Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on November 11, 2005, 09:30:25 AM
-
Pat Robertson...
What is wrong with this guy's wiring? How can the religious right continue to let this idiot be a spokesman?
We call and clamor for the Imans to denounce Bin Laden and Zarqauwi. Needs to be done. But it looks like we have some home grown zealots to be wary of too..
''I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected Him from your city.''
-- Pat Robertson, Nov. 2005 (re the rejection of the School Board for trying to insert ID in the science classroom.)
''If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war.''
-- On Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Aug. 2005
''I think the gradual erosion of the consensus that's held our country together is probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings.''
-- On whether ''activist judges'' are more of a threat than terrorists, May 2005
''Maybe we need a very small nuke thrown off on Foggy Bottom to shake things up''
-- Referring to the State Department's location while criticizing the agency, Oct. 2003
-
Individual Christians are the only ones really -- and Jewish people, those who trust God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob -- are the only ones that are qualified to have the reign, because hopefully, they will be governed by God and submit to Him.
When I said during my presidential bid that I would only bring Christians and Jews into the government, I hit a firestorm. "What do you mean?" the media challenged me. "You're not going to bring atheists into the government? How dare you maintain that those who believe in the Judeo-Christian values are better qualified to govern America than Hindus and Muslims?" My simple answer is, "Yes, they are."
You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense. I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist. I can love the people who hold false opinions but I don't have to be nice to them.
The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians.
I think "one man, one vote," just unrestricted democracy, would not be wise. There needs to be some kind of protection for the minority which the white people represent now, a minority, and they need and have a right to demand a protection of their rights.
Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It's no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history.
-
Midnight,
You are probably well aware of this already, but the United States is literally filled with demagogues who say stupid things every day, and who have a loyal following who continue to support them regardless of how absurd their commentary becomes. So for every Pat Robertson, we also have Al Sharptons, Louis Farrakhans and so on. This is the price we have to pay for maintaining freedom of speech in a soundbite driven society.
There are many differences between our Robertsons and the aforementioned Imams however. The Imams will preach that the infidels are apes, dogs, and pigs, tell the faithful that they must be cleansed from the earth and that Jihad is their duty, and good percentage of the umma will listen and respond by taking up arms or strapping on bomb belts and carrying out their holy duty. Even if one were to take the call to nuke foggy bottom as a serious threat rather than Robertsonian hyperbole, American Christians do not respond by saying "God's will is that we nuke the state department - honey we have some plutonium in the garage right?"
But if it makes you feel better, although I hardly qualify as a leader, I've spoken publicly against Pat's tendency to ignore the spirituality of the church, his "worship America" tendencies, and called several parts of his doctrine and practice unbiblical. So theres at least one Christian extremist who has never been in Pat's camp.
I'll trust you to deal with Al Sharpton...
:D
- SEAGOON
-
NOW should have denounced Clinton in office during the Lewinski affair...but they didn't. Quiet as kittens.
The ACLU should have denounced the FBI in the Randy Weaver case, but didn't.
Why should Religious leaders denounce a TV evangelist?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
NOW should have denounced Clinton in office during the Lewinski affair...but they didn't.
I'll bite. Why?
-
I have a feeling that if even one beheading were traced to him or his followers....or even something as slight as a suicide bomber...
you might see religious leaders getting as far away from this joke of a guy as possible... He is right now tho.... much less dangerous than jesse jackson or sharpton.
I would denounce all three as minor little evil pissants.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I'll bite. Why?
Ask yourself this...if Bush was in office and had a BJ in office, do you think NOW would have spoke up? You can bet your house on it.
-
I think that all three are probably equally racist.
As for which one is most dangerous, I'm going to have to go with Pat. He's the only one with a regular television show.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ask yourself this...if Bush was in office and had a BJ in office, do you think NOW would have spoke up? You can bet your house on it.
Again, why would they?
