's as unholy as the world's
>> governments are doing it): That's the path to "antichrist."
> Horsepucky.
Nope.
Fact.
The objective of Satan is to gather all glory, honor, power, wisdom, riches,
blessing, and strength unto the "beast" so the "beast" can garner it unto
"the beast."
And you fools are playing right into the beasts agenda.
Ike
archie dux
wrote:
> "archie dux" <architeuthis0...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Oh? Well, then, why don't you correct
my historical misinformation?
Here, I'll restore the part you fled via
snippery:
The British had one of the more democratic and
responsive governments in the world at that time.
They had the history of the Magna Carta,
they had a House of Commons determined
by popular election, they had a Parliament
which was fully capable of defying the King,
they had a long and deep history of common
law which protected the common man.
Our democratic institutions did not appear
out of thin air, they grew from English tradition.
The Founders were not freeing themselves
from some kind of Soviet-style dictatorship
when they rebelled; they had simply come
to the point where they could set up their
own government, and there wasn't, in the long
run, a whole lot England could do about it.
Pol Pot was an "OVERLORD". Stalin
was an "OVERLORD". Hitler was an
"OVERLORD". King Charles, and the
Parliament, were nothing of the sort.
...and then you make a list of
the factual misinformation you find
therein. ''
Take as much space as you wish:
Archie
>
> Ike
archie dux
wrote:
> "SkyEyes" <skyey...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:0f435f05-9f0e-420d...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Dec 17, 7:20 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
> > Like giving religious tax-free status?
>
> As opposed to every other kind of 501(c)(3) organization?
>
> A non-profit organization is non-profit organization: You can't tax profits
> when there aren't any.
>
> >> social engineering,
> > Like making sure that bigots *can't* discriminate against people they
> > don't like?
>
> Yep.
>
> Private property is private property. What people do with it is THEIR
> business.
Oh, you can be just as pathetic a bigot on
your front porch as you are here on Usenet,
there's no govermental interference with your
right to be wrong.
>
> >> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
> > Like making sure that women, in concert with their doctors, can make
> > their own medical decisions and reproductive choices?
>
> How about the "reproductive choice" of not violating the law in the first
> place?
Law? What law?
>
> >> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
> > Like the way that Congress tried to do when Terri Schiavo's husband
> > wanted to take her off the ventilator and let the meat die?
>
> Who said I agreed with that? Who said the majority of Christians agreed with
> that?
>
> >> (especially when it's as unholy as the world's
> >> governments are doing it): That's the path to "antichrist."
> > Horsepucky.
>
> Nope.
>
> Fact.
>
> The objective of Satan is to gather all glory, honor, power, wisdom, riches,
> blessing, and strength unto the "beast" so the "beast" can garner it unto
> "the beast."
>
> And you fools are playing right into the beasts agenda.
And you, no doubt, will continue to believe in
such silliness right up til the moment that
Horus weighs your meager heart against
the feather of Ma'at and your poor benighted
essence is thrown to Ammut, Eater of Souls.
Archie
>
> Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
> Ah, you're a fan of Mr. Paine too? A wise man.
Just because I agree with his politics (as they actually agreed with Jesus'
politics) doesn't mean I commend his religious ignorance.
Nevertheless, Jesus said...
Mt 20:25-28
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes [i.e.
rulers] of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great
exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but
whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister, and whosoever
will be chief among you, let him be your servant, even as the Son of man
came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a
ransom for many.
Turns out God is against "big government," too: Better to do it ourselves,
and leave the politicians out of it, like He said.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
Rome was only one permutation of the "beast." There have been many.
>>> There is no Satan.
>>
>>"You say."
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> By that standard the best government in the world is
>>> Sudan, which has no government at all. Is that your idea
>>> of an objectivist paradise?
>>
>>Notice how the fraud has to make a case where there is none: I didn't say
>>"at all." Neither did they. We said "least."
>>
>>Ike
>
> OOOOOOOO!!! I am "the fraud..." wow. I have been called many thing but
> that is new to me. I guess better the fraud than the fool :-)
Yes, fool would have been better.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:hgdenl$ago$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>>
>> "Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9CE4515EECD19...@216.196.97.130...
