Conspiracy paranoia alert: "the murderers of Abu Ammar"? That's Arafat. Who are his murderers? The guys he contracted AIDS from?

I do not believe she is talking about Yasir Arafat - there may well be hundreds of men called Abu Ammar in the Arab lands including Palestine. If she is supposed to be a Hamas supporter, well, she is unlikely to be an appreciator of Arafat, to say the least. Arafat's Islamic credentials are in very serious doubt.

By the way, I have come across "Shaykha Maulana Aisha" on an online forum before, and she was a crank then and seems to still be one now. People are not supposed to call themselves "Maulana" (which is what Maulani seems to be a mis-spelling of). It means "our master".

Posted by: Yusuf Smith at June 26, 2005 3:44 PM

Jihad..Jihad..Jihad !! Finish with the jewish vermin once and forever !!

YOU DO AND I'LL GIVE YOU SUCH A PINCH!!!

Posted by: Shy Guy at June 26, 2005 3:44 PM

I request that Giaour be banned from JW. This is not a matter that I take lightly. In contrast to the KJ, who has been repeatedly threatened with banishment, JW Giaour has provided absolutely nothing useful to the forum. His rants are at best provide freakish amusement, at worst, tie up the commentary section with frivolous distractions from matters of life and death. Yesterday was the last straw.

Hugh posted an insightful essay addressing the crossroads that America currently faces in Iraq. Unfortunately, Giaour posted early with some incredibly disgusting comments impugning the honor of our troops and our veterans:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/006810.php#comments

Consequently, the commentary section degenerated into a bitch-slapping contest between patriots and leftists, with little bearing on Hugh's analysis. It was particularly frustrating for me because (for reasons I have yet to understand) my computer does not allow me to post comments on JW, so I had could only watch this hijacking from the sidelines (I am currently posting from a computer at my university).

Even though I have grave reservations about Hugh's solution to the problem, he addresses some potentially fatal blind spots of those who are staying the course. Even though family obligations and the aforementioned technical difficulties prevent me from fully participating in debates like this one, I want these views to be given a proper hearing they deserve. I don't like seeing them upstaged by a freak show.

In case you do not have time to read Giaour's garbage first hand, here are some highlights:

"I've watched old farts on the History channel talk about WWII or Korea, bragging how in 30 minutes of combat They became a man?"

Then it gets even worse:

"Chris Hedges said it well in War is the force that gives us meaning War is necrophilia.?"

In case you haven't heard of Chris Hedges, here is one of the more sensible reviews of his obscene book about war:
http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1262/War%20Is%20a%20For.htm

Hedges also alleges that Israeli troops shoots at Palestinian children "for sport.":

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=4&x_context=2
http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Eyeless_in_Gaza.asp

This Hedges article about the "dominionist" and "reconstructionist" movements is so paranoid and egregious that even the New Duranty Times would not publish it:

http://www.4religious-right.info/chris_hedges_nov24_04.htm

Like many people who never fought in a war, I am in awe of the sacrifice our soldiers make to defend America, but veteran status is not a license for dishonoring those who are proud of their service.

Posted by: Andrei Rublev at June 26, 2005 4:08 PM

This I.T.S. reminds me of a group of infants, all in one room, all cutting teeth at the same time.

Posted by: DCWatson at June 26, 2005 4:12 PM

Las night I watched a report on AL BBC about the introduction of the ban on headscarves in French Schools last year. Only about 30 hardcore (many black) females refused.

The teachers were quite courageous and once convinced, they resolutely enforced the issue. The Dhimmi-tardy Poms could learn something, and since it worked so well the US should follow suit. The teachers were well informed about the Islamic "fundamentalism' behind it and showed clear resolve in formulating the appropriate response.

The arguments against accepting the new laws were indeed very Islamic:
"They (the French) don't respect us, they are arrogant and ignorant, Allah's law is bigger etc."

Many tried to engage others in 'discussions' (Da'wa) about Islam, a lot of wincing and tears about 'disrespect for their religion'-but in the end the French saw it through inspite of the 2 hostages in Iraq and the threat to have them beheaded.

To put us all to shame it was the French who started this. Our countries have yet to follow suit. I would be very much in favor of having this whole "mummenschanz" (spook) banned, period!

Posted by: Terminator at June 26, 2005 5:56 PM

Andrei Rublev is a little off-topic. I'm not really familiar with Chris Hedges' work.

I make no comment about the Harper's article, in that this is the first I've heard of it. I confess, however, that if I were a member of the IDF, I would get pretty damned trigger-happy around thuggish rock-throwing Palestianian boys.

A skim-thru the anti-war stuff seems mostly to regard war as the utter horror it is, even one done in self-defense. Homicide is ugly, even in the most justified of situations.

As for the Theocracy Watch article,

http://www.4religious-right.info/chris_hedges_nov24_04.htm

there is nothing here that immediately rouses my suspicions of unfair reporting.

The Dominionist/Reconstructionist/Pre-tribublationist premillennial dispensationist axis really does constitute a kind of threat, mainly from their bizarre alliance with the secular Republican right (the secular Republicans are just as licentiously depraved as are those of the secular left).

The currrent Republican regime's pandering to the wacko religious right is ultimately self-defeating, in that the secular wing of the party -- mainly the big money interests -- is quite ready to kick them in the teeth when something important comes up to divide them. To state it differently, the Republicans can not and will not deliver on their tacit promises to erect even fraction of a Falwell-Robertson styled theocracy.

I'm relatively new here. I don't understand Andrei Rublev's bias. What's his outrage over the wacko wannabe ayatollahs of the Christian right being called to task for what they really are?

Posted by: Loxias at June 26, 2005 5:57 PM

As a Christian, I call B.S. on the "Dominionist Movement", you leftists are a lot loopy about this "threat". I have never met a "dominionist". Jesus said His kingdom is not of this world. Like I have said before, when Christians start hi-jacking planes and chopping heads...then you can worry.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 26, 2005 6:30 PM

Wasn't there a guy with a funny little square moustache once, who was also always calling for a final solution to the "Jewish vermin"?

Whatever happened to him?

(Maybe some elderly Russian forensic dentist could help us out here?)

Schickle- somebody-or-other...

Posted by: BigSleep at June 26, 2005 7:07 PM

Like I have said before, when Christians start hi-jacking planes and chopping heads...then you can worry.

While I don't see them hijacking planes, they do seem to want to extend the reach of the death penalty.

you leftists are a lot loopy about this "threat"

No loopier than the secular right (when they speak behind the Christian right's back). The neo-fundamentalist (mainly dispensationalist) right are often as one-note as are the jihadists.

I'm into defending my nice, rich, largely benign, decadantly secular Western Civilization, and not in replacing it with a wacked-out theocracy -- from either the Muslims or the Christian right, or from any other religious place.

Posted by: Loxias at June 26, 2005 7:09 PM

As I have said elsewhere, Loxias:

Defense of one's faith is NOT support, unconscious or otherwise, for extremism (especially the extrme minority know as 'dominionists'), nor is it a refusal to acknowledge the problems of the past.

I would be curious to have you explain how it is.

The threat loxias, giaour and co. see:

http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200505020944.asp

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17957

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17927

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17958

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/jg20050513.shtml

Mr. Spencer's own response:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/006113.php#comments

futher comments by Mr. Spencer, which you seem to be ignoring, Loxias:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/006775.php#comments

Attempting to drag down our side and compare it so much with islam just really seems to fit the quote: 'Aid and Comfort to the Enemy.'

Get over it and get with us on the true threat!

Posted by: Gary at June 26, 2005 7:46 PM

I don't understand Andrei Rublev's bias. What's his outrage over the wacko wannabe ayatollahs of the Christian right being called to task for what they really are?

Posted by: Loxias

Give the New Testament Scripture that will back your claims.

Jesus came to serve - not rule. [the same is expected of us]

Mic 6:3 What have I done unto thee? and wherein have I wearied thee? testify against Me.

Give the New Testament Scripture that you find so offensive Loxias - concerning violence between humans.

Until you do - you are falsely accussing True Christianity

With true Christianity - you can go off and live your life what ever way you choose.

Not so with Islam.

009.005 fight and slay the Pagans ''''wherever'''' ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war.

And for the record Loxias - your but is in a far worse place to be - than the Christians - when it comes to Islam

Posted by: Beth at June 26, 2005 7:47 PM

Attempting to drag down our side and compare it so much with islam just really seems to fit the quote: 'Aid and Comfort to the Enemy.'

Get over it and get with us on the true threat!

Posted by: Gary

I think it best to let them speak. No doubt - they speak for many.

Posted by: Beth at June 26, 2005 7:49 PM

Andrei Rublev

I fully support Gaiour, and I proudly stand in his corner. His posts are the most brilliant that I've seen in JW and DW.

Keep them coming Gaiour!

Posted by: Voltaire at June 26, 2005 7:53 PM

And incidently Andrei Rublev, recently the oldest war veteran in Australia died. He was 107. He said that war is stupid and a complete waste of life. He was honoured by the President of the Returned Services League, who agreed with his remarks.

The Prime Minister of Australia also agreed with what he said.

War veterans have the right to say whatever they want to say about their war experiences.

You may disagree with some-one but you have no right to try to stop them from speaking out.

Posted by: Voltaire at June 26, 2005 7:58 PM

"ALLAH BLESS HAMAS AND PEOPLE OF PALESTINE !"