-
It made me extremely happy to see jordanians protesting in the street AGAINST AQ and zarkowi (SP)
Either way I don't like pat robertson and he doesnt speaks for all of us
-
pat has more chance but the other two use theirs to best advantage to stir up the natives and incite violence.... pat has probly incited less rioting or condoned it than the other two scumbags.
lazs
-
Its comical to me, as long as robertson doesnt start calling for suicide bombers he can say whatever he wants to.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ask yourself this...if Bush was in office and had a BJ in office, do you think NOW would have spoke up? You can bet your house on it.
Rip I really don't think Cheney swings that way.....well ya never know.
:rofl
-
I saw a program, where a spokesman for Pat Robertson mentioned and confirmed that Pat wants military action in the Middle East because he says it goes along with the Bible description of the second coming. With a War in the middle East, where half the Jews are killed and the other half revert to Christianity.
I dont know to much about the bible, Ive only read a little a bit of it. But anybody who wants the world to end, so he can go to heaven when Jeebus comes back, Is mentally ill.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Pat Robertson...
What is wrong with this guy's wiring? How can the religious right continue to let this idiot be a spokesman?
We call and clamor for the Imans to denounce Bin Laden and Zarqauwi. Needs to be done. But it looks like we have some home grown zealots to be wary of too..
To denounce implies association. I'm a Christion but Pat Robertson does not and will never speak for me. I would venture to say that most Christian denominations wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole. He's just a quack who claims to be a Christian but doesn't seem to follow Biblical principals.
Also you will never hear the majority of people who follow Islam denounce the terrorists. Why on earth would they want to accociate themselves with murderers when they themsleves live lives of peace?
-
Denouncing = Association?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Denouncing = Association?
have you denounced Louis Farakan yet?
-
Ok I hearby denounce him. I think he is a racist idiot.
Feel better?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Denouncing = Association?
It implies previous association. If you don't think they were associated in any way, why would you be calling for them to denounce Pat?
-
Originally posted by ChickenHawk
It implies previous association. If you don't think they were associated in any way, why would you be calling for them to denounce Pat?
Since when?
I denounce Osama Bin Laden! I guess that means we used to be pals? LOL... funny.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
have you denounced Louis Farakan yet?
How about asking our liberal friend to denounce a certain religious leader that makes a living out of extorting money from big businesses by telling them that his organization will sue their pants off if they don't incorporate his cultural system?:confused:
Lets see what Ann Coulter has to say about Mr. Jackson. :D:D:D
Jesse Jackson, the Baptist minister, apparently had no intention of waiting for the afterlife to get his taste of the good life. With his Rainbow/Push Coalition bringing in millions of dollars a year at its peak, Mr. Jackson indulged in expensive homes, cars and companionship, mostly with his ministry's money.
That's a paraphrase of how The New York Times began a news item about a fallen preacher -- not Jesse "Show Me the Money" Jackson, but "televangelist" Jim Bakker, head of PTL ministries, swiftly deposed after a sex scandal in the '80s.
Bakker's affair was evidently limited to a single night, there was no "love child," and over the course of seven years Bakker paid his lady friend about half ($265,000) of what Jackson admits to paying his mistress in two years ($472,000) -- and about one-third of what the National Enquirer reports Jackson has paid ($640,000).
Jackson's mistress probably needs the money more: Having had her affair with a black liberal, she cannot expect lucrative offers from smut magazines to pose nude. The pornography industry is primarily interested in prolonging the humiliation of Republicans.
Indeed, the entire establishment is truly gleeful only when discussing the sexual scandals of putative conservatives. By contrast, the Jackson "situation," as a New York Times column put it, merely "illustrates the need to acknowledge that our leaders will occasionally disappoint."
