It’s Time to Formally Declare America A Christian Nation.

[Mashmont]

I supported the war on terror wherever it was needed to bring those who attacked us to justice. The United States had the inherit right of self-defense to track down and break up the terrorist community responsible for 911. Iraq and Saddam Hussein had absolutely zero, nothing to do with that terrorist community or the attacks on 911. The rationale for invading Iraq was a preemptive war to change the regime based on suspected possession of WMD. I knew before the invasion it was morally wrong. My primary reason for opposition was because of the UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq. 6 out of 10 Americans wanted Bush to give the inspectors more time. You didn’t. When did you finally figure out
that Pope John Paul was correct before the invasion and you were wrong. What year was that. Morally and deadly wrong. What was the year that you finally figured out that you supported a war that was morally wrong against the leader of your church?

UN inspectors in 1999 reported Iraq did have WMD. Do you really think Saddam turned boy scout in the next two years and got rid of them with zero impetus to do so? Only gullible people buy that story. You opposed the war because you hated Bush as evidenced by your screen name here. You didn't give a crap about 'civilian casualties' or you would have opposed the Afghan war as well, the one that carried on for 20 years, mostly under your incompetent boy 0bama. I've explained my position already about the war and why I changed my mind. Now you're throwing it up to me. I am getting really tired of your trolling crap. You blab all day long, change your story, contradict yourself, and generally say nothing. I'm not going to respond further to you. Take my earlier advice. Get off the forum, and get a life. You're wasting it in here. Make something of the remaining time you have. Go to church. Get right with God.

Now let's see if you'll have the decency to not respond, or will you launch some final snarky salvo. Should we take bets? Let's see if you can be a man.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I'm not going to respond further to you. T

Duly Noted, You can’t defend or stand by anything you have written. I will summarize and explain your falsehoods, misconceptions about anyone who doesn’t accept what you choose to believe. I consider you to be dangerous to freedom and decency in America. You will never have your white Christian Nation because you will never have more followers than Trump does. GOOD bye I hope you enjoy every thing I write about the scourge of white Christian nationalism that you are trying to sell and impose on the world in the name of God. It is indefensible and apparently you learned it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Same thing. Human life. Biological life.

Wrong again as usual


The Bible: The Bible clearly distinguishes between man and beast:

1. On the sixth day, Adam was created “in the image of God” and quite apart from the land animals through a clearly distinguished separate act of creation. The Hebrew word bara(create) is used three times in Genesis 1:27 to emphasize this act of creation.
2. Only man received the breath of God. In this way, he was given a spirit (Eccles. 12:7; 1 Thess. 5:23) so that he transcends the world of the animals.
3. Only when Adam was created, did God “use his hands”: “The Lord God formed [Hebrew yatsar] the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7). In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word yatsar is used to describe the actions of a potter who skillfully and imaginatively forms his vessels. In the same way, God used earthly matter for Adam’s physical parts.
4. Only man can actually communicate with God. Only he possesses the gift of speech and of prayer by means of which he can express all his thoughts before his Creator. Man was created to be near and close to God. He is dependent on communion with God.
5. Only man has a free will and possesses the faculty of creative thought. According to Psalm 8:5, man was made “a little lower than the heavenly beings.” Human beings possess gifts such as freely developing personalities, inventiveness, and the capacity for cultural development (writing, music, historical awareness).
6. Even the difference in flesh is mentioned in the Bible: “All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another” (1 Cor. 15:39). This finding has consequences for molecular biology: Proteins comprise the major part of the body. The human body contains approximately fifty thousand different kinds of proteins, each fulfilling its own specific functions. They have different amino acid sequences. All organisms have certain amino acids in the same positions in the polypeptide chain, and they serve to establish and preserve the characteristic functions of the specific protein. In contrast to this precise positioning, there are other positions where the amino acids clearly differ from one kind to the other.
7. It is said only about man that he was not only created “by God,” but also “for Him” (Col. 1:16). This high purpose is only ascribed to man. Animals are also creatures of God, but they did not receive the calling to become children of God (John 1:12).
8. In contrast to the animals, man is an eternal being; this means that his existence never ends, even after the death of the body (Luke 16:19–31). An imperishable body will be raised from the perishable one (1 Cor. 15:42).

4.4 Differences Between Human Life and Animal Life (OB16)

The Bible clearly distinguishes between man and beast—something evolution does not do.

answersingenesis.org

 

[NotfooledbyW]

UN inspectors in 1999 reported Iraq did have WMD.

Bush invaded Iraq in March 2003.

In October 2002 Bush signed UNSC Res 1441 for a new round of inspections.

In December 2002 SH was cooperating with the new round of inspections as confirmed by the Secretary of state.

Colin Powell's remarks on ABC's This Week with George Stephanoplous: war is not “inevitable” DECEMBER 2002



MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, sir, that mobilization is occurring in Iraq right now, or in the region around Iraq. But at the same time, Iraq seems to be cooperating with the inspectors. I know your views on the Iraqi declaration, but aside from that, do you have any other evidence that Iraq is not complying with the UN resolution?

Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, the declaration is certainly noncompliant. There is no question about it. I don't think anybody is defending that declaration.

They have been cooperating with the inspectors and we'll see if that cooperation continues. There has been some resistance in recent days to some of the things the inspectors are looking for, and we are providing more information and intelligence to the inspectors to cue their visits and we'll see whether that attitude of cooperation continues.

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: And if it does, war is not inevitable?
SECRETARY POWELL: They have been cooperating with the inspectors and we'll see if that cooperation continues

SECRETARY POWELL: We've never said that war is inevitable. The President has always said that he is interested in a peaceful solution. resolution?

Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos


When MM brought up 1999 weapons inspectors for a war that was started for years later she was just how ignorant the man is in the history of the lead up to the war in Iraq. There’s no excuse for that amount of ignorance In one who said he supported George W Bush invading Iraq in March 2003 before realizing no preemptive war is morally wrong.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Do you really think Saddam turned boy scout in the next two years and got rid of them with zero impetus to do so?

No but in December 2002 when Saddam Hussein offered to let the US military and the CIA enter Iraq and search for the alleged WMD on the ground and work with the UN inspectors to prove they had no WMD - I did not think Saddam Hussein became a Boy Scout, but I did think the Bush administration should’ve taken him up on the offer because first of all it was a peaceful way to settle the WMD questions and nobody gets killed. When the Bush administration officials replied to Saddam Hussein‘s offer they declined and like threw assholes told Iraqi official at the United Nations “We will see you in Baghdad” of course that meant they were going to start shock and awe.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Do you really think Saddam turned boy scout in the next two years and got rid of them with zero impetus to do so?

What kind of moron asks a question in a post (see above) and then tells you that if you answer it, my God see below:

Now let's see if you'll have the decency to not respond, or will you launch some final snarky salvo. Should we take bets? Let's see if you can be a man.

What a loser who pulls this crap while announcing that they are going to run away.

 

[hjmick]

What kind of moron asks a question in a post (see above) and then tells you that if you answer it, my God see below:





What a loser who pulls this crap while announcing that they are going to run away.

Yeah, Mushmouth is weak that way. Though it is unlikely the little shit will run away, it will put you on ignore first.

After seeing you make the asshole your bitch for... how many pages now? I'm surprised it hasn't already done so.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You didn't give a crap about 'civilian casualties' or you would have opposed the Afghan war as well, the one that carried on for 20 years, mostly under your incompetent boy 0bama

I gave a crap about Iraqi casualties and American men and women in uniform being sent to war based on the big Bush lie. And how in the hell do you ever manage to think that you know what my motivation was to oppose the invasion of Iraq. You’re a dishonest moron andca disgrace to the Catholic Church. Iraq did not attack us and they had nothing to do with the September 11, 2001 Al-Qaeda attack. We had the inherent right of self-defense to launch the war on terror against Al-Qaeda militants in Afghanistan or wherever the hell they were and kill them. War is hell and our men and women in uniform and civilians get killed. The raid last week that killed the leader of ISIS Involves civilian casualties. Are you opposed to raids like that? I’m already forgetting you are too cowardly to stick around to answer that question Mashmont . Bush fucked up Afghanistan when he dropped it to invade Iraq. That is a fact. I will never know if you supported the war in Afghanistan like 90% of Americans did. I don’t know if you were in the 10% opposed it at the start because you’re too cowardly to stay here and explain yourself. But I’ll take my unwavering support through from the start under George Bush through Barack Obama and through and to the end with Joe Biden knowing it was Donald Trump who wanted to invite the Taliban to Camp David for peace talks promising to get out on a date certain four months after his first term was up. Then Biden had to come in and clean up Donald Trump’s mess in Afghanistan. As well as on Covid, as well as the economy.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Yeah, Mushmouth is weak that way. Though it is unlikely the little shit will run away, it will put you on ignore first.

After seeing you make the asshole your bitch for... how many pages now? I'm surprised it hasn't already done so.

Happy to hear you’ve been observing. I never insulted him because all you have to do is ask the right questions that expose the absurdity of his factless hate filled talking points, snd let him self-insult himself. And he’s one of the best I’ve seen at that. Such a dumb ass arrogant in the name of God wannabe dictator of the world.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Back to the topic, any state religion is antithetical to Western society. We are a multi religious society. Given the utter lack of historical precedent s of religious states (as in, fucking all of them), this would fundamental ly change the nature of the US.

Further, historically in the US Catholics were viewed poorly. I have no desire to see what happens when Southern Evangelical s are suddenly screwed by "legions of a foreign religion governed from Rome." It won't go well for Catholics.

 

[Mashmont]

I think what we have learned on my thread is that the atheist minority feels VERY threatened of the thought of someone who is onto their little arrangement with the Marxist power structure and their media. "Shout 'separation of church and state!!' ", they instruct their media, and that opens the door for all the atheist laws to flood in without opposition. Because, ladies and gentlemen, opposition is what the atheist left abhors and attempts to silence and/or wipe out.