'allah' forgot to mention Palestine. There is a prophecy though - concerning Palestine:

Exd 15:14 The people shall hear, and be afraid: sorrow shall take hold on the inhabitants of Palestina. Song of Moses - the saints 'sing' this song} Rev 15:3

Isa 14:31 Howl, O gate; cry, O city; thou, whole Palestina, art dissolved: for there shall come from the north a smoke, and none shall be alone in his appointed times.

Isa 45:21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD?

Joe 3:4 Yea, and what have ye to do with Me? O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of Palestine? will ye render Me a recompence? and if ye recompense Me, swiftly and speedily will I return your recompence upon your own head.

Joe 3:1 For, behold, in those days, and in that time,

Joe 3:2 I will gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel.

Joe 3:14 Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision.

The name Israel came from God and NO other.

Woe unto the murderers in Palestine and those who support them. They have NO Spiritual Authority for doing so.

Posted by: Beth at June 26, 2005 7:59 PM

For those of you who are SOOO against war - why are you supporting Palestine?

Arabs live in Israel - why can't Jews live in 'Palestine' ???

Is that not racist???

Posted by: Beth at June 26, 2005 8:03 PM

Does anyone else see how the West can lose this fight for our lives? It is plain in the above posts.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 26, 2005 8:09 PM

Carolyn2.

When you're being invaded, as we are being invaded by muslims inside our own country, then yes you have to fight to save your country and your way of life.

But just invading a country like Iraq which was not a danger to any other country is just stupid and foolish.

ONe day there will be a civil war between muslims and us "infidels" and then I will proudly fight.

But timing is crucial and apparently we have to wait until they've reached a critical mass and introduce sharia law until we can fight back.

At the moment, this is just a phoney war.

Posted by: Voltaire at June 26, 2005 8:19 PM

Voltaire, "A house divided cannot stand"- if those who choose not to believe in G-d hate Christians even more than islam, how can we prevail? We truly need to be united in this battle. The statements about the looming Christian theocracy is just not true. There are some websites about aliens supposedly involved in our world government, should we get all paranoid because some people believe that?

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 26, 2005 8:28 PM

are not true ↑

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 26, 2005 8:29 PM

Oh yes, on topic
"After all the targeted assasinations, with one of the worst being being the sniper in the plane asking Sharon by plane if it was okay to 'take the shot' and then when told yes, he put a missile in Sheikh Yassin's wheelchair outside the mosque"
GOOD SHOOTING!

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 26, 2005 8:33 PM

For all those so worried about War:

-tell it to those liberated from Death Camps -by War.

-tell it to the millions of black slaves- liberated by War.

-tell it to the children of the colonists in that former English outpost now known as the United States of America- liberated and created by War.

War is a necessary evil, at times. Like surgery.

Otherwise, why not just let pedophiles kidnap, rape and murder children at will? Since you might have to hurt them to stop them?

Our enemies are willing to fight and die.

We must be willing to answer their challenge, and help them die.

It's easy for an old soldier to weep for the dead and the 'waste of warfare' ...because he survived.

Somehow forgetting all those who would NOT have survived had the warriors failed to oppose the fascists, communists, Nazis, and their ilk, everywhere.

I'll chalk it up to well-meaning but essentially meaningless sentimentality ...but that's why we don't have 107 year olds in the trenches.

War is not a thing. It is a tool.

Used by despots, it is a horror.

Used against despots, it has horrors, but is vital.

And liberating.

Posted by: BigSleep at June 26, 2005 8:47 PM

All,

The left is as the left is: Lunatic fringe utopians who see the world in a totally naiive do-gooder fashion. They are not going to change their minds, they are convinced that socialism (intelligencia) and communism (labor class) is the answer to the world's problems, and only underfunding and non-believers have gotten in their way.

They are evangelical in nature, as you can see by how aggressively they attempt to pursuade non-believers to take up the cause, and they are fundamentalist in that they believe all who think differently are evil sinners who pose a danger to the civilized world.

Changing their minds is nearly impossible, as they are virtually brainwashed with the mission of establishing a humanist utopia. Their cause is messianic, as they believe the world will be saved when the time comes that we enter the Egalitarian Age in which mankind achieves harmonious perfection.

Accept that they are lost souls, that the cool-aid they drank is powerful and their leaders are ruthless, but such is the way and we must simply no better and not get our rational panties in a wad every time one of the liberal missionaries preaches from their soap box.

We must simply tut-tut them with condescending pats on the head and ignore their blather, as dumbing down to their level is a complete waste of time. As I learned a long time ago: never argue with a fool.

Posted by: Madzionist at June 26, 2005 10:04 PM

Voltaire,

WOT, but are you from Australia?

If so, I have a question about Mr. Casserly, and those Anzac's who've gone before him.

Posted by: PRCS at June 26, 2005 10:17 PM

For all those so worried about War:
-tell it to those liberated from Death Camps -by War.

Posted by: BigSleep

You left out those Iraqis who were being fed feet first - into paper shredders.

I will defend Hugh on one part of his statements - and that is - the most important part of this war IS NOT BEING FOUGHT!

He is right - above all others! In order to be successful in taking down any enemy - you have to know what is making them 'tick' - and then you go after it!

What's the sense in going to war with 'ecyremists' if the Koran is ONLY GOING TO KEEP SENDING THEM???

Humanitarian laws that are already on the books - condemn the Koran - yet no one wants to enforce them.

Those who have an understanding of the power that 'spiritual' teachings have upon men - also know the power the Bible has. They know for a fact that the Bible has the power to pull down Islam.

That's 2 tools - humanitaraian laws and Great Prophecies to prove how false the 'allah' of the Koran is - and yet - those being attacked - choose to remain divided.

This is REAL SERIOUS folks! It is DEADLY SERIOUS!

Posted by: Beth at June 26, 2005 10:24 PM

"...for reasons I have yet to understand) my computer does not allow me to post comments on JW"
Posted by: Andrei Rublev

Andrei,

Your browser need to have Java and Javascript enabled. The switches are in the browser Preferences or Tools menu. Hope this helps.

Posted by: skidd at June 26, 2005 11:39 PM

Robert's gonna be abmicturated tomorrow morning when he wallows through all of this. I find it difficult, however, to keep silent when foolish people post foolish things.

Some people posting here find it impossible to believe a secular humanist leftist can possibly be anti-jihadist, and even anti-Muslim*, and end up either demanding proof texts to prove my point (!) or paint me as a communist.

I don't like dispensationalism and in particular dispise its louder adherants. There seem to be a few of them posting here. In the words of St. Hillary (blesséd be her name!), the 'right wing conspiracy' is more or less centered here, along with its fellow-traveller neo-pagan component epitomized by the likes of Karl Rove and Grover Norquist.

The main point of this board is to expose the Jihadists -- and having some fun while doing so. Why should mid-left Democrats like myself be regarded as the beast of Babylon? You dispensationalists need to go read your Scofield or Ryrie Bible some more; try the Beatitudes, Matthew 5:3-11; I particularly like v 11:

Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

It is Robert's cross to deal with all of this.

--
*in the same sense I am anti-Mormon, anti-Christian Scientist, anti-Scientology, anti-7th Day Adventist, anti-JW -- i.e., these are all religions that have relatively recent 'divinely revealed' teachings or have veered so far from the usual historical path that they have exited Christianity altogether and become separate world religions.

Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 12:04 AM

Tut-tut, Loxias.

Posted by: Madzionist at June 27, 2005 12:21 AM

"Jihad..Jihad..Jihad "

When I first saw "Team America" I thought it was just a "spoof" with a hint of reality. But the "Jihad Jihad" bit really has me wondering!

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at June 27, 2005 1:14 AM

White American Patriot:

Now, now, be nice or else I'll be forced to re-position the geo-synchronous JDL-Mossad Star of Dovid Satellite over you and convert you to Judaism in your sleep!

And you know we can do it!

So, STFU!

Posted by: Itai at June 27, 2005 1:36 AM

White American Patriot:

Now, now, be nice or else I'll be forced to re-position the geo-synchronous JDL-Mossad Star of Dovid Satellite over you and convert you to Judaism in your sleep!

And you know we can do it!

So, STFU!

Posted by: Itai at June 27, 2005 1:36 AM

10 Reasons To Love Palestine
by Goffaq Yussef

Golly gee, I am SOOOO proud to be Palestinian Arab from the WestBank. Let me tell you the reasons why I have such warm, fuzzy
feelings about my people and culture:

1. There is no such thing as Mothers Day. No worry about cards, gifts, and expensive meals. There is no honor in being a woman in our culture, so there is no reason to devote a day to her. We do,however, get to enjoy watching our fathers beat our mothers senseless for the slightest real or imagined infraction. Also, if
Dad suspects that Mom spoke to a strange man in the street, he gets to kill her to preserve the family honor!

2. Weapons. Every child, from the time he can grasp an object, is trained to feel comfortable with a rifle or pistol in his hand. And
every Palestinian has a weapon: a gun, a rocket launcher, a pound of C-4. What good are hands if they aren't used to kill?

3. Hate. Boy, we love to hate. Hate is the very basis and foundation of our culture. From the time a child is old enough to understand language, we teach him to hate. Hate Jews, hate the West, hate his fellow man, and most of all, hate himself. We have no love songs, we do not preach love, the word love does not appear
anywhere in our society. Hate is the fuel that runs our motors.

4. Death. The moment a Palestinian Arab child is born, his parents begin to plan his death. How will he die? Will he be struck by an
Israeli bullet while being used as a human shield by Palestinian gunmen? Will he get shot while throwing rocks at Jewish soldiers?
Will he be packed with explosives and sent to blow himself up, killing others? Or will he merely be one of the many Palestinians
murdered by other Palestinians in the normal course of daily life in the death-culture of the Palestinian Arabs? Who knows? That's part
of the thrill.

