Evangelicals and Trump

[Correll]

It seems that W is having a hard time acknowledging America's Christian heritage. It would seem to me that having the phrase "the year of the Lord" in the constitution would be an obvious artifact of a Christian heritage. And that admitting that that literally was referencing Jesus Christ as Lord without having to argue that our country was created as a theocracy or the constitution was a Christian document, whatever that means. It was a document that laid out the governance for a nation which was overwhelmingly Christian. So much so that they used the generally accepted convention for writing dates that was used in the overwhelmingly dominant Christian culture which was America.

The question follows, why is he so determined to deny our Christian hertiage?

I think it is because he wants to undermine anyone that wants to celebrate it, or God Forbid, work to uphold it, or maintain it.

 

[Correll]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

,

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

.
not showing the claim is the only way to prevent the self evident fact from being realized - you can not deny its validity.

there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.

.
what do you mean 100 years ago - as though that makes you any less culpable - what century has christianity not been at the forefront of persecution and victimization of the innocent -
.
View attachment 393387
.
just recently the racist christians and their protest to protect civil war memorabilia ...

that's probably chick, no need for sunglasses hiding behind a hood. fits her photo profile almost to a T.

You made a claim about today, and for proof you posted a picture from one hundred years ago.


Now you just posted a lot of shit there, but in no way did you address the absurdity of your previous supporting evidence, ie the one hundred year old picture, to prove Christians today are bad people.


Are you running away from that idiocy, since I called you on it, or hoping that if you throw enough shit against the wall, like a retarded monkey, that no one will notice how I made a fool of you?


You people are the bigots today and this is all about you wanting to deny Christians the right to participate in the political process by bullying them from the public square, like the marxist thugs you are.

 

[Correll]

Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) must be a huge hero to you and Correll. He was paid $30 bucks to make copies of the Seven Articles and he wrote the LORDY LORDLY date after the articles were signed - and those two words miraculously turned the entire Constitution into a Christian Nationalist Document and we have a new nation founded entirely by white Protestant Christians in 1790 year of our Lord.

OOOOPS !!!!!!!! The Scribe who put “Lord God” in the date line does not come with a guarantee that he was a Christian.

See here is what Freemasons believe:

“.....membership requires acceptance of the belief in the existence of a Supreme Being that includes the gods of Islam, Hinduism, or other religions.“​

​

“Freemasonry refers to its god as the Great Architect of the Universe. In honoring this generic "Great Architect," the person involved in Freemasonry does not worship the God of the Bible but another god.”​

​

“....Masons teach that a person can go to heaven as the result of a person's good works. Of course, to encourage allegiance to any god other than the God of the Bible also reflects a belief that salvation can be found outside of Jesus.“​

​

“.....Mason teachings, in contrast, consider the Bible one of many sacred books (called Volumes of Sacred Law) that hold equal importance.”​

​

“....In contrast, the Mason view of God is a god who is a general being inclusive of all deities. Called the "Nameless one of a hundred names," this view of God represents a multi-god worldview incompatible with biblical Christianity. Further, in Masonic teachings Jesus is only one of many spiritual leaders rather than the only Son of God (John 3:16) and God in human form (John 1:14).“​

​

So ding do you or PC claim to know what Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) was talking about when he wrote the “Year of Lord” date on the record and display copies?

Which Lord were they talking about exactly?

They (the signers) were not talking about their “Lord”. They were not pointing to JESUS CHRIST. that’s impossible. When the Delegates signed their names the Lordy Date was not on the document.

Now since it looks like a Scribe named Jacob Shallus was paid $30 bucks to write those words on his own because the signers did not say, read or hear them when the articles were ratified.

So PC is a liar., perhaps ignorant of the truth.

Are you disputing this ?

—the "our Lord" clause is not part of the official legal Constitution. The official Constitution's text ends just before these extra words of attestation—extra words that in fact were not ratified by various state conventions in 1787-88​

What is the ‘Year of our Lord’ doing on diplomas, government documents, and the Constitution?

