1 2 3 4 5 8 | bottom
Quote# 138253

In essence, the dynamic that our society has is, if it’s white, hold it in contempt, undermine it, abuse it, toss it aside, even if it is a child-victim of rape, torture, sexual enslavement, trafficking, and prostitution. If it’s non-white protect it, praise it, advance its interests, cover for it, make excuses for it, even if it’s an utterly foreign, middle-aged paedophile rapist and racist pimp of children. It's really nothing less than that.

Theberton, Youtube 0 Comments [6/20/2018 1:32:12 PM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: hydrolythe

Quote# 138252

Ted Kaczynski is a genius and a hero. I recommend the small book he wrote very highly. It is called 'The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and its Future'. He wrote this manifesto before he was arrested. So it must have been written around 1996 at the latest, just when the Internet first began appearing in peoples' homes. His basic argument in this book is very sound and makes rational sense. And since 1996, technology has certainly increased even more dramatically; by leaps and bounds actually. And all this is to the great DETRIMENT of the basic psychological HUMAN fulfillments, dignity and self-worth that every person requires.

As technology increases, the REAL needs of the human soul and mind DECREASE. And people will be amazed at how accurately he predicted what the dystopian future would hold for us, if the technocracy wasn't destroyed. Thar future we are living in right NOW - if it can really be called "living". Hail Dr. Theodore Kaczynski, a hero for the ages. I salute you and the sacrifice you made for humanity. And it was your own blood brother who sold you out and caused you to be arrested and confined. You can't get any more low down than that. Your own BROTHER. I may be posting various sections of his book here in the future.

Imperium Europa, YouTube 0 Comments [6/20/2018 1:31:40 PM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 138242

12-Year-Old Negligent And Responsible For Own Rape' http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/11/05/1141331/school-district-claims-student-was-herself-responsible-for-being-raped/?mobile=nc



Whatever differences of opinion we have, this is just awful. I don't mean to be insensitive, but I am a little bit concerned as to whether the district really is at fault here. One guy committed suicide over this, and another teacher is behind bars. Was it individual teachers that abused this girl, or did the whole district abuse her? If the district was aware of it and just looked the other way as long as nobody was running their mouths, and then just passed the trash when things looked iffy, then I could see how they were at fault. Maybe if other victims of this dead guy were receiving compensation from the district, I could see that. I could be more wholeheartedly sympathetic to her cause. Otherwise it just looks like another person reaching for money.

But, I mean, come on... The courts will decide that, I guess. The lawyers ought to know better than to use "blame the victim" language in their defense. I don't see how the district is going to weasel out of paying SOME damages. Saying it's the victim's own fault isn't going to reduce damages. If anything, the judge will stick it to 'em for their lawyers being idiots.

===

Playing devil's advocate here, but is there ever a legit "blame the victim" scenario? I can't think of any intelligent examples at the moment... Something like a neighbor builds a fire in his backyard, maybe burning leaves or a bonfire, or something. The girl next door decides it will be fun to play in it and ends up getting 3rd degree burns, lung damage from smoke inhalation, etc. Is it fair to sue the guy just for building a fire? Or is it the burn victim's fault for being stupid?

No one in his right mind, myself included, will ever argue that having sex with someone without their consent is OK. However, a young woman has some degree of manipulating her odds. Does she dress provocatively and go to parties where she KNOWS there will be alcohol, drugs, and guys with too much blood in their testosterone system? I'd say she has more of a likelihood of her clothes just falling off and passing out on someone else's bed than, say, someone who dresses conservatively and prefers nice, quiet evenings at home with a glass of wine and a good book.

Similarly, everyone who lives in Greenville, MS, knows that unless you're a drug dealer, a prostitute, a gang member, or you're going to eat at Doe's (preferably before sunset), you have no business hanging out on Nelson Street. No, it's not your fault if you get robbed or shot. But you're not going to win any points with cops or judges for being an idiot! If a white person wants to avoid racial tension after dark, he stays south of US 82.

I know comparing abusive teachers to frat parties is apples/oranges, but defense is claiming the girl was "negligent," which is why they are going to fail. Negligence defenses don't work for frat parties, and they certainly aren't going to work here.

But what I can't understand is why with so many women teachers going to jail for messing with male underage students haven't succeeded in a variation of the negligence defense, especially when we're talking about young, green, attractive women teachers. As a male teacher right out of college, I took assignments where the dating pool was narrow if not non-existent. I can't even begin to imagine the psychology of a woman who goes from an overabundance of male attention to none at all. Being horrendously teased by horny male students can't help matters. So...the teacher just "happens" to need to run out to her car during her planning period, the student just "happens" to be taking a shortcut through the parking lot on his way to weight-lifting. Nobody will ever know. Not until the sex tape ends up on YouTube, anyway, and it will be his parents who bring charges.

Y'know, seduction is sometimes used as part of a rape accusation. In the olden days, young teachers running one-room schools on the frontier were often rape victims. Why is it so different now? Maybe the girl has no business teaching if she lacks the maturity to avoid that kind of manipulation. But rape is rape, and it makes no difference if it is through seduction or brute force.

I honestly don't think it works the other way, i.e. 12-year-old girls don't rape grown men.

But let's (for the sake of argument) turn this back around on the victim. If it is well-known among students that a certain male teacher is a horn-dog and a young girl KNOWINGLY and willfully puts herself in a position to be "exploited" (note the use of scare quotes here), I'd say the district has a good case for accusing the victim of negligence.

Angel Rho, a TWELVE year old girl could walk into the teacher's lounge stark naked and drunk, and plaster herself to a male teacher who's the only other person there, and it STILL wouldn't be her fault if she was raped. She was TWELVE.


