“Between 6,000 and 10,000 churches in the U.S. are dying each year”

[martybegan]

I thought according to progressives reality is what they make it?

Girls can be boys, boys can be girls, etc.

And again, blacklisting people based on their beliefs is fascist.

Its not about blacklisting people based on their beliefs.

Its about banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

Its a matter of public safety.

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

What ex con crack head are you talking about?

How soon people forget.

Marion Barry - Wikipedia

 

[ding]

Its not about blacklisting people based on their beliefs.

Its about banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

Its a matter of public safety.

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

What ex con crack head are you talking about?

How soon people forget.

Marion Barry - Wikipedia

You beat me to it.

 

[martybegan]

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

What ex con crack head are you talking about?

How soon people forget.

Marion Barry - Wikipedia

You beat me to it.

To be fair I did forget the "D.C." after Washington.

Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxia Culpa.

 

[ding]

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

What ex con crack head are you talking about?

How soon people forget.

Marion Barry - Wikipedia

You beat me to it.

To be fair I did forget the "D.C." after Washington.

Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxia Culpa.

I figured it out.

 

[hobelim]

No, I'm suggesting that people should conform to the way reality actually works.

What good is putting someone in public office during peacetime or war if they really really really believe that at any moment God can fart angels out of the sky to fix things?

How is it even possible that that will not lead to disaster?

I thought according to progressives reality is what they make it?

Girls can be boys, boys can be girls, etc.

And again, blacklisting people based on their beliefs is fascist.

Its not about blacklisting people based on their beliefs.

Its about banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

Its a matter of public safety.

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

 

[martybegan]

I thought according to progressives reality is what they make it?

Girls can be boys, boys can be girls, etc.

And again, blacklisting people based on their beliefs is fascist.

Its not about blacklisting people based on their beliefs.

Its about banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

Its a matter of public safety.

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

Again, when you open up an arbitrary standard, it can be abused, and will be abused for political reasons.

You want to eliminate religious people from public office.

The people can decide how they want to. If enough of them decide to amend the constitution they can even impose things like a national church, a national anti-church, or everyone has to wear Fezes when outdoors.

 

[ding]

I thought according to progressives reality is what they make it?

Girls can be boys, boys can be girls, etc.

And again, blacklisting people based on their beliefs is fascist.

Its not about blacklisting people based on their beliefs.

Its about banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

Its a matter of public safety.

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

 

[hobelim]

Its not about blacklisting people based on their beliefs.

Its about banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

Its a matter of public safety.

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

Again, when you open up an arbitrary standard, it can be abused, and will be abused for political reasons.

You want to eliminate religious people from public office.

The people can decide how they want to. If enough of them decide to amend the constitution they can even impose things like a national church, a national anti-church, or everyone has to wear Fezes when outdoors.

Show me a sane religious person and they'll get my vote.

 

[gipper]

Guys used to be really proud of their mullet hair cuts too. People move on, and tend to drop those things that serve no purpose in their lives.

If only they could do this to the American political class. They certainly serve no purpose to 99% of Americans.

 

[hobelim]

Its not about blacklisting people based on their beliefs.

Its about banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

Its a matter of public safety.

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

lol... Thats OK...I'm not running for anything..

 

[ding]

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

lol... Thats OK...I'm not running for anything..

If you believe in God, which you claim you do, then you are one of those insane religious people you were going on about.

 

[martybegan]

No, it's a matter of you trying to silence those who disagree with you.

The only qualifications for public office should be age and citizenship.

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

Again, when you open up an arbitrary standard, it can be abused, and will be abused for political reasons.

You want to eliminate religious people from public office.

The people can decide how they want to. If enough of them decide to amend the constitution they can even impose things like a national church, a national anti-church, or everyone has to wear Fezes when outdoors.

Show me a sane religious person and they'll get my vote.

It's not about your vote, it's about you wanting to disqualify them from anyone voting for them.

Your own bias shows the whole point of your proposed rule is to remove people you don't like from the political process.

That makes you a fascist.

 

[hobelim]

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

lol... Thats OK...I'm not running for anything..

If you believe in God, which you claim you do, then you are one of those insane religious people you were going on about.

No, many people who believe in God are sane. Just not the ones who claim to believe but then dedicate their lives to lying in his name, or claiming that he is the almighty king of the universe, yet edible by humans.

 

[hobelim]

Nonsense. .

Would you elect a coward to lead the nation during war? Would you expect a liar to tell the truth? Would you hire a child molester to work with children? Would you put the insane in charge of the asylum? No?

Is that fascist?

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

Again, when you open up an arbitrary standard, it can be abused, and will be abused for political reasons.

You want to eliminate religious people from public office.

The people can decide how they want to. If enough of them decide to amend the constitution they can even impose things like a national church, a national anti-church, or everyone has to wear Fezes when outdoors.

Show me a sane religious person and they'll get my vote.

It's not about your vote, it's about you wanting to disqualify them from anyone voting for them.

Your own bias shows the whole point of your proposed rule is to remove people you don't like from the political process.

That makes you a fascist.