'Year of our Lord' is a religious relic that has been mostly discarded. This anachronistic dating convention is reported to FFRF from time to time as a violation that disgraces

ffrf.org

Here’s what happened;

The Convention debated and edited this draft for more than a month. They then passed it and the copious edits off to the Committee of Style, a political dream team that included James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Governeur Morris. The Committee of Style brought the polished product back to the whole convention on September 12, 1787. There is no lordly date on that draft. You can actually see George Washington's copy of this nearly complete version of the Constitution and his handwritten edits. It runs to four pages and ends with Article VII.​

On September 15, the Convention agreed on the complete text, and, for $30, hired Jacob Shallus to engross (transcribe in legible, bold, and occasionally ornate lettering) the final draft onto the four sheets of vellum that reside in that National Archives today.​

Shallus worked to complete his work from September 15 through 17. The Convention met on September 17 and read Shallus's engrossed copy aloud. It was ony then that Franklin made a motion to add on the date and signatures, the motion Madison recorded: "offered the following as a convenient form ... ''Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present the seventeenth of September, &c —"​

Franklin's motion to add the signatures and date was made after this final draft was read aloud, so when it was read aloud it did not include "Year of our Lord." This also makes sense, Shallus would not have known the actual date of the signing.​

In short, none of the drafts contains the "Year of our Lord." The absence of the date—"Year of our Lord" or otherwise—on the three drafts of the Constitution illustrates the previous point: the date and signatures are not part of the Constitution itself.​

So you and PC are lying through your teeth saying that when they paid a possibly non-Christian scribe to add the date to a record copy he added the “Year of our Lord” and that proves that every other word in the entire Constitution are about JESUS CHRIST and every one who believed that his mother was a virgin, everyone who believed he died on a cross to cancel out every single conceived human’s sins, (if they believed the 1800 year old story) , and who believe he rose from the dead, and will come back some day to be with all the believers and cast everybody who doesn’t believe into the burning fires of hell.

lol one of the most tortured and idiotic narratives yet.

Yeah, what the hell was he even trying to say?

 

[Bezukhov]

In 1915 there was actually one state supreme court which said that the reference to "in the year of our Lord" in the U.S. Constitution was a reference to Jesus Christ!
Herold v Parish Board of School Directors, 136 L.R. 1034 at 1044 (1915).
Where is God in the Constitution?

How do you know that Freemason Jacob Shallus was a believer in Trinitarian Christianity that was allegedly founded by Jesus Christ. He could have been a Unitarian like John Adams.

Nice that you brought up the subject of Freemasonry. My opinion is if you want to thank some one for the liberties you enjoy today don't bother with this Christian over here, go thank that Baphomet worshipping Freemason over there. The Churches of Christendom, both Protestant and Catholic, fought tooth and nail to stymie any attempt to allow greater freedoms to the peoples of the West.

 

[Bezukhov]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

,

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

.
not showing the claim is the only way to prevent the self evident fact from being realized - you can not deny its validity.

there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.

.
what do you mean 100 years ago - as though that makes you any less culpable - what century has christianity not been at the forefront of persecution and victimization of the innocent -
.
View attachment 393387
.
just recently the racist christians and their protest to protect civil war memorabilia ...

that's probably chick, no need for sunglasses hiding behind a hood. fits her photo profile almost to a T.

You made a claim about today, and for proof you posted a picture from one hundred years ago.


Now you just posted a lot of shit there, but in no way did you address the absurdity of your previous supporting evidence, ie the one hundred year old picture, to prove Christians today are bad people.


Are you running away from that idiocy, since I called you on it, or hoping that if you throw enough shit against the wall, like a retarded monkey, that no one will notice how I made a fool of you?


You people are the bigots today and this is all about you wanting to deny Christians the right to participate in the political process by bullying them from the public square, like the marxist thugs you are.

Did Jesus want His followers to "participate in the political process"? Did First Century Christians "participate in the political process"? As an aside, do you believe that Jesus' Return to Earth will happen when every elected office in America is held by Bible Thumping Republicans?

 

[ding]

Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) must be a huge hero to you and Correll. He was paid $30 bucks to make copies of the Seven Articles and he wrote the LORDY LORDLY date after the articles were signed - and those two words miraculously turned the entire Constitution into a Christian Nationalist Document and we have a new nation founded entirely by white Protestant Christians in 1790 year of our Lord.

OOOOPS !!!!!!!! The Scribe who put “Lord God” in the date line does not come with a guarantee that he was a Christian.

See here is what Freemasons believe:

“.....membership requires acceptance of the belief in the existence of a Supreme Being that includes the gods of Islam, Hinduism, or other religions.“​

​

“Freemasonry refers to its god as the Great Architect of the Universe. In honoring this generic "Great Architect," the person involved in Freemasonry does not worship the God of the Bible but another god.”​

​

“....Masons teach that a person can go to heaven as the result of a person's good works. Of course, to encourage allegiance to any god other than the God of the Bible also reflects a belief that salvation can be found outside of Jesus.“​

​

“.....Mason teachings, in contrast, consider the Bible one of many sacred books (called Volumes of Sacred Law) that hold equal importance.”​

​

“....In contrast, the Mason view of God is a god who is a general being inclusive of all deities. Called the "Nameless one of a hundred names," this view of God represents a multi-god worldview incompatible with biblical Christianity. Further, in Masonic teachings Jesus is only one of many spiritual leaders rather than the only Son of God (John 3:16) and God in human form (John 1:14).“​

​

So ding do you or PC claim to know what Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) was talking about when he wrote the “Year of Lord” date on the record and display copies?