[CAUTION: Devil's advocate alert]

But we don't know any extenuating circumstances. Why is she naked? Why is she drunk? Is it her fault for being either? It's possible. Did she know there might be one or more teachers in the teacher's lounge? Well, it IS the teacher's lounge, after all. It stands to reason there very likely could be at least one teacher in there. And there's a 50/50 chance that the teacher is male--you only get two options here. And how do you know it's rape? It could be consensual. And don't pull "can't legally consent" on me. I don't care what the law says. 12-year-olds are capable of "wanting it." I was 12 once, and I wasn't a year or two older than that when I discovered that there were girls roughly that age who already knew what dry-humping is and one or two who had already started having sex. It's a friggin miracle I was still a virgin at 19. Like it or not, consensual sex does happen at pre-teen and early teen years. And I don't buy for one second that they all care whether they are being "used" by someone in a position of trust, because "using" and "being used" is a two-way street.

Now, assuming that same drunk, naked 12-year-old walked into a teacher's lounge and a crusty, old, Coach Hardon happens to be in there and he DOES rape her, i.e. non-consentual sex, then no, it's not her fault for getting raped. But it IS her fault for being stupid, i.e. getting drunk, running around naked, and going inside a teacher's lounge where students aren't ever allowed. It was her poor judgment and poor choices that put her in that position in the first place.

That's assuming the middle school football team didn't kidnap her, force her to drink and strip, and chase her through the school only to have her duck in the lounge to hide or get help, only to be taken advantage of by Coach Hardon.

But if that's not what's going on, if this is something analogous to frat-party antics, and if the girl makes herself vulnerable by making stupid choices, she is negligent. She's spitting into the wind. If you run out into a busy street, you don't get to sue someone when they run over you with a car.

People who commit rape deserve to be brought to justice. Coach Hardon is going to lose his teaching creds, lose his career, lose any hope of functioning in society for being a pedophile, and spend a significant amount of time in prison. It doesn't matter if she consented or not (realistically). I don't dispute that, nor do I dispute that victims of rape deserve justice. Neither am I in favor of a "blame the victim" mentality.

But there is another side to all this, and that is the side of the accused and anything or anyone associated with him. On the one hand, the accused has the right to due process. The accusations could be false, after all, and what REALLY happened was the coach said something she didn't like at P.E.--something like "you MUST wear shoes to play dodgeball." I dunno. So she chugs some vodka, strips, attacks the coach in the teacher's lounge, and when the principal rushes in to see what the ruckus is all about, she points and says "HE made me do it!! !" The guy gets fired on the spot, and if there's a case in court it's going to be her word against his, and who do you think the judge is going to believe?

10 years later and the same girl is .02 away from graduating from college with honors, so it pisses her off. She thinks about it and decides maybe she can recoup on her student loans a little, so she sues the school district for damages. All this when the wrongdoing was entirely on her part.

Purely hypothetical, I know, but not unrealistic. So I think we have to be careful how we pursue sensitive matters of seeking justice for rape when there is so much room to unfairly manipulate the system.

Back in the real world, this person was abused by two teachers, not the entire school and not the administration. Her case is against those who did her harm. One of her bullies is dead and the other will never have a normal life. I feel for her and recognize what happened to her was awful and perhaps she can't live a normal life because of it. But you punish the guilty, not the innocent, and I don't see how there is anything left to be done. With all due respect to this woman and all she went through, this lawsuit reeks of frivolity. She thinks she has someone by the balls, so she's going to play this for all it's worth. And I'm not sure why. Is it just the money? Revenge motive? Closure? Just because she can? I've never been raped, and I'm not a woman, so I can't speak for a female rape victim. But I just don't see how any of this is really going to make her feel any better. Unless she comes to terms with what happened spiritually and emotionally, and for all I know she already has, she'll never "get over it" if that's even possible. I don't know what more there can be done or what more there SHOULD be done. I don't see how making an entire district responsible for what two individuals did is going to solve anything. I'm sure the details are probably more convoluted than what we get from the article, which seems more commentary than informative, but just based on what I've read so far that's all I have for you.



AngelRho, Wrong Planet 0 Comments [6/20/2018 1:30:54 PM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 138241

There are NO Biblical grounds for divorce. The biggest lie in churches today is that divorce is permissible in cases of adultery. If that were true, then what about all the other sins one's spouse can commit... murder, theft, extortion, lust? Jesus taught in Matthew 5:28 that lust is the same as adultery. If you believe that lust is a sin, then every wife of a husband who lusts has grounds for divorce. Clearly, Jesus did not intend for anyone to divorce, which He makes very clear in Matthew 19:8. Divorce is always a sin.

In Matthew 19:9 Jesus simply taught that if a man's wife divorces him, then he is the victim, and not committing adultery by remarriage. She filed. It was her self-righteousness that dragged the husband into court. By comparing Scripture with Scripture, it is plain that divorce is never permissible. The person who files for divorce is sinning, and has no Biblical grounds for remarriage (to do so is the horrible sin of adultery, Matthew 5:32). The Apostle Paul is careful in 1st Corinthians 7:10 to use the word “depart,” concerning the wife who leaves her husband; but Paul does NOT mention putting away (divorce). The wife who departs is clearly commanded not to shack up nor remarry.

Divorce is one’s unwillingness to forgive their spouse! No wife would ever divorce her husband if she truly loved him—not one! I don’t care if he beats her, she won’t divorce him (leave, yes; divorce, no). Say what you will, I don’t recall any disclaimer in the wedding vows for spousal abuse which would permit a divorce. And by the way, there are NO Scriptural grounds for divorce.

Society Has Gone Insane

Women today have been brainwashed by domestic violence literature to seek divorce at the first sign of abuse. I was recently reading a pamphlet from an organization called VARO (Victim’s Advocates Reaching Out). There are thousands of such non-prophet anti-violence and abuse organizations all across America. I couldn’t believe what the VARO pamphlet said inside. There was a listing of “signs of abuse,” with questions, and then at the bottom they requested for the reader to seek help at once if they answered” yes” to any of the questions. One of the questions was, “Is your spouse tracking your time?”