5. Unemployment. Palestinians used to have jobs, working in Israel. But then, our leaders had a brilliant idea: suicide bombings! For their own protection, Israel had to close its
borders, preventing Palestinians from going to their jobs, so they could sit around unemployed and blame the Jews for it. What great
fun to be your own worst enemy!

6. Martyrdom. Who in their right mind wants to be a martyr? Among normal people, a martyr complex is considered immature and
obnoxious, if not downright crazy. With us, it's the central syndrome of our society! Hey, look at me, I'm gonna kill myself and become admired! And then, when we do kill ourselves, instead of
being considered pathetic, we DO get admired! It's a whole complete cycle of sickness! American kids collect baseball cards;
Palestinian kids collect martyr cards (really! no joke!).

7. A feeling of entitlement. When Israel came into being, we declared war. We lost. We fought again. We lost. We fought again. We lost. Israel had the right to kill us all (we sure would
kill all of them if we got the chance). Instead, they allow us to live on land they conquered. But we can't leave that alone. We have to claim entitlement to live on land that we lost in 6 wars. Since when does the loser of a war get to claim the land he fought over? They don't. But we do. Not only that, but we happily kill
our kids over it! Hey, what's more important -- a chunk of dirt, or some worthless kid who isn't going to amount to anything anyway?

8. Uselessness. The Jews have won more Nobel Prizes than all other ethnic groups combined. Their contributions to science, art,
literature and the humanities is far out of proportion to their population. What have Palestinians produced? Nothing! Not a thing. We don't do anything productive. We're too busy rioting and killing and chanting and screaming and calling for everyone's death. And we blame the Jews for it, as though the Jews stop us from being productive.

9. Friends. The Palestinian people sure know how to pick 'em. Saadam Hussein. The Taliban. Adolf Hitler. You name a psychopath,
and we embrace him. And look who our supporters are! The American Nazi Party. The KKK. Just check their websites and see how they
stand in solidarity with us. When you support the Palestinian "cause," you're in real good company. Bring your white sheet!

10. Freedom. The biggest laugh in the world is when people call us "freedom fighters" or they say we're fighting for our freedom. Take
a look at all 22 Arab countries. Do you see any freedom there? Well, that's what our country will be like if we ever get one. It will be a dictatorship run by armed, masked thugs who will kill anyone who dissents. Just like we are now. Freedom???? LOLOLOLOL The word doesn't even exist in our language. Hey, just like George
Orwell said: "Freedom is slavery. Long live big brother!"

Remember: Israel is bad! LOLOL -- It's existence keeps reminding us what a bunch of losers we are.

Posted by: Kemaste at June 27, 2005 2:06 AM

Like Madzionist says - Loxias is just a big fundamentalist re Humanism/Socialism, and hence is in the same category as us Bible believing Christians when it comes to pushing his wheelbarrow.

Maybe he should have a look at what some of the Great forefathers of the US believed in terms of Christianity. He would class them as "fundamentalists" as well, even though they had a huge role in building the US.

Most were die hard Christians. Shock horror! Not perfect, but Christian.

Maybe Loxias should go live in a humanist paradise like China. At least the once dominated Christian countries gave rise to democracy.

Today we see socialistic laws like social security that makes people dependent, rather than INdependant of government, we see Humanistic "Hate" laws and "discrimination" laws, that have no set defined boundaries and are constantly "re-interpreted" to mean that a paedophile can sue for "discrimination" (no wonder the left gets along with Islam, Mo (may pigs piss be upon him) would be proud; see the Australian case of a convicted Wicca paedophile suing the Salvation Army, under socialist Humanist “Hate” laws) etc etc.

Loxias - you're borderless, socialistic laws are dragging us down. The only people who are benefiting is the Legal Industry, oh and Muslims!! (funny they are the ones drafting these laws also, and often support Muslim immigration - see Australia - Jillian Burnside QC for one, a leading do-gooder atheist or Chief High Court Judge Kirby, who tries to deny the democratic process of their country via High Court Action – a typical socialist/humanist, if an election doesn’t work, bugger the people, by using a PC judge to bring in laws).

Humanism is forced upon us as "fact" in "secular" schools (which technically, are not supposed to push any worldview as fact), then humanists like Loxias have the nerve to have a go at us "evil" Christians.

Maybe we'd be winning this "War on Terror" Loxias, if you Humanists could actually identify the ENEMY as a whole, unlike many of the Bible believing Christians you seem to be so afraid of (even though they have "infested" your society (I assume the US) for hundreds of years!) At least the Bible believing Christians are officially fighting Islam, not only via Pastors like the two Daniels in Australia, but by missionary work in Islamic countries. What would you rather, a Christian democratic country or an Islamic one Loxias? I’m yet to see a Christian do a 9/11, let alone justify it in the Bible. At least great atheists like Stalin, Hitler, Mao can justify their actions under Humanism/evolution/socialism as the end justifies the means and “Truth is relative” isn’t it? (speaking of which, can I have my money that’s in your wallet?)

I'm sure that there are more Christian missionaries losing their life, being imprisoned for trying to convert Muslims in Muslim countries than there are the materialistic Humanists who are trying to give Muslims a different option to hate and killing of the Koran.

Few Humanist take up the challenge. The Bible believing Christians are leading the fight against Islam, and thats what scares the left. People might just see that Christianity isn't dead and possibly the West might return. That's what sacres the left, that all their "hard won" morally relative laws might come undone.

Yet how many Christians are dying on a daily basis fighting ISlam? Tens of thousands. Maybe Loxias, you should be like a friend of mine, who is off to the ME to one of the worst of ISlamic countries to do missionary work, despite the threat of life and limb, and there would be a few less terrorist Muslims.

Then again, your materialistic belief puts you first doesn't it? You socialists prefer to do good things, but with other people's money via the government, no? Christianity is the opposite.

It tells the individual to do good things with their OWN money. Hence Christianity actually puts the responsibility on the individual, rather than the State (unfortunately many Christians see that's its OK to hand over rights to the government to do "good things" - and governments are corrupt, hence the reason why it is all important to keep political power decentralised and accountable - just like it was in Australia and the US and Britian, once upon a time....)

A case in point is the USA v’s Europe. The USA, which was founded by a huge majority of Christians, puts the rights on the individual first. Europe which is Humanist/socialist says the state first, THEN the individual (aka Socialism, that will eventually lead to dictatorship).

Yes Loxias the US is a secular government – but its principles and morals were originally formed on Christian morals. Not Humanist ones, but you guys are changing the laws slowly, and the lawyers and the police are getting much more “work” aren’t they, while the criminals get more and more 'rights'.

You must indeed be proud, that in this day and age, a pedophile can sue for discrimination, or some illegal immigrant can take you to the "international" court of justice where some foreign judge will preside over you.

So much for the individuals' rights.

Islam and Socialism have one thing in common. That is - its the STATE that matters, THEN the individual.

Christ clearly puts the onus on the INDIVIDUAL, THEN the State. There is an inherent, but important difference, and it explains why the left so readily embraces our "Religion of Peace".

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at June 27, 2005 2:08 AM

10 Reasons To Love Palestine
by Goffaq Yussef

Golly gee, I am SOOOO proud to be Palestinian Arab from the WestBank. Let me tell you the reasons why I have such warm, fuzzy
feelings about my people and culture:

1. There is no such thing as Mothers Day. No worry about cards, gifts, and expensive meals. There is no honor in being a woman in our culture, so there is no reason to devote a day to her. We do,however, get to enjoy watching our fathers beat our mothers senseless for the slightest real or imagined infraction. Also, if
Dad suspects that Mom spoke to a strange man in the street, he gets to kill her to preserve the family honor!

2. Weapons. Every child, from the time he can grasp an object, is trained to feel comfortable with a rifle or pistol in his hand. And
every Palestinian has a weapon: a gun, a rocket launcher, a pound of C-4. What good are hands if they aren't used to kill?

3. Hate. Boy, we love to hate. Hate is the very basis and foundation of our culture. From the time a child is old enough to understand language, we teach him to hate. Hate Jews, hate the West, hate his fellow man, and most of all, hate himself. We have no love songs, we do not preach love, the word love does not appear
anywhere in our society. Hate is the fuel that runs our motors.

4. Death. The moment a Palestinian Arab child is born, his parents begin to plan his death. How will he die? Will he be struck by an
Israeli bullet while being used as a human shield by Palestinian gunmen? Will he get shot while throwing rocks at Jewish soldiers?
Will he be packed with explosives and sent to blow himself up, killing others? Or will he merely be one of the many Palestinians
murdered by other Palestinians in the normal course of daily life in the death-culture of the Palestinian Arabs? Who knows? That's part
of the thrill.

5. Unemployment. Palestinians used to have jobs, working in Israel. But then, our leaders had a brilliant idea: suicide bombings! For their own protection, Israel had to close its
borders, preventing Palestinians from going to their jobs, so they could sit around unemployed and blame the Jews for it. What great
fun to be your own worst enemy!

6. Martyrdom. Who in their right mind wants to be a martyr? Among normal people, a martyr complex is considered immature and
obnoxious, if not downright crazy. With us, it's the central syndrome of our society! Hey, look at me, I'm gonna kill myself and become admired! And then, when we do kill ourselves, instead of
being considered pathetic, we DO get admired! It's a whole complete cycle of sickness! American kids collect baseball cards;
Palestinian kids collect martyr cards (really! no joke!).

