Mark Dreher #wingnut

Mark Dreher #wingnut forums.carm.org

Have no fear D Laurier.

You will change.

Everyone starts out as a liberal but at some point in their life, hopefully as early as possible, the Father's continual behind the scenes guidance and training eventually wears them down and they all convert into a conservative.

If you think of your grandparents and all the other people in that age range they are without exception very conservative, the only real question is at what age you to will put aside your youthful indiscretions, sober up and also receive maturity.

Since the "no elderly liberals" mandate is strictly enforced by the Father can you guess the fate of a liberal who refuses to eventually succumb to the Father's cleansing?

An untimely early death, yes you are right, good guess.

234 comments

old comment by Brain_In_A_Jar

Actually, this is sort-of true. The process occurs when you become too exhausted, after beating your head against relentless conservative stonewalling, to continue believing that you can actually do anything to improve the world, and you ditch your good-intentions and humanitarian ideals and just settle for hanging on to what you've got and not letting your own life get any worse.

In doing so, you become another buttress of the wall.

Some conservatives are people who just never gave a damn about anyone worse off than them to begin with; but a lot of the rest are former liberals who've either lost hope that they could ever do anything to help, or had to focus so much on their own survival that they no longer have the time or resources to really think of anyone else.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"Everyone starts out as a liberal but at some point in their life, hopefully as early as possible, the Father's continual behind the scenes guidance and training eventually wears them down and they all convert into a conservative."

Oh, how little you know about politics in the wider world, outside your own little borders & comfort zone, Mr. Dreary.

Examples: In Japan, the Liberal Democrats are in fact Conservative. And I challenge you to go to Australia, enter a room with a Liberal Democrat there, then tell him/her he/she's a 'Communist'. Then later he/she/ will walk out, with bloodstained clothes (but otherwise unharmed), said room now looking like a charnel house, a la the film "Hostel". Whilst saying 'Bloody Yank pooftah!'. You'll have learned the hard way, that in Australia, the 'Liberal Democrats' there are in fact as right-wing as the Repubicans are in the US.

I'll remember to place a flower on your grave, Mr. Dreary.

And over here in the UK, the Liberal Democrats are actually 'middle of the road', politically; as opposed to the Labour party, which is centre-left, and the Conservatives, which is centre-right. I'll give you a clue which party I vote for - and always have done - since I turned 18 in 1982: The Antichrist Maggie Thatcher (*spit*)

She is the prime reason why I've always had (and always will have) a more than infinite hatred of anything - and anyone - right-wing. Also having your country bombed by Hitler's Luftwaffe, V1s & V2s in WWII will have that effect on you, too. The nearest America had to such? Pearl Harbour. You know nothing, my friend.

"no elderly liberals". "You will change".

My grandfather (on my mother's side) would like a word with you. He's always voted Labour. WWII, and all that jazz. He fought against Rommel's Afrika Korps in North Africa - especially at the Mareth Line, which ultimately routed the Nazis out of that continent completely. Pre- and post-WWII, he was a trade unionist, fighting for workers' rights (Transport & General Workers Union). I'd say that's as left-wing as you can get. He's always been an Atheist too (as he always says, "'Religion is the opiate of the masses' - Karl Marx").

I love the smell of annihilated arguments in the morning. Smells like... victory.

old comment by Anon

The only reason older people are (on average) more conservative is because people tend to maintain large parts of their outlook from the time of their own youth.
As society has been trending towards more liberal for at least a thousand years now it's inevitable that this generation will be more liberal than my grandparents one, and my grandkids will probably be more liberal than me, a product of the times they'll grow up in.
What this means for conservatives is as follows:
They are losing.
Slowly, as time passes people become less conservative, this is because the fundamental principle behind it is to keep everything old-fashioned, and the more time passes the more the younger generation reject it.

old comment by JesusWouldFacepalm

You are absolutely wrong. I learned everything I know about liberal politics from my 55-year-old dad, who hates Conservatives with a burning passion. My mom and all my grandparents also identify as liberal, and so do my aunts, uncles, cousins, etc, young and old alike. And so far we're all pretty damn healthy to boot.

You do seem to have a point though in that political views tend to change with age. In my experience, the younger people in my family (with a few exceptions) are more toward the political center than the older members. My dad and I both took the exact same political test and based on our scores, he's the more liberal of the two of us. He said it's a good thing that I'm less liberal than him, because I haven't seen as much crap from the world and from conservatives to justify my views as he has. Or something like that.

old comment by emau99

Ted Kennedy. Madalyn Murray O'Hare. Bertrand Russell. Get the picture?

If you think of your grandparents and all the other people in that age range they are without exception very conservative

My Grandmother died at age 81. She was a liberal. You are incorrect.

By what right do you presume to understand my Grandparents' politics better than I?

the only real question is at what age you to will put aside your youthful indiscretions, sober up and also receive maturity.

The only lack of maturity I see here is yours.

Since the "no elderly liberals" mandate is strictly enforced by the Father

Except for my grandparents, as mentioned above.

can you guess the fate of a liberal who refuses to eventually succumb to the Father's cleansing?

An untimely early death, yes you are right, good guess.

Convert or die, eh? So tell me, Mark: what's the difference between your faith and, say, the faith of Muslim radicals?

Consider your answer carefully, please.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Comrade Potatovich

Da, tovarich! Your quick thinking and revolutionary input serves the cause well, thus painting the fundie running-dog further into a corner of his own making.

No doubt you notice how the capitalist revisionist Mark Dreary daren't show his face in this thread at least, eh? The cowardice of the class traitor shows itself at last! In Soviet Russia, new one tears YOU! X3 >:D

(*sings*):

'Stand up, all victims of oppression,
For the tyrants fear your might!
Don't cling so hard to your possessions,
For you have nothing if you have no rights!
Let racist ignorance be ended,
For respect makes the empires fall!
Freedom is privilege extended,
Unless enjoyed by one and all.
So come brothers and sisters,
For the struggle carries on.
The Internationale,
Unites the world in song.
So comrades, come rally,
For this is the time and place!
The international ideal,
Unites the human race.'

('The Internationale' version by comrade Billy Bragg)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Internationale#English_lyrics

Choose your language, comrades:

http://www.hymn.ru/internationale/index-en.html

(right-click & save as to download MP3s)

old comment by Amadaun

Wow. But...what about all those grandparents etc. everyone's been asserting, then? Why didn't God give them heart attacks and car accidents and things? Also, most of the conservatives I know are heavy drinkers and smokers.

(Incidentally, I'm jealous of how long all your grandparents lived. Mine actually work into Dreher's system a bit, since the only survivor is the Air Force dickhead and the most recent casualty was a bohemian alcoholic who survived two heart attacks previously. On the other hand the first to go was the pious, obedient, and dutiful mother of five. Alzheimer's disease. But none of that is statistically significant.)

What is statistically significant is that as people age there seems to be a physiological tendency toward attempting to 'hold the line' and keep things as you are comfortable with them, which does lead to a certain drift toward the conservative pole. Far from universal or assured, though, so still foolish talk happening.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Amadaun wrote:

"Wow. But...what about all those grandparents etc. everyone's been asserting, then? Why didn't God give them heart attacks and car accidents and things? Also, most of the conservatives I know are heavy drinkers and smokers.

I think the people on this website are a "left wing anomaly".

Unusual.

Like a 1%ers club.

Not too often.

I speak in "overall trends".

You know.

Generally.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Brain_In_A_Jar wrote:

In doing so, you become another buttress of the wall."

I don't think a liberal does anything for society.

I mean what do you really do?

Vote democratic?

That's it?

A liberal does nothing.

That is how you spot them.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@MEEEEEE

"What about Wavy Gravy?"

No doubt related to Wavey Davey, from "Vic Reeves Big Night Out":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Reeves_Big_Night_Out*

'Wavey Davey

A simple, child-like, naïve man who waves at people, things and celebrities, in an increasingly malevolent way. He is later revealed to be Satan.'

...or is that just a rumour you've started? As for Mark Dreary, just three words: 'You lying get!' [/The Living Carpets]

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm just about to slip a Caramac bar under a squirrel...!

*- My favourite items were "The Man With The Stick", "Morrissey the Consumer Monkey", "That's Justice" with Judge Lionel Nutmeg, and "Novelty Island" ('Very poor!').

old comment by Mark Dreher

Brain_In_A_Jar wrote:

"If voting had no measurable effect on society, mr Dreher, you might have a point. Do you consider your political system to be that broken?

Besides, what effective action does the average conservative take that a liberal doesn't, besides voting? Prayer? If you believe voting to be ineffectual, what do you do instead to affect the world?"

What "I will do" to change the world.

Is a different matter.

I will do a lot.

But what will the average Republican do?

He will vote Republican.

He will go to church.

He will say grace.

And he will tell everyone he knows.

To do the same.

An Angel

Of God.

A Republican.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Brain_In_A_Jar wrote:

"So, you concede (somewhat incoherently) that I surmised correctly, mr Dreher, and that for all your accusations of liberals doing nothing, your own mob do no more, other than to pray a lot and tell each other to vote (which you evidently do believe also achieves nothing).

Thank you for having the graciousness to effectively admit defeat, although it probably doesn't look like that to yourself or anyone else stupid enough to think that praying actually changes anything."

You do not "ask for things" in prayer.

A proper prayer.

Consists of "praise" and "thanksgiving" ONLY.

So it is not really possible to "change anything".

A prayer consists of thanking God.

For your existence.

old comment by Professor M

A proper prayer.

Consists of "praise" and "thanksgiving" ONLY.

"Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." Four "requests" right there -- but then, I guess you'd know more about how to really pray than that liberal hippie "Jesus" dude.

There is nothing farther to the left than a democrat.