>>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:hgcqaj$ih5$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs
>>>> best?"
>>>
>>>
>>> It dies everytime a conservative demands that government solve
>>> a problem (immigration, crime, abortion, pornography, flag
>>> burning, etc.)
>>
>> Uh, that IS Government's job, duffus--make laws for the protection of
>> the state and enforce them.
>>
>
>
> So government is right in creating and enforcing the
> laws that we all live under.
>
> What are you complaining about then?
The parts that they have no business dealing with.
>> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
>
>
> Does that mean you won't be cashing your Social Security check?
What Social Security check?
>> social engineering,
>
> Read: Civil Rights.
Read: Government micromanagement.
>> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
>
>
> Unless they are pregnant, right?
???
If the law of God was enforced, there would be no problem.
>> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
>
> Polygamy is OK then?
Yep.
>> (especially when
>> it's as unholy as the world's governments are doing it): That's the
>> path to "antichrist."
>
> What is "antichrist"?
Human self-will, actually.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
Oh, illiterate are you?
Mr 10:42-43
But Jesus called [the Disciples] to him, and saith unto them, Ye know
that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship
over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them: But so shall
it not be among you...
>>>> You MISTAKE is thinking that GOVERNMENTS can do the job PEOPLE ARE
>>>> SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
>>>
>>> Government is not the people?
>>
>> Nope. Government is "the beast: Everyone has to have one, but you keep
>> it on a SHORT chain.
>
> Until you need something from it.
I need nothing from it.
>>>>> I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long as
>>>>> there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other people
>>>>> from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
>>>>
>>>> Great: That's the path to SATAN, i.e. power mongering.
>>>
>>> There is no Satan.
>>
>> "You say."
>>
> And your contrary proof is......?
You.
>>>> Whatever happened to "live free or die?"
>>>>
>>>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs
>>>> best?"
>>>
>>>
>>> By that standard the best government in the world is
>>> Sudan, which has no government at all. Is that your idea
>>> of an objectivist paradise?
>>
>> Notice how the fraud has to make a case where there is none: I didn't
>> say "at all." Neither did they. We said "least."
>
> Name for us the country whose government you admire most.
None. There is nothing to admire about the governments of men--NONE of them.
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
> "ARPA established the IPTO in 1962 with a mandate to build
> a survivable computer network to interconnect the DoD's main
> computers at the Pentagon, Cheyenne Mountain, and SAC HQ. As
> described in the following pages, this initiative led to the
> development of the ARPANET seven years later, and then to
> the NSFNET and the Internet we know today."
>
> http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_darpa.htm
Nope.
The government was a contributor, but it didn't build the thing.
I was there. I know.
Academics built it.
Manufacturers built it.
Providers built it.
Individuals built it.
That's why it actually works (for the most part)--the Government wasn't in
charge.
<chuckle>
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
> So tell me why every decent society action has had to be legislated?
What "decent society?"
There's no such thing...
A "decent society" WOULDN'T HAVE to be "legislated"...
1Ti 1:8-11
But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully, knowing
this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and
disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for
murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for
whoremongers [adulterers], for them that defile themselves with mankind
[homosexuals], for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if
there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, according to
the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
...but there will be.
[snip]
> It is a great theory but practice? Not so much.
We shall see.
> No. I am saying that government has had to force decency on people to
> make them behave.
How can something profane "force decency on people," or "make them behave"
when they themselves are indecent and wicked?
> Making people behave is not Satan's work.
Oh, the government is "making people behave?" It has adopted the laws of
Moses? And is following God's definition of righteous behavior, and not its
perverse own?
When did this happen?
[snip the rest of the pointless rambling]
Ike
L.Roberts
wrote:
> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
''to give his life a
ransom for many.''
Don't you think the spook is overdoing it a bit there? I mean, if it
can give itself one life, by whatever magic is has, it could give
itself millions of lives? If thats the case what is the big deal? It
kind of makes it right next to meaningless doesn't it? And just how
much of its 'life' is it believed to have given up, one freaking
weekend? And the suffering? If I were one of the surviving victims of
Hiroshima, I bet I would have gladly have traded places with the Late
JC. Oh, I forget, there was the 'emotional burden of carrying around
in stigma of everybody elses sins. What a crock of shit.