7. A feeling of entitlement. When Israel came into being, we declared war. We lost. We fought again. We lost. We fought again. We lost. Israel had the right to kill us all (we sure would
kill all of them if we got the chance). Instead, they allow us to live on land they conquered. But we can't leave that alone. We have to claim entitlement to live on land that we lost in 6 wars. Since when does the loser of a war get to claim the land he fought over? They don't. But we do. Not only that, but we happily kill
our kids over it! Hey, what's more important -- a chunk of dirt, or some worthless kid who isn't going to amount to anything anyway?

8. Uselessness. The Jews have won more Nobel Prizes than all other ethnic groups combined. Their contributions to science, art,
literature and the humanities is far out of proportion to their population. What have Palestinians produced? Nothing! Not a thing. We don't do anything productive. We're too busy rioting and killing and chanting and screaming and calling for everyone's death. And we blame the Jews for it, as though the Jews stop us from being productive.

9. Friends. The Palestinian people sure know how to pick 'em. Saadam Hussein. The Taliban. Adolf Hitler. You name a psychopath,
and we embrace him. And look who our supporters are! The American Nazi Party. The KKK. Just check their websites and see how they
stand in solidarity with us. When you support the Palestinian "cause," you're in real good company. Bring your white sheet!

10. Freedom. The biggest laugh in the world is when people call us "freedom fighters" or they say we're fighting for our freedom. Take
a look at all 22 Arab countries. Do you see any freedom there? Well, that's what our country will be like if we ever get one. It will be a dictatorship run by armed, masked thugs who will kill anyone who dissents. Just like we are now. Freedom???? LOLOLOLOL The word doesn't even exist in our language. Hey, just like George
Orwell said: "Freedom is slavery. Long live big brother!"

Remember: Israel is bad! LOLOL -- It's existence keeps reminding us what a bunch of losers we are.

Posted by: Kemaste at June 27, 2005 2:08 AM

10 Reasons To Love Palestine
by Goffaq Yussef

Golly gee, I am SOOOO proud to be Palestinian Arab from the WestBank. Let me tell you the reasons why I have such warm, fuzzy
feelings about my people and culture:

1. There is no such thing as Mothers Day. No worry about cards, gifts, and expensive meals. There is no honor in being a woman in our culture, so there is no reason to devote a day to her. We do,however, get to enjoy watching our fathers beat our mothers senseless for the slightest real or imagined infraction. Also, if
Dad suspects that Mom spoke to a strange man in the street, he gets to kill her to preserve the family honor!

2. Weapons. Every child, from the time he can grasp an object, is trained to feel comfortable with a rifle or pistol in his hand. And
every Palestinian has a weapon: a gun, a rocket launcher, a pound of C-4. What good are hands if they aren't used to kill?

3. Hate. Boy, we love to hate. Hate is the very basis and foundation of our culture. From the time a child is old enough to understand language, we teach him to hate. Hate Jews, hate the West, hate his fellow man, and most of all, hate himself. We have no love songs, we do not preach love, the word love does not appear
anywhere in our society. Hate is the fuel that runs our motors.

4. Death. The moment a Palestinian Arab child is born, his parents begin to plan his death. How will he die? Will he be struck by an
Israeli bullet while being used as a human shield by Palestinian gunmen? Will he get shot while throwing rocks at Jewish soldiers?
Will he be packed with explosives and sent to blow himself up, killing others? Or will he merely be one of the many Palestinians
murdered by other Palestinians in the normal course of daily life in the death-culture of the Palestinian Arabs? Who knows? That's part
of the thrill.

5. Unemployment. Palestinians used to have jobs, working in Israel. But then, our leaders had a brilliant idea: suicide bombings! For their own protection, Israel had to close its
borders, preventing Palestinians from going to their jobs, so they could sit around unemployed and blame the Jews for it. What great
fun to be your own worst enemy!

6. Martyrdom. Who in their right mind wants to be a martyr? Among normal people, a martyr complex is considered immature and
obnoxious, if not downright crazy. With us, it's the central syndrome of our society! Hey, look at me, I'm gonna kill myself and become admired! And then, when we do kill ourselves, instead of
being considered pathetic, we DO get admired! It's a whole complete cycle of sickness! American kids collect baseball cards;
Palestinian kids collect martyr cards (really! no joke!).

7. A feeling of entitlement. When Israel came into being, we declared war. We lost. We fought again. We lost. We fought again. We lost. Israel had the right to kill us all (we sure would
kill all of them if we got the chance). Instead, they allow us to live on land they conquered. But we can't leave that alone. We have to claim entitlement to live on land that we lost in 6 wars. Since when does the loser of a war get to claim the land he fought over? They don't. But we do. Not only that, but we happily kill
our kids over it! Hey, what's more important -- a chunk of dirt, or some worthless kid who isn't going to amount to anything anyway?

8. Uselessness. The Jews have won more Nobel Prizes than all other ethnic groups combined. Their contributions to science, art,
literature and the humanities is far out of proportion to their population. What have Palestinians produced? Nothing! Not a thing. We don't do anything productive. We're too busy rioting and killing and chanting and screaming and calling for everyone's death. And we blame the Jews for it, as though the Jews stop us from being productive.

9. Friends. The Palestinian people sure know how to pick 'em. Saadam Hussein. The Taliban. Adolf Hitler. You name a psychopath,
and we embrace him. And look who our supporters are! The American Nazi Party. The KKK. Just check their websites and see how they
stand in solidarity with us. When you support the Palestinian "cause," you're in real good company. Bring your white sheet!

10. Freedom. The biggest laugh in the world is when people call us "freedom fighters" or they say we're fighting for our freedom. Take
a look at all 22 Arab countries. Do you see any freedom there? Well, that's what our country will be like if we ever get one. It will be a dictatorship run by armed, masked thugs who will kill anyone who dissents. Just like we are now. Freedom???? LOLOLOLOL The word doesn't even exist in our language. Hey, just like George
Orwell said: "Freedom is slavery. Long live big brother!"

Remember: Israel is bad! LOLOL -- It's existence keeps reminding us what a bunch of losers we are.

Posted by: Kemaste at June 27, 2005 2:08 AM

10 Reasons To Love Palestine
by Goffaq Yussef

Golly gee, I am SOOOO proud to be Palestinian Arab from the WestBank. Let me tell you the reasons why I have such warm, fuzzy
feelings about my people and culture:

1. There is no such thing as Mothers Day. No worry about cards, gifts, and expensive meals. There is no honor in being a woman in our culture, so there is no reason to devote a day to her. We do,however, get to enjoy watching our fathers beat our mothers senseless for the slightest real or imagined infraction. Also, if
Dad suspects that Mom spoke to a strange man in the street, he gets to kill her to preserve the family honor!

2. Weapons. Every child, from the time he can grasp an object, is trained to feel comfortable with a rifle or pistol in his hand. And
every Palestinian has a weapon: a gun, a rocket launcher, a pound of C-4. What good are hands if they aren't used to kill?

3. Hate. Boy, we love to hate. Hate is the very basis and foundation of our culture. From the time a child is old enough to understand language, we teach him to hate. Hate Jews, hate the West, hate his fellow man, and most of all, hate himself. We have no love songs, we do not preach love, the word love does not appear
anywhere in our society. Hate is the fuel that runs our motors.

4. Death. The moment a Palestinian Arab child is born, his parents begin to plan his death. How will he die? Will he be struck by an
Israeli bullet while being used as a human shield by Palestinian gunmen? Will he get shot while throwing rocks at Jewish soldiers?
Will he be packed with explosives and sent to blow himself up, killing others? Or will he merely be one of the many Palestinians
murdered by other Palestinians in the normal course of daily life in the death-culture of the Palestinian Arabs? Who knows? That's part
of the thrill.

5. Unemployment. Palestinians used to have jobs, working in Israel. But then, our leaders had a brilliant idea: suicide bombings! For their own protection, Israel had to close its
borders, preventing Palestinians from going to their jobs, so they could sit around unemployed and blame the Jews for it. What great
fun to be your own worst enemy!

6. Martyrdom. Who in their right mind wants to be a martyr? Among normal people, a martyr complex is considered immature and
obnoxious, if not downright crazy. With us, it's the central syndrome of our society! Hey, look at me, I'm gonna kill myself and become admired! And then, when we do kill ourselves, instead of
being considered pathetic, we DO get admired! It's a whole complete cycle of sickness! American kids collect baseball cards;
Palestinian kids collect martyr cards (really! no joke!).

7. A feeling of entitlement. When Israel came into being, we declared war. We lost. We fought again. We lost. We fought again. We lost. Israel had the right to kill us all (we sure would
kill all of them if we got the chance). Instead, they allow us to live on land they conquered. But we can't leave that alone. We have to claim entitlement to live on land that we lost in 6 wars. Since when does the loser of a war get to claim the land he fought over? They don't. But we do. Not only that, but we happily kill
our kids over it! Hey, what's more important -- a chunk of dirt, or some worthless kid who isn't going to amount to anything anyway?

8. Uselessness. The Jews have won more Nobel Prizes than all other ethnic groups combined. Their contributions to science, art,
literature and the humanities is far out of proportion to their population. What have Palestinians produced? Nothing! Not a thing. We don't do anything productive. We're too busy rioting and killing and chanting and screaming and calling for everyone's death. And we blame the Jews for it, as though the Jews stop us from being productive.

9. Friends. The Palestinian people sure know how to pick 'em. Saadam Hussein. The Taliban. Adolf Hitler. You name a psychopath,
and we embrace him. And look who our supporters are! The American Nazi Party. The KKK. Just check their websites and see how they
stand in solidarity with us. When you support the Palestinian "cause," you're in real good company. Bring your white sheet!