Another asked, “Does your spouse ever make any belittling comments to you in front of others?,” “Are you often criticized for little things?” Another question asked, “Has your spouse ever tried to prevent you from contacting friends or family?” One of the questions asked “Has your husband ever forced you to have sex against your will?” The implications are clearly against an authoritative husband who decides where, when, what, who, and why concerning his wife’s life, activates, and friends.

"Who’s teaching the women? We know that many socially conservative organizations are now teaching men to be good fathers. Think about it. Women are learning about issues of marriage and dealing with husbands through Women’s Studies courses (feminist and humanist propaganda), local “battered women’s shelters” (which disseminate more of the same in each community) and many other kinds of organizations that teach women to be independent—independent from husbands. Women are also taught by such organizations to know the incentives to divorce (propaganda and tactics that make divorce an easy lifestyle option for them). Most conservative organizations have been recipients of some of the same liberal, anti-family propaganda—many without knowing it." -Men's News Daily


You probably won’t like this; but a husband has a God-given RIGHT to decide who his wife associates with, where she goes, when she goes there, when she has sex with him, how she dresses, et cetera.

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Savior 0 Comments [6/20/2018 1:27:44 PM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 138239

a straight girl will date anything vaguely male-shaped so long as its as cis and het as she is. istfg you could line up the handsomest butches who could eat her pussy for days or the most genteel bi boys who could top her from wall to wall of her tacky apartment, and she’ll still choose her broke, ugly trogolodyte boyfriend who thinks staring at her tits is foreplay and humping vaguely in her direction will get her to cum bc gay men are meant only to compliment her tasteless dress over brunch and lesbians are gross.

spuriusbrocoli, Tumblr 0 Comments [6/20/2018 1:27:17 PM]
Fundie Index: 0

Quote# 138251

(He is referring to the Unabomber)

Those who criticize him for his methods are foolish beyond means. The ends justify the means. His goal was clear and a necessity. Criticizing him for killing such a minuscule amount of people is absolutely preposterous. He should not have done it for reasons other than your fake morality. He should have planned a much greater strategy. He was smart enough to topple our understanding of reality.

Sadly the system is, and was, in such a way that we won't ever return to where we should be, that is until we do return. Most likely after a tremendously horrific time period in human history. Then after our numbers have dropped to 2% of the disgustingly bloated number of humans on this earth now, we will return to our roots. Living off the land as we should, as animals of earth. Not as parasites destroying it.

The Lizard King, YouTube 2 Comments [6/20/2018 12:02:40 PM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 138249

I did magic mushrooms and came to a blackpill: we are even more bound to nature than I thought

So I was at this firends house in a pretty nature-y part of the city and did psychedelics for the first time in my life: around 3 grams of psilocybin mushrooms (a medium dose).

I felt I was part of the nature around me, and even if I was totally conscious of my hatred for nature, I feld that connection and primal oneness with it, kinda like while my brain still hated nature rabidly, my heart loved it.Fucks even the dogs in there were more around me seeking my company. I felt like i wandered around as part of the wildlife there, instead of some cilvilized human. Sounds outside of cars, civilization or people in other areas talking grew hostile fellings in me.

And there is the blackpill. We are so fucking attached to nature NOTHING sort of radical manipulation of the human race will solve anything. We will ALWAYS still crave it. There is NO societal measure, NO self condition NOTHING that won't net us free from its shackles, and specially, our natural needs (validation, company, sex, oneness, belonging).

The uglier you are, the less those needs will be covered while still being absolutely imprisoned by it, no matter how civilized you think you are, no matter how much you hate it, no matter how religious you think you are, no matter how much self conditioning you subjected yourself to.

Zyros, incels.me 3 Comments [6/20/2018 12:00:15 PM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 138248

The thing I get hung up on more is the whole "consent" bs. You summarized my position on it well. The way AOC is implemented is as a safety-net compromise. If kids can have sex with each other and CONSENT to sex with each other, then they can consent to have sex with anyone they want to have sex with. If it really is true that kids CANNOT consent, which is nonsense because they consent all the time, then they all need to be picked up by the cops and hauled off to the D.C. every time they get caught, or DHS needs to come out to their homes and place them in "protective custody" (although they'll just end up getting sexually abused in foster care, but whatever). Lock up the parents for reckless endangerment for not knowing what their kids are doing. And stop freakin' holding kids to different legal standards!! ! If all we want to do is scare the hell out of them before they turn 18, fine. But if you want to start acting like an adult, make adult mistakes, you should suffer adult consequences, even if all you do is give the kids just enough to make them want to stop doing what gets them in trouble.

"Can't consent" is just downright absurd. If they cannot consent, then they never would consent. What we're really saying is they can't give LEGAL consent. But why? Because GROWNUPS made up laws to that effect. So really this just amounts to appeal to law and perhaps even circular reasoning. It's illogical. Or maybe we mean "can't give INFORMED consent." Maybe so, but not always. 12 year olds know more than some of us are willing to admit. They're having sex, they're aware of the risks, and they still like it anyway. Tell a nicotine addict that tobacco smoke can kill him and see just how much that deters him from lighting up.

Come on, I knew what was what by the time I was 12. And I knew girls younger than that who knew what was what a lot more than I did. We'd sneak out behind my grandfather's tool shed and make out until someone called for us. And I've even mentioned someone who lived close to us who had a sexual encounter at 12 years old with a messed-up babysitter. Can't consent...please! Utter nonsense.