L.Roberts
Atheist
Ike E 12/10/2009
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:20:36 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:Xns9CE4515EECD19...@216.196.97.130...
>>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:hgcqaj$ih5$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs best?"
>>>
>>>
>>> It dies everytime a conservative demands that government solve
>>> a problem (immigration, crime, abortion, pornography, flag
>>> burning, etc.)
>>
>>Uh, that IS Government's job, duffus--make laws for the protection of the
>>state and enforce them.
>>
>>What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements, social
>>engineering, micromanaging people's personal affairs, interfering in
>>family
>>and religious beliefs, etc. (especially when it's as unholy as the world's
>>governments are doing it): That's the path to "antichrist."
>>
>>Ike
>>
> That is a cop-out.
No, it's a fact, and you're going to learn it the hard way.
> Big brother is not a left wing concept.
LOL
You have no idea how "left wing" it is...
People do more damage to their own souls in the "name of good" than the
wicked ever could.
> These are
> the same people who say they are Protecting states rights.
Too bad someone didn't--then the Federal beast could never have gotten out
of hand.
Ike
haiku jones
wrote:
> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:23ca8c9f-59f1-4a53...@15g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
>
> [snip]
>
> > Ah, you're afan of Mr. Painetoo? A wise man.
>
> Just because I agree with his politics
Here are some of his politics:
As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of
all government to protect all conscientious professors
thereof, and I know of no other business which
government hath to do therewith.
> (as they actually agreed with Jesus'
> politics doesn't mean I commend his religious ignorance.
One could drown in irony this deep...
>
> Nevertheless, Jesus said...
>
> Mt 20:25-28
>
> But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes [i.e.
> rulers] of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great
> exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but
> whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister, and whosoever
> will be chief among you, let him be your servant, even as the Son of man
> came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a
> ransom for many.
>
> Turns out God is against "big government," too: Better to do it ourselves,
> and leave the politicians out of it, like He said.
Turns out that God wants you to go along with
whatever government is in power, because God
Himself put it there:
1 Let every person be subject to the governing
authorities. For there is no authority except
from God, and those that exist have been
instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities
resists what God has appointed, and those who
resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct,
but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who
is in authority? Then do what is good, and
you will receive his approval,
4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if
you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear
the sword in vain; he is the servant of God
to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
--- Romans 13
Haiku Jones
>
> Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
> On Dec 18, 3:17 pm, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>> news:23ca8c9f-59f1-4a53...@15g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
>
>> [snip]
>
>>> Ah, you're afan of Mr. Painetoo? A wise man.
>
>> Just because I agree with his politics
> Here are some of his politics:
> As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of
> all government to protect all conscientious professors
> thereof, and I know of no other business which
> government hath to do therewith.
>> (as they actually agreed with Jesus'
>> politics doesn't mean I commend his religious ignorance.
> One could drown in irony this deep...
Why? I'm informed, and you are the religiously ignorant. The irony is in
you.
God made ONE way.
Satan made many.
And it's Satan's intention to gather "the many" (such as yourself) to
Jerusalem through globalism, as Ezekiel saw...
Eze 8:8-12
Then said he unto me, Son of man, dig now in the wall.
And when I had digged in the wall, behold a door.
And he said unto me, Go in, and behold the wicked abominations that they
do here.
So I went in and saw; and behold every form of creeping things, and
abominable beasts, and all the idols of the house of Israel, pourtrayed upon
the wall round about. And there stood before them seventy men of the
ancients of the house of Israel, and in the midst of them stood Jaazaniah
the son of Shaphan, with every man his censer in his hand; and a thick cloud
of incense went up.
Then said he unto me, Son of man, hast thou seen what the ancients of
the house of Israel do in the dark, every man in the chambers of his
imagery? for they say, The LORD seeth us not; the LORD hath forsaken the
earth.
>> Nevertheless, Jesus said...
>
>> Mt 20:25-28
>
>> But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes [i.e.