Which Lord were they talking about exactly?

They (the signers) were not talking about their “Lord”. They were not pointing to JESUS CHRIST. that’s impossible. When the Delegates signed their names the Lordy Date was not on the document.

Now since it looks like a Scribe named Jacob Shallus was paid $30 bucks to write those words on his own because the signers did not say, read or hear them when the articles were ratified.

So PC is a liar., perhaps ignorant of the truth.

Are you disputing this ?

—the "our Lord" clause is not part of the official legal Constitution. The official Constitution's text ends just before these extra words of attestation—extra words that in fact were not ratified by various state conventions in 1787-88​

What is the ‘Year of our Lord’ doing on diplomas, government documents, and the Constitution?

'Year of our Lord' is a religious relic that has been mostly discarded. This anachronistic dating convention is reported to FFRF from time to time as a violation that disgraces

ffrf.org

Here’s what happened;

The Convention debated and edited this draft for more than a month. They then passed it and the copious edits off to the Committee of Style, a political dream team that included James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Governeur Morris. The Committee of Style brought the polished product back to the whole convention on September 12, 1787. There is no lordly date on that draft. You can actually see George Washington's copy of this nearly complete version of the Constitution and his handwritten edits. It runs to four pages and ends with Article VII.​

On September 15, the Convention agreed on the complete text, and, for $30, hired Jacob Shallus to engross (transcribe in legible, bold, and occasionally ornate lettering) the final draft onto the four sheets of vellum that reside in that National Archives today.​

Shallus worked to complete his work from September 15 through 17. The Convention met on September 17 and read Shallus's engrossed copy aloud. It was ony then that Franklin made a motion to add on the date and signatures, the motion Madison recorded: "offered the following as a convenient form ... ''Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present the seventeenth of September, &c —"​

Franklin's motion to add the signatures and date was made after this final draft was read aloud, so when it was read aloud it did not include "Year of our Lord." This also makes sense, Shallus would not have known the actual date of the signing.​

In short, none of the drafts contains the "Year of our Lord." The absence of the date—"Year of our Lord" or otherwise—on the three drafts of the Constitution illustrates the previous point: the date and signatures are not part of the Constitution itself.​

So you and PC are lying through your teeth saying that when they paid a possibly non-Christian scribe to add the date to a record copy he added the “Year of our Lord” and that proves that every other word in the entire Constitution are about JESUS CHRIST and every one who believed that his mother was a virgin, everyone who believed he died on a cross to cancel out every single conceived human’s sins, (if they believed the 1800 year old story) , and who believe he rose from the dead, and will come back some day to be with all the believers and cast everybody who doesn’t believe into the burning fires of hell.

Dude, if it bothers that much to acknowledge that Jesus Christ was the Lord the constitution referenced in "the year of the Lord," then just ignore it. You can believe it was a general deity that was referenced. I really don't care.

Your reluctance speaks volumes.

 

[PoliticalChic]

In 1915 there was actually one state supreme court which said that the reference to "in the year of our Lord" in the U.S. Constitution was a reference to Jesus Christ!
Herold v Parish Board of School Directors, 136 L.R. 1034 at 1044 (1915).
Where is God in the Constitution?

How do you know that Freemason Jacob Shallus was a believer in Trinitarian Christianity that was allegedly founded by Jesus Christ. He could have been a Unitarian like John Adams.

Nice that you brought up the subject of Freemasonry. My opinion is if you want to thank some one for the liberties you enjoy today don't bother with this Christian over here, go thank that Baphomet worshipping Freemason over there. The Churches of Christendom, both Protestant and Catholic, fought tooth and nail to stymie any attempt to allow greater freedoms to the peoples of the West.

"The Churches of Christendom, both Protestant and Catholic, fought tooth and nail to stymie any attempt to allow greater freedoms to the peoples of the West."

Really?

Genesis 1:26 And God said, 'Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness



Western Civilization is built on two pillars: Divine guidance through the Judeo-Christian faith, written into our memorializing documents, and the ability to reason. “We receive our notions of Divine meaning from a three-millennia -old lineage stretching back to the ancient Jews; we receive our notions of reason from a twenty-five-hundred-year-old lineage stretching back to the ancient Greeks.”
Ben Shapiro, “The Right Side Of History,” p. 18



Genesis 1:26 is God giving every individual meaning, and Henley describes how to use it:
"I am the master of my fate:I am the captain of my soul.”.