Concrete example? Just do a quick google. Here's one:
http://www.hlntv.com/video/2012/10/11/teacher-falsely-accused-having-sex-student
Fortunately, this is an example of a teacher using GOOD judgment and actually NOT going to jail over accusations. But the police did come to her classroom and read her her rights, if I understand correctly, with children present. It's really disrupted her family, endangered her career, and negatively impacted the school and district as a whole.

Here's another, in fact, ACTUALLY INVOLVING a girl who was 12 years old at the time:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/falsely-accused-virginia-teacher-sean-lanigan-attempts-reclaim/story

AngelRho, Wrong Planet 0 Comments [6/20/2018 11:57:49 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 138246

Statutory rape exists as a legal reality because children are incapable of consent, regardless of what they think they're capable of.


Not buying it. Sounds too much like a rationalization to me. Children consent to all sorts of things all the time. Depending on what mood the wife and I are in, like if we're both ambivalent towards doing one activity or another, or maybe we just couldn't care any less, we'll call the oldest into the room, present him with two choices, and let him decide. Now, sure, little kids typically choose the second option, so we'll ask twice and reverse the options. If he still makes the same choice, we know it's because it's something he wants and not something he's just going along with.

Or maybe mom is making a quick trip to the store. Who wants to go? Who wants to watch a movie with daddy? And one or both of the bipeds will go along with mommy.

They get choices, and they get the option to consent to some activities. Why? Because they're capable of consenting, and to my recollection we haven't made them choose among options in which there was at least one that could harm them.

I object to child sex for completely different reasons, but I should point out that preteens do explore their sexuality and even engage in sexual intercourse. From what I gather, that is becoming less frequent than it was when I was that age, but things do happen that seem to be out of the reach of the law, like when a 12 year old has sex with a 9 year old. Of course, it could be that I'm an adult and like most adults I'm not a part of that circle anymore and thus unaware of how often it really does go on. However, I know of some former neighbors of ours who had a 12 year old boy lose his virginity to a 16 year old babysitter... Anyway, like it or not, sex is a pleasurable activity for most people and kids younger than 9 can even figure out how to masturbate. So if they know it feels good and have no problems engaging in it, they certainly can give a partner the "go ahead" while they're playing doctor.

The same kid who can consent to that can consent to sex with an adult that he or she likes and/or feels sexually attracted to.

"Cannot consent" is bs. It's a rationale, an assumption and a compromise that legislatures are forced to accept. It's a "line in the sand" because an exact age at which ALL children are able to say "yea" or "nay" doesn't exist. So an AOC of, like 14, 16, or 18 is drawn up to err on the side of safety. It's the kind of language you hear from conservative, evangelical Christians to legislate morality and keep kids sexually pure. If we suspend antiquated Biblical values in our culture and society, we might find and accept that kids are capable of consent at much lower ages than we're willing to admit.

Much of foundational western law is formalized Christian morality straight from the Bible. The "can't consent" argument is a poor one that only really works for kids less than 3 years old. "It causes physical harm" is a better argument. But past a certain age the "physical harm" argument doesn't work because it doesn't physically harm everyone. Same thing with the "psychological harm." It doesn't affect all children equally. So why even put an age on it and enforce the laws? Because it's wrong, Christians already accept that it's wrong, and the AOC is just a way to keep children sexually pure for a longer period of time and provide legal recourse against immoral people willing to violate them. Of COURSE kids can consent. It's the job of parents to make sure that they don't consent and keep them out of situations in which they would. All the rationalizations in the western world can't get around the fact that the non-religious "borrow" their values from Biblical morality. Setting the AOC at 14 or 16 is just a compromise--a pitiful one at that, but better than nothing at all.

AngelRho, Wrong Planet 1 Comments [6/20/2018 11:57:29 AM]
Fundie Index: -1

Quote# 138245

I am a limited political pedophile.

What does this mean?

I am not attracted to female children below the age of 12, but I would still have sex with a modern Western female even younger, even a toddler.

Why?

Because I hate almost all modern Western women and don't care what happens to them. I know they will all become worthless sluts who will fuck the dirtiest men around (actual omegas - http://www.coalpha.org/Misuse-of-terms-l...95159.html) and that they will reject any male who will be interested in a serious relationship, let alone marriage. They might marry a beta when they're 35 or so just so he can feed their disgusting omega spawn but even then they'll fuck dirtbags who will still have them.

I don't care what happens to almost any Western female toddler (excluding women from sane groups in the West, like Amish, Mormons, Mennonites or Orthodox Jews). Would I get hard on 3 year old female toddler were I to get one? I don't know, I honestly haven't been with one before. But even if I could not, I'd still try to lick its vagina or something like that, just for experiment. I suspect it would be easier with some developed girl who is like 11. I have no doubt I'd be attracted to her and would fuck her well.

The point isn't attraction. Were I attracted to below 12 jailbaits I'd be sure I could get it hard even for a 3 year-old, but I can't be sure of that right now for reasons I've mentioned - a) I am not attracted to them now b) I have never been with somebody who is, like, a toddler.
The point is something else completely -as a modern Western female, you have no rights in my eyes. You are lost, broken, tainted, worthless. You will never be anything than a public urinal. You have no capability of being a good wife or a mother.

On the other hand, I'd never act in ways I described with a female from a non-feminist country !

So in that sense I am a political pedophile, in a limited sense (I am not a political pedophile toward non-feminist women).

Any questions?

caamib, Incelocalypse 1 Comments [6/20/2018 11:57:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: xavier badoo

Quote# 138244

The problem with this whole debate is that the real point is being missed. The REAL ISSUE is whether the district holds any responsibility for what happened. Passing the blame along to others is the worst way in the world to defend oneself against this kind of thing. It's like saying, "It's not our fault 'cause the devil made him do it." What she did or didn't do is IRRELEVANT as to whether they hold responsibility.