Hi there -- I'm a socialist. In the U.S., that means I'm more in line with the Greens or the Peace and Freedom Party than the (corporate-capitalist) Democrats, but I'm occasionally reduced to voting for a Dem to keep another theocratic totalitarian Republican from getting into office.

Actually, in most industrialized democracies, most political parties are to the left of the Democrats.

Oh, and

by the way

I heard your Enter key

crying.

It feels abused.

old comment by

Professor M wrote:

"Since the "no elderly liberals" mandate is strictly enforced by the Father

Hm...something tells me that by "liberal" he means "anyone to the left of Mussolini", which is the current U.S. usage of the term. In that case...um...Howard Zinn? Noam Chomsky? I mean, neither of them are "liberals" (more socialist or anarchist-socialist), but definitely in that "there can't possibly be anyone over 40 in that group!" left-of-the-far-right range."

A "liberal" is anyone whose views conflict with the bible.

A pro-choice is a liberal.

A "pro-homosexual" is a liberal.

I have a page which talks about the criteria for being a liberal:

http://thenewholybible.org/what_is_a_liberal.htm

Yours,

Mark Dreher

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Mark Dreary

"A "liberal" is anyone whose views conflict with the bible.

A pro-choice is a liberal.

A "pro-homosexual" is a liberal."

I challenge you to go to Australia and say that to someone there who professes to be a 'Liberal Democrat'. Here's the potential scenario:

(*Mark Dreary and a Liberal Democrat Australian enter a room; door is locked. After a few minutes, there are shouts, swearing etc, interspersed with sounds of punches, kicks, furniture splintering, impacts upon walls; bloodcurdling screams. Silence. Door opens to reveal said Australian emerging, clothes blood-spattered, but otherwise unharmed, saying 'Bloody pooftah!'; said room is now a charnel house, resembling a scene from the film "Hostel". Anything remotely resembling Mark Dreary no longer exists in room.*)

PROTIP: 'Liberal Democrats' in Australia are as right-wing as Republicans/Neocons/Teabaggers in the US.

...so, you want to book that flight to Sydney/Melbourne/Perth/Brisbane/Cairns to prove me wrong, or shall I, Mr. Dreary...? >:D

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@#1300890

(emphasis added)

"This guy has some issues. Usually, even fundies, when they see that their ideas are not wellcome, stop. This guy is answering just to praise himself, to edificate in other people's answers. In other words, TROLL."

And not just in the internet sense, neither:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=81884&Page=6

I refer you to the Wiki links therein, relative to Mr. Queerer's quote to commenter Kilroy (was here).

In his 'trolling', Markypoos here has shown he's far more liberal than he would like - or dare - to admit. As he's so far in his own closet, he's prancing gaily & fabulously with Aslan & Tumnus in Narnia, whilst carrying artworks by Tom of Finland...!

'Trolling' for more than Kilroy (was here)'s soul, methinks; otherwise, a case of the lady doth protest too much.

old comment by Karlsbad

@Mark Dreher

I have never met an adult who so trumped up his own existence as you. You honestly think you are God incarnate? You are tiny. Like all humans, like all things on this planet, like all things, you are tiny. We exist in a vast and eternal universe composed of over a hundred billion galaxies, each containing hundreds of billions of stars; out of all of them ours is nothing special, just another speck of dust. Your God is just a response to this, something that grew out of the human mind to help it sweep the reality of its insignificance under the proverbial rug. But metaphysics is at best unknowable, and at worst purely false. Your God, all gods, are dead. One by one they have fallen, felled by the ever greater knowledge man has attained until the last one collapses and with it brings down the sky that was the metaphysics of our ancestors. For without God, what metaphysics can we really believe in? The same reasons for discarding a belief in God are equally good for abandoning the soul and the afterlife, for rejecting all sense of objective morality, and ultimately for the denial of free will itself. We are nothing more than complex compositions of atoms acting out the movements dictated by the deterministic laws of the physical universe. We do not make decisions, we do not have a purpose, we do not have some bright shining afterlife waiting for us once time overtakes us; we have only oblivion to look forward to, and it will be the best thing that ever happens to us.

Call me a pessimist, cynic, fatalist, nihilist; they are all just synonyms for realist as far as I'm concerned. Not that I could concern myself otherwise, of course. You will do what you will do, just as I have done what I have done in typing this. The outcome is already decided.

old comment by Karlsbad

"Mark Dreher wrote:

Atheism is just laziness."

Theism is just fear; whether fear of the unknown, or fear of pain. If your God exists, show me where He is. This world is an indifferent, sometimes hostile, place full of horrible and terrifying things. What omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God would create this? Or allow it to come into existence? The "creation" shows no signs of your God, no signs of a caring and all-powerful father-figure. Your holy book, like all holy books, is nothing but the writings of humans who were just as scared of reality as you are and had far less knowledge than we do now. The gods were just our distant ancestors' imaginary friends, things to hide behind and drive away the reality of the big scary universe. You've got nothing; just like everyone else.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"Theism is just fear; whether fear of the unknown, or fear of pain. If your God exists, show me where He is. This world is an indifferent, sometimes hostile, place full of horrible and terrifying things. What omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God would create this? Or allow it to come into existence? The "creation" shows no signs of your God, no signs of a caring and all-powerful father-figure. Your holy book, like all holy books, is nothing but the writings of humans who were just as scared of reality as you are and had far less knowledge than we do now. The gods were just our distant ancestors' imaginary friends, things to hide behind and drive away the reality of the big scary universe. You've got nothing; just like everyone else."

The earth is not "terrifying", if you have God.

Disturbing or anxious thoughts are normally fed to you by God.

He has to, he has a mandate to that effect:

"There will be no peace, says the Lord, for the wicked".

Peace on this earth only comes when you step into God's line.

old comment by Karlsbad

"Mark Dreher Wrote:

The earth is not "terrifying", if you have God. Disturbing or anxious thoughts are normally fed to you by God. He has to, he has a mandate to that effect: "There will be no peace, says the Lord, for the wicked". Peace on this earth only comes when you step into God's line. "

Exactly. God was born so that humanity could escape the fearsome nature of reality, hence why that belief relieves you of your fear. When others do not share that it threatens your own sense of security, hence why you claim that God causes fear and pain for others and that peace can only be attained through God. As you've just shown, albeit indirectly, your God is nothing more than a psychological construct which naturally arose from the harshness of the human condition. You've still got nothing, Mark, just the inevitable thoughts in your head frantically moving about in response to the universe around them. There is no escape.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"Exactly. God was born so that humanity could escape the fearsome nature of reality, hence why that belief relieves you of your fear. When others do not share that it threatens your own sense of security, hence why you claim that God causes fear and pain for others and that peace can only be attained through God. As you've just shown, albeit indirectly, your God is nothing more than a psychological construct which naturally arose from the harshness of the human condition. You've still got nothing, Mark, just the inevitable thoughts in your head frantically moving about in response to the universe around them. There is no escape."

Well "peace of mind" is one of the main benefits of Christianity.

And it was written, that without God, your life will always be in a bit of an uproar.

"There will be no peace, says the Lord, for the wicked".

And by wicked God means, "those who ignore God".

No grace etc..

Who knew just saying grace could bring peace to your home?

But it can.

And I think it's God who gives you that peace, not just some "psychological mind game".

old comment by Karlsbad

@Mark Dreher

"Well "peace of mind" is one of the main benefits of Christianity. And it was written, that without God, your life will always be in a bit of an uproar. "There will be no peace, says the Lord, for the wicked". And by wicked God means, "those who ignore God". No grace etc.. Who knew just saying grace could bring peace to your home? But it can. And I think it's God who gives you that peace, not just some "psychological mind game"."

Again, this is precisely my point. All beliefs in purpose, meaning, value, and causal responsibility are just the inevitable reaction of the human mind. Of course you think it's God and not just psychology because if you responded by acknowledging otherwise then the security blanket would unravel and you'd be where I am, staring unwaveringly into the infinite and eternal void of nothingness that underlies physical reality. And that prospect, lurking in the back of your mind, is utterly terrifying. You, Mark, are a textbook example of this. You, Mark, are the proof that what I have said is correct. You've undermined your own beliefs, completely and utterly, as you were always fated to do by the deterministic universe in which we exist. Whether you accept that or not, remains to be seen.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"Again, this is precisely my point. All beliefs in purpose, meaning, value, and causal responsibility are just the inevitable reaction of the human mind. Of course you think it's God and not just psychology because if you responded by acknowledging otherwise then the security blanket would unravel and you'd be where I am, staring unwaveringly into the infinite and eternal void of nothingness that underlies physical reality. And that prospect, lurking in the back of your mind, is utterly terrifying. You, Mark, are a textbook example of this. You, Mark, are the proof that what I have said is correct. You've undermined your own beliefs, completely and utterly, as you were always fated to do by the deterministic universe in which we exist. Whether you accept that or not, remains to be seen."

Well Karlsbad, that way of thinking always presupposes that God is "a made up thing".

And I am willing to actually give you "proof of God", and in a wide variety of ways.

Here is the first one, from my own website:

http://thenewholybible.org/picture_of_the_cloud_of_gods_glory.htm

Now those are four photos of God that I took myself, with my own camera.

What do you think of those?

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Well Karlsbad, that way of thinking always presupposes that God is "a made up thing". And I am willing to actually give you "proof of God", and in a wide variety of ways.

Here is the first one, from my own website: http://thenewholybible.org/picture_of_the_cloud_of_gods_glory.htm
Now those are four photos of God that I took myself, with my own camera. What do you think of those?"