The Times column sneered at the idea of using a "test of sexual propriety" as a basis for moral judgments. Real moral lapse -- not to be confused with a 59-year-old man trying to derive sexual satisfaction from a young female staffer -- is being a Republican. Immorality, it seems, can also be "cut(ting) millions of the needy from welfare rolls," or firing Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders because she had "suggested that masturbation should be openly discussed with young people."
It takes a particularly fanatical socialist to believe the government is required to teach adolescent boys to masturbate -- but this logic demonstrates: Disbelief in the ministrations of the federal government is the only known liberal iniquity. Immorality incarnate is either Perverts or People Who Believe in Tax Cuts. Take your pick. Democrats are the proud party of perversion.
Over a decade ago, the same point was made during the media's giddy celebration of the perfidy of televangelist Bakker. Even then, the left was careful to couch its sneers at Bakker in terms that would not reflect badly on adultery per se. New York Times columnist Tom Wicker sniffed, for example, "Mr. Bakker, whose offense is not exactly unheard of ..."
Wicker then went on to pronounce that "the greatest offense" was "the narrowness, exclusivity and lack of charity -- the bigotry --" of Christian evangelism. This "greatest offense" includes a belief in "heterosexuality only, and only within marriage"(!), as well as the "maintenance at all costs of the traditional family." The "at all costs" in that last sentence is a nice touch. It's been about 15 years since Wicker wrote it. How about we compare "costs" of "not exactly unheard of" adultery with the "costs" of traditional families?
The Times' more recent explication of what true sin is (Republicanism) refers to society's "obsession with sexual sin" as if we should really be concentrating on something else, like self-immolation. But there's a reason several millennia of religious teaching share this unseemly "obsession with sexual sin": It's apparently one of the more tempting transgressions. People don't have to be exhorted constantly not to stick forks in their eyes -- also a sin -- because it's not that big a temptation.
The dirty masses' "obsession with sexual sin" also operates to protect what are normally two of the left's favorite victim groups -- women and children. Indeed, comparing the quantity of love letters women write to mass murderers and serial killers with the number of love letters women write to their adulterous ex-husbands, women seem to find "sexual sin" uniquely unforgivable.
They're having a good laugh in Koreatown about the exposure of Jesse Jackson (who further cemented the hatred between blacks and Koreans when he minimized the violence against Koreans during the Los Angeles riots with the dismissive remark, "Desperate people do desperate things"): "Ha-ha, Jesse Jackson have love child -- more work, less babies." But they won't be able to laugh long. Liberals always get a lot of credit for suffering, while never actually being made to suffer.
Immediately after he was forced to own up to the love child (the National Enquirer had DNA evidence), Jackson pledged to withdraw from public life to "revive my spirit and reconnect with my family." For a few days, the airwaves were bristling with accounts of the Rev. Jesse's Jackson's deep suffering and his "trial of tears."
God's grace worked fast: After taking the weekend off, Jesse Jackson was back in action this week, just in time for a lucrative Wall Street shakedown. It's not as if he had done something really bad, like support a reduction in marginal tax rates.
-
What? you want me to say Jesse is a dimwit? OK. I'll say it as long as it gets this train wreck back on topic.
We got ourselves a Christian Evangelist with a TV show spouting very dangerous crap. I think every pastor should make Sunday's sermon about evil and how Pat Robertson is filling the bill.
Saying there are others who are as bad sure as heck ain't addressing the problem, it is only acting like a three year old and pointing out that "Johnny's mom lets him eat candy!"
sheeeesh
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
What? you want me to say Jesse is a dimwit? OK. I'll say it as long as it gets this train wreck back on topic.
We got ourselves a Christian Evangelist with a TV show spouting very dangerous crap. I think every pastor should make Sunday's sermon about evil and how Pat Robertson is filling the bill.
Saying there are others who are as bad sure as heck ain't addressing the problem, it is only acting like a three year old and pointing out that "Johnny's mom lets him eat candy!"
sheeeesh
But...but...FREEDOM OF SPEECH! :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
But...but...FREEDOM OF SPEECH! :rofl :rofl :rofl
you got nothing huh?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Ok I hearby denounce him. I think he is a racist idiot.