10. Freedom. The biggest laugh in the world is when people call us "freedom fighters" or they say we're fighting for our freedom. Take
a look at all 22 Arab countries. Do you see any freedom there? Well, that's what our country will be like if we ever get one. It will be a dictatorship run by armed, masked thugs who will kill anyone who dissents. Just like we are now. Freedom???? LOLOLOLOL The word doesn't even exist in our language. Hey, just like George
Orwell said: "Freedom is slavery. Long live big brother!"

Remember: Israel is bad! LOLOL -- It's existence keeps reminding us what a bunch of losers we are.

Posted by: Kemaste at June 27, 2005 2:08 AM

Watch out for that " Website Not Responding" It'll get you every time!

Posted by: Kemaste at June 27, 2005 2:11 AM

"You may disagree with some-one but you have no right to try to stop them from speaking out.

Posted by: Voltaire "

Pity that the 'hate' and 'vilifiation' laws that were brought in by a LEFT WING LABOR GOVERNEMENT IN Victoria don't live by that rule Voltaire, and let the two Australian Christian Pastors have their fee speech about Islam.

And the left is against who again......? Probably not the Muslims, as I remember election night in Victoria, watching as Steve Bracks was 'hugged' by a follower of the Religion of Peace when his victory was won. That particular Muslim was happy the left won the election.

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at June 27, 2005 3:17 AM

Should read "free Speech" - but then again, thanks to PC lefty judges and PC lefty laws, it has cost the Pastors a tidy "fee"!

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at June 27, 2005 3:23 AM

WHITE AMERICAN Patriot is an authentic troll. In his first sentence, he makes a major factual error.

The lessons civilization can learn from Homer’s tale of the Trojan Horse helping to bring down the Trojans should be on everyone’s mind today because should America fall due to her complacency, worldwide chaos will ensue.

Homer makes no reference whatsover to the Trojan Horse. The lost Cypria does (we know it from ancient quotes). The usual ancient compilation of it comes from the very boring Quintus Smyrnaeus.

Yeah, I've actually read the Iliad on multiple occasions, and and actually have read the ineffably boring Quintus Smyrnaeus (I even own a copy of him, no less).

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0674990226/002-3879936-2601606?v=glance

This thread has become positively silly.

Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 3:27 AM

A few words about the meaning of a couple of terms that have come up in this rather lenghty thread:

MARTYR
The concept of Martyr is originally a Christian one. And, from the beginning, the Church refused to award it to people who actually looked for trouble, who threw themselves in the way of persecuting mobs and so on. The Church asks its members to leave the place where they are persecuted; if martyrdom happens to them, and they face it bravely, they are honoured; if not, not. But anyone who goes looking for martyrdom is classed in Christianity as a suicide - and that is a sin, not a virtue.

LOXIAS
Loxias is the name of the Greek God Apollo as prophet, oracle, revealer of truth. To adopt it represents a great deal of egotism from a certain poster: it means that he sees himself as "Loxias, unforsworn tongue of truth" (Aeschylus), an object of worship, a glimpse into the mind of Truth itself. I trust that he offers himself the suitable pinch of incense and libations at all appropriate times, and perhaps he might sacrifice a lamb to his own immense ego every now and then. Of course he is against religion: being himself a God, he is jealous of worship that goes anywhere but to him.
IN other words, mate, grow up and start thinking a little less of your own vain self.

Posted by: Paolo at June 27, 2005 3:29 AM

Maybe he should have a look at what some of the Great forefathers of the US believed in terms of Christianity.

John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, when both were out of office, struck up a friendship done through letters. Adams ridiculed the divinity of Christ in one of his letters to Jefferson. Jefferson was deist, one who had severe doubts about the divinity of Christ.

John Adams was a very fine Unitarian. His great-grandson, Henry Adams (Charles Francis Adams was his father, and 6th President John Quincy Adams was his grandfather; JQ was 2nd President Adams' son) wrote about this in the most perfect work of American literature ever: The Education of Henry Adams, and most certainly the best autobiography ever written in all of world literature.

Shall we speak of that great disbeliever, Benjamin Franklin?

No, our founding fathers were NOT Christian, at least in your sense. Rather, they were secular humanists.

Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 3:50 AM

LOXIAS
Loxias is the name of the Greek God Apollo as prophet, oracle, revealer of truth. To adopt it represents a great deal of egotism from a certain poster: it means that he sees himself as "Loxias, unforsworn tongue of truth" (Aeschylus), an object of worship, a glimpse into the mind of Truth itself. I trust that he offers himself the suitable pinch of incense and libations at all appropriate times, and perhaps he might sacrifice a lamb to his own immense ego every now and then. Of course he is against religion: being himself a God, he is jealous of worship that goes anywhere but to him.

IN other words, mate, grow up and start thinking a little less of your own vain self.

Read the play Ion. It's a play about putting up with Mother and a decent stepfather.

Loxias is not so much a name as it is a title. Wolfen One, trickster one, Wolfen Apollo.

The name was not chosen casually.

Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 4:05 AM

'You dispensationalists '~ Loxias.

Again, you make connections that are not there. We are still waiting for an explanation of that. As I said before:

Defense of one's faith is NOT support, unconscious or otherwise, for extremism (especially the extrme minority know as 'dominionists'), nor is it a refusal to acknowledge the problems of the past.

Posted by: Gary at June 27, 2005 4:26 AM

'You dispensationalists '~ Loxias.

Again, you make connections that are not there. We are still waiting for an explanation of that. As I said before:

Defense of one's faith is NOT support, unconscious or otherwise, for extremism (especially the extreme minority know as 'dominionists'), nor is it a refusal to acknowledge the problems of the past.

Posted by: Gary at June 27, 2005 4:26 AM

'You dispensationalists '~ Loxias.

Again, you make connections that are not there. We are still waiting for an explanation of that. As I said before:

Defense of one's faith is NOT support, unconscious or otherwise, for extremism (especially the extreme minority know as 'dominionists'), nor is it a refusal to acknowledge the problems of the past.

Posted by: Gary at June 27, 2005 4:26 AM

Would-be-Loxias, I suggest you do not try to teach Greek literature to me. "The name was not chosen casually". In other words, you insist on claiming the titles of the god of truth. Who would not have been stupid enough to call a bunch of Unitarians "secular humanists." For your information, Your Godhood, Unitarianism is a religion.

Posted by: Paolo at June 27, 2005 4:48 AM

In other words, you insist on claiming the titles of the god of truth.

Yes, Paolo. Shall we speak of Apollo's twin sister? Loxian Apollo is a trickster.

"Who would not have been stupid enough to call a bunch of Unitarians "secular humanists."

In current terms, Presidents Adams and Jefferson (2nd and 3rd POTUS) were secular humanists. And you are abmicturated by this fact, mostly because I have called you on the fact. So was Franklin.

America is not an atheist state. Unfortunately, the current regime wants to impose pretribulational premillenialist dispensationism upon all voters. Their neo-pagan fellow-travellers take money from the Saudis and convince the regime to play handsies with Crown Prince Abdullah.

Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 5:19 AM

'dispensationism'

Ahhh, I am coming to understand- you are anti-Israel.

Posted by: Gary at June 27, 2005 5:44 AM

'dispensationism'

Ahhh, I am coming to understand- you are anti-Israel.

If you've been reading me, you know better. I don't think you understand what 'dispensationalism'means.

Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 6:04 AM

Ahhh, I am coming to understand- you are anti-Israel.

If you think this you are indeed stupid.

Posted by: Loxias at June 27, 2005 6:06 AM

Would-be-Loxias: you are in bad faith and you know it. Not only is there no such thing as modern terms - you have to judge people for what they were, not for what you in your ideological lunacy would like to make of them - but I think there can be no doubt whatsoever that if any of these very straight Dead White Males had had any glimpse of what your likes take to be values and liberty, they would have vomited. They would not have bothered to argue the point about freely available porn or homosexuality taught to pre-teens in schools as an acceptable lifestyle, they would have clapped you in the nearest town gaol. That is not to say whether any of these things are right or not, but you when you ascribe your own modern system of values to the Jeffersons and Washingtons, you are talking nonsense. And it bothers me that there should even be any need to say it. You cannot seriously intend what you have been saying; and you cannot, if you are sane, imagine that there is anything like a theocracy going on in the US. Every day of every week we discuss the crimes and misdeeds of real live theocracies; if you are seriously capable of comparing President Bush - for whom I have little respect - with the King of Arabia or the Supreme Leader of the Iranian Islamic Republic, then I tell you plainly that, far from having any essential connection with truth, you are playing with several cards short of a pack.

It may be a pleasure to you to know that this is my last word. I have other things to do with my time than to try and straighten out possibly insane left-wing fanatics.

Posted by: Paolo at June 27, 2005 6:08 AM

Voltaire,

War affects different people in different ways. Hence, it is perfectly acceptable for a veteran to express bitterness and cynicism over his war experiences. It is also acceptable to criticize a war that you think is not legitimate. But it is unacceptable for veterans to ridicule other veterans who came out all the better for it. Giaour crossed all lines of decency when he insulted the veterans who spoke proundly of their roles in WW II and Korea. The fact that he knows war first-hand does not give him a special priviledge to drag down other veterans who managed to get over it.

Like Chris Hedges, who refers to war as "necrophilia," Karen Armstrong refers to World War I as the "the collective suicide" of Europe. Despite all the pretense at scholarship and depth, these are incredibly superficial assessments. They lump everyone with the aggressors. It is both shallow and obscene to refer to people who defeated the fascists and liberated the death camps as "suicidal necrophiliacs." May we never see that day that the majority of Amercans suddenly cease to recognize the heroism that transcends the horror of war.