You took a photo of the sunset. I see nothing but light on clouds, if you see more then it is because of the human brain's well established tendency to recognize familiar patterns. You can see faces and objects in all sorts of things if you are looking for them, hence the prolific nature of such images from all human cultures being purported as evidence for many different religions. Indeed, I could show you pictures of potatos and trees that seem to have faces but it would prove nothing. This, again, is just the human mind responding to the universe in a way that makes it feel comfortable, it is no proof that God exists.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"You took a photo of the sunset. I see nothing but light on clouds, if you see more then it is because of the human brain's well established tendency to recognize familiar patterns. You can see faces and objects in all sorts of things if you are looking for them, hence the prolific nature of such images from all human cultures being purported as evidence for many different religions. Indeed, I could show you pictures of potatos and trees that seem to have faces but it would prove nothing. This, again, is just the human mind responding to the universe in a way that makes it feel comfortable, it is no proof that God exists."

Well Karlsbad, here are a couple more "proofs" for you to evaluate:

http://thenewholybible.org/the_sacred_foundation_stone.htm

http://thenewholybible.org/the_sign.htm

They each take just a minute to read.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Well Karlsbad, here are a couple more "proofs" for you to evaluate:
http://thenewholybible.org/the_sacred_foundation_stone.htm
http://thenewholybible.org/the_sign.htm
They each take just a minute to read."

As to your first "proof", there is considerable uncertainty surrounding it. First of all, there are legitimate scholars who dispute the claim that said rock actually is the Foundation Stone. Second, the image you are using has been in the Library of Congress since the early 20th century so it could not have been revealed "first and only" by you. Third, the so-called symbols are just pattern recognition at work again. I look at it and the first thing I think of is the Mjolnir, a symbol of the Nordic god Thor and by extension Germanic paganism. As to your second "proof", it is equally unfounded. At the very least, you are committing an error of statistical analysis by assuming a connection from a correlation. All you have is a coincidence, with no proof of causal connection. As for the picture of your pants, there are a lot of people with different sized thighs so it proves nothing because it is in no way a unique condition.

In any case, all you have provided thus far is attempts at physical evidence. But no amount of physical evidence is going to suffice as conclusive proof of God. Do you know why? Descartes. In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes shows quite clearly that we can not be certain of anything beyond our own self-awareness. Our experience of the physical world, despite feeling "real", is entirely subjective and dependent upon sensory data which may or may not reflect some actual reality. If you've ever taken hallucinogenic drugs, or perhaps seen The Matrix, you'll be able to understand this. So to prove God, you're going to have to appeal to pure thought and logic. Nothing physical can ever eliminate doubt.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"As to your first "proof", there is considerable uncertainty surrounding it. First of all, there are legitimate scholars who dispute the claim that said rock actually is the Foundation Stone. Second, the image you are using has been in the Library of Congress since the early 20th century so it could not have been revealed "first and only" by you. Third, the so-called symbols are just pattern recognition at work again. I look at it and the first thing I think of is the Mjolnir, a symbol of the Nordic god Thor and by extension Germanic paganism. As to your second "proof", it is equally unfounded. At the very least, you are committing an error of statistical analysis by assuming a connection from a correlation. All you have is a coincidence, with no proof of causal connection. As for the picture of your pants, there are a lot of people with different sized thighs so it proves nothing because it is in no way a unique condition.

In any case, all you have provided thus far is attempts at physical evidence. But no amount of physical evidence is going to suffice as conclusive proof of God."

That photo is available at the Library of Congress but no one had noticed the signs on the photo until I pointed them out.

And I pointed them out only after God told me that they were there.

I don't want to freak you out or anything, but I have met God, the physical presence of God.

I just tell you that because you are an atheist, and at a bare minimum, I can tell you God is as real as the nose on your face.

I think you may find my facebook page to be interesting.

http://www.facebook.com/TheViceRegent

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Karlsbad

@Mr. Queerer

"Atheism is just laziness."

And Mr. Queerer here is too lazy to find the answer to his own question posited here:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=81884&Page=6

'why are you an Atheist?'

After all, as per Matthew 7:7: 'seek, and ye shall find.'

(It was by my seeking - via libraries etc - and thus finding in books, that ultimately resulted in my becoming a self-taught computer engineer, and getting a job in a computer shop, where I work today; essentially a hobby I get paid to do. One word: Research.)

Like I say, Mr. Queerer here certainly doesn't have any black pots & kettles in his house; least of all shiny mirrors, lest he should catch a glimpse of himself and see the reason why, nay, the answer to, his own question.

'When you look into the Abyss, the Abyss looks into you.'

-Friedrich Nietzsche

He daren't look into the abyss of himself, for fear of seeing what he really is: a conceited, egomaniac, mentally handicapped attention-seeking, delusional retard and subhuman.

Ex-Olympic gold medal-winning athlete Jonathan Edwards was a long-time Christian:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Edwards_%28athlete%29#Religious_beliefs

...but he got better. [/"Monty Python and the Holy Grail"]

Yet he wasn't like Mr. Queerer here in any way, shape or form. Mr. Edwards became an Atheist purely by dint of his own critical thinking faculties, and by questioning his own faith.

I fear Mr. Queerer is too far gone in his insanity, for any hope of his return to Reality. Where Atheism lives.

Jonathan Edwards had no fear.

He changed.

Moral: Delusion = insane. Two or more people sharing the same delusion = Religion.

Ergo, the religiously delusional - as exampled by Mr. Queerer here don't have the credibility - least of all the right - to have anything they say acknowledged by we normal, sane people.

Like I say, Mr. Queerer darent find out for himself the answer to his own question 'Why are you an Atheist?'. He's too lazy to do so himself. Or mayhaps laziness isn't just the main factor in his refusal to do so - lest he does a Jonathan Edwards: questioning his own beliefs - for fear of such being destroyed.

Like I say, to find the answer to his own question, all Mr. Queerer has to do is look in a mirror...

old comment by Mark Dreher

Anon-e-moose wrote:

"Atheism is just laziness."

After all, as per Matthew 7:7: 'seek, and ye shall find.'

(It was by my seeking - via libraries etc - and thus finding in books, that ultimately resulted in my becoming a self-taught computer engineer, and getting a job in a computer shop, where I work today; essentially a hobby I get paid to do. One word: Research.)

Like I say, Mr. Queerer here certainly doesn't have any black pots & kettles in his house; least of all shiny mirrors, lest he should catch a glimpse of himself and see the reason why, nay, the answer to, his own question.

'When you look into the Abyss, the Abyss looks into you.'

-Friedrich Nietzsche"

Well Nietzsche was an atheist. And the favorite philosopher of one A. Hitler.

Moosey, I don't answer your questions because I don't want you to get too worked up.

You know, there is one other fellow professing to be the second coming in the world.

And he is from Australia!

http://www.divinetruth.com/

His name is Alan John Miller, I think you will like him more than me.

PS, As per his website, he seems to be in need of some cash, so if you could pop over a few quid, or whatever you use for money, I'm sure he would appreciate it.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"That photo is available at the Library of Congress but no one had noticed the signs on the photo until I pointed them out. And I pointed them out only after God told me that they were there. I don't want to freak you out or anything, but I have met God, the physical presence of God. I just tell you that because you are an atheist, and at a bare minimum, I can tell you God is as real as the nose on your face. I think you may find my facebook page to be interesting.

http://www.facebook.com/TheViceRegent"

Like I said, there are no signs in the photo. Just your mind looking for patterns it will recognize, which is why nobody saw anything there before and why people still see nothing there (Or worse, other things). As for a claim of having physically met God, I'm going to have to return you to my previous refutation of all possible physical evidence as conclusive proof. There is no way that your claim, even if you could provide evidence for it, would be convincing because physical evidence is neither certain nor immutable if assumed to be real. Likewise for the psychological, I can not be certain of your mental state and given what I have observed of human behaviour I have every reason to conclude that you are simply delusional in some way. You would too, if you had made the same observations that I have made.

My atheism, and everything built upon it, is derived from logic. Can you offer me any proof that is not just you looking for patterns in the physical universe that we are experiencing? Can you offer a reasoned, logical argument for God?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

Sure, after we published the name "TheNewHolyBible.org", according to "whois", the Father killed Osama Bin Laden, the world's most wanted terrorist, as a sign.

Less than one hour later, some calculate less than two minutes later.

http://thenewholybible.org/the_sign.htm

Now I know that might be a coincidence.

But how many brand new bibles have been published in the last 2000 years?

Zero.

Could be a coincidence, and yet I have so many similar signs that you start to run into the problem of "the preponderance of evidence".

The preponderance of evidence is where an individual realizes that "this guy has far far too many signs".

And I do.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Sure, after we published the name "TheNewHolyBible.org", according to "whois", the Father killed Osama Bin Laden, the world's most wanted terrorist, as a sign.

Less than one hour later, some calculate less than two minutes later.
http://thenewholybible.org/the_sign.htm
Now I know that might be a coincidence.

But how many brand new bibles have been published in the last 2000 years? Zero.
Could be a coincidence, and yet I have so many similar signs that you start to run into the problem of "the preponderance of evidence". The preponderance of evidence is where an individual realizes that "this guy has far far too many signs". And I do."

