“A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could”
"Religion is the basis and Foundation of Government."
--James Madison (Father of the U.S. Constitution)
"America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."
"World dictatorship can be established only when the victory of Socialism has been achieved in certain countries or groups of countries … [and] when these federation of republics have finally grown into a world union of Soviet Socialist Republics uniting the whole of mankind under the hegemony of the international proletariat organized as a state."
There are 3 forms of government competing for world dominance:
1. Secular/Atheist/Communist model where HUMAN rulers decide your "rights & freedoms" with NO guarantee because what man gives man can take away. Our founders call this "TYRANNY of men."
2. Sharia: The Quron is your constitution and HUMANS rule over you.
3. Judeo-Christian (USA) model: GOD is our sole granter of rights & liberties, power comes from GOD to us individually, we are sovereign and the government is our servant.
There is a practical LEGAL reason why God (who is the sole legal granter of our rights and liberties) is acknowledged in all 50 U.S. state constitutions.
It is UN-American to trust in man.
The minute we'd allow the communists us to pluck our rights & liberties out of God's hand, and have them placed into the hands of men, they automatically CEASE to be unalienable i,e no longer guaranteed.
Our model of Government is why America is EXCEPTIONAL.
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not on the power of government...[but] upon the capacity of each and every one of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."
"RELIGION, MORALITY and KNOWLEDGE are NECESSARY to GOOD GOVERNMENT, the PRESERVATION OF LIBERTY, and the happiness of mankind."
-- United States Supreme Court, 1892
"RELIGION must be considered as the FOUNDATION on which THE WHOLE STRUCTURE RESTS. In this age there can be no substitute for CHRISTIANITY; the great conservative element on which WE MUST RELY for THE PURITY and PERMANENCE of free institutions."
"We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."
—Nikita Khrushchev (on the demise of America)
"We will bury your grand-children without firing a shot."
--Khrushchev (on turning the West communist from within)
"I am for SOCIALISM, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself...I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. COMMUNISM is the goal."
“My object in life is to dethrone God and destroy Capitalism. We are ruthless and ask no quarter from you. When our turn comes we shall not disguise our terrorism. The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to Socialism.”
“Now ALL ACTS OF LEGISLATURE apparently contrary to natural right and justice, ARE, IN OUR LAWS, and must be in the nature of things, considered as VOID. The laws of nature are THE LAWS OF GOD; whose authority can be superseded by NO power on earth. A LEGISLATURE must NOT obstruct our obedience to Him from whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions which contradict His [God’s] laws, we are in conscience bound to disobey.”
did christ say he is the only son of god? aren't we all children of god? what makes christianity a more credible religion than any other religion? Are any religions right? Why do science and religion clash? Do the BOTH have major flaws? Politics: Can either side have all the right answers? Why does faith have to be blind?
@BlueFireWitch Remember when He didn't stone the woman who was caught in adultery? The Law said to stone such a woman; but Jesus came to show MERCY, and He became a RANSOM.
Christ fulfilled the Law - He fulfilled the prophecies in the Law and Prophets.
Apostle Paul says the Laws pointed to Christ.
Isaiah says "lest they turn and understand with their heart". Apparently, science recently found out that the heart has a brain of its own - separate - and it communicates thru the frontal lobe.
@1156511 Time of trouble? Ahh, more Christian mythos. I am a Neo-Hellenist. Despite this video speaking about your mythological character, I don't actually believe in Jesus, nor do I think he was the son of any god. Nor do I think that his birth or supposed resurrection has any importance or impact on my life. I am a Neo-Hellenist. Our saviors are much older, your stories mimic ours. It's like Coke Classic vs New Coke. Coke Classic hands down.
Well, that is relative. To YOU it is not an abomination; however, to GOD, those are HIS FEELINGS. It doesn't matter what you feel about it. He FEELS it is. In His land, where His Laws were known, He would not have a witch since they pray to other gods (and He knows that He is the only God). Basically, He is addressing "anything that flies". About stoning - God sent Jesus to save all of us, or we should all be stoned for breaking the 1st command -- to love Him with all our spirit soul and body.