>> rulers] of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are
>> great
>> exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but
>> whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister, and
>> whosoever
>> will be chief among you, let him be your servant, even as the Son of man
>> came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a
>> ransom for many.
>
>> Turns out God is against "big government," too: Better to do it
>> ourselves,
>> and leave the politicians out of it, like He said.
> Turns out that God wants you to go along with
> whatever government is in power...
Only in the most presently passive sense: If one doesn't respect authority
when the wicked "sit in Moses seat" now, why would they respect authority
when Jesus and the saints are sitting in them?
> ...because God Himself put it there:
No. Not "put it there," but "allows it for now," as Jesus said to Pilate,
"you could have no authority over me except it were given to you from
above."
That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of Roman "big government."
> Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no
> authority except from > God, and those that exist have been instituted by
> God.
> Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has
> appointed, and those who
> resist will incur judgment.
> For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no
> fear of him who is
> in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for
> he is God's servant > for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for
> he does not bear the sword in vain; he is
> the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
First of all, this is from Paul, not God.
Second, it speaks of passive tolerance of the governments of men.
Third, it was written long before Paul's confrontations with Rome.
Fourth, THIS is what God has to say about the governments of men (then as
now)...
Dan 7:15-27
I Daniel was grieved in my spirit in the midst of my body, and the
visions of my head troubled me. I came near unto one of them that stood by,
and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the
interpretation of the things.
These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise
out of the earth. But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom,
and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.
Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from
all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails
of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his
feet, and of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which
came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a
mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his
fellows.
I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed
against them until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the
saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the
kingdom.
Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth,
which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth,
and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. And the ten horns out of
this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after
them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three
kings. And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear
out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and
they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of
time.
But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to
consume and to destroy it unto the end.
And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the
whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High,
whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and
obey him.
And again...
Rev 11:16-18
And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats,
fell upon their faces, and worshipped God, saying, We give thee thanks, O
Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast
taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned. And the nations were angry,
and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged,
and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to
the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest
destroy them which destroy the earth.
Why would the nations be angry at the second coming of Jesus Christ?
Because, as Daniel prophesied, God will TAKE AWAY their rule, and turn
everything over to Jesus and the saints.
This takes us right back to what Jesus said, as I quoted earlier: The saints
are not to take on mannerisms of the nations and their wicked top-down rule,
but to serve from the bottom up WITHOUT their evil hierarchies.
Ike
P.S. You really shouldn't quote the Bible to try to make your case, oh,
ignorant one--I'll BURY you with it.
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snippeth]
> Answer the question. Can you be depended up to do the
> right thing without legislation?
What "right thing?" YOURS or God's? "You say" or "God says?" Do you even
KNOW what "the right thing" is?
[snippeth]
> People want to refine it and allow the people they left out to
> have a piece of the American dream.
Wait until they find out that it's really a Satanic nightmare.
[snip]
> And you are a sill man who thinks that a person's gender dictates
> their approach to politics. You proved my point for me. If it weren't
> for legislation, I would not even have a chance for anything but life
> as a house Frau with 10 rug rats hanging on my skirt.
And then we would be back to "the right thing."
> Well tell me if you can behavior civilly without being forced to.
Ah, the foolishness: God defines "civil," not you, and YOU are part of the
"civil unrest." In other words, what you think is "the right thing" is "the
wrong thing," which means you are not part of the solution, but the problem.
[snippeth]
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
[snip]
> Oh, you can be just as pathetic a bigot...
Who said I was a bigot?
Ike
Ike E 12/10/2009
"L.Roberts" <ozzca...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ec173a07-0bac-4e19...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
No. I think you're an ass who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Any other questions?
[snippeth]
Ike
thomas p.
"Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelelsen
news:hghp8g$1bi$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:fc098941-9e63-4c19...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
snip
>> Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no
>> authority except from > God, and those that exist have been instituted by
>> God.
>> Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has
>> appointed, and those who
>> resist will incur judgment.
>> For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have
>> no fear of him who is
>> in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
>> for he is God's servant > for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid,
>> for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is
>> the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
>
> First of all, this is from Paul, not God.