Actually, there have been dozens of new versions and hundreds of translations of the Bible, beginning with it's codification at the First Council of Nicaea in 325CE. I'm sure many could, with some searching of history, be associated with so-called 'signs'. Not that the death of Osama Bin Laden really counts as a sign of anything, since there is nothing to suggest a supernatural influence in the event. As for your other so-called signs, I have refuted each specific example you've offered so far. Occam's Razor, as a principle of logical analysis, suggests that the explanation with the least assumptions is the best. The result of its application, is that your claims of supernatural intervention are less likely than purely materialistic explanations using readily testable and verified. Preponderance of the evidence might be convincing, if you actually had some conclusive evidence. There is far too much reasonable doubt involved in all of your claims for them to be taken seriously. Besides, you still can't use physical evidence to move beyond agnosticism because physical evidence can never be certain. Either present something logical, not dependent upon physical claims, or accept that you have no conclusive proof. So far, you still have nothing.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"Actually, there have been dozens of new versions and hundreds of translations of the Bible, beginning with it's codification at the First Council of Nicaea in 325CE. I'm sure many could, with some searching of history, be associated with so-called 'signs'. Not that the death of Osama Bin Laden really counts as a sign of anything, since there is nothing to suggest a supernatural influence in the event. As for your other so-called signs, I have refuted each specific example you've offered so far. Occam's Razor, as a principle of logical analysis, suggests that the explanation with the least assumptions is the best. The result of its application, is that your claims of supernatural intervention are less likely than purely materialistic explanations using readily testable and verified. Preponderance of the evidence might be convincing, if you actually had some conclusive evidence. There is far too much reasonable doubt involved in all of your claims for them to be taken seriously. Besides, you still can't use physical evidence to move beyond agnosticism because physical evidence can never be certain. Either present something logical, not dependent upon physical claims, or accept that you have no conclusive proof. So far, you still have nothing."

Well there have been many "translations", but this is a whole new bible.

It replaces and it supersedes the old bible, the torah and the koran.

So it is a first.

There are obviously a wide variety of signs, but it would require a few minutes of reading.

"The Final Judgment" I think would give you the most data.

http://thenewholybible.org/the_final_judgment.htm

It is an interesting read.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Well there have been many "translations", but this is a whole new bible. It replaces and it supersedes the old bible, the torah and the koran. So it is a first.

There are obviously a wide variety of signs, but it would require a few minutes of reading. "The Final Judgment" I think would give you the most data.
http://thenewholybible.org/the_final_judgment.htm

It is an interesting read."

That's not a first. Every holy text has said the same thing about the ones that preceeded it back to the first person who had the foolish notion of something supernatural. Nothing special, just the same old bullshit repeated over again. Much like your so-called "proofs". That one was just a repetition of the same nonsense you've offered me before, with an additional layer of wild assertions and unfounded claims. As I keep telling you, physical experience is never going to validate your belief with total certainty. Only logic can do that. Either offer a logical argument, one that does not rely on a physical experience for its validity, or this conversation is over.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

That's not a first. Every holy text has said the same thing about the ones that preceded it back to the first person who had the foolish notion of something supernatural. Nothing special, just the same old bullshit repeated over again. Much like your so-called "proofs". That one was just a repetition of the same nonsense you've offered me before, with an additional layer of wild assertions and unfounded claims. As I keep telling you, physical experience is never going to validate your belief with total certainty. Only logic can do that. Either offer a logical argument, one that does not rely on a physical experience for its validity, or this conversation is over."

Well you sound like a guy, so you would appreciate this.

http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee383/TheViceRegent/DSC00518.jpg

Shekinah's Chariot. "The prettiest car on the face of the earth". This is the vehicle used to transport the actual physical presence of God on the earth. An entity separate from me. It is a possession owned by me, the second coming, and I drive it for the beloved one. It was given to me as a gift from God after the completion of the five year typing process that created the New Holy Bible. The prettiest car on the face of the earth. There can only be one. And this is it. Every head turns. Every girl smiles.

The magnificent "chariots of the Shekinah" have always been, from the beginning of time, as a minimum standard, "the prettiest thing that could possibly be built or created" (from "Third Enoch", 1:6-7), as they are used to transport "the Shekinah" of God. The physical presence of God, or the physical presence of "the Holy Spirit". And me.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Well you sound like a guy, so you would appreciate this.

http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee383/TheViceRegent/DSC00518.jpg

You own a car. So fucking what? You going to try to tell me that it just magically appeared in your garage overnight? Because I'm not going to accept that unless you can show me some damn hard evidence, and then you're going to have to work pretty hard to prove that there was no way it could have ended up in your garage except by the magical intervention of your specific interpretation of "God". Which is to say nothing of how hard you're going to have to work to convince me that it is "the prettiest car on the face of the Earth". Got any way to back up that claim? Because frankly I don't think it's that special, and it didn't appear on any lists of pretty cars I could find.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"You own a car. So fucking what? You going to try to tell me that it just magically appeared in your garage overnight? Because I'm not going to accept that unless you can show me some damn hard evidence, and then you're going to have to work pretty hard to prove that there was no way it could have ended up in your garage except by the magical intervention of your specific interpretation of "God". Which is to say nothing of how hard you're going to have to work to convince me that it is "the prettiest car on the face of the Earth". Got any way to back up that claim? Because frankly I don't think it's that special, and it didn't appear on any lists of pretty cars I could find."

If there was a list, it would be on it.

That is just an interesting thing given to me by God.

A perk.

As I said, it is a "preponderance of the evidence" thing.

If you want to discuss logic, on how we were created etc..

Here is the story of creation:

http://thenewholybible.org/The_Story_of_Creation.htm

That explains where evolution is in the bible.

There is the logical evidence you have been waiting for.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"If there was a list, it would be on it. That is just an interesting thing given to me by God. A perk. As I said, it is a "preponderance of the evidence" thing.

If you want to discuss logic, on how we were created etc.. Here is the story of creation: http://thenewholybible.org/The_Story_of_Creation.htm

That explains where evolution is in the bible. There is the logical evidence you have been waiting for."

That was not logical evidence by a long shot. The "behemoth" described in Job could not possibly be a brontosaurus (more correctly called Apatosaurus) because Job clearly describes it as eating grass, which did not exist until the late Cretaceous period (long after Brontosaurus had become extinct). In any event, the description of Behemoth is vague and hyperbolic. There are many real animals it could apply to, and it could easily just be a fictional creature too. Once again, nothing convincing. As for Neaderthals, modern genetics shows that they are almost genetically identical to modern humans (about 99% genetic similarity, to the chimpanzee's 95-98%) and actually interbred with some of the earliest modern humans. Most of your talk about evolution is just plain wrong, and would be best answered by investigating an actual biology textbook, whilst the nonsense about divine intervention is quickly cut away with the application of Occam's razor. Theistic evolution demands the supernatural to work, when the theory works just fine without anyone's neurosis in the sky. The same is true of all of our scientific descriptions back to the beginning of the universe. Now, are you ready to give a straight up logical argument without relying on anything physical?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"That was not logical evidence by a long shot. The "behemoth" described in Job could not possibly be a brontosaurus (more correctly called Apatosaurus) because Job clearly describes it as eating grass, which did not exist until the late Cretaceous period (long after Brontosaurus had become extinct). In any event, the description of Behemoth is vague and hyperbolic. There are many real animals it could apply to, and it could easily just be a fictional creature too. Once again, nothing convincing. As for Neaderthals, modern genetics shows that they are almost genetically identical to modern humans (about 99% genetic similarity, to the chimpanzee's 95-98%) and actually interbred with some of the earliest modern humans. Most of your talk about evolution is just plain wrong, and would be best answered by investigating an actual biology textbook, whilst the nonsense about divine intervention is quickly cut away with the application of Occam's razor. Theistic evolution demands the supernatural to work, when the theory works just fine without anyone's neurosis in the sky. The same is true of all of our scientific descriptions back to the beginning of the universe. Now, are you ready to give a straight up logical argument without relying on anything physical?"

A logical argument?

I don't know what that is.

Jesus loves me this I know, because the bible tells me so?

It is kind of hard talking about God in an obscure manner, when you are tasked with blowing God's nose.

I think atheists read too much, and the wrong books.

I never heard of Occam's razor.

But then I see evolution in the bible, and also that the bible does not say the earth is 6000 years old.

So there is nothing for Occam's razor to "pare off".

The earth is millions of years old.

The "six days of creation" were not "24 hour" days.

As "To God one day is like a thousand years" Psalm 90:4, 2nd Peter 3:8

And there is your evolution in the bible.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"A logical argument? I don't know what that is. Jesus loves me this I know, because the bible tells me so? It is kind of hard talking about God in an obscure manner, when you are tasked with blowing God's nose. I think atheists read too much, and the wrong books. I never heard of Occam's razor. But then I see evolution in the bible, and also that the bible does not say the earth is 6000 years old. So there is nothing for Occam's razor to "pare off". The earth is millions of years old. The "six days of creation" were not "24 hour" days. As "To God one day is like a thousand years" Psalm 90:4, 2nd Peter 3:8 And there is your evolution in the bible."

True, the Bible does not specify an age for the Earth. But that's the trouble, it doesn't specify anything. It doesn't say six thousand years, it doesn't say six hundred million years. It says nothing on the subject of the age of the Earth. Furthermore, the absence of any statement about the age of the Earth is a damn long way from asserting the theory of evolution. The Bible says nothing to suggest all living things undergo generational adaptation in response to survival and reproductive pressures. So no, no evolution in the Bible. But this is going nowhere, so let me pose a new line to you. Suppose you are right. Suppose your God does, in fact, exist. Why the fuck should I care? Fear of Hell? Fuck that, Mark. You know what would be Hell? God giving us free will and then expecting us to squander it for His benefit. Fuck that shit, Mark. Your God wants obedience? Fuck him. Why shouldn't I assert my free will and do what I want, and in the process force your God to do what I want Him to do and send me to Hell for it? Seems like I've found a hole in God's supposed omnipotence, so what's He going to do about it?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"True, the Bible does not specify an age for the Earth. But that's the trouble, it doesn't specify anything. It doesn't say six thousand years, it doesn't say six hundred million years. It says nothing on the subject of the age of the Earth. Furthermore, the absence of any statement about the age of the Earth is a damn long way from asserting the theory of evolution. The Bible says nothing to suggest all living things undergo generational adaptation in response to survival and reproductive pressures. So no, no evolution in the Bible. But this is going nowhere, so let me pose a new line to you. Suppose you are right. Suppose your God does, in fact, exist. Why the fuck should I care? Fear of Hell? Fuck that, Mark. You know what would be Hell? God giving us free will and then expecting us to squander it for His benefit. Fuck that shit, Mark. Your God wants obedience? Fuck him. Why shouldn't I assert my free will and do what I want, and in the process force your God to do what I want Him to do and send me to Hell for it? Seems like I've found a hole in God's supposed omnipotence, so what's He going to do about it?"