It might, though. If she knowingly acted in such a way to provoke a sexual encounter, perhaps a consensual one, then she wasn't even really raped.It's stupid for a teacher to fall for this crap, but any idiot, I don't care how old you are, can figure out if you have sex with a teacher, you automatically have that teacher by the balls. Heck, you don't even have to know the teacher or even be in the classroom. All you have to do is say "Mr. so-n-so raped me" and that teacher gets an unpaid administrative leave. A negligence defense could very well be what it takes to help prevent abuse of the system.

SHE WAS TWELVE.
No more needs to be said, but you keep on digging anyway:


It doesn't matter how old the person is. Consent means "no rape." Rape as commonly understood means that a sexual advance has been rejected and the attacker refuses to take "no" for an answer. That is what rape is. When you hear "no," you stop. Rape happens when you hear "no" and you do it anyway. A 12 year old who invites rather than rejects a sexual advance is consenting. And no, I don't care what the law says. Laws change. Now, sure, I acknowledge WHY we have laws, and setting AOCs avoid legal ambiguities. [b]We accept that "12 year olds can't consent" to make it easier on ourselves when it comes to pursuing child exploitation in the justice system, but--I'm sorry--laws don't reflect reality. Kids have sex with each other before they're 12 years old. Kids that age even have sex with young adults and don't see anything wrong with it. And they don't call the cops. Unless someone tells them they should, or unless they think they have something to gain from it. They are remarkably intelligent, and I'm not sure you give them enough credit.[/b[



AngelRho, Wrong Planet 0 Comments [6/20/2018 11:57:15 AM]
Fundie Index: 0

Quote# 138237

Pride apparel made in places where being gay is illegal.

What does the #LGTBQ care?

They're too busy pozzing unsuspecting neg-holes this "Pride Month."

Hey poz-holes, taking PrEP is doesn't make you HIV negative again!

#Ghost

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/19/business/gay-pride-merchandise-retailers.html

Ghost, Gab 3 Comments [6/20/2018 8:44:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 138236

There is enough evidence to prove that I'm right...especially by way of the hydrogen bombs and the nuclear bombs and all the other bombs of the two world wars...If they aren't earthquakes, in diverse places, I don't know what is...diverse here being places where they shouldn't happen.

As far as gravity is concerned, I'm afraid it is an unknown property until we realise the true nature of the universe. Gravity is an imploding force created by mass warping space and space can only be warped if there is a clash of two universal forces...and indeed there are...our dimension is one of those forces and the static dimension, made known to us in the Holy Bible, is the other. They run side by side except the static universe is a relic from before the big-bang whilst ours is travelling at the high speed of the expanding universe...hence all the scientific laws that are made known to us by our modern science becomes null and void when we accept there is a higher science, of which, Jesus Christ, is the only scientist of any worth.

What this all means then is that when someone makes a point which is difficult to understand then it is wise to do some research before shooting from the hip.

NicholasMarks, Religion and Ethics 3 Comments [6/20/2018 8:43:28 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: NearlySane

Quote# 138238

(On vlogger The Amazing Atheist deliberately trying to induce flashbacks in an actual rape victim)

This shows how immoral atheists can be in how they treat women. Atheists treat women as sex objects, while us Christians treat women as fellow humans created through evolution in the image of God, who will be our wives and the mother’s of our children.

Keep in mind that Tj Kirk/The Amazing Atheist is the top atheist YouTuber.

Jacob Harrison, SSTDT comments 6 Comments [6/20/2018 8:31:17 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 138232

Men tricked at weddings by foids

Look at this shit
^^link^^
This makes me so angry to see because these men have been fooled by these femoids into think they are special, to the point where they break down into tears when they see her, but little do they know how many cocks she has taken, and how many times she will cheat on him in wedlock, and the despair she will cause when she takes half his money on divorce because “Tyrone made me feel like a real woman again”

Honestly such fucking RAGEFUEL

TemporaryBritcel , incels.me 13 Comments [6/20/2018 5:26:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 138222

I. INTRODUCTION
The Bible clearly teaches that today, there is to be an institutional separation of Church and State. To think otherwise is to believe in a theocratic or sacerdotal form of Government. What the Bible does not teach — and what the secularist would like to say the U.S. Constitution supports — is an influential separation of Church and State. Clearly however such thinking is not supported in the Constitution or the Scriptures.

“Render unto Caesar” represents one of the biblical passages that supports the idea of institutional separation. Let us examine this more closely from a historical perspective.

As primitive Christianity began as recorded in the book of Acts the separation of the Church from the State of Rome clearly existed. It was not until the fourth century A.D., when Constantine co-opted Christianity as the State religion (in his attempt to unify the vast and diverse Roman Empire), that the clearly, previously existing, separation between the two institutions disappeared. Tragically, this lack of separation occurs even during the Post-Reformation period! Luther, Zwingli and Calvin practiced a sacerdotal societal structure, versus a composite one per the clear teaching of the NT (cf., Matthew 20:20-22; Romans 13:1-8; 1Peter 2:13-14). In that much of the reformer’s emphasis on doctrinal correction of heresy related to soteriology (the doctrine of Salvation) no surgical exercise was performed relative to the aberrant earlier wedding of Church and State.

Important to this study is the thought that in the NT era — save the first three centuries of it — a theocratic, sacerdotal system has existed in most countries of the world. Historically, it is not until the American experiment in government, in which our founding fathers in reaction to sacerdotal England (wherein the Church of England and the State of England still remain one in the same), sought a pragmatic solution to separate themselves from a forced religious belief system incumbent on one being born in England.

If biblically speaking, the Church and State are to be separate institutions, does that suggest, as the secularist would postulate, a total disenfranchisement of the Church from the State — i.e. an influential separation as well? Is that the extrapolation Christ would desire from the aforementioned text of Matthew 22:21? No!