Yes, the Epistles were written by men, as were the Gospels and Acts
and all of the Old Testament.
snip
Ike E 12/10/2009
news:4b2c8193$0$36562$edfa...@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
...said the fool who doesn't seem to know the difference between the words
"inspired" and "dictated."
[Also note that the fool cut out all of the other statements I cited
indicating God's opinion about the governments of men. Go figure.]
Ike
Virgil
"Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
It is not that he does not understand what "inspired" means, it is that
he is not willing to be convinced, without much better proof than has so
far been presented, that there is any purely spiritual being capable of
performing that inspiring.
>
> [Also note that the fool cut out all of the other statements I cited
> indicating God's opinion about the governments of men. Go figure.]
Perhaps any foolishness was entirely in the statements you allege were
cut.
Opinions differ among those who post here about who are the fools.
As an agnostic, I hold it foolish to claim certainty in what I cannot
prove. As an agnostic atheist I hold a similar position about beliefs.
Ike E 12/10/2009
"Virgil" <Vir...@home.esc> wrote in message
news:Virgil-0B3A48....@bignews.usenetmonster.com...
[snippeth]
> It is not that he does not understand what "inspired" means, it is that
> he is not willing to be convinced, without much better proof than has so
> far been presented, that there is any purely spiritual being capable of
> performing that inspiring.
"The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'"
[snippeth]
Ike
Mitchell Holman
news:hgg1en$4ks$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> "SkyEyes" <skye...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:0f435f05-9f0e-420d...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com.
> ..
>> On Dec 17, 7:20 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
>
>> Like giving religious tax-free status?
>
> As opposed to every other kind of 501(c)(3) organization?
>
> A non-profit organization is non-profit organization: You can't tax
> profits when there aren't any.
>
When a church takes in more than it spends it is
making a profit. Do you think all those megachurches
are LOSING money?
>>> social engineering,
>
>> Like making sure that bigots *can't* discriminate against people they
>> don't like?
>
> Yep.
>
> Private property is private property. What people do with it is THEIR
> business.
>
"No jews need apply". "Colored Entrance In Rear". Sorry,
one of the purposes of government is to "promote the general
welfare", and that trumps property rights.
Or would you have return to the Good Old Days of buildings
without fire escapes and children working in coal mines?
>>> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
>
>> Like making sure that women, in concert with their doctors, can make
>> their own medical decisions and reproductive choices?
>
> How about the "reproductive choice" of not violating the law in the
> first place?
>
Abortion is legal, get over it.
>
> The objective of Satan is to gather all glory, honor, power, wisdom,
> riches, blessing, and strength unto the "beast" so the "beast" can
> garner it unto "the beast."
Fact check: There is no Satan.
Mitchell Holman
$emh$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> "Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9CE4CFC7FC38E...@216.196.97.130...
>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:hgdenl$ago$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>
>>>
>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9CE4515EECD19...@216.196.97.130...
>>>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>> news:hgcqaj$ih5$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs
>>>>> best?"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It dies everytime a conservative demands that government solve
>>>> a problem (immigration, crime, abortion, pornography, flag
>>>> burning, etc.)
>>>
>>> Uh, that IS Government's job, duffus--make laws for the protection of
>>> the state and enforce them.
>>>
>>
>>
>> So government is right in creating and enforcing the
>> laws that we all live under.
>>
>> What are you complaining about then?
>
> The parts that they have no business dealing with.
Every mafia don and drug cartel and immigrant
smuggling operation complains about "government
interference" in their "private business".
Who decides what government "has no business"
regulating?
>
>>> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
>>
>>
>> Does that mean you won't be cashing your Social Security check?
>
> What Social Security check?
>
>>> social engineering,
>>
>> Read: Civil Rights.
>
> Read: Government micromanagement.
Freedom to discriminate?
>
>>> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
>>
>>
>> Unless they are pregnant, right?
>
> ???
>
> If the law of God was enforced, there would be no problem.
Bin Laden, the IRA, Eric Rudolf, 9/11 - you don't
see a problem with people "enforcing the law of God"
as they see it?
>
>>> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
>>
>> Polygamy is OK then?
>
> Yep.