Skidd,

Thank you for the suggestion, but I cannot find this option on my computer. Anyway, I doubt this is the problem because one month I was able to post (with some difficulty). Now I cannot post at all (I am using my wife's computer. She doesn't like my doing this so might be my last post for the day!).

Everyone else,

Sorry to have started the commentary section off topic (at least I had the tact not to upstage any articles written by JW staff!). JW is now getting a higher profile. With more new commentators, you will fresh new ideas, but also more B.S. And everyone as knows, B.S. begets B.S. (monkey see, monkey do). We need rules and guidelines that are clearly spelled out to discourage B.S. from the left and inflammatory rhetoric from the right (like "nuking Mecca, banning Islam," etc.). Please forgive my arrogance. I know this isn't my call. But as JW gets more exposure, it's going to be more closely scrutinized. It doesn't favor our cause if we come across as a website dominated by rightwing haters (even though this is not true). A lot of people sitting on the fence don't yet understand that hatred of evil is a virtue. There is still hope for some of them. Let's not scare them away.

Posted by: Andrei Rublev at June 27, 2005 10:46 AM

That one Isreali missle, which dispatched the murderer yassin to meet his prophet in hell, probably saved more Isreali lives than any other piece of ordance. It showed the arabs who squat in Judea and Summaria that the Jews were finally prepared to respond seriously to this "second infatada".

Posted by: Infidel33 at June 27, 2005 10:47 AM

I have other things to do with my time than to try and straighten out possibly insane left-wing fanatics.

Posted by: Paolo at June 27, 2005 06:08 AM

Couldn't have said it better, Paolo.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 27, 2005 11:24 AM

In re: to Andrei's: "We need rules and guidelines that are clearly spelled out to discourage B.S. from the left and inflammatory rhetoric from the right (like "nuking Mecca, banning Islam," etc.)....as JW gets more exposure....it doesn't favor our cause if we come across as a website dominated by rightwing haters....."

Surely, this site is for opinions, everyone has them and they all stink to someone else. There are going to be JW's from all sides of the political venue; however, the site is not required to teach tolerance only not to support or encourage speech which is clearly out of the protection of the 1st Amendment - to those scholars out there, if it's not within the 1st Amendment, [it's within the Patriot Act]. JW can't sit by and knowingly allow people to post "illegal" statements (such as those you have referreed to above who have gotten away with more than they normally would], but they have the right to have opinions expressed which are protected by the 1st Amendment...and being a loyal JW, you would not want it any other way!
One of the reasons we love coming here - air our feelings and our differences!

Therefore, when someone says something that is "illegal," speak up about it; you know how to report it; but if they are merely disagreeable, or woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning, then disagree to your heart's content and be glad we're living in a nation that allows us the RIGHT to disagree and the PRIVILEGE to be on this forum. There is a difference. After all, for what are our servicemen fighting & dying?

Posted by: JW gal at June 27, 2005 12:22 PM

Now, Andrei: your home pc must permit you to go over a nonsecure site, (if your 'weight' is on the pc, then you might not want to go over a nonsecure site; otherwise, not to fear). 'Weight' was a joke, lest we get too serious; I refer to any 'personal' data. This is a TYPE KEY requirement. At TYPE KEY, once you type in your name & password, click ENTER; Type YES, when it asks if it's ok to go over a nonsecure site. Otherwise, you're doomed to read JW at college, where you have absolutely no privacy!

Posted by: JW gal at June 27, 2005 12:29 PM

"We need rules and guidelines that are clearly spelled out to discourage B.S. from the left and inflammatory rhetoric from the right (like "nuking Mecca, banning Islam," etc.)"

Actually, banning Islam is a very reasonable discussion. This website is devoted to revealing dhimmitude and jihad as fundamental tenets of islam, which make it a religion completely incompatible with any other culture including ours. Banning islam is an entirely reasonable proposal so long as moslems insist on waging a war of conquest against us with the intention of enslaving us, killing us, or converting us.

As for nuking mecca, well we did nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki with huge success, so it would be very wrong to say we shouldn't allow it to even be discussed on this weblog.

Censorship of our criticism of islam would run contrary to the very purpose Mr. Spencer created this website for in the first place. Now, if posters begin the practice of blaming the biology of Arabs rather than the ideology of islam then I would agree it crosses the line to racism, like the white supremist loser who posts his filth on this thread from time to time.

But as for islam itself and the moslems who choose to follow it, the boards must remain entirely free to attack without censorship so long as it is not innappropriately laced with profanity.

-MZ

Posted by: Madzionist at June 27, 2005 12:43 PM

Well said, Madzionist!!

Posted by: Infidel33 at June 27, 2005 3:09 PM

JW gal,

Somewhere, you have to draw the line between the indefensible and the controversial. Racism and genocide for example, are clearly indefensible. Staying the course in Iraq, is clearly controversial. In a website whose raison d'etre is countering of jihad, pacifism (opposition to ALL war, not just some war) is also indefensible. You can criticize the war in Iraq all you want, you can critcize the president all you want, but insulting veterans who are proud of their service crosses the line. There is PLENTY of room for dissent within these guidelines. This website is about exposing and countering the destructive aspects of Islam, not the settling of accounts with proud veterans and Evangelical Christians.

MZ,

Maybe we need an article by someone from JW to clear this matter once and for all. There you can comment on it to your heart's content. I for one should hope to see "nuking Mecca" and "banning Islam" be demoted from the controversial to the indefensible. Nothing personal; Even Ali Sina, one of my favorite writers, has suggested "banning Islam" (He mistakenly believes that Nazism is illegal). This disappoints me, but does not diminish my overall respect for what he writes.

Posted by: Andrei Rublev at June 27, 2005 3:50 PM

"I for one should hope to see "nuking Mecca" and "banning Islam" be demoted from the controversial to the indefensible."

That's your problem: you only think for one. Start your own weblog if you want to censure content to match your views.

-MZ

Posted by: Madzionist at June 27, 2005 4:14 PM

3rd writes "Maybe he should have a look at what some of the Great forefathers of the US believed in terms of Christianity. He would class them as "fundamentalists" as well, even though they had a huge role in building the US."

You don't know doodly squat.

At best the overwelming majority of the Founding fathers were deists, and didn't recognize the divity of Jesus, although they accepted his teachings.

By today's standards, not only would they not be recognize as fundamentalists.. they would not even be considered Christians.

" The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors."

THomas Jefferson from a letter to Adams

Yeah, they were fundamentalists alright..

LOL

Posted by: Crusher at June 27, 2005 5:30 PM

Crusher,

John Adams was DEEPLY religious (He was a Calvinist). He believed that equality under the law was a gift from God (BTW: That is one of the main reasons that Adolf Hitler hated Christianity. You can read this in his "Table Talk"). Unlike Thomas Jefferson, John Adams did not own slaves.

His son, John Quincy Adams was also deeply religious. You can see this in his writings about the Graeco-Turkish war where he emphatically contrasts the morality of Christianity with that of Islam. Like his father, he also strongly believed that equality under the law was a divine gift, and he practiced what he preached. His unwillingness to remove the Cherokees from Georgia cost him the second term (it was Andrew Jackson who later permitted the now infamous "Trail of Tears"). Many years later, John Quincy Adams managed advocated on behalf of the slaves from the "Amistad."

Posted by: Andrei Rublev at June 27, 2005 5:53 PM

Here's what John Quincy Adams had to say about Islam:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15201

Posted by: Andrei Rublev at June 27, 2005 5:58 PM

Alexi writes:"John Adams was DEEPLY religious (He was a Calvinist). He believed that equality under the law was a gift from God (BTW: That is one of the main reasons that Adolf Hitler hated Christianity. You can read this in his "Table Talk"

Table Talk is just a collection of assorted ruminations "edited" by Martin Borman if I'm not mistaken. Not the words of sHitler himself. And I don't trust Borman or his motives, which may well include muddying the waters about what sHitler was and wasn't as well as to try and make himself "look better"

But in his speeches and works, he was quite clear where he stood on Christianity. He also wanted to form the "German Church".

What did it say on the back of Wermacht uniform buttons?

I'm not claiming that Hitler was a good old fashion Christian. far from it. But he certainly was inspired by the rants of Martin Luther who most definately was.

"Unlike Thomas Jefferson, John Adams did not own slaves."

And?

I never claimed that Adams or Jefferson were not deeply religious. They certainly were.

All I claimed is, is that fundamentalists would not consider them as such, if they actually understood what these men believed.

Thanks for the essay on JQA. However, nothing that you wrote refuted what I stated.

Posted by: Crusher at June 27, 2005 7:36 PM

So I don't know squat do I "crusher". Read and weap from http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-u-s-presidential-religious-affiliations. 28 of 43 were solely Christian of some sort.

Read and weap "crusher" .....

List of U.S. Presidential religious affiliations
This is a list of the religious affiliations of Presidents of the United States. The particular religious affiliations of U.S. Presidents can affect their electability, shape their visions of society and how they want to lead it, and shape their stances on policy matters. For example, a contributing factor to Alfred E. Smith's defeat in the presidential election of 1928 was his Roman Catholic faith. In the 1960s, President John F. Kennedy faced accusations that as a Catholic president he would do as Pope John XXIII would tell him to do. Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and several other presidents were accused of being infidels during election campaigns -- and at other times.