As we will see from this study, the Institution of the State is quite dependent on the existence of a strong and healthy Institution of the Church (which it does not control) to build men and women in righteousness for service in government.

WITHOUT A STRONG CHURCH THAT MAKES DISCIPLES, THE STATE SOON GOES WAYWARD DUE TO THE SINFULNESS OF ITS LEADERS.

Since this is such a vital need and concern of the State itself, and the State’s leadership, what more so and specifically does the book of Proverbs state about the absolute need for righteous governmental leaders? Let us turn our attention in pursuit of the answer to that question.

II. UNDERSTANDING THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
Every statesman needs to take a lesson from Proverbs 14:34. Here in this important Proverb is a nationalistic, (versus personal) bestowal of truth. Here is a sound political maxim:

Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.

Righteousness in the lives of individuals — both in a country’s citizens and leaders — is the superior virtue over all others. It is a nation’s number one national resource! The writer of Proverbs is stating that it is the one ingredient that assures the exaltation of a nation.

It is not the international trade or the gross domestic product, nor is it the presence of natural resources that is most fundamental to the exaltation of a nation. Rather, it is the righteousness of a nation’s individuals that is the greatest resource — and the greatest commodity that a nation needs to manufacture!

The same principles which build individuals in righteousness (as expounded by the Word of God) are the same principles, wherein multiplied by and through individuals, that build a nation. It is when a nation is impregnated with highly principled individuals that it gains well-being.

Given this cut-to-the-chase analysis of our greatest need, the question then quickly becomes one of how righteousness is formed in the lives of individuals. Having said that, therein exists, in terms of serving the Institution of the State, the absolutely critical preeminent duty of the Church in an institutionally separated society: to convert the soul and disciple — Christianize — the leaders of the State and its citizenry.

Conversion is even preeminent to education; without a moral foundation, knowledge makes arrogant (ICorinthians 8:1) and is of little value in terms of nation building. Therefore in our composite country, the State is highly dependent on an Institution it does not control: The Church in regard to its own health and sustainability. Conversely, for the Church to spend her energy in the Capital Community attempting to affect policy with little manifest concern for the souls of the State’s leaders is to practice, biblically speaking, a misinformed and misguided sort of involvement: it is to attempt to do what others — strong in Christ Public Servants — can do much better! It is to be less than efficient. It is to misunderstand the primacy of her God-ordained role in a composite society.

The Church can best influence the State by building and sending righteous Public Servants to serve in government. Keep in mind the State is not in the business of manufacturing righteous individuals. Rather, God has designed it to punish unrighteous individuals (cf. Romans 13:4; 1Peter 2:13-14). [...] States Proverbs 11:10-11 in this regard:

When it goes well with the righteous, the city rejoices, and when the wicked perish, there is joyful shouting. By the blessing of the upright a city is exalted, but by the mouth of the wicked it is torn down.

[...]

As you can see, Proverbs has much to say about the necessity of righteous governmental leaders! Scripture shouts about this matter! The Church must be in the business of manufacturing them via evangelism and discipleship at all levels of their career paths.


Ralph Drollinger, Capitol Ministries 7 Comments [6/20/2018 5:25:28 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Skyknight

Quote# 138229

The Portals Of Hell Have Been Opened


The Portals of Hell have opened, there will be great darkness and also great light, will it be Rapture or Rupture for us? https://sites.google.com/site/helpfor...
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_cJ...
http://sanctification.podbean.com/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-sL...
Satan is being vicious toward the true Christians today as the spirit of Antichrist grows stronger on this Earth. All the demons from ages past have gathered to do battle against the true Christians of our Lord Jesus Christ, because we serve our Master our savior, our Lord Jesus.
True Christians should look up to heaven, and not dread this hour at all. Our God's power is much stronger than all the multitudes of demons that are coming against the the true Church of our Lord Jesus Christ in this last hour.
The demons know they can't destroy the true Christians, The Christians with the blood of Jesus will trample the demons underfoot. The demons know the true Christians have been given power over all of them, even over Lucifer himself. All we are required to do is live a Holy life without any willful sinning and we are promised the victory...the battle belongs to our Lord Jesus Christ!!!
Jesus chose Paul for a soul winning mission, and Paul suffered so very much for our Lord Jesus Christ. Much of the time after Paul's conversion he lived in the thick of the battle.
Paul was imprisoned, beaten, persecuted, but what a wonderful message our Lord sent through him to us... the pure Word of the living God!
Our Lord will be able to get the very best soul winning work out of us during our hours of suffering, trials and persecutions during this Christian life. We will cling to the Old Rugged Cross of our Lord Jesus with greater determination, greater strength because we will draw from our Lord Jesus Christ, we will draw on those powers we need from our Jesus, day after day!
Paul is a great example of the Christians of today. (II Corinthians 4:8-10). Persecuted, mistreated, robbed of life just like Jesus was robbed of life, the Early Church went through all of that. The words of our Lord held Paul steady when Paul was under more than he thought he could bear: My grace is sufficient for thee; my grace is sufficient.
Paul's answer was that God's grace was sufficient, that God's strength was made perfect in Paul's weakness. No longer did Paul seek and beg our Lord through his problems. Paul trusted our God completely. We who are going through troubles and trials will not have it easy, but as we trust in our Lord Jesus Christ we will win for all eternity!
We must trust our God completely because our God provides all the power we need so we will not come up lacking in anything.
Paul's attitude in the face of great persecutions was a shining example for all of us as we live our Christian lives. In II Timothy, we read Paul's farewell letter to Timothy, one of his spiritual sons in our Lord: (II Timothy 4:6,7). Paul told Timothy that he had kept the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ. Paul believed God in everything and in all things; Paul never let the enemies of his God rob him of God's promises. Finally Paul's work was done; our Lord had poured out the last message through him; Paul had encouraged the last soul; graduation day had come. A swordsman awaited to send him to his heavenly home.
Some wouldn't have liked that kind of graduation ceremony, but Paul knew it was our Lord's way for him to go, and with all humility, with all love, Paul bowed to the will of our God. Paul used the faith of our God and the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ to seal his testimony with his own blood. The grace of our God was sufficient for Paul just as it will be sufficient for some of us when we come to the end of this life's journey. some of us will be Raptured, but there will be others who will be required to seal their testimony with their own blood!