>
>>> (especially when
>>> it's as unholy as the world's governments are doing it): That's the
>>> path to "antichrist."
>>
>> What is "antichrist"?
>
> Human self-will, actually.
Why do you hate freedom?
thomas p.
> "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4b2c8193$0$36562$edfa...@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
>>
>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelelsen
>> news:hghp8g$1bi$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> "haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:fc098941-9e63-4c19...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> snip
>>
>>>> Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is
>>>> no authority except from > God, and those that exist have been
>>>> instituted by God.
>>>> Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has
>>>> appointed, and those who
>>>> resist will incur judgment.
>>>> For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have
>>>> no fear of him who is
>>>> in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
>>>> for he is God's servant > for your good. But if you do wrong, be
>>>> afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is
>>>> the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
>>>
>>> First of all, this is from Paul, not God.
>>
>> Yes, the Epistles were written by men, as were the Gospels and Acts
>> and all of the Old Testament.
>
> ...said the fool who doesn't seem to know the difference between the words
> "inspired" and "dictated."
Let's have a civil conversation - just a suggestion. I know the difference
between "inspired" and "dictated", but
what we objectively know is that all of the bible was written by men. Your
personal beliefs that selected parts were inspired by a god are not, as far
as I know, not in evidence, but I am certainly willing to be corrected.
>
> [Also note that the fool cut out all of the other statements I cited
> indicating God's opinion about the governments of men. Go figure.]
I cut the rest of the post and noted the cut as is the accepted custom.
I did that because there was only one part of your post I wished to comment
on. Once again I express my hope for a civil conversation without
gratuitous
insults.
thomas p.
I look forward to seeing your argument for the truth of the above.
>
> [snippeth]
>
> Ike
>
Mitchell Holman
No mention of governemnt.
>
>>>>> You MISTAKE is thinking that GOVERNMENTS can do the job PEOPLE ARE
>>>>> SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
>>>>
>>>> Government is not the people?
>>>
>>> Nope. Government is "the beast: Everyone has to have one, but you
>>> keep it on a SHORT chain.
>>
>> Until you need something from it.
>
> I need nothing from it.
>
>>>>>> I will vote for less government when this comes to pass. As long
>>>>>> as there are idiots out there actively trying to prevent other
>>>>>> people from getting their just due then legislation is needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Great: That's the path to SATAN, i.e. power mongering.
>>>>
>>>> There is no Satan.
>>>
>>> "You say."
>>>
>> And your contrary proof is......?
>
> You.
Prove Satan exists.
>
>>>>> Whatever happened to "live free or die?"
>>>>>
>>>>> Whatever happened to "the government that governs LEAST governs
>>>>> best?"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By that standard the best government in the world is
>>>> Sudan, which has no government at all. Is that your idea
>>>> of an objectivist paradise?
>>>
>>> Notice how the fraud has to make a case where there is none: I
>>> didn't say "at all." Neither did they. We said "least."
>>
>> Name for us the country whose government you admire most.
>
> None. There is nothing to admire about the governments of men--NONE of
> them.
>
Modern Conservative: Someone who insist that government
pave his roads, protect his borders, inspect his food, deliver
his mail, provide his social security benefits, maintain his
local police and fire departments and collect his garbage so he
can spend his days ranting on a government-built internet about
the evils of "big government" and demanding that we "get the
government off our backs"
Mitchell Holman
$al9$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
"Know the truth and its roots. The book of God is our guide"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Osama Bin Laden, 2002
L.Roberts
wrote:
> "L.Roberts" <ozzcat2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Notice no attempt to address the points. (copied and pasted from a
reply of yours to someone earlier in this thread.)
There ya go dumbass.
L.Roberts
Atheist
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"SkyEyes" <skye...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:0f435f05-9f0e-420d...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 17, 7:20 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
>
>> Like giving religious tax-free status?
>
>As opposed to every other kind of 501(c)(3) organization?
>
>A non-profit organization is non-profit organization: You can't tax profits
>when there aren't any.
>
>>> social engineering,
>
>> Like making sure that bigots *can't* discriminate against people they
>> don't like?
>
>Yep.
>
>Private property is private property. What people do with it is THEIR
>business.