“This is the Jewish and Christian God. This is the Judeo-Christian civilization. This is the foundation for the greatest culture and civilization in world history- the West, the greatest force for material prosperity and freedom in history of the planet.” Ben Shapiro, “The Right Side Of History,” p. 20

 

[ding]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

,

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

.
not showing the claim is the only way to prevent the self evident fact from being realized - you can not deny its validity.

there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.

.
what do you mean 100 years ago - as though that makes you any less culpable - what century has christianity not been at the forefront of persecution and victimization of the innocent -
.
View attachment 393387
.
just recently the racist christians and their protest to protect civil war memorabilia ...

that's probably chick, no need for sunglasses hiding behind a hood. fits her photo profile almost to a T.

You made a claim about today, and for proof you posted a picture from one hundred years ago.


Now you just posted a lot of shit there, but in no way did you address the absurdity of your previous supporting evidence, ie the one hundred year old picture, to prove Christians today are bad people.


Are you running away from that idiocy, since I called you on it, or hoping that if you throw enough shit against the wall, like a retarded monkey, that no one will notice how I made a fool of you?


You people are the bigots today and this is all about you wanting to deny Christians the right to participate in the political process by bullying them from the public square, like the marxist thugs you are.

Did Jesus want His followers to "participate in the political process"? Did First Century Christians "participate in the political process"? As an aside, do you believe that Jesus' Return to Earth will happen when every elected office in America is held by Bible Thumping Republicans?

You'd have to ask Jesus. I believe we are called to be stewards. So nothing wrong with participating in the political process. I'm pretty sure colonial Christians believed the same thing.


One Nation Under God: Alexis de Tocqueville

Upon my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.

In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country.

Religion in America...must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of it. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief.

I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion -- for who can search the human heart? But I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.

In the United States, the sovereign authority is religious...there is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that its influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth.

In the United States, the influence of religion is not confined to the manners, but it extends to the intelligence of the people...

Christianity, therefore, reigns without obstacle, by universal consent...

I sought for the key to the greatness and genius of America in her harbors...; in her fertile fields and boundless forests; in her rich mines and vast world commerce; in her public school system and institutions of learning. I sought for it in her democratic Congress and in her matchless Constitution.

Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great. The safeguard of morality is religion, and morality is the best security of law as well as the surest pledge of freedom. The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other. Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its conflicts -- the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of its claims.

Tocqueville gives this account of a court case in New York:
While I was in America, a witness, who happened to be called at the assizes of the county of Chester (state of New York), declared that he did not believe in the existence of God or in the immortality of the soul. The judge refused to admit his evidence, on the ground that the witness had destroyed beforehand all confidence of the court in what he was about to say. The newspapers related the fact without any further comment. The New York Spectator of August 23rd, 1831, relates the fact in the following terms:

"The court of common pleas of Chester county (New York), a few days since rejected a witness who declared his disbelief in the existence of God. The presiding judge remarked, that he had not before been aware that there was a man living who did not believe in the existence of God; that this belief constituted the sanction of all testimony in a court of justice: and that he knew of no case in a Christian country, where a witness had been permitted to testify without such belief."

 

[ding]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

Breezewood is on a whole other level.

He is literally pretending that their is no difference between a sperm and a fertilized egg.


He is completely with out a soul.

I believe Breezewood is a political subversive.

 

[ding]

Nothing like a good argument from the 4th Century to give context to a discussion about ... “Evangelicals & Trump.”

.
recorded history for some is ...

the christian bible was written in the 4th century -
.
blah blah blah
.
the forgeries and fallacies of the 4th century is what empowers already corrupt minds. bing - chick.

lol and yet not a single anachronism anywhere in the NT shows up in the texts as being about events in any other time frame than the times it it is supposed to be in, not a single one over how many pages, again? Amazing that some Roman in the 4th Century could pull that off, eh? lol you're a sick man.

.

lol and yet not a single anachronism anywhere in the NT shows up in the texts as being about events in any other time frame than the times it it is supposed to be in, not a single one over how many pages, again? Amazing that some Roman in the 4th Century could pull that off, eh? lol you're a sick man.

.
they spent the entire 4th century writing their christian bible ... if what you say were true picaro what was that time spent for. let me help you -
.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

.
by adding forgeries and fallacies to nearly every page written as the one above.

where are your etched in stone ten commandments - did they disappear after the murder moses threw them to the ground. of course, they are lost .

The spoken religion of antiquity is Christianity - the triumph of good over evil for admission into the everlasting. You believe in the forgeries and fallacies of 4th century Gnostic Christians who rejected the Almighty and who celebrated the triumph of evil over good.