Remove people I don't like from the political process? Don't be silly. I love religious people.

If I didn't I would just stand by and do nothing but watch, and laugh, as they slowly disintegrated into nothingness.



You are the one without balls.

 

[ding]

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

lol... Thats OK...I'm not running for anything..

If you believe in God, which you claim you do, then you are one of those insane religious people you were going on about.

No, many people who believe in God are sane. Just not the ones who claim to believe but then dedicate their lives to lying in his name, or claiming that he is the almighty king of the universe, yet edible by humans.

 

[hobelim]

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

lol... Thats OK...I'm not running for anything..

If you believe in God, which you claim you do, then you are one of those insane religious people you were going on about.

No, many people who believe in God are sane. Just not the ones who claim to believe but then dedicate their lives to lying in his name, or claiming that he is the almighty king of the universe, yet edible by humans.

I don't belong to or follow any religion sparkie.

 

[martybegan]

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

lol... Thats OK...I'm not running for anything..

If you believe in God, which you claim you do, then you are one of those insane religious people you were going on about.

No, many people who believe in God are sane. Just not the ones who claim to believe but then dedicate their lives to lying in his name, or claiming that he is the almighty king of the universe, yet edible by humans.

The fact you can't understand the symbolic nature of Catholic Communion shows you are an idiot.

And again, arbitrary measures can be abused.

 

[ding]

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

Again, when you open up an arbitrary standard, it can be abused, and will be abused for political reasons.

You want to eliminate religious people from public office.

The people can decide how they want to. If enough of them decide to amend the constitution they can even impose things like a national church, a national anti-church, or everyone has to wear Fezes when outdoors.

Show me a sane religious person and they'll get my vote.

It's not about your vote, it's about you wanting to disqualify them from anyone voting for them.

Your own bias shows the whole point of your proposed rule is to remove people you don't like from the political process.

That makes you a fascist.

Remove people I don't like from the political process? Don't be silly. I love religious people.

If I didn't I would just stand by do nothing but watch as they slowly disintegrated into nothingness.

You are the one without balls.

 

[martybegan]

Washington elected an ex-con crackhead.

When you start applying arbitrary limits to who can run for office, you open the door to people being blocked for political reasons.

Of course that's what you want, you just don't have the balls to say it.

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

Again, when you open up an arbitrary standard, it can be abused, and will be abused for political reasons.

You want to eliminate religious people from public office.

The people can decide how they want to. If enough of them decide to amend the constitution they can even impose things like a national church, a national anti-church, or everyone has to wear Fezes when outdoors.

Show me a sane religious person and they'll get my vote.

It's not about your vote, it's about you wanting to disqualify them from anyone voting for them.

Your own bias shows the whole point of your proposed rule is to remove people you don't like from the political process.

That makes you a fascist.

Remove people I don't like from the political process? Don't be silly. I love religious people.

If I didn't I would just stand by and do nothing but watch, and laugh, as they slowly disintegrated into nothingness.



You are the one without balls.

And yet you want to deny certain people the right to run for office due to their beliefs.

 

[ding]

No, I don't care about politics or religion at all.

Mr Magoo, bozo the clown, Benedict Arnold, or the town drunk can already run for office.

I don't think that requiring a person who will have the ability to destroy civilization to be sane is a political or religious issue at all.

That rules you out.

lol... Thats OK...I'm not running for anything..

If you believe in God, which you claim you do, then you are one of those insane religious people you were going on about.

No, many people who believe in God are sane. Just not the ones who claim to believe but then dedicate their lives to lying in his name, or claiming that he is the almighty king of the universe, yet edible by humans.

The fact you can't understand the symbolic nature of Catholic Communion shows you are an idiot.

And again, arbitrary measures can be abused.

The apostles didn't understand what Jesus was telling them either. At least not until he suffered death and rose.

"...John 6:30 begins a colloquy that took place in the synagogue at Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign he could perform so that they might believe in him. As a challenge, they noted that "our ancestors ate manna in the desert." Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. "Give us this bread always," they said. Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst." At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically.

Again and Again

Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52).

His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56).

No Corrections

Notice that Jesus made no attempt to soften what he said, no attempt to correct "misunderstandings," for there were none. Our Lord’s listeners understood him perfectly well. They no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically. If they had, if they mistook what he said, why no correction?

On other occasions when there was confusion, Christ explained just what he meant (cf. Matt. 16:5–12). Here, where any misunderstanding would be fatal, there was no effort by Jesus to correct. Instead, he repeated himself for greater emphasis.

In John 6:60 we read: "Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’" These were his disciples, people used to his remarkable ways. He warned them not to think carnally, but spiritually: "It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63; cf. 1 Cor. 2:12–14).

But he knew some did not believe. (It is here, in the rejection of the Eucharist, that Judas fell away; look at John 6:64.) "After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him" (John 6:66).

This is the only record we have of any of Christ’s followers forsaking him for purely doctrinal reasons. If it had all been a misunderstanding, if they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t he call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood." John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper—and it was a promise that could not be more explicit..."

Christ in the Eucharist | Catholic Answers