>
>>> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
>
>> Like making sure that women, in concert with their doctors, can make
>> their own medical decisions and reproductive choices?
>
>How about the "reproductive choice" of not violating the law in the first
>place?
>
>>> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
>
>> Like the way that Congress tried to do when Terri Schiavo's husband
>> wanted to take her off the ventilator and let the meat die?
>
>Who said I agreed with that? Who said the majority of Christians agreed with
>that?
>
>>> (especially when it's as unholy as the world's
>>> governments are doing it): That's the path to "antichrist."
>
>> Horsepucky.
>
>Nope.
>
>Fact.
>
>The objective of Satan is to gather all glory, honor, power, wisdom, riches,
>blessing, and strength unto the "beast" so the "beast" can garner it unto
>"the beast."
>
>And you fools are playing right into the beasts agenda.
>
>Ike
>
And you know this because you have Satan's ear?
Ewwwww! Earwax!!
LV
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
When the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank."
---Sympathy for the Devil-The Rolling Stones
--------------------------------------------
"Some people are only alive because it is
illegal to kill them."
---Anonymous
----------------------------------------------
How does your idiocy measure up?
My Blog http://ladyveteranslog.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------
Are you being harassed on Usenet and want to fight
back instead of leaving the net? Are you willing to
stand up to Internet bullies and stalkers?
Join my group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antiCHU
----------------------------------------------
"I am mad as hell and I will not take it anymore!"
---Network
Lady Veteran
<architeu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 18, 6:52�am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> "SkyEyes" <skyey...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:0f435f05-9f0e-420d...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Dec 17, 7:20 am, "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> What's NOT in the Government's job description are entitlements,
>> > Like giving religious tax-free status?
>>
>> As opposed to every other kind of 501(c)(3) organization?
>>
>> A non-profit organization is non-profit organization: You can't tax profits
>> when there aren't any.
>>
>> >> social engineering,
>> > Like making sure that bigots *can't* discriminate against people they
>> > don't like?
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>
>
>> Private property is private property. What people do with it is THEIR
>> business.
>
>Oh, you can be just as pathetic a bigot on
>your front porch as you are here on Usenet,
>there's no govermental interference with your
>right to be wrong.
>
>
>
>>
>> >> micromanaging people's personal affairs,
>> > Like making sure that women, in concert with their doctors, can make
>> > their own medical decisions and reproductive choices?
>>
>
>> How about the "reproductive choice" of not violating the law in the first
>> place?
>
>Law? What law?
>
>
>
>>
>> >> interfering in family and religious beliefs, etc.
>> > Like the way that Congress tried to do when Terri Schiavo's husband
>> > wanted to take her off the ventilator and let the meat die?
>>
>> Who said I agreed with that? Who said the majority of Christians agreed with
>> that?
>>
>> >> (especially when it's as unholy as the world's
>> >> governments are doing it): That's the path to "antichrist."
>> > Horsepucky.
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> Fact.
>>
>> The objective of Satan is to gather all glory, honor, power, wisdom, riches,
>> blessing, and strength unto the "beast" so the "beast" can garner it unto
>> "the beast."
>>
>> And you fools are playing right into the beasts agenda.
>
>And you, no doubt, will continue to believe in
>such silliness right up til the moment that
>Horus weighs your meager heart against
>the feather of Ma'at and your poor benighted
>essence is thrown to Ammut, Eater of Souls.
>
>Archie
>
I thought I heard a Buuuuurrrrrrppppp!
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
Should I call you "educationally challenged" or "narrow-minded?"
Lady Veteran
<noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Lady Veteran <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in
>news:85rki5t7avsa7erom...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 02:32:18 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>>news:83dji5piuv6vbnlte...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:20:00 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:2ncfi5h8jf5sk8efj...@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 03:35:12 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>>>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:8ovci5976rg4gts86...@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 06:27:50 -0600, "Ike E 12/10/2009"
>>>>>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Nope. You're a clueless moron buying into BO's
>>>>>>>>>socialist/communist bullshit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Ike
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If I am labeled that way because I care about my fellow human
>>>>>>>> than what you think doesn't really matter to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That's the mantra of every fool who has ever turned freedom over
>>>>>>>to tyrants.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ike
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suuuuure it is.....What history books are you reading?