Feel better?
yes I do...thanks.
Pat Roberts is an a.s.s.h.a.t
-
"I think every pastor should make Sunday's sermon about evil and how Pat Robertson is filling the bill."
And you've been to church to know that they haven't, right?
Keep in mind how fragmented the various Christian sub-types are. For example, from the point of view I was raised with, only Catholics and some Eastern Orthodox believers are really Christian at all. Wierdos like Robertson are basically splinter-groups and are routinely "denounced". Robertson is a Southern Baptist, a denomination which I grew up being taught was extremist and backwards.
J_A_B
-
We should go ahead and denounce everyone while we are at it.
Everyone you are denounced by me. My concious is cleared.
-
I can't really denounce him since I am not a member of his church but he is a waste of humanity.... comparitively speaking tho he is head and shoulders better (less evil) than jackson or the fat james brown lookalike. I don't think he will instill any riots.
lazs
-
Perhaps I didn't get my point across very well. Unless a pastor is a Southern Baptist, he doesn't have any reason to denouce Pat Robertson because they are not affiliated with him.
You might say "but their both Christians". I could just as easily say why don't you denounce Pat Roberston to the world MT, your both Americans.
Nobody with any sense is going to go anywhere near enough to that quack to do any denouncing. It's not the responsability of 99% of the pastors in this country.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Midnight,
You are probably well aware of this already, but the United States is literally filled with demagogues who say stupid things every day, and who have a loyal following who continue to support them regardless of how absurd their commentary becomes.
- SEAGOON
That is a perfect description of miko2 on the AGW board.
-
When I read the title of this thread: "Religious Leaders Should Denounce".... I thought this was another one of those threads we used to see all the time here.
eg.
"Why aren't the Muslim/Islamic clerics/leaders denouncing the terrorist nutjobs?"
I guess we finally have our answer: "They aren't really one of us."
Hey, if it works for you, it works for me.
-
Originally posted by Nash
When I read the title of this thread: "Religious Leaders Should Denounce".... I thought this was another one of those threads we used to see all the time here.
eg.
"Why aren't the Muslim/Islamic clerics/leaders denouncing the terrorist nutjobs?"
I guess we finally have our answer: "They aren't really one of us."
Hey, if it works for you, it works for me.
wow Nash you are a very astute person. You took the opinion of one person and made it a group thought for everyone.
Do you have to take classes for this liberal ideology or is this type of logic only developed after years of experience?
-
ok....Im going out on a limb here, trust me.......
Roberston speaks for God. Beware you heathens....
-
Do you have to take classes for this liberal ideology or is this type of logic only developed after years of experience?" - Gunslinger
It aint "liberal ideology," Gunslinger. In fact it aint even ideology. It was just a dumb observation.
Holy non sequitur...
Classes?
Of course, it may have sounded academic to you (why? Beats me.).... And we all know that academia = liberals run amok = bad.
Stoopid = good.
(two can play at the non sequitur game, pal.)
I too love the smell of Fall.
(non sequitur triple threat!)
-
Okay, I havent read anything in this thread......but what are we fighting about? I want to start some watermelon and bust some liberal arse!
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ask yourself this...if Bush was in office and had a BJ in office, do you think NOW would have spoke up? You can bet your house on it.
Lets not forget the Vaginal Ashtray
-
Does anybody actually know anyone who is a big time Robertson fan?
I know most of us if not all of us have watched him from time to time if for no other reason the comedic value.
But does anyone really know anybody who takes him seriously?
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Does anybody actually know anyone who is a big time Robertson fan?
I know most of us if not all of us have watched him from time to time if for no other reason the comedic value.
But does anyone really know anybody who takes him seriously?
That's what I'm trying to tell Nash. He thinks all of us Bush type fans worship Robertson every day at sunset.