Joe Walker, Youtube 5 Comments [6/20/2018 3:40:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 138227

Those are fighting words. The Latin Americans already have citizenship in another country. Most Trump voters do not.

As for this sudden sympathy for families being broken up by courts, geez, I think the democrats should shut up before people start pointing out that they do it to American people all the time. Including totally innocent people who haven’t even been accused of a crime.

Bill P, Unz 11 Comments [6/20/2018 3:40:17 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 138226

As of 2009, there was no fully conservative translation of the Bible which satisfies the following ten guidelines:[4]

Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias. For example, the Living Bible translation has liberal evolutionary bias;[5] the widely used NIV translation has a pro-abortion bias.[6]
Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other feminist distortions; preserve many references to the unborn child (the NIV deletes these)
Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity;[7] the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level[8]
Utilize Terms which better capture original intent: using powerful new conservative terms to capture better the original intent;[9] Defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words that have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".
Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction[10] by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots";[11] using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census
Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.
Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
Exclude Later-Inserted Inauthentic Passages: excluding the interpolated passages that liberals commonly put their own spin on, such as the adulteress story
Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities.
Thus, a project began among editors at Conservapedia to translate the Bible in accordance with these principles. The translated Bible can be found here.

Benefits include:

mastery of the Bible, which is priceless
mastery of the English language, which is valuable
thorough understanding of the differences in Bible translations, particularly the historically important King James Version
benefiting from activity that no public school would ever allow; a Conservative Bible could become a text for public school courses
political issues can become a pathway to evangelizing liberals
liberals will oppose this effort, but they will have to read the Bible to criticize this, and that will open their minds
this project has a unifying effect on various Christian denominations, and serves as an important counterweight to liberal efforts to divide conservative candidates based on religion

Andy Schlafly, Conservapedia  10 Comments [6/20/2018 3:40:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Jacob Harrison

Quote# 138224

I had my Damascus Road experience in 1973

I emigrated to the "land of the free" in October 1968. The winters in New York are much colder than in London so I got very sick during the first winter. I went to the hospital and they took X-rays and discovered that I was suffering from a duodenal ulcer.

After 6 months in the U.S. I had to register for the draft, and even though I was not a citizen I could have been drafted and shipped to Vietnam. I already had 4 years experience of military life so I was really ambivalent about the military environment. I told the army recruiter that I had an ulcer, so he classified me as IY, which was a medical exemption. I never considered the ulcer a major disability . . . but the Pentagon thought otherwise.

If I had emigrated at the time of the Civil War, I would have been the first to join general George Armstrong Custer's Brigade.

In April 1973 I began attending a Pentecostal Church in New York. That was when I converted to Christ or had my Damascus Road experience. Unfortunately, I did not learn the correct name of the Messiah until 2010.

I was baptized in water shortly thereafter. In 1974 I got married, and before I knew it I was blessed with 3 beautiful children.

The Pentecostal Church was supposed to be a "Protestant" Church, but the Pentecostal Movement, with their speaking in tongues, has a lot in common with voodoo. They also stubbornly hold to the Jesuit "Left Behind Madness " or rapture doctrine.

I became a U.S. citizen in 1976, which was one of the proudest days of my life.

Living in the British Empire state; and attending a Pentecostal Church, I could make no spiritual progress whatsoever, so in 1982 I packed up and moved to Dallas, Texas, with my wife and 3 children.

Thanks to President Lincoln saving the Union, we didn't have to get passports to move to Texas.

I attended Christ for the Nations Bible Institute in Dallas, Texas, from 1982 to 1984.

The school is ecumenical but I learned all about the suppressed books of Avro Manhattan and ex-priest Charles Chiniquy and his 19th century bestseller entitled Fifty Years in the Church of Rome

With 3 children to support, I did not have much time for extra curricular activities but I did learn all about the Vatican's Trojan Horse ecumenical strategy and the suppressed works of Avro Manhattan and Charles Chiniquy.

When I graduated from the Institute, I went to work for a big electrical contractor in Dallas. Due to the manipulation of the oil prices, the Texas economy collapsed in 1986, so I was forced to return to New York.

One thing I did learn in Texas was how to say howdy and y'all.

Since 1996, I have been working on the Reformation Online and it looks like I am getting to the bottom of the strong conspiracy at last (II Samuel 15:12).

2 things always intrigued me from the beginning: the origin of the New World maps, and who was really behind the conspiracy to assassinate President Lincoln.

My 2 favorite verses from the Book of Isaiah are:

No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of JEHOVAH, and their righteousness is of me, saith JEHOVAH (Isaiah 54:17).

So shall they fear the name of JEHOVAH from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of JEHOVAH shall lift up a standard against him (Isaiah 59:19).

Patrick Scrivener , Reformation 3 Comments [6/20/2018 3:39:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Jacob Harrison

Quote# 138223

YOU ARE BLESSED FOR VISITING THE REFORMATION ONLINE—THE MOST TIMELY, TRUTHFUL, AND FEARLESS SITE ON THE INTERNET!!

"Behold I have set before thee an open door
and no Man can shut it" (Apocalypse 3:8).

The handwriting on the wall announced the fall of ancient Babylon and the handwriting on the door announced the fall of modern Babylon.