What is your problem with God?

Did God not give you something he owes you?

I think most atheists, when they are young, asked for something from God.

Something they did not get. Then, like a baby in a playpen, they throw a fit.

And then they renounce God.

Did you not get something you asked for from God?

If not, I can not imagine how you worked up such animosity towards God.

What did he ever do to you?

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Karlsbad

@Mr. Queerer

"A logical argument?

I don't know what that is.

Jesus loves me this I know, because the bible tells me so?"

Well, ther you have it. Markypoos here has just admitted he's nothing more than a wind-up merchant, a Poe (albeit an extremely dedicated one). After all:

http://thenewholybible.org/jesus_always_called_the_gentiles_the_dogs.htm

"My Jewish friends, you may want to listen very carefully to God's own hand picked messenger, the very loyal fellow Jew named Jesus. And maybe you should always remember that he routinely called the gentiles "the dogs". (Matthew 15:26) And that he would not even preach or in anyway associate with them"

So why is here with we dogs, if he's not not even preaching or associating with us...?!

The Bible - if he was what he claims he really is - tells him:

Matthew 10:14: 'If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town'

Like I say, if the Bible tells him, then he'd better obey that part of Scripture (as the Bible orders it's adherents to obey such), and leave FSTDT. What makes him think his words have the right to be listened to? He's certainly worn out his welcome.

--EDIT--

Like I say Karlsbad: Mr. Queerer's nothing more than a wind-up merchant. Who - via his ignoring my mention of Matthew 10:14 - has also conclusively proved he's no more religious than I am. Or Richard Dawkins.

As a fellow commenter says here:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=55197&Page=5

@TWoozl

"PRO 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

PRO 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit."

Thus:

'The only way to combat ridiculous propositions is through mockery'

-Thomas Jefferson

And a book that claims to be the literal 'Word of God' that has a talking snake therein is the most ridiculous proposition in said book. Ergo, everything Mr. Queer says is ridiculous, and certainly doesn't have the right to be accepted in any way, shape or form. QED. After all:

'We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.'

-Gene Roddenberry

And he came up with a storm of a story: "Star Trek".

Nope. Markypoos here has admitted he's just a Poe; albeit a very dedicated one. But remember what I said, re. L. Ron Hubbard?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Anon-e-moose wrote:

"Well, there you have it. Markypoos here has just admitted he's nothing more than a wind-up merchant, a Poe (albeit an extremely dedicated one). After all:

http://thenewholybible.org/jesus_always_called_the_gentiles_the_dogs.htm

So why is here with we dogs, if he's not not even preaching or associating with us...?!"

Well Moosey, if you must know, that is a page specifically meant to "put a bee in the bonnet" of any Jewish individual who thinks that Jesus just came for the gentiles.

That is not the case, Jesus came just for the Jews.

They rejected him.

The Apostle Paul, later, was the one who brought Christianity to the gentiles.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"What is your problem with God? Did God not give you something he owes you? I think most atheists, when they are young, asked for something from God. Something they did not get. Then, like a baby in a playpen, they throw a fit. And then they renounce God. Did you not get something you asked for from God? If not, I can not imagine how you worked up such animosity towards God. What did he ever do to you?"

I'd say we're more like teenagers whose parents (parent?) are excessively restrictive and overbearing, not giving us the freedom we need to mature and become our own people. SO what did God ever do to us? I'd say that was expecting us to be who He wants us to be despite us wanting to be something else, and further refusing to accept us for who we were. What kind of worthless parent is that? What's worse, is that in this case it was God who gave us the freedom of will that allows us to want something different for ourselves in the first place. So what the fuck is God going to do? I don't like God's bullshit, so I'm going to do my own thing. You know what? God can send me to Hell for it if He wants. Not that He seems to have a choice, there. He seems pretty powerless in this matter, really. If I don't fear his punishment for disobedience, what other reason is there for me to fuck myself over for God's benefit? What is stopping me from taking control of the situation and being disobedient just so that God will have to send me to Hell, thereby losing the "control" He may have had as so-called judge?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"I'd say we're more like teenagers whose parents (parent?) are excessively restrictive and overbearing, not giving us the freedom we need to mature and become our own people. SO what did God ever do to us? I'd say that was expecting us to be who He wants us to be despite us wanting to be something else, and further refusing to accept us for who we were. What kind of worthless parent is that? What's worse, is that in this case it was God who gave us the freedom of will that allows us to want something different for ourselves in the first place. So what the fuck is God going to do? I don't like God's bullshit, so I'm going to do my own thing. You know what? God can send me to Hell for it if He wants. Not that He seems to have a choice, there. He seems pretty powerless in this matter, really. If I don't fear his punishment for disobedience, what other reason is there for me to fuck myself over for God's benefit? What is stopping me from taking control of the situation and being disobedient just so that God will have to send me to Hell, thereby losing the "control" He may have had as so-called judge?"

Well you have to eliminate most sin from your life in order to go to Heaven.

And the bible says homosexuality is a sin.

I really don't have any good news for people wishing to persist in that sin.

And one reason is the relationships are so temporary, they blow away with the slightest breeze of the wind.

You never really have anything until you are in a normal relationship.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Karlsbad

"What is stopping me from taking control of the situation and being disobedient just so that God will have to send me to Hell, thereby losing the "control" He may have had as so-called judge?"

@Mr. Queerer

"Well you have to eliminate most sin from your life in order to go to Heaven.

And the bible says homosexuality is a sin.

I really don't have any good news for people wishing to persist in that sin."

Ahem:

image

And as admitted here:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=81884&Page=6

He fancies Kilroy (was here). Thus...:

His argument - nay, his 'beliefs' as a whole - is invalid.

...oh, and as for 'sin':

image

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Well you have to eliminate most sin from your life in order to go to Heaven. And the bible says homosexuality is a sin. I really don't have any good news for people wishing to persist in that sin. And one reason is the relationships are so temporary, they blow away with the slightest breeze of the wind. You never really have anything until you are in a normal relationship."

That's the point, Mark. I don't want to go to Heaven, I want God to show me whether He really is all powerful. An all-powerful God can do anything, right? Totally free to do what He wants? So how does He react to someone who wants to be disobedient, and wants Him to inflict His eternal punishments on them? Are you, Oh would-be second born Christ, even understanding what I'm saying here? I do not give a fuck about what God wants, I do not give a fuck about Hell, I do not give a fuck about Heaven, I do not give a fuck, Period. All I want is to cause fucking strife for the douchebag trying to control me and tell me who I am and what I should be. What have you got that can possibly change my mind?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"That's the point, Mark. I don't want to go to Heaven, I want God to show me whether He really is all powerful. An all-powerful God can do anything, right? Totally free to do what He wants? So how does He react to someone who wants to be disobedient, and wants Him to inflict His eternal punishments on them? Are you, Oh would-be second born Christ, even understanding what I'm saying here? I do not give a fuck about what God wants, I do not give a fuck about Hell, I do not give a fuck about Heaven, I do not give a fuck, Period. All I want is to cause fucking strife for the douchebag trying to control me and tell me who I am and what I should be. What have you got that can possibly change my mind?"

The Father exerts controls on people in order to have them not behave like wild animals.

Getting humans to do anything is like "herding cats".

It does not work, unless you put the screws to them pretty good.

Man will always fall to the lowest common denominator.

It is much easier to eat food without thanking God for it first, etc..

The sex organs of a male, I think you will agree, are designed to fit perfectly with the sex organs of a female.

And there is no real "e coli poisoning" possibility in having sex that way.

Plus all homosexual relationships exist within only two main dynamics, arguing and cheating.

There is no way to get around it, when you go to a homosexual's house, you step into a buzzsaw.

Arguing and fighting and on and on.

It is not a pleasant lifestyle because God does not want it to be.

You have to be Ozzie and Harriet to get any "peace in the valley".

Or else, it is like the beetle bailey cartoon with the guy with a black cloud always over your head.

Always bad.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"The Father exerts controls on people in order to have them not behave like wild animals. Getting humans to do anything is like "herding cats". It does not work, unless you put the screws to them pretty good. Man will always fall to the lowest common denominator. It is much easier to eat food without thanking God for it first, etc..

The sex organs of a male, I think you will agree, are designed to fit perfectly with the sex organs of a female. And there is no real "e coli poisoning" possibility in having sex that way. Plus all homosexual relationships exist within only two main dynamics, arguing and cheating. There is no way to get around it, when you go to a homosexual's house, you step into a buzzsaw. Arguing and fighting and on and on. It is not a pleasant lifestyle because God does not want it to be. You have to be Ozzie and Harriet to get any "peace in the valley". Or else, it is like the beetle bailey cartoon with the guy with a black cloud always over your head. Always bad."