 

[ding]

Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) must be a huge hero to you and Correll. He was paid $30 bucks to make copies of the Seven Articles and he wrote the LORDY LORDLY date after the articles were signed - and those two words miraculously turned the entire Constitution into a Christian Nationalist Document and we have a new nation founded entirely by white Protestant Christians in 1790 year of our Lord.

OOOOPS !!!!!!!! The Scribe who put “Lord God” in the date line does not come with a guarantee that he was a Christian.

See here is what Freemasons believe:

“.....membership requires acceptance of the belief in the existence of a Supreme Being that includes the gods of Islam, Hinduism, or other religions.“​

​

“Freemasonry refers to its god as the Great Architect of the Universe. In honoring this generic "Great Architect," the person involved in Freemasonry does not worship the God of the Bible but another god.”​

​

“....Masons teach that a person can go to heaven as the result of a person's good works. Of course, to encourage allegiance to any god other than the God of the Bible also reflects a belief that salvation can be found outside of Jesus.“​

​

“.....Mason teachings, in contrast, consider the Bible one of many sacred books (called Volumes of Sacred Law) that hold equal importance.”​

​

“....In contrast, the Mason view of God is a god who is a general being inclusive of all deities. Called the "Nameless one of a hundred names," this view of God represents a multi-god worldview incompatible with biblical Christianity. Further, in Masonic teachings Jesus is only one of many spiritual leaders rather than the only Son of God (John 3:16) and God in human form (John 1:14).“​

​

So ding do you or PC claim to know what Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) was talking about when he wrote the “Year of Lord” date on the record and display copies?

Which Lord were they talking about exactly?

They (the signers) were not talking about their “Lord”. They were not pointing to JESUS CHRIST. that’s impossible. When the Delegates signed their names the Lordy Date was not on the document.

Now since it looks like a Scribe named Jacob Shallus was paid $30 bucks to write those words on his own because the signers did not say, read or hear them when the articles were ratified.

So PC is a liar., perhaps ignorant of the truth.

Are you disputing this ?

—the "our Lord" clause is not part of the official legal Constitution. The official Constitution's text ends just before these extra words of attestation—extra words that in fact were not ratified by various state conventions in 1787-88​

What is the ‘Year of our Lord’ doing on diplomas, government documents, and the Constitution?

'Year of our Lord' is a religious relic that has been mostly discarded. This anachronistic dating convention is reported to FFRF from time to time as a violation that disgraces

ffrf.org

Here’s what happened;

The Convention debated and edited this draft for more than a month. They then passed it and the copious edits off to the Committee of Style, a political dream team that included James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Governeur Morris. The Committee of Style brought the polished product back to the whole convention on September 12, 1787. There is no lordly date on that draft. You can actually see George Washington's copy of this nearly complete version of the Constitution and his handwritten edits. It runs to four pages and ends with Article VII.​

On September 15, the Convention agreed on the complete text, and, for $30, hired Jacob Shallus to engross (transcribe in legible, bold, and occasionally ornate lettering) the final draft onto the four sheets of vellum that reside in that National Archives today.​

Shallus worked to complete his work from September 15 through 17. The Convention met on September 17 and read Shallus's engrossed copy aloud. It was ony then that Franklin made a motion to add on the date and signatures, the motion Madison recorded: "offered the following as a convenient form ... ''Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present the seventeenth of September, &c —"​

Franklin's motion to add the signatures and date was made after this final draft was read aloud, so when it was read aloud it did not include "Year of our Lord." This also makes sense, Shallus would not have known the actual date of the signing.​

In short, none of the drafts contains the "Year of our Lord." The absence of the date—"Year of our Lord" or otherwise—on the three drafts of the Constitution illustrates the previous point: the date and signatures are not part of the Constitution itself.​

So you and PC are lying through your teeth saying that when they paid a possibly non-Christian scribe to add the date to a record copy he added the “Year of our Lord” and that proves that every other word in the entire Constitution are about JESUS CHRIST and every one who believed that his mother was a virgin, everyone who believed he died on a cross to cancel out every single conceived human’s sins, (if they believed the 1800 year old story) , and who believe he rose from the dead, and will come back some day to be with all the believers and cast everybody who doesn’t believe into the burning fires of hell.

lol one of the most tortured and idiotic narratives yet.

Yeah, what the hell was he even trying to say?

Apparently his world would stop turning if he had to acknowledge the truth of our Christian heritage.

 

[Correll]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

,

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

.
not showing the claim is the only way to prevent the self evident fact from being realized - you can not deny its validity.

there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.

.
what do you mean 100 years ago - as though that makes you any less culpable - what century has christianity not been at the forefront of persecution and victimization of the innocent -
.
View attachment 393387
.
just recently the racist christians and their protest to protect civil war memorabilia ...

that's probably chick, no need for sunglasses hiding behind a hood. fits her photo profile almost to a T.