-
Hi Chickenhawk,
Originally posted by ChickenHawk
Perhaps I didn't get my point across very well. Unless a pastor is a Southern Baptist, he doesn't have any reason to denouce Pat Robertson because they are not affiliated with him.
Even that is more complicated than it seems. While Pat was ordained in a Southern Baptist church in the 60s, his theology is much more Charismatic/Pentecostal and certainly wouldn't correspond with what is being tought in say Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
In fact, theologically Pat is more in step with the sliding all over the place theology of the TBN network, and isn't tied to any particular creed or confession. Additionally, as you are probably aware, the Southern Baptists are congregational and are technically an association rather than a denomination. Censure and church discipline in such an association is haphazard at best, and is really only vested in the local congregation. Since Pat doesn't serve a particular local congregation, who would censure him and whose authority would he recognize? He doesn't even mention his affiliation or ordination on his "official website" which probably has a lot to do with the fact that most American Fundamentalists are fiercely independent and many view denominational affiliation, seminary training, and ordination as "bad things" - the idea for instance that any body could censure a minister for being completely off the theological reservation is fiercely resisted in many quarters and this attitude only encourages the spread of bad theology, politicizing the church, meglomania, and crazy antics.
So, while I can answer in a heartbeat who you would need to write in order to begin the process of church discipline and censure against me, its unclear if anyone could officially censure or ecclesiastically discipline Pat.
Other biographical trivia for Pat (whose real name is Marion Gordon Robertson) includes the fact that his father was a Democratic Congressman and Senator, and that Pat saw combat as a Marine in the Korean war.
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Pat Robertson is an a.s.s.h.a.t
i would go further and say most televangelists are a.s.s.h.a.t.s...
was watching some faith healing shcmuck(the one that likes posh wHiTe suits) the other weekend...huge production set in a capacity filled soccer stadium in some impoverished African nation...on comes this lady,blind as a bat all her life...he touches her forhead,she falls back into the arms of his "aids"... and by God..she can see!!!..He leads her around the stage back and forth as proof she can indeed see!
She comes back for more...He places his hand on her forhead again"Praise Jesus for you are healed!"...this time she stumbled forward and fell on her face,her head bouncing off one fo the stage monitors..I didn't see any blood but had she cracked her head i'm sure Mr Evangelist would have healed her.
The mass of starving & destitute Africans sucking it up made me feel sick.
Oral Robert's son is another faith-healing tool...the fake-healing was pretty sad"I'm gonna prove to you that there's a God!" he said as he fixed someone's cancer(or something)...then the "Sow a Seed of $1000" pitch came on....I'd give him $10 if i knew i could sue him for fraud.
Faith is irrational and religious intolerence is the cause of more killing than anything else.(Islam being the most intolerant & dangerous of all religions)
-
I would agree with you Sir loin, the problem is that in all religions you have your fundamental extremests. This causes pain for everyone else wich leads to posts like this from MT saying you guys should denounce him, when most of us who are christian don't assosicate ourselves with him in the first place. It's like saying all blacks follow luids farakan or Al Sharpton. It's like saying all leftist socialists like Nash beleive in what the Cindy Shehans of the world are saying and beleive the US actually used Chemical weapons on Falluja. The truth is that most average folks on this board don't associate themselves with ANY of these extreme views.
-
Oh..Don't want to forget Jerry Fallwell..He used to regularly sit in on security breifings with President Reagan...No theocracy there...nope!
Religion has no place in politics or public schools..
or Supreme courts...you want to see the Ten Commandment's monument as you make your way up the stairs?...as an athiest i would feel my belief's were not being respected and that the court was already judging me.
if you gonna put up the Ten Commandments,why not have another monument that spells out the punishment for breaking them?
"Though shall not commit adultry"...punishment according to Bible?
Death.
"Though shall not take the Lord's name in vain"..or else..