>>>>>
>>>>>All of them.
>>>>>
>>>>>And the greatest consistent mistake in the history of mankind is
>>>>>relying on
>>>>>GOVERNMENTS to do folk's bidding..inevitably, the people wind up
>>>>>doing the governments' bidding.
>>>>>
>>>>>The framers knew this.
>>>>>
>>>>>Too bad you idiots have forgotten...
>>>>>
>>>>>Ike
>>>>>
>>>> So why is it that either government cares too much or doesn't care
>>>> at all. Why can't there be a medium here?
>>>
>>>Because it is NOT the job of governments to "care."
>>
>> So tell me why every decent society action has had to be legislated?
>> Civil rights, women voting, segregation of the armed forces. All is
>> legislated and people have been forced to accept these decent acts.
>>
>
>
> Actually a lot of our rights come not from legislation
>but from the courts. Civil rights, womens rights, privacy
>rights, marriage rights, gay rights. Sometimes Congress
>follows suit, as in civil rights, and sometimes they just
>quietly acknowledge the new status quo, as in miscegination
>laws and voting rights. But conservatives are quick to
>appoint judges who will reflect their core beliefs and block
>nominees who don't.
>
>
>
> "A wife is to subordinate herself to her husband."
>"The woman is to place herself under the authority of the man."
>James Leon Holmes, nominated to a federal judgeship by the
>Bush administration and confirmed by the Republican Senate.
There are a lot of delusional people in this world. I think this is
one of them.
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Lady Veteran" <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:85rki5t7avsa7erom...@4ax.com...
>
>[snip]
>
>> So tell me why every decent society action has had to be legislated?
>
>What "decent society?"
I define a decent society as one in which all citizens enjoy equal
rights and has the opportunity to earn their slice of the utopia being
offered.
>
>There's no such thing...
Not now there isn't.
>
>A "decent society" WOULDN'T HAVE to be "legislated"...
>
Yes it would. People tend to ruin the whole thing.
>1Ti 1:8-11
>
> But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully, knowing
>this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and
>disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for
>murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for
>whoremongers [adulterers], for them that defile themselves with mankind
>[homosexuals], for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if
>there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, according to
>the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
Nothing about racial equality there.
>
>...but there will be.
>
>[snip]
>
>> It is a great theory but practice? Not so much.
>
>We shall see.
>
>> No. I am saying that government has had to force decency on people to
>> make them behave.
>
>How can something profane "force decency on people," or "make them behave"
>when they themselves are indecent and wicked?
>
So anarchy is godly?
>> Making people behave is not Satan's work.
>
>Oh, the government is "making people behave?" It has adopted the laws of
>Moses? And is following God's definition of righteous behavior, and not its
>perverse own?
So go create your own utopia and leave the rest of us poor sinners
alone then.
You reap the benefits of this government yet you scorn it.
Hypocritical.
>
>When did this happen?
>
>[snip the rest of the pointless rambling]
>
I think your mind and your fingers are disconnected.
>Ike
Lady Veteran
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Mitchell Holman" <noe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:Xns9CE4528EB1222...@216.196.97.130...
>> "Ike E 12/10/2009" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:hgcqip$kc7$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>
>>> I believe you're just another silly woman who is foolish enough to
>>> think that anything good can come from human governments.
>>
>>
>> If nothing good comes from government why are you
>> posting on a government built network?
>
>It's not.
ARPANET was begun and funded by the US government in conjunction with
the universities.
>
>It started out as a group of different systems--Arpanet, Bitnet, private
>commercial operations like CompuServe and AOL, etc--which eventually melded.
>
I am talking about the late 1960's.
>So everyone who participated (including me) built the system, NOT "the
>government."
I didn't say they built it. They funded it.
>
>(I was doing this on mainframes and bulletin board systems using UNIX and
>PASCAL before there was ever such a thing as "the World Wide Web," back when
>everything was separated, i.e. email, fetch, LISTServers, etc, etc.)
Since when? The 1970's? You are 10 years too late kiddo.