You made a claim about today, and for proof you posted a picture from one hundred years ago.


Now you just posted a lot of shit there, but in no way did you address the absurdity of your previous supporting evidence, ie the one hundred year old picture, to prove Christians today are bad people.


Are you running away from that idiocy, since I called you on it, or hoping that if you throw enough shit against the wall, like a retarded monkey, that no one will notice how I made a fool of you?


You people are the bigots today and this is all about you wanting to deny Christians the right to participate in the political process by bullying them from the public square, like the marxist thugs you are.

Did Jesus want His followers to "participate in the political process"? Did First Century Christians "participate in the political process"? As an aside, do you believe that Jesus' Return to Earth will happen when every elected office in America is held by Bible Thumping Republicans?

He did not tell us to NOT participate in the political process. And as American citizens we have as much right to do so as any other citizen.


Note that it is not US questioning your participation in the political process, but you questioning ours.


You are the want a be tyrant, not US, you anti-Christian bigot.

 

[ding]

It seems that W is having a hard time acknowledging America's Christian heritage. It would seem to me that having the phrase "the year of the Lord" in the constitution would be an obvious artifact of a Christian heritage. And that admitting that that literally was referencing Jesus Christ as Lord without having to argue that our country was created as a theocracy or the constitution was a Christian document, whatever that means. It was a document that laid out the governance for a nation which was overwhelmingly Christian. So much so that they used the generally accepted convention for writing dates that was used in the overwhelmingly dominant Christian culture which was America.

The question follows, why is he so determined to deny our Christian heritage?

I think it is because he wants to undermine anyone that wants to celebrate it, or God Forbid, work to uphold it, or maintain it.

I don't know for certain but I have a few ideas; insecurity of his own beliefs, subordination of Christianity for social and political purposes, rival religion to atheism, etc.

It's all spelled out in my signature.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

 

[Correll]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

Breezewood is on a whole other level.

He is literally pretending that their is no difference between a sperm and a fertilized egg.


He is completely with out a soul.

I believe Breezewood is a political subversive.

No doubt. Probably other kinds of subversive too.

 

[Correll]

Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) must be a huge hero to you and Correll. He was paid $30 bucks to make copies of the Seven Articles and he wrote the LORDY LORDLY date after the articles were signed - and those two words miraculously turned the entire Constitution into a Christian Nationalist Document and we have a new nation founded entirely by white Protestant Christians in 1790 year of our Lord.

OOOOPS !!!!!!!! The Scribe who put “Lord God” in the date line does not come with a guarantee that he was a Christian.

See here is what Freemasons believe:

“.....membership requires acceptance of the belief in the existence of a Supreme Being that includes the gods of Islam, Hinduism, or other religions.“​

​

“Freemasonry refers to its god as the Great Architect of the Universe. In honoring this generic "Great Architect," the person involved in Freemasonry does not worship the God of the Bible but another god.”​

​

“....Masons teach that a person can go to heaven as the result of a person's good works. Of course, to encourage allegiance to any god other than the God of the Bible also reflects a belief that salvation can be found outside of Jesus.“​

​

“.....Mason teachings, in contrast, consider the Bible one of many sacred books (called Volumes of Sacred Law) that hold equal importance.”​

​

“....In contrast, the Mason view of God is a god who is a general being inclusive of all deities. Called the "Nameless one of a hundred names," this view of God represents a multi-god worldview incompatible with biblical Christianity. Further, in Masonic teachings Jesus is only one of many spiritual leaders rather than the only Son of God (John 3:16) and God in human form (John 1:14).“​

​

So ding do you or PC claim to know what Jacob Shallus (a FreeMason) was talking about when he wrote the “Year of Lord” date on the record and display copies?

Which Lord were they talking about exactly?

They (the signers) were not talking about their “Lord”. They were not pointing to JESUS CHRIST. that’s impossible. When the Delegates signed their names the Lordy Date was not on the document.

Now since it looks like a Scribe named Jacob Shallus was paid $30 bucks to write those words on his own because the signers did not say, read or hear them when the articles were ratified.

So PC is a liar., perhaps ignorant of the truth.

Are you disputing this ?

—the "our Lord" clause is not part of the official legal Constitution. The official Constitution's text ends just before these extra words of attestation—extra words that in fact were not ratified by various state conventions in 1787-88​

What is the ‘Year of our Lord’ doing on diplomas, government documents, and the Constitution?