Death..
etc..
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
Oh..Don't want to forget Jerry Fallwell..He used to regularly sit in on security breifings with President Reagan...No theocracy there...nope!
Religion has no place in politics or public schools..
or Supreme courts...you want to see the Ten Commandment's monument as you make your way up the stairs?...as an athiest i would feel my belief's were not being respected and that the court was already judging me.
if you gonna put up the Ten Commandments,why not have another monument that spells out the punishment for breaking them?
"Though shall not commit adultry"...punishment according to Bible?
Death.
"Though shall not take the Lord's name in vain"..or else..
Death..
etc..
Last time I checked chritians weren't stoning woman for adultry. The problem with your asertation of removal of religion from all aspects of public life is that you are now infringing on their right to freely practice religion. Not teaching in schools is like not teaching english lit. to me it needs to be in schools because it needs to be taught (from an educational/historical stand point) not to mention if you teach kids the differences of theology it promotes the "D" word that liberals and colleges fawn over....diversity. Removal of all aspects of it leads to book burning, ignorance, and intollerence.
-
Nicely put Seagoon. Thank you for clearing that up.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Okay, I havent read anything in this thread......but what are we fighting about? I want to start some watermelon and bust some liberal arse!
You never seem to let not knowing anything stop you before.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
That's what I'm trying to tell Nash. He thinks all of us Bush type fans worship Robertson every day at sunset.
Well ya gotta remember. Tis after all Nash your talking to.
;)
-
Andy I'm having puter probs... Sometimes I can get on and sometimes I can't... Today I changed out componets...errrrrrr parts... from 2 puters just to finally 8 hours laterr to get on line...
So Besides all of that...
Andy keep doing what you do... I love what you say and It's an eye opener.
Pray all is well with you and your wifes loss. Prayer are still with you.
Mac
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ask yourself this...if Bush was in office and had a BJ in office, do you think NOW would have spoke up? You can bet your house on it.
Bush is too busy sleeping to get bjs. He did however promise to restore integrity to the white house...Still waiting...
-
Pat Robertson leader of the American taliban.
-
It's ironic that the same people calling out to Muslim leaders to speak out against terrorism are silent about the right wing religious crackpots.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
It's ironic that the same people calling out to Muslim leaders to speak out against terrorism are silent about the right wing religious crackpots.
have you even read this thread?
-
''I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected Him from your city.''
-- Nov. 2005
He has made idiotic statements in the past, but this is not one.
In this statement, Roberston did not call for any action against Dover, even by the almighty.
He is an idiot blinded by ideology, but to make paralells to the Taliban, Ayatolla Khomeni or Torquemada is stretching it a bit.
-
Originally posted by AWMac
Andy I'm having puter probs... Sometimes I can get on and sometimes I can't... Today I changed out componets...errrrrrr parts... from 2 puters just to finally 8 hours laterr to get on line...
So Besides all of that...
Andy keep doing what you do... I love what you say and It's an eye opener.
Pray all is well with you and your wifes loss. Prayer are still with you.
Mac
Thank you Mac, I can't tell you how much I was moved by the expressions of sympathy and offers of help, public and private, I've received from the board. I don't come close to being worthy of it, but I sincerely appreciate it none the less.
Anywho, I've almost always enjoyed this forum, and please know that I appreciate the way that most of the guys who disagree with my worldview interact. Yeah, it gets rough on occasion, but I'd rather deal with that than the wishy-washy non-confrontational pablum that our culture prefers, wouldn't you? I'd also be the first one to admit that your Nash or your Raider are still vastly more respectful and pleasant than I was to deal with when I was on the other side of the fence. Skuzzy would have banned me in a heartbeat and would have been right to do so. Then again I'm not sure anyone would have understood my posts as they would have looked kind of like this: "******* **** how ********* stupid does an ******* have to be to ******** believe such a pile of ****" etc.
- SEAGOON