Because let me tell you, the ultimate goal of the atheist left is FORCED abortion. Don't believe it? Take a look at China for the past 40 years. One child law. Forced abortion. You violate it, you're imprisoned. To the libertarian fools, which appear to be numerous in here, you are purchasing the very loss of liberty you cling to so tightly. You think the Communists are going to respect your "live and let live" philosophy? Hell, no. They will laugh in your faces. Your days of getting high will be all over.

Join me in lobbying for a Constitutional Change to the religion clause to make Christianity the state religion. You'll find that a lot more agreeable than Communism. 100 million in the last century could vouch for that, if only they hadn't been exterminated.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Further, historically in the US Catholics were viewed poorly. I have no desire to see what happens when Southern Evangelical s are suddenly screwed by "legions of a foreign religion governed from Rome." It won't go well for Catholics.

Mashmont has a problem in that half of his Catholic brothers and sisters vote for Democrats. He seems to not know the fact that Catholics are permitted within the church to vote for a pro-choice candidate if they see the opposing candidate is the greater of two evils. What that does to our wannabe Christian enlightened despot it means catholic Support what he wants to do is already split in half. I wonder if his church has Biden voters sitting on one side of the aisle and Trump voters sitting on the other and it would be interesting to see the demographics of such a set up. So Mashmont needs the white evangelical nationalistic Christians who are huge Trump supporters residing in enough of America’s rural states in order to get a plurality required to convert America to a Christian nation with Christian laws. So you are right if they ever formed a coalition and pulled off their stunt It couid be hell to pay between these two groups. In the Evangelical side there are the black churches and on the Catholic side there are the social justice pro-immigrant Latino and woke white voters. We could end up with 100 years Civil War European style with a race war right in the middle of it like the Boogaloo boys and the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys appear to have been hoping to incite all standing by for Trump. And Mashmont is right there dragging his Catholic Church right into the mobocracy that the political right is beginning to lean on.

Just a sidenote - White evangelical Trump supporting Christians are convinced that all the founders were white protestant Bible Thumping Christians and they wrote the constitution for the God of the Bible to create a Christian nation in the first place for Protestants not Catholics.

Mashmont is saying here that the founding fathers wrote a Constitution designed for an atheist takeover of the nation and that what the atheists did. That should be an interesting conversation if they ever sit down to dinner together and actually talk

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Join me

No. You are a nutjob.

 

[AsherN]

I think what we have learned on my thread is that the atheist minority feels VERY threatened of the thought of someone who is onto their little arrangement with the Marxist power structure and their media. "Shout 'separation of church and state!!' ", they instruct their media, and that opens the door for all the atheist laws to flood in without opposition. Because, ladies and gentlemen, opposition is what the atheist left abhors and attempts to silence and/or wipe out.

Because let me tell you, the ultimate goal of the atheist left is FORCED abortion. Don't believe it? Take a look at China for the past 40 years. One child law. Forced abortion. You violate it, you're imprisoned. To the libertarian fools, which appear to be numerous in here, you are purchasing the very loss of liberty you cling to so tightly. You think the Communists are going to respect your "live and let live" philosophy? Hell, no. They will laugh in your faces. Your days of getting high will be all over.

Join me in lobbying for a Constitutional Change to the religion clause to make Christianity the state religion. You'll find that a lot more agreeable than Communism. 100 million in the last century could vouch for that, if only they hadn't been exterminated.

I'm by no stretch of the imagination an atheist. And I strongly oppose the formation of a catholic theocracy.

 

[Mashmont]

I'm by no stretch of the imagination an atheist. And I strongly oppose the formation of a catholic theocracy.

But for some reason, you're fine with the current atheocracy and what will result from it.. You people have yet to explain that.

 

[Mashmont]

Hey, for you guys still complaining, this is still my thread. I have a no trolling rule for my threads. If you want to post in it, act right, stick to the topic, no insulting, no diverting, no babbling. Speak intelligently. It's not that hard.

 

[Zincwarrior]

But for some reason, you're fine with the current atheocracy and what will result from it.. You people have yet to explain that.

Yes, we are ok with the government being neutral among religious people.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Hey, for you guys still complaining, this is still my thread. I have a no trolling rule for my threads. If you want to post in it, act right.

Ok Boomer.

 

[AsherN]

But for some reason, you're fine with the current atheocracy and what will result from it.. You people have yet to explain that.

Near 250 years of an atheist government, but now the apocalypse is coming?

 

[AsherN]

Hey, for you guys still complaining, this is still my thread. I have a no trolling rule for my threads. If you want to post in it, act right, stick to the topic, no insulting, no diverting, no babbling. Speak intelligently. It's not that hard.

I have news for you, it's not "your thread". You started something on a public forum. It is the site's thread. It will go anyway the mods are OK with.