'Year of our Lord' is a religious relic that has been mostly discarded. This anachronistic dating convention is reported to FFRF from time to time as a violation that disgraces

ffrf.org

Here’s what happened;

The Convention debated and edited this draft for more than a month. They then passed it and the copious edits off to the Committee of Style, a political dream team that included James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Governeur Morris. The Committee of Style brought the polished product back to the whole convention on September 12, 1787. There is no lordly date on that draft. You can actually see George Washington's copy of this nearly complete version of the Constitution and his handwritten edits. It runs to four pages and ends with Article VII.​

On September 15, the Convention agreed on the complete text, and, for $30, hired Jacob Shallus to engross (transcribe in legible, bold, and occasionally ornate lettering) the final draft onto the four sheets of vellum that reside in that National Archives today.​

Shallus worked to complete his work from September 15 through 17. The Convention met on September 17 and read Shallus's engrossed copy aloud. It was ony then that Franklin made a motion to add on the date and signatures, the motion Madison recorded: "offered the following as a convenient form ... ''Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present the seventeenth of September, &c —"​

Franklin's motion to add the signatures and date was made after this final draft was read aloud, so when it was read aloud it did not include "Year of our Lord." This also makes sense, Shallus would not have known the actual date of the signing.​

In short, none of the drafts contains the "Year of our Lord." The absence of the date—"Year of our Lord" or otherwise—on the three drafts of the Constitution illustrates the previous point: the date and signatures are not part of the Constitution itself.​

So you and PC are lying through your teeth saying that when they paid a possibly non-Christian scribe to add the date to a record copy he added the “Year of our Lord” and that proves that every other word in the entire Constitution are about JESUS CHRIST and every one who believed that his mother was a virgin, everyone who believed he died on a cross to cancel out every single conceived human’s sins, (if they believed the 1800 year old story) , and who believe he rose from the dead, and will come back some day to be with all the believers and cast everybody who doesn’t believe into the burning fires of hell.

lol one of the most tortured and idiotic narratives yet.

Yeah, what the hell was he even trying to say?

Apparently his world would stop turning if he had to acknowledge the truth of our Christian heritage.

Well, it would clearly be a trauma to him.

 

[Correll]

It seems that W is having a hard time acknowledging America's Christian heritage. It would seem to me that having the phrase "the year of the Lord" in the constitution would be an obvious artifact of a Christian heritage. And that admitting that that literally was referencing Jesus Christ as Lord without having to argue that our country was created as a theocracy or the constitution was a Christian document, whatever that means. It was a document that laid out the governance for a nation which was overwhelmingly Christian. So much so that they used the generally accepted convention for writing dates that was used in the overwhelmingly dominant Christian culture which was America.

The question follows, why is he so determined to deny our Christian heritage?

I think it is because he wants to undermine anyone that wants to celebrate it, or God Forbid, work to uphold it, or maintain it.

I don't know for certain but I have a few ideas; insecurity of his own beliefs, subordination of Christianity for social and political purposes, rival religion to atheism, etc.

It's all spelled out in my signature.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Mmm, pretty good stuff. Very well thought out. Your own thinking?

 

[ding]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

Breezewood is on a whole other level.

He is literally pretending that their is no difference between a sperm and a fertilized egg.


He is completely with out a soul.

I believe Breezewood is a political subversive.

No doubt. Probably other kinds of subversive too.

A people without a heritage are easily persuaded. ~ Karl Marx

 

[Correll]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

Breezewood is on a whole other level.

He is literally pretending that their is no difference between a sperm and a fertilized egg.


He is completely with out a soul.

I believe Breezewood is a political subversive.

No doubt. Probably other kinds of subversive too.

A people without a heritage are easily persuaded. ~ Karl Marx

i've certainly seem that Liberals, who celebrate everyone's culture and/or heritage our own, are terrified that any consideration or support could be given to celebrating or supporting our own heritage and traditions.


Because they want to "radically transform" America, and they NEED to shout down any suggest that maybe there is something of value to our already existing culture.

 

[ding]

It seems that W is having a hard time acknowledging America's Christian heritage. It would seem to me that having the phrase "the year of the Lord" in the constitution would be an obvious artifact of a Christian heritage. And that admitting that that literally was referencing Jesus Christ as Lord without having to argue that our country was created as a theocracy or the constitution was a Christian document, whatever that means. It was a document that laid out the governance for a nation which was overwhelmingly Christian. So much so that they used the generally accepted convention for writing dates that was used in the overwhelmingly dominant Christian culture which was America.

The question follows, why is he so determined to deny our Christian heritage?

I think it is because he wants to undermine anyone that wants to celebrate it, or God Forbid, work to uphold it, or maintain it.

I don't know for certain but I have a few ideas; insecurity of his own beliefs, subordination of Christianity for social and political purposes, rival religion to atheism, etc.

It's all spelled out in my signature.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Mmm, pretty good stuff. Very well thought out. Your own thinking?