Throughout much of American history, the religion of past American presidents has been the subject of contentious debate. Some devout Americans have been disinclined to believe that there may have been agnostic or even non-Christian presidents, especially amongst the Founding Fathers of the United States. As a result, apocryphal stories of a religious nature have appeared over the years about particularly beloved presidents such as Washington and Lincoln. On the other hand, secular-minded Americans have sometimes downplayed the prominence that religion played in the private and political lives of the Founding Fathers.

Episcopalians are extraordinarily well represented among the presidents. This is in part because the Episcopal Church was the state religion in some states (such as Virginia) before their Constitutions were changed. Before the American Revolution, the Episcopal Church was the American branch of the Anglican Church of England. The first seven presidents listed below with Episcopalian affiliation were also the first seven from Virginia, and five of those were among the six presidents most closely identified with Deism. Since there have seldom been any churches of Deism, strictly speaking Deist is not an affiliation in the same way Episcopalian is; it is included in the list below, however, to give a more complete view of the religious views of the presidents.

The church closest to the White House is also Episcopal, and has been attended at least once by nearly every president since James Madison. St. John's Episcopal Church, just across Lafayette Square north of the White House, and built after the War of 1812, is one of about five sometimes referred to as "the Church of the Presidents".

Many people are interested not only in the religious affiliations of the presidents, but also in their inner beliefs. Some presidents, such as Madison and Monroe, were extremely reluctant to discuss their own religious views at all. In general, it is difficult to define with any certainty the faiths of presidents, because no one can truly be sure what relationship (if any) exists between another person and his deity, and because presidents, as public officials, have generally remained within the mainstream of American religious trends.

With regard to Christianity, distinguishing affiliation from belief can be somewhat complicated. At issue, to a certain extent, is "What counts as belonging to a church?" Must one be a communicant to belong, or is baptism or even simple attendance sufficient? Are Unitarians, Jehovah's Witnesses, and independents who generally hold Jesus in high regard, but do not believe he was divine, to be counted as Christians or not? Numerous presidents changed their affiliations and/or their beliefs during their lives. George Washington, for example, gravitated from conventional Christianity as a youth towards Deism as he aged.

List of Presidential religious affiliations/beliefs (by President)
George Washington – Deist; Episcopalian (VA)
The religious views of George Washington are a matter of some controversy. There is strong evidence that he (like many of the Founding Fathers) was a Deist - believing in Divine Providence, but not believing in divine intervention in the world after the initial design. Before the revolution, when the Episcopal Church was still the state religion in Virginia, he served as a vestryman (lay officer) for his local church. He spoke often of the value of religion in general, and he sometimes accompanied his wife to Christian church services. However, there is no record of his ever becoming a communicant in any Christian church and he would regularly leave services before communion - with the other non-communicants. When Rev. Dr. James Abercrombie, rector of St. Peter's Episcopal Church in Philadelphia mentioned in a weekly sermon that those in elevated stations set an unhappy example by leaving at communion, Washington ceased attending at all on communion Sundays. Long after Washington died, asked about Washington's beliefs, Abercrombie replied: "Sir, Washington was a Deist." Various prayers said to have been composed by him in his later life are highly edited. He did not ask for any clergy on his deathbed, though one was available. His funeral services were those of the Freemasons.
John Adams – Unitarian (MA)
The Adamses were originally members of Congregational churches in New England. Congregationalist churches became more diverse than other Reformed churches such as Presbyterians, where higher courts ensure doctrinal uniformity. Many New England congregations reacted against the First Great Awakening and were influenced by Arminianism, Deism, Unitarianism, and (later) Transcendentalism – moving away from Calvinism and its doctrine of Predestination. By the 1750s several Congregational preachers were teaching the possibility of universal salvation. The first Unitarian church in America was established in Boston in 1785. By 1800, all but one Congregationalist church in Boston had Unitarian preachers teaching the strict unity of God, the subordinate nature of Christ, and salvation by character. Harvard University, founded by Congregationalists, itself became a source of Unitarian training. [1] (http://www.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnadams.html)
Thomas Jefferson – Deist; Episcopalian (VA)
Though a vestryman (lay officer) of the Episcopal Church in Virginia, his beliefs were primarily Deist. Unlike its effect on Congregational churches, Deism had little influence on Episcopal churches, which have a more hierarchical structure making them slower to modify their teachings. Of only three things Jefferson chose for his epitaph, one was the 1786 Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom. Jefferson's views are considered very close to Unitarian [2] (http://www.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/thomasjefferson.html). The Famous UUs (http://www.famousuus.com/) website says: [3] (http://www.famousuus.com/bios/thomas_jefferson.htm)
"Like many others of his time (he died just one year after the founding of institutional Unitarianism in America), Jefferson was a Unitarian in theology, though not in church membership. He never joined a Unitarian congregation: there were none near his home in Virginia during his lifetime. He regularly attended Joseph Priestley's Pennsylvania church when he was nearby, and said that Priestley's theology was his own, and there is no doubt Priestley should be identified as Unitarian. Jefferson remained a member of the Episcopal congregation near his home, but removed himself from those available to become godparents, because he was not sufficiently in agreement with the trinitarian theology. His work, The Jefferson Bible, was Unitarian in theology..."
A remarkable quote from a letter Jefferson wrote to a Dr. Woods indicates that in fact he possessed considerable antipathy towards Christianity:
"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."
See Wikiquote (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson) and Positive Atheism (http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/jefferson.htm) for many more similar quotes.
James Madison – Deist; Episcopalian (VA)
In 1779 the Virginia General Assembly deprived Church of England ministers of tax support, but in 1784 Patrick Henry sponsored a bill to again collect taxes to support churches in general. Madison's 1785 Memorial and Remonstrance was written in opposition to another bill to levy a general assessment for the support of religions. The assessment bill was tabled, and instead the legislature in 1786 passed Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom, first submitted in 1779. Virginia thereby became the first state to disestablish religion — Rhode Island, Delaware, and Pennsylvania never having had an established religion.
James Monroe – Deist; Episcopalian (VA)
John Quincy Adams – Unitarian (MA) [4] (http://www.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnquincyadams.html)
Andrew Jackson – Presbyterian (NC/SC)
became a member about a year after retiring the presidency
Martin Van Buren – Dutch Reformed or no affiliation (NY)
Van Buren did not join any church in Washington, nor in his home town of Kinderhook (village), New York. The sole original source to claim that he did join a church – in Hudson, New York – is Vernon B. Hampton, in Religious Background of the White House (Boston: Christopher Publishing House, 1932). The basis for this claim has not been found.
William Henry Harrison – Episcopalian possibly (VA)
Harrison died just one month after his inauguration. After funeral, rector at St. John's Episcopal Church in Washington, DC said Harrison bought a Bible one day after his inauguration and planned to soon become a communicant.
John Tyler – Deist; Episcopalian (VA)
James K. Polk – Presbyterian; later Methodist (NC/TN)
Raised Presbyterian, Polk had never been baptized due to an early family argument with the local Presbyterian minister in rural North Carolina. Polk's father and grandfather were Deists, and the minister refused to baptize James unless his father affirmed Christianity, which he would not do. At age 38, Polk had a religious conversion to Methodism at a camp meeting, and thereafter he thought of himself as a Methodist. Out of respect for his mother and wife, however, he continued to attend Presbyterian services. Whenever his wife was out of town, or too ill to attend church, however, Polk worshipped at the local Methodist chapel. On his deathbed less than 4 months after leaving the Presidency, he summoned the man who had converted him years before, the Rev. John B. McFerrin, who then baptized Polk as a Methodist.
Zachary Taylor – Episcopalian (VA)
Millard Fillmore – Unitarian (NY)
In the early 1830s, he worked to overturn the New York test law that required all witnesses in New York courts to swear an oath affirming their belief in God and the hereafter.
Franklin Pierce – Episcopalian (NH)
1850: unsuccessfully worked to abolish that portion of the New Hampshire Constitution which made the Protestant religion the official religion.
1853 inauguration: affirmed instead of swearing the oath; did not kiss Bible
1861: 4 years after retiring the presidency, he was baptized, confirmed, and became a regular communicant in St. Paul's Episcopal Church, in Concord, NH.
James Buchanan – Presbyterian (PA)
raised Presbyterian, he joined its church after he retired the presidency
Abraham Lincoln – Deist; no affiliation known (KY/IN/IL)
For much of his life, Lincoln was undoubtedly Deist (see [5] (http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/steinlinc.htm), [6] (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/chapter_5.html)). In his younger days he openly challenged orthodox religions, but as he matured he kept his Deist views more to himself, and would sometimes attend Presbyterian services with his wife. He loved to read the Bible, and even quoted from it, but he almost never made reference to Jesus, and is not known to have ever indicated a belief in the divinity of Jesus.
A number of pastors have claimed a late conversion for Lincoln, but these are hard to substantiate.
One notable claim is an entry in the memory book The Lincoln Memorial Album—Immortelles (edited by Osborn H. Oldroyd, 1882, New York: G.W. Carleton & Co., p. 366) attributed to An Illinois clergyman (unnamed) which reads "When I left Springfield I asked the people to pray for me. I was not a Christian. When I buried my son, the severest trial of my life, I was not a Christian. But when I went to Gettysburg and saw the graves of thousands of our soldiers, I then and there consecrated myself to Christ. Yes, I do love Jesus."
Other entries in the memory book are attributed by name. See a discussion of this story in They Never Said It, by Paul F. Boller & John George, (Oxford Univ. Press, 1989, p. 91).
Some pastors date a conversion following the death of his son Eddie in 1850, and some following the death of his son Willie in 1862.
Rev. Dr. Ralph Randolph Gurley was pastor of the New York Avenue Presbyterian church in Washington D.C., which Lincoln attended with his wife when he attended any church. Rev. Gurley made no claims of Lincoln converting.
Andrew Johnson – no affiliation (NC/TN)
Some sources refer to Johnson having Baptist parents. He accompanied his wife to Methodist services sometimes, belonged to no church himself, and sometimes attended Catholic services - remarking favorably there was no reserved seating. Accused of being an infidel, he replied: "As for my religion, it is the doctrine of the Bible, as taught and practiced by Jesus Christ." (See The Age of Hate, 1930, by G.F. Milton, p. 80.)
Ulysses S. Grant – no affiliation known (OH)
Grant was never baptized into any church, though he accompanied his wife to Methodist services. Many sources list his religious affiliation as Methodist based on a Methodist minister's account of a deathbed conversion. He did leave a note for his wife in which he hoped to meet her again in a better world.
Rutherford B. Hayes – no affiliation (OH)
In his 1890 May 17 diary entry, he states: "I am not a subscriber to any creed. I belong to no Church. But in a sense satisfactory to myself, and believed by me to be important, I try to be a Christian and to help do Christian work." (page 435)
James Garfield – Disciples of Christ (OH)
In his early adulthood, Garfield sometimes preached and held revival meetings.
Chester A. Arthur – Episcopalian (VT/NY)
Grover Cleveland – Presbyterian (NJ/NY)
Benjamin Harrison – Presbyterian (OH/IN)
Harrison became a church elder, and taught Sunday school
Franklin Steiner, in his book The Religious Beliefs Of Our Presidents[7] (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/franklin_steiner/presidents.html), categorized Harrison as the first President who was unquestionably a communicant in an orthodox Church at the time he was elected
Grover Cleveland – Presbyterian (NJ/NY)
During his second (non-consecutive) term, Cleveland included mention of Jesus Christ in his Thanksgiving Proclamation, something no other President had ever done.
William McKinley – Methodist (OH)
McKinley believed the U.S. government had a duty to help spread Christianity and Western civilization to the rest of the world.
Theodore Roosevelt – Dutch Reformed (NY)
1908: opposed putting In God We Trust on coins as sacrilegious
William Howard Taft – Unitarian (OH)
Woodrow Wilson – Presbyterian (VA/GA/NJ)
Warren G. Harding – Baptist (OH)
Calvin Coolidge – Congregationalist (VT/MA)
Herbert Hoover – Quaker (IA/OR/CA)
Franklin D. Roosevelt – Episcopalian (NY)
Harry S. Truman – Baptist (MO)
Dwight D. Eisenhower – Jehovah's Witness; later Presbyterian (TX/KS/PA)
Brought up Jehovah's Witness, Eisenhower abandoned that before joining the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. (See [8] (http://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.html), [9] (http://www.premier1.net/~raines/eisenhower.html), and [10] (http://www.adherents.com/largecom/fam_jw.html).) He was baptized, confirmed, and became a communicant in the Presbyterian church in a single ceremony 1953February 1, just weeks after his first inauguration. He is the only president known to be baptized, or to be confirmed, or to become a communicant while in office. Eisenhower was instrumental in the addition of the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, and the 1956 adoption of "In God We Trust" as the motto of the USA, and its 1957 introduction on paper currency. The chapel at his presidential library is intentionally inter-denominational.
John F. Kennedy – Roman Catholic (MA)
Lyndon Johnson – Disciples of Christ (TX)
Richard Nixon – raised Quaker (CA)
Gerald R. Ford – Episcopalian (NE/MI)
Jimmy Carter – Baptist, born again (GA)
In 2000, Carter left the Southern Baptist Convention, disagreeing over the role of women in society. See [11] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/982650.stm)
Ronald Reagan – Disciples of Christ (IL/CA)
George H. W. Bush – Episcopalian (MA/CT/TX)
Bill Clinton – Baptist (AR)
George W. Bush – raised Episcopalian, at age 40 became Methodist, born again, religious teetotaler