Patrick Scrivener , Reformation 4 Comments [6/20/2018 3:39:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Jacob Harrison

Quote# 138220

No More Religious Diversity (or Skeptics)

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
John Lennon - "Imagine"

Like John Lennon, skeptics and atheists today would love to see a world free of religion. Surprisingly, their vision is not only inevitable, but, of all people, Jesus is the one who will make it happen. Unfortunately for them, along with religion, atheism and skepticism will also be forced out.

Let's cover that latter statement first, since it's pretty obvious. You've probably heard that Jesus will rule the earth with a "rod of iron" (Ps 2:9; Rev 2:27; 12:5; 19:15). We already saw an example of that above where the nations that do not obey the Torah command to go up to the Festival of Booths will be punished with drought (Zec 14:19). Pretty harsh correction, indeed, but it accomplishes two things. It not only corrects the bad behavior, but it also demonstrates the supernatural power behind the government and its laws.

That type of evidence of God and his power is why I say that in time the "religions" of atheism, agnosticism or skepticism will disappear. There will be no denying the supernatural or God anymore. The supernatural will come and bite you in the rear when you doubt it enough to disobey!

Jeremiah 31:34 (HCSB) — No longer will one teach his neighbor or his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they will all know Me, from the least to the greatest of them...

The Millennium's widely available, clear and complete teaching about God and his ways are going to make doubt about God's existence or his will look ridiculous (in ironically the same way most people view Creationists today). It's this very doubt today that makes room for not only skepticism, but all the false religions of the world.

Yet I wouldn't say that Jesus will outlaw Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Catholicism, and all the contradictory forms of Protestantism. He won't have to. I don't think anybody will want to follow these invented traditions of mere men anymore when the supernaturally powerful way of God himself is at last so accessible and plainly clear to the whole world.

The few who want to cling to the old religions will be on their own for as long as they can hold out. They will eventually be punished for their rebellion, after some gentle correction first:

Isaiah 30:21 (HCSB) — and whenever you turn to the right or to the left, your ears will hear this command behind you: “This is the way. Walk in it.”

Tim McHyde, Escape All These Things 10 Comments [6/19/2018 2:14:11 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Denizen

Quote# 138212

Go Bake Cakes - Wormy Snow Flakes! Typical Libera-holeism thinking! They want what they want regardless of any imposition/oppression, because they know better than everyone.

WOW such spoiled children of the devil! Go Bake Cakes - Wormy Snow Flakes! They DONT really care about anyone else being “hurt”!

They are appalled that they couldn’t corrupt another human being by forcing him to abide by their evil lifestyle/will which in turn gives them a notion of less deviation between normal & queer, Good & Evil placating their disgusting free will choice to be gay!

THEY "jew'd" OUR FOOD DUDE!!!, Real Jew News 6 Comments [6/19/2018 1:29:45 PM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 138211

A shop can turf you out for any reason. It is private property and you are in it at the owner’s pleasure. No reason needs to be given. How that pans out for civil rights is that the owner can then be sued for civil rights violation if it can be proven that it was a civil rights issue and not a personal objection to the customer.

The store owners civil rights are protected as well by law and this extends to being allowed to decline to serve any customer but with the above proviso and which must first be expounded upon and then proven. It is not even a matter of religious liberty.

Some people find homosexuality disgusting without any religious underpinning for their reaction. This is a natural reaction to a perverse and unnatural act. That is why it has been illegal and even punishable by death for most of human history. This current phase of history is not even human.

Ashcan, Real Jew News 5 Comments [6/19/2018 1:29:14 PM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 138209

(The Broxtowe CSA case was, to quote the blog, one of the first "Satanic Panic" cases in the UK. The Team 4 social workers were the ones who investigated and "found evidence" of Satanic Ritual Abuse - naturally, it was complete tosh.)

This week we’ve been discussing the 1987–89 Broxtowe child abuse case, arguably the first “Satanic panic” case in the UK. (To trace how the 1980s Satanic panic made its way across the Atlantic from its genesis in the USA, we’ve found this article on the SAFF website very useful.) Following up on yesterday’s post about the response of Team 4 to the groundbreaking JET report, today we’re looking into the unredacted bits of the Appendices to the Team 4 report, which contains information which was used by the Team 4 social workers in drafting their response to the JET report.

We owe a very large debt of gratitude to Rebecca Hemsley, who put in an FOI request for the Team 4 response to the JET report in September 2015, and received it in 2016. To our knowledge, ours is the first publication of that report and its Appendix. Looking at the index, and then at what’s actually been left unredacted, it’s hard not to feel just a bit disappointed. For example, it might have been edifying to read “8. [Redacted]’s detailed account of her work, a prepared report and a detailed response to JET Case Conference Minutes”.

Instead, we are left with “Misunderstandings of Mallus Maleficorum (sic)”; an excerpt from a 1980s zine called NOX; and some material outlining just the sort of guidelines which the JET report states that Ray Wyre gave to the foster parents to guide their diary-keeping about the children in their care, and which the Team 4 response emphatically states he did not.

However, even the dregs of the Appendix have a great deal to show about the approach taken by Team 4, as we shall see.

The Malleus Maleficarum (Witch Hammer or Hammer of the Witches), written in about 1486 by two members of the Dominican Order, Johann Sprenger and Heinrich Kraemer, was a theological treatise intended to be used as a handbook for discovering and destroying witches in Europe. It served as a spur for the witch hysteria which gripped Europe for several centuries, and was adopted by Protestant as well as Catholic witch hunters. (Keep in mind that in those days, “witches” were considered to consort with Satan, whereas now we think of “witches” as belonging to the Wiccan tradition.)

But to find the Malleus indexed and turned into a resource for child protection professionals in the late 20th century is…how shall we say? Fucking ludicrous?

Social workers, Hoaxtead Research 0 Comments [6/19/2018 1:24:02 PM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Katie
1 2 3 4 5 8 | top