What the fuck is this shit, Mark? What the fuck are you trying to say here? You saying that I can not sin to force God to send me to Hell? That God will prevent me from sinning so I will have to go to Heaven? Fuck this shit man, if you are God's right-hand man then you can give me a straight answer! Why should we care about what God wants when God does not care what we want? If God wants to hurt us for not sucking his proverbial cock at the drop of a hat, why should we not invite that pain and enjoy it? If I am crazy enough to say "Fuck you God, I'm going to take control here and force you to do something painful to me", why should I do a single fucking thing otherwise? Can you answer a single one of these questions, or are you just parroting the same old 'be afraid of the almighty God' bullshit?

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Mr. Queerer

"I've showed you mine.

Now you show me yours"

See what I mean, Karlsbad? Mr. Queerer's so far in that closet of his, he's frolicking oh so fabulously with Aslan & Tumnus, whilst carrying artworks by Tom of Finland! As Al Murray (Pub Landlord) would say:

image

'You're obsessed, you are!'

"We don't have to debate about what we should think about homosexual activity. It’s written in the Bible."

-Ted Faggard

image

@Mr. Queerer

"the bible says homosexuality is a sin.

I really don't have any good news for people wishing to persist in that sin"

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=81884&Page=5

"I'm trolling for your soul Kilroy. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28gay%29

'Trolling for 'Trade':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_%28Homosexual%29

"calling me a "gay troll"?

I am definitely a normal troll.

With children and such."

Ted Faggard is married & with children too. Like the lady, he doth protested too much; was in denial:

http://encyclopediadramatica.ch/Ted_Haggard

One word: Hypocrite.

But then, we are dealing with someone who worships a deity who says that homosexuality is a sin, but at the same time says nothing against sex with underage children; because as you know, Karlsbad, said deity - in the guise of the Holy Ghost - impregnates the child bride Mary.

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/republican-list-of-paedophiles-shocking/

Funny that it's right-wing - and thus by definition God-fearing - Christians who always accuse homosexuals of having sex with underage boys, do they not...? Hmmmmm, a little bit of deflection - to say nothing of projection; also a little bit of denial in the mix. Yeah, that's the ticket. [/mega-sarcasm]

Fact: Mr. Queerer condemns homosexuality. So does God:

image

But then, as per the above, sharing the same 'opinions' is the least of his problems. Question: How many Republicans (certainly in that list via the above link) are openly admitted & avowed Atheists? You do the maths, Karlsbad, re. morals. I bet Mr. Queerer here daren't ask himself that same question, lest he realise his own so-called Christian 'morals' are therefore proven to be inferior; what is he afraid of? But apart from the matter of inherent paedophilia in right-wing Fundamentalist Christianity, one thing can be concluded, nay proven:

Ted Faggard. Mr. Queerer. Six of one, half-a-dozen of the other.

Be seeing you. [/"The Prisoner"]

'I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.'

-Patrick McGoohan, "The Prisoner"

Mr. Queerer = Number 2, Karlsbad. He is a prisoner of his own failed so-called 'beliefs', combined with being incarcerated in 'The Village' that is his own mental handicap, and therefore his inferiority.

We Atheists, however, such as you Karlsbad, Kilroy (was here) and yours truly, as well as all those in FSTDT & beyond, we wouldn't know about that. Atheism: the more than infinite superiority of such, freedom-wise (within the law; but then we live according to the Golden Rule, and all that jazz), and especially our more than infinitely superior morals:

US prison population - 2 million:

80%: Christian

0.002%: Atheist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Alamo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_evangelist_scandals

http://davidjstewartexposed.blogspot.com/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/26/AR2006122600847.html

http://vassleer.newsvine.com/_news/2007/01/03/504714-murdered-for-being-an-atheist

'Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man'

-Thomas Jefferson

Moral: Before one complains about the speck of sawdust in someone's eye, 'tis a good idea to remove the Giant Sequoia from your own; also the phrases 'When in glass houses don't throw stones' and 'Put your own house in order before you criticise other peoples' behaviour' exist for a reason. This quote also exists (emphasis added):

"Organized religion is a sham and a crutch for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers. It tells people to go out and stick their noses in other people's business."

-Jesse Ventura (ex-politician, ex-actor, ex-wrestler and ex-Navy SEAL)

PROTIP: Matthew 10:14: 'If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town'

Mr. Queerer is no longer welcome here in FSTDT, Karlsbad. Least of all have the right to be listened to.

If he's the Christian he dares to claim he is, he must obey that part of Scripture. If, after this, he continues to post here, he'll not just continue to prove me right as stated previously, as in the phrase 'It is better to be thought a fool and remain silent, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt' exists for a reason. And Mr. Queerer proved that the first time he posted in FSTDT. To say nothing of my previous offers of proving me wrong by him leaving FSTDT forever.

If, despite Matthew 10:14, he posts again, he'll have proven himself to be nothing more than a dedicated - if mentally subhuman (with an attention seeking-based psychological disorder; OCD/Schizophrenia) - Poe, masquerading as a 'Christian'. Who in actuality is as religious as Richard Dawkins; but - as per L. Ron Hubbard - Mr. Queerer is starting to believe his own hype.

image

'The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.'

-Bertrand Russell

You don't see Prof. Dawkins behaving the same way as Mr. Queerer here eh, Karlsbad? Not in public, certainly not on TV, least of all on the internet. Why should he? Just goes to prove the more than infinite superiority of Atheism, eh...?!

Being a superior Atheist. Being an inferior mentally subhuman nutzoid 0-IQ retard mong fundie like Mr. Queerer here. Hmmmmmmm, that one's a toughy! Choices, choices...! [/hyper-sarcasm]

'The only way to combat ridiculous propositions is through mockery'

-Thomas Jefferson

Time to not just mock, but completely rip the piss out of Mr. Queerer, and all his mentally handicapped - and therefore inferior - fundie bullshit; and without giving him recourse to argument as his own behaviour here of late has demonstrated how mentally handicapped - and therefore intellectually inferior - he really is to be able to formulate a logical argument in the first place, thus he doesn't deserve reasoned answers to anything he says, because he doesn't have the right to such.

Only those fundies prepared to prove their claims to the satisfaction of we Atheists, via arguments based solely on cold, hard, solid, physical facts based on equally solid physical evidence (or else admit that they - and their so-called 'beliefs' - not only FAIL, but must admit said so-called 'beliefs' can never justify their existence and are therefore destroyed) deserve the privilege of reasoned, logical, intellectual debate. And Mr. Queerer here can start with eliminating the evasions, irrelevancies & non-sequiturs in his answers. To say nothing of typing without unjustifiable gaps in line breaks/sentences, like the subnormal freak he is.

Fundieism: 'Spirituality'? 'Faith'? 'Belief'? Bullshit. Atheism: Evidence. Facts. Reality.

- Don't pray in our schools and we won't think in your churches.
- We have the fossils. We win. Next up, just three words: Large Hadron Collider.
- Born just fine the first time, thanks.
- The last time we combined church and state, people were burned at the stake.
- Instead of being born again, why not just grow up?
- There was Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny & the Tooth Fairy. Then I grew up. Religion is for those who never grew up - or refuse to.
- Strange, how so few fundies have read the US Constitution, least of all know that the words 'God', 'Jesus' and 'Creator' don't so much as appear once in such, yet more Atheists know what's in the Bible, and understand it better than fundies. I guess that's why the phrases 'cherry picking' and 'reading from cover to cover' exist. Would you read any other fiction book by starting halfway, then constantly go forwards & backwards to random pages/chapters? But I also guess that the quote by Isaac Asimov 'Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for Atheism ever conceived' exists for a reason.

old comment by Karlsbad

Okay, Anon-E-Moose, since you addressed me at such length I will respond to you too. First, please speak for yourself with all that "atheism is morally superior" rubbish. All morality is subjective and meaningless, at best a set of pragmatic guides for surviving in a social group, and so moral arguments have no force at all. Your morals are no better than Dreher's, Haggard's, or anyone else's; they're all just hollow constructs with no objective reality and therefore no logical hierarchy. Of course this applies to all metaphysical beliefs too, not just morality, so all that talk of atheism being "superior" is just bluster. Atheism seems to be the more logically consistant way to progress from epistemic agnosticism, but it is not "superior" because the latter would imply some kind of objective way of establishing a hierarchy in a realm where objectivity does not exist. That is to say, "superior, for what?". The claim only makes sense when you give it a frame of reference, and that frame of reference will inevitably be subjective.

As for why Mr Dreher is still commenting, perhaps it is because I have actually been trying to engage with his assertions? You may not consider him welcome or deny that he has any right to rational responses (as if such a "right" could meaningfully exist!), but I do not share your silly convictions. You sound like a secular humanist, correct me if I'm wrong, which really makes you just as religious as Dreher. If you really are an atheist, then you still have a long way to go in the logical progression. I recommend reading about Nietzsche's conclusions resulting from the Death of God, that's where I started on the long road of logic that leads to existential nihilism.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"What the fuck is this shit, Mark? What the fuck are you trying to say here? You saying that I can not sin to force God to send me to Hell? That God will prevent me from sinning so I will have to go to Heaven? Fuck this shit man, if you are God's right-hand man then you can give me a straight answer! Why should we care about what God wants when God does not care what we want? If God wants to hurt us for not sucking his proverbial cock at the drop of a hat, why should we not invite that pain and enjoy it? If I am crazy enough to say "Fuck you God, I'm going to take control here and force you to do something painful to me", why should I do a single fucking thing otherwise? Can you answer a single one of these questions, or are you just parroting the same old 'be afraid of the almighty God' bullshit?"

Karlsbad my job is to be a messenger.

A homosexual is a left winger.

i.e. - "someone who threw the bible out the window".

And I am a minister.

My job is to get you to go out in the yard and to pick up that bible.

I do not know how you got estranged from God.

But I can tell you your bravado is just that.

Huff and puff.

When you get to the edge and look down.

You will rethink it.