About 50/50. Half came from The Socialist Phenomenon. It's a great book.

The Socialist Phenomenon

I learned about it from a speech by Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Which is a must read.

Alexander I. Solzhenitsyn -- A World Split Apart — Commencement Address Delivered At Harvard University, June 8, 1978

www.orthodoxytoday.org

 

[ding]

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.

It would be so refreshing to have an honest discussion for once with an advocate for abortion.

.
- and your purpose for the "discussion" you have not already imposed by your incendiary statements.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

To state the obvious; that it is wrong to abort a human life.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok -
.
View attachment 391463
.
you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

.

That is moronic. Completely moronic.

but murdering everything else in Garden Earth is ok - you've not explained how having a vasectomy or using a condom is not the same as an abortion ... fill us in.

.
don't be a coward, give it a whirll -
.
View attachment 391758
.
have you your letter from the priest, their permission for your vasectomy ... bing fixed it for himself no different than an abortion.

A sperm is not a human life you ******* moron. A fertilized egg, is. THe sperm by itself, will not grow up and one day have a family of it's own.

The fertilized egg, will. Because it is a human life. A brand new human life, with a lot of growing in front of him or her, but a human never the less.
.

What part of that, is too hard for you to understand?

.
preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved - bing chose abortion for himself while denying the same to others the same as you and your self centric, qualifying motivations intervening against the lives of others you have no legitimacy being involved with.
.

The sperm is not.

you are a joke by using a condom you are preventing a birth. the very purpose of a vasectomy is the prevention of life - your doing nothing more than screaming fire in a packed theatre.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,


and later on, it is a human being.

.

Except it obvious does matter whether the intervention occurs, before the parts come together it is parts that could become something greater if the right chain of events happens,
and later on, it is a human being.

.
the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs - you are nothing more than a disingenuous sociopathic zealot.

at least build and sale your chastity belt you alone have the key for, they will be forever in your debt.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.

THe line is not one I have drawn, the line is the difference between a human life and not a human life.


YOur denial of this, is you just stonewalling like a troll.

.
no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

you must have no intervention, intercourse but only for the sole purpose you deem as animalistic reproduction whether or not pregnancy is the result for your objection to be valid.

and they will need your approval to make the attempt being certain by your presence no mistakes or loss of fluids occurs.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.

No, I mustn't. Your words have no weight to them. They are structured as though it is a conclusion with a supporting argument.

But, your claims are empty assertions, with no actual reasons or logic to give them weight.

.
you mustn't what - bear witness to their intercourse to preserve whatever may spill from their bedside.

You said I must. I said, NOT.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

You went weird, because you cannot support your conclusion. Yet you will hold to it, for reasons you can not, or will not share.

.

preventative intervention is the same no matter when it occurs - and is the choice made by the individual involved -

the line you yourself have drawn is not conciliatory, the intervention is the same result no matter when it occurs -

no, its your making a false issue from the same result - from beginning to end.

.
my position has been made perfectly clear - your end run is nothing more than sociopathic zealotry.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

.

He's a subversive. He's knows he's making a bullshit argument. But it's the stupidest argument one could make.

Yes, your position is clear. It just refuses to recognize that a fertilized egg is different than a sperm cell.

ie, you are delusional.

.
there is no difference in the end result for any intervention whenever it occurs - bing's vasectomy is the same as an abortion.
.

Your pretense that it is the Christians who are the would be tyrants in our society today, is not fooling anyone. Try again lefty.

.
there is no pretense to recorded history -

View attachment 393049

christianity is a religion of persecution and victimization of the innocent, uninterrupted since the 4th century to the present day - in this country particularly by their vestiture from the beginning in slavery and other brutalities to indigenous and other peoples of meekness made vulnerable to their evil. correll.

1. you keep making that claim. But you do nothing to support it, other than constant repetition. THat is a tacit admission on your part, that you have no real argument.

2. You claim that Christianity is a religious of persecution TODAY, and to support the post a picture from ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.... That is you, losing this debate, you anti-Christian bigot.

Breezewood is on a whole other level.

He is literally pretending that their is no difference between a sperm and a fertilized egg.


He is completely with out a soul.

I believe Breezewood is a political subversive.

No doubt. Probably other kinds of subversive too.

A people without a heritage are easily persuaded. ~ Karl Marx

i've certainly seem that Liberals, who celebrate everyone's culture and/or heritage our own, are terrified that any consideration or support could be given to celebrating or supporting our own heritage and traditions.


Because they want to "radically transform" America, and they NEED to shout down any suggest that maybe there is something of value to our already existing culture.

That's multiculturalism and it's aimed at destroying the dominant culture of a nation.