And of those who were deist, many still subscribed to the Christian moral.

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at June 27, 2005 7:46 PM

The early USA was built on the Christian moral (as were most “Western” countries). Get over it “crusher”. USA still has more Christians per capita than any other Western country, and still sends out more missionaries to other countries (MUSLIM INCLUDED - which is more than you Humanists tend to do), than any other.

You can deny history all you like, but the USA was built on Christian morals, and the early lawmakers obviously used these morals as a guide to lawmaking. Not to mention the overwhelming belief system (Christian) that the populace had. This is in stark contrast today – where Humanist laws have allowed everything and anything – no hard questions asked. From abortion on demand (a holocaust that fuels immigration, what would you prefer, a home grown Yank, or an immigrant with divided loyalties?)

Since humanism invaded the classrooms in the 60's the West has declined morally, crime has soared. Well done Humanism! Truth is relative! (oh Crusher can I also have my money that’s in your wallet?! It is mine you know? Truth is relative?)

Bin Laden when studying in the West was at first keen in visiting the west. But he looked upon the West, saw the crime, saw the immorality, and guess what? He thought along the lines of ‘if this is the "West" then I prefer Islam.

He then "got into" Islam like never before. And to some degree he has a point - the West IS decadent now that Humanism/evolution/materialism is the No1 Western belief, and Christianity a very poor second. Muslims use that argument today – “Islam will fix the West’s crime etc”.

You Humanists must be proud. Locking up Christian Pastors who speak out against Islam, even atheists for that matter (although that's yet to occur in Australia, Andrew Bolt is an atheist - one whom I admire - he too has spoken out publicly, yet he is not dragged before a "secular"/humanist court???? Must only apply to Christians hey??).

It is Humanist Laws that the Muslims hide behind. Its the same reason in the REAL world of politics the left tends to align itself with Islam.

Both share a hatred of Christianity. Trouble is, once Islam is finished with Christianity in the West, it will turn on all you PC Humanist Do Gooders! I hope the Left is proud!

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at June 27, 2005 8:07 PM

3rdtime writes "So I don't know squat do I "crusher". Read and weap from http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-u-s-presidential-religious-affiliations. 28 of 43 were solely Christian of some sort.

Read and weap "crusher" ....."

You don't know squat otherwise you would've addressed my remarks. Which you didn't.

THe subject was "The Founding Fathers"

The issue was, "Were they Christians/Christian fundamentalists"

I've been posting to the internet long enough to know, that when people are unable to address a claim they don't agree with, they shower a multitude of extraneous information that doesn't address the subject and issue which was being discusses.

Neither Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, etc. accepted the "divinty" of Jesus. That fact alone is sufficient to exclude them from Christian fundamnentalism. If you think not, then you are in possession of a defintion of "Christian Fundamentalist" I am not familiar with. Not accepting the divintiy of Jesus would exclude one from the RC church, Anglican Church, and any Baptist church I'ver ever heard off.

What much else is there?

And I specifically stated ".. they accepted the teachings of Jesus."

Golly. I was as clear as the morning sky about that. If you persist in arguing that the Founding Fathers were conventional Christians , much less fundamentalists, you will persist in being wrong.
If you were too emotionaly discombobulated to read what I wrote, much less respond to it, take a time out.

I'm also well aware, that the Presidents have been by and large religious. Perhaps, none more so than Jimmy Carter, a Church Deacon.

Posted by: Crusher at June 27, 2005 8:27 PM

3rdtimeunlucky writes"The early USA was built on the Christian moral (as were most “Western” countries).

Oh, so you admit then, that the founding Fathers were not fundamentalists?

What "Christian moral" establishes the principal of freedom of conscience or religion? Given they didn't exist, or at best rarely existed, for 1600 years of Christianity, on what basis are those Christian morals?

And which Christian morals.. were not originally Jewish ones?

Freedom of Conscious is a humanist concept, not a Christian one.

"Get over it “crusher”. USA still has more Christians per capita than any other Western country,"

Who said no?

My, but you are a silly God bot.

"and still sends out more missionaries

Ahh the missionaries...

to other countries (MUSLIM INCLUDED - which is more than you Humanists tend to do), than any other."

I'm not a humanist actually. THis is the second reply you've made, and you haven't come close to addressing the specific issue I discussed.

What is wrong with you?

"You can deny history all you like, but the USA was built on Christian morals, and the early lawmakers obviously used these morals as a guide to lawmaking. Not to mention the overwhelming belief system (Christian) that the populace had. This is in stark contrast today – where Humanist laws have allowed everything and anything – no hard questions asked. From abortion on demand (a holocaust that fuels immigration, what would you prefer, a home grown Yank, or an immigrant with divided loyalties?)"

My, so many phobias? Where do we begin?

Since humanism invaded the classrooms in the 60's the West has declined morally, crime has soared. Well done Humanism! Truth is relative! (oh Crusher can I also have my money that’s in your wallet?!

Hey, if you don't ahve enough money, don't blame me. I'm all for rasing the minimum wage.

It is mine you know? Truth is relative?)"

Oh lets see. When we had "God" in schools, we had slavery, missionaries outlawing the Hawaiian Language and Hula, Jim Crow, Separate but Equal, no vote for women, no child labor laws.., deplorable working conditions.

Yup.. that was a big, big help.

Yup, no doubt those were the good ole' times for people like you.

And as far as morals go... DO you wish to comapre divorve, teenage pregnancy and high school drop out rates between the Bible belt states and the Northeast blue states?

Posted by: Crusher at June 27, 2005 8:41 PM

Tut-tut crusher.

-MZ