Do you know which sin received the worst punishment in Hell? Homosexuals. Believe it or not they are punished worse than murderers. Do you find that interesting? Man I sure do.

32 "And other men and women being cast down from a great rock precipice fell to the bottom, and again were driven by them that were set over them, to go up upon the rock, and thence were cast down to the bottom and they had no rest from this torment. And these were they that did defile their bodies behaving as women, and the women that were with them were they that lay with one another as a man with a woman." (Apocalypse of Peter, verse 32)

That all sounds rather bad.

And you should probably try and avoid it.

It does not make sense not to.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Karlsbad my job is to be a messenger. A homosexual is a left winger. i.e. - "someone who threw the bible out the window". And I am a minister. My job is to get you to go out in the yard and to pick up that bible. I do not know how you got estranged from God. But I can tell you your bravado is just that. Huff and puff. When you get to the edge and look down. You will rethink it.
...
That all sounds rather bad. And you should probably try and avoid it. It does not make sense not to."

Damn, Mark, is that really what you're telling yourself right now? That I'm just huffing and puffing about this? Let me tell you, I'm not a model of mental health. My head is pretty fucked up. Life has put me through a lot of pain, and you know what? I put myself through a lot of pain too. Hell, I like the pain. No lover kisses like a knife blade, and the feeling is better than sex. This ain't just bravado, Mark, this is a damn challenge and I have the wounds to prove it. I have a beard, I have a tattoo, I self-mutilate for fun, and I care nothing for morality. If your God is real, then I spit in His face and dare him to punish me for it. Do you know why? Because it gives me the power in this relationship. I force God to do something, and then I enjoy it when He does. Sure it doesn't make sense to you, because you are already sucking God's cock out of fear. Me? I'd rather an eternity of searing pain than an eternity of swallowing God's spunk. So you know the Bibles that are being "thrown out the window"? I'm holding a lighter to the pages of mine and smiling as I watch it burn. Why should I stop, Mark? Invoking fear of Hell certainly isn't going to work on me.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"Damn, Mark, is that really what you're telling yourself right now? That I'm just huffing and puffing about this? Let me tell you, I'm not a model of mental health. My head is pretty fucked up. Life has put me through a lot of pain, and you know what? I put myself through a lot of pain too. Hell, I like the pain. No lover kisses like a knife blade, and the feeling is better than sex. This ain't just bravado, Mark, this is a damn challenge and I have the wounds to prove it. I have a beard, I have a tattoo, I self-mutilate for fun, and I care nothing for morality. If your God is real, then I spit in His face and dare him to punish me for it. Do you know why? Because it gives me the power in this relationship. I force God to do something, and then I enjoy it when He does. Sure it doesn't make sense to you, because you are already sucking God's cock out of fear. Me? I'd rather an eternity of searing pain than an eternity of swallowing God's spunk. So you know the Bibles that are being "thrown out the window"? I'm holding a lighter to the pages of mine and smiling as I watch it burn. Why should I stop, Mark? Invoking fear of Hell certainly isn't going to work on me."

God is a simple entity.

He is not your enemy.

Cutting releases endorphins that are subtly addicting.

The body's version of oxycontin.

And dope is dope.

All opiates are wack.

All opiates are a nightmare, so God keeps you away from them.

God likes sex.

It is written that the Shekinah (or the holy spirit) hovers over a couple when they are having sex.

She brought you two together, she likes to make sure you are getting along.

Etc..

God is not against "fun", God is against damaging fun.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"God is a simple entity. He is not your enemy. Cutting releases endorphins that are subtly addicting. The body's version of oxycontin. And dope is dope. All opiates are wack. All opiates are a nightmare, so God keeps you away from them. Maybe you should try a little hemp. You need to mellow out. God is not against everything that is seemingly "fun". God does not mind if his children use hemp, hemp is in the bible, it was the main incense used at the holy temple because God loved it. God likes sex. It is written that the Shekinah (or the holy spirit) hovers over a couple when they are having sex. She brought you two together, she likes to make sure you are getting along.

Etc..

God is not against "fun", God is against damaging fun."

I don't give a fuck what God is for or against, and bribery isn't going to sway me any more than fear will. If God is going to get involved in my life, and is going to force me into having some shitty afterlife, then I'm going to force God's hand by sinning with abandon. I'm going to have a beard and be friendly towards Jews, I'm going to encourage my gay friends to fuck who ever they like, and I'm going to advocate rebellion and defiance of God to everyone I can. I want to see God crying as his 'wayward' children take, not just demand, their freedom, and I will steal God's power when I do. Seems a fitting goal for a Firstborn Son, no? This is an all or nothing matter, Mark. Either God steps back and leaves us to be what ever we want, or we do what ever we want anyway and force him to punish us for it. So again, why should we care about what God wants, when God does not care about what we want?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"I don't give a fuck what God is for or against, and bribery isn't going to sway me any more than fear will. If God is going to get involved in my life, and is going to force me into having some shitty afterlife, then I'm going to force God's hand by sinning with abandon. I'm going to have a beard and be friendly towards Jews, I'm going to encourage my gay friends to fuck who ever they like, and I'm going to advocate rebellion and defiance of God to everyone I can. I want to see God crying as his 'wayward' children take, not just demand, their freedom, and I will steal God's power when I do. Seems a fitting goal for a Firstborn Son, no? This is an all or nothing matter, Mark. Either God steps back and leaves us to be what ever we want, or we do what ever we want anyway and force him to punish us for it. So again, why should we care about what God wants, when God does not care about what we want?"

Why should you care what God wants?

Because God is your parent.

And God is right in the room with you Karlsbad.

The guardian angel is a copy of God, and it is right next to you.

You have a companion, who you do not even know exists.

Your a member of a team, and you do not even know it.

Don't you ever talk to yourself?

The guy on the other end of the line is God.

Your conscience, whatever you want to call it.

Although, it is not in his best interest to reveal himself, because the first thing you will do is start complaining.

And ruin the whole relationship.

But that's God, you deal with God everyday.

You are simply making friends with the only other guy in the room.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"Why should you care what God wants? Because God is your parent. And God is right in the room with you Karlsbad. The guardian angel is a copy of God, and it is right next to you. You have a companion, who you do not even know exists. Your a member of a team, and you do not even know it. Don't you ever talk to yourself? The guy on the other end of the line is God. Your conscience, whatever you want to call it. Although, it is not in his best interest to reveal himself, because the first thing you will do is start complaining. And ruin the whole relationship. But that's God, you deal with God everyday. You are simply making friends with the only other guy in the room."

God is my parent? What difference would that make? He still doesn't care about what I want, He still only cares about what He wants. That makes for a very, very bad parent. Same is true for every person, so is it any wonder that we're all such disobedient children? Frankly, the idea that I have a "guardian angel" is laughable. Hell, the idea that anyone has such a thing is absurd! What a useless guardian, who can not intervene in our lives, or else a hypocritical one if they simply will not help. But to stay focused, we've established that God is a frequently absent, often abusive, always selfish parent who gets upset when his adult children want to live their own lives. Sounds like your God is a fucking cunt. Why would anyone ever want to worship Him, least of all the very children He so readily abuses? An eternity in Hell sounds better than the very ambiguous idea of Heaven if you spend the latter in servitude to this tyrannical God.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"God is my parent? What difference would that make? He still doesn't care about what I want, He still only cares about what He wants. That makes for a very, very bad parent. Same is true for every person, so is it any wonder that we're all such disobedient children? Frankly, the idea that I have a "guardian angel" is laughable. Hell, the idea that anyone has such a thing is absurd! What a useless guardian, who can not intervene in our lives, or else a hypocritical one if they simply will not help. But to stay focused, we've established that God is a frequently absent, often abusive, always selfish parent who gets upset when his adult children want to live their own lives. Sounds like your God is a fucking cunt. Why would anyone ever want to worship Him, least of all the very children He so readily abuses? An eternity in Hell sounds better than the very ambiguous idea of Heaven if you spend the latter in servitude to this tyrannical God."

The guardian angel is not here "to keep you from harm".

She (actually a female, named Shekinah) is mostly here just to make sure your heart keeps ticking.

As she carries "the divine spark" that makes your heart work.

She is not your bodyguard.

A bodyguard against whom?

The next guy has a Shekinah too.

The Shekinah is called "the indwelling of God".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekinah

The feminine side of God, the female side of God.

God is a female.

A pretty gal with green eyes.

You should say hello.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"The guardian angel is not here "to keep you from harm". She (actually a female, named Shekinah) is mostly here just to make sure your heart keeps ticking. As she carries "the divine spark" that makes your heart work. She is not your bodyguard. A bodyguard against whom? The next guy has a Shekinah too. The Shekinah is called "the indwelling of God".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekinah

The feminine side of God, the female side of God. God is a female. A pretty gal with green eyes. You should say hello."

Right, so the "guardian angel" is some kind of Russell's Teapot you made up because you failed Biology? What ever, it doesn't matter. You are ignoring the point again, so I will reiterate: We've established that God is a frequently absent, often abusive, always selfish parent who gets upset when his adult children want to live their own lives. Sounds like your God is a fucking cunt. Why would anyone ever want to worship Him, least of all the very children He so readily abuses? An eternity in Hell sounds better than the very ambiguous idea of Heaven if you spend the latter in servitude to this tyrannical God. His bribes are hollow, His threats are empty, and we have no respect for his status. What else have you got?

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"Right, so the "guardian angel" is some kind of Russell's Teapot you made up because you failed Biology? What ever, it doesn't matter. You are ignoring the point again, so I will reiterate: We've established that God is a frequently absent, often abusive, always selfish parent who gets upset when his adult children want to live their own lives. Sounds like your God is a fucking cunt. Why would anyone ever want to worship Him, least of all the very children He so readily abuses? An eternity in Hell sounds better than the very ambiguous idea of Heaven if you spend the latter in servitude to this tyrannical God. His bribes are hollow, His threats are empty, and we have no respect for his status. What else have you got?"

I got nothing.

I showed you my car.

A picture of God.

A one hour connection to the death of Osama Bin Laden.

Two symbols carved into the holiest spot on the face of the earth.

The single massive thigh mentioned in two placed in the bible.

Hmm..

What else, what else?

That's all I can think of at the moment.

Pretty thin, I know.

Woe is me.

Oh, wait!

I know something.

A fellow like you could always use a free talisman.

http://thenewholybible.org/shekinahs_talisman.htm

Hey mr talisman, tally my banana.

old comment by Karlsbad

Mark Dreher Wrote:

"I got nothing. I showed you my car. A picture of God. A one hour connection to the death of Osama Bin Laden. Two symbols carved into the holiest spot on the face of the earth. The single massive thigh mentioned in two placed in the bible.
Hmm..

What else, what else? That's all I can think of at the moment. Pretty thin, I know. Woe is me. Oh, wait! I know something. A fellow like you could always use a free talisman.

http://thenewholybible.org/shekinahs_talisman.htm

Hey mr talisman, tally my banana."

Exactly, you have nothing. All you have shown me are some easily explained photos and a peculiar but hardly unique correlation. Your God, as I have said, is just a delusion in your head. Even if your God did exist, neither I nor anyone else would have a reason to worship Him. I'll be fine without the talisman too, I don't believe in paganism or witchcraft. So long Mark, I think we're done here.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

"Exactly, you have nothing. All you have shown me are some easily explained photos and a peculiar but hardly unique correlation. Your God, as I have said, is just a delusion in your head. Even if your God did exist, neither I nor anyone else would have a reason to worship Him. I'll be fine without the talisman too, I don't believe in paganism or witchcraft. So long Mark, I think we're done here."

The preponderance of evidence does start to become overwhelming, doesn't it?

God is real.

You don't want to wind up like that atheist Christopher Hitchens who just died.

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/01/hitchens-201201

God is real.

And you sound like a fairly young person.

It's God's way or the highway.

It's good to find that out at a young age.

The younger, the better.

old comment by Mark Dreher

Karlsbad wrote:

If you run into problems such as cutting, that means that you are being bothered by a thing called an "unclean spirit".

You yourself have the power to "bind up" and stop that spirit if you want to:

http://thenewholybible.org/suffer_from_anxiety_worry_or_dep.htm

It only takes around 15 minutes to remove almost all fear, worry, and anxiety from your life.

old comment by Mark Dreher

"I did NOT start out as liberal, I started out as socialist, and moved towards communism. My dad is more communistic than I am, my mum is more socialistic than I am. To make it absolutely clear to you: both of them are older than me.

My paternal grandparents were liberals all their lives, my maternal grandparents were probably not political at all, but as they were workers they voted for the socialists, out of habit.

And no, neither one of us are Jewish (who, according to you, retain their "childish liberalism"), we're all Germanic with a dash of Walloon."

Well the most important part is that you are aware that liberals do not go to Heaven.

That information can help you.

Should you desire to avoid Hell.

There are two critical "deal breakers" within liberalism:

1. Pro-choice.

2. Pro-homosexual.

Being on the wrong side on these issues will preclude your admittance to Heaven.

In order to ensure a long life on this earth, and an eternal fate in Heaven, I want you to be sure to understand these facts.

A normal person would say an original grace prayer before every meal.

And attend one Protestant church service per week.

Yours,

Mark Dreher

old comment by Mark Dreher

"Well the most important part is that you are aware that liberals do not go to Heaven."
It's of no importance to me, as I'm not a liberal.

"A normal person would say an original grace prayer before every meal.

And attend one Protestant church service per week."
That's a rather abnormal person where I live. 4 percent visit the church one time per week.

My paternal grandfather died when he was 93. That is indeed an untimely early death."

Well I'm glad you're not a liberal.

My job really is to point out that that is not a benign position, as per God.

God is an arch conservative, and the closer you are to that, the closer you are to God.

And if you want to take it one step further, and ensure your eternal destiny in Heaven, you would have to do the other steps I mentioned.

1. Original grace prayer every meal.

2. One Protestant church service per week.

Just FYI.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"You will change.

Since the "no elderly liberals" mandate is strictly enforced by the Father can you guess the fate of a liberal who refuses to eventually succumb to the Father's cleansing?

An untimely early death, yes you are right, good guess."

Clint Eastwood. A supporter of Ronald Reagan in the past (who even premiered his 1982 film "Firefox" in the White House for Reagan & his staff before it's release in cinemas).

He's 81.

Your argument is invalid.

This advert for Chrysler during the halftime of Superbowl XLVI made the GOP/Religious Right/Neocons shit themselves at Mr. Eastwood's implied support for President Obama. Your argument is invalid II.

old comment by CinnamonGull

DREEEEEHER! I MISSED YOU!
image
YOU LEFT US SO SUDDENLY, I THOUGHT YOU'D DIED!
image
DON'T DO THAT AGAIN, PLEASE!

Anyway, people, you're wasting your time. All his arguments have already been refuted in another thread, so he moved on to a new audience, hoping that you guys won't get fed up with his feeble threats as quickly.
And what he says here is also bullshit. I am currently studying chemistry at a major university (or college. I forgot what's the difference in English). Among my teachers are a lot of old people, and not just any bitter old blatherers, but men and women of science. Guess what? Most of them (not all) are fairly liberal, and the only serious conservative is a forty - something Orthodox hypocrite. So yeah.
So here's something I wanted to ask you, but couldn't because you ran away so fast. In http://fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=81783, you say that Shekinah is your mother. Then you say you slept with her. Errr...I mean...what?

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@CinnamonGull

Like the deluded nutter he is, Mr. Dreary lives in his own little world (I wonder what particularly fabulous hue the sky is in his dimension?!), refusing to acknowledge Reality, and the facts - based on evidence - that such is based on (remember, Mr. Dreary: No evidencee, no acceptee!). As we keep telling these nutbar fundies, how can we acknowledge or accept your claims, if you can't produce the evidence to prove such (and no, using the Bible itself to prove the Bible - and therefore your claims - is invalid) to our satisfaction?

As a rainbow doesn't actually physically exist, but at least it can be seen, Haruhi Suzumiya exists in just light novels & anime...:

image

...but at least we can see her. And she is God! And as proven above, even God herself has been touched by His Noodly Appendage! As has Chiaki Kurihara (the Bettie Page of anime), Marika Kato, and Space Sailor Moon in "Moretsu Pirates":

image

Arr-harr! Avast booty on the starboard bow! Yo-ho-ho, and a Pot Noodle & chocolate Parfait! X3

old comment by Mark Dreher

Philbert McAdamia wrote:

"An untimely early death, yes you are right, good guess.
Not my guess.

If Sky Daddy smites me before I "reach maturity" and go all right wing how am I supposed to live long enough to do that? Is this why so many folks back in the good ol' days of miracles lived to be 900 or so? Have you seen pics of Saint Ronnie? He looked about 840, at least. Hell, I'm only 67, just a boy, It will take me a looooong time to gain the senility of a republican/fundy. I'm still headed in the opposite direction; more and more liberal each day, and I'm somewhere to the left of "Whoopie!" now."

Well, I could prove the existence of God to you in about five minutes.

http://thenewholybible.org/atheists_here_is_your_proof_of_God.htm

Maybe three.

Yours,

Mark Dreher

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Mr. Dreary

"Well, I could prove the existence of God to you in about five minutes.

http://thenewholybible.org/atheists_here_is_your_proof_of_God.htm

Maybe three."

Nope. Not proof to my satisfaction. The Bible - any version - or any religious-based text - cannot be used to prove itself. Two words: Peer Review. The only possible way you can, is to make him appear before me, in hard, solid, physical form (and that's 'God' himself, not Jesus) that can be seen*, heard, and touched. After all, if he's as 'omnipotent' as you lot always claim, he can - and will - be able to do so. No argument from you allowed.

Also for him to prove he is what he says he is, via demonstrations of his power; again, to my satisfaction. And if that means - in my case - he must do whatever I say in perpetuity, so be it. Them's the terms, they're not up for negotiation.

Like I say, that's the only possible way - proof - to my satisfaction of the existence of your so-called 'God' that I'll accept. You now have three minutes from the time I click 'Submit Comment' for you to do so. If you can't do so, then you yourself will have proven that your 'God' doesn't exist, never has & never will, we Atheists have been proven right in what we've always said (and about you inferior fundies & your even more inferior 'beliefs'), and you & your 'beliefs' are wrong in perpetuity, and by admission you admit this. This means you, Mr. Dreary.

Time's a-ticking...! Tick... Tick... Click. >:D

*- PROTIP: A rainbow doen't actually physically exist, but at least it can be seen.

old comment by Swede

You mix up world view with political view, Dreahry. Besides, in most of the world there are more political alternatives than just right-wing and ultra-right-wing.

Everyone starts out curious about the world and ready, sometimes even eager, for change. The older you get, the less curious you are and the more stubborn you become against change. The older you get, the more past you have, which you might look back on with nostalgia and a wish to conserve.

If you are born feeling that all humans are equal and that if we help each other, we will all benefit from it, you're hardly going to "mature" into thinking it's every man for himself, women ought to stay at home, and the more you hoard, the better person you become.

Was that why the Father killed off his son? Because he refused to "mature" from empathic hippie who wanted to help everyone and share all belongings, to egoistic hoarder who lets people die if they can't afford medical care?

Mark Dreher #wingnut forums.carm.org

234 comments

Confused?