Actually, in the Laws of Moses, they are told the scientifically sound advice not to eat pork (among other things), nor bottom-feeders. They are also told to work the land 6 years and then let "her" rest. In Job, it talks about many things that science is only recently finding out are true - such as the "floodgates of the deep"... I saw a documentary that came out some years ago that "happened" upon a strange: sight: a "shore" at the bottom of the ocean to another "body" of water. Delusion?
@1156511 Homosexuals are an abomination and stoning witches=not scientifically sound. Women being unclean during their time of the month=not scientifically sound. Calling bats birds=not scientifically sound.
Okay, then... the coming together of the sperm and the egg ("and the two shall become one flesh") is comparable to a seed that is put in fertile soil, and watered... if the right conditions continue (if it is well-taken care of), it will become a tree; the way to prevent a tree from forming out of it would be to dig it up and tear it to peices - this is comparable to digging into the uterus, and tearing out/destroying WHAT WILL BE A HUMAN. In either case, you destroyed something substantive.
@1156511 We all know that they weren't talking about sperm and egg in that metaphor. The science behind it was unknown at the time. Ok, so is taking a seed out of the ground the same as chopping down a tree? Absolutely not. Because it's not a tree until it takes on the characteristics of a tree, before that it's just a seedling.
@BlueFireWitch When you say "we"... I don't believe like you. I believe God knows all; therefore we TRUST HIM - science is humans finding out what is true on their own: trusting God is like a bridge between "not knowing" and "knowing" without science - like a father gives knowledge to his child.
Without seedlings, there would be no trees. Trees are nothing but grown-up seedlings. Human beings are nothing but "grown-up first-trimester babies". The first-trimester baby is the establishment.
@115651 So if you want to believe something that's obviously not true, then fine. But it's obviously not true because the ancient Jews didn't know about those scientific truths, if they did, they would have wrote about them. Also, ask any Biblical scholar and they'll tell you they weren't speaking of sperm and egg. They didn't know that eggs inside women existed. Didn't and there's no proof that they did. So to believe that is absolute delusion.
@1156511 Actually, they are only cells before joining. What I mean is that the cluster of cells doesn't take on the characteristics of human life until the second trimester. However, I would revise that to say that there is no human characteristics before 8 weeks.
But aren't even Leonardo DaVinci's unfinished/unformed works of art considered precious 'works of art'? They are still very valued... in the same way, even though the baby doesn't appear to have what WE CONSIDER to be ''human'' characteristics... do you get where I'm coming from? What enables the baby to come to be? The coming together of the sperm and egg... like Leonardo's putting ideas to paper enables a completed painting... do you agree, or no?
@1156511 That's like comparing apples to oranges. A work of art is a figurative term, not a scientific term. The argument is emotional and not based on rational thought.
@1156511 Just what I said, it's not based on rational thought, just the notion that somehow you can compare a human to a painting or rhetorical phrase. The decidedly scientific notion of what is human life, versus the decidedly rhetorical notion of what constitutes a "work of art." The two, as I said, cannot be compared because they come from two different schools of thought. They cannot be adequately compared and the thought that they can, only constitutes an emotional connection.
I saw a a bumper sticker that said "Jesus is a Liberal," and literally almost threw up. Jesus does not believe in killing defenseless babies in the womb, homosexuals doing impure sexual acts that are not natural, and he would never allow evil terrorists back into a country that they want to blow up and kill as many people as possible.
Christ's opinion is absolute, so is Christ's opinion liberal when He says not to be partial to the poor but to judge truthfully? Is Christ's opinion conservative when He says to forsake money? What exactly is Christ's opinion? It's neither liberal nor conservative...but it is absolute!
For the perspective of a theologian who has founded the "Liberals Like Christ" movement, Google those words and look for his pages on "Christlike" to see how liberal Jesus was. Also Google his "JesusnoRepublican" page to see how UNChristian the Republican Party is. His "FamilyValuesParty" page shows how much more like Jesus and his teaching the liberal Democrats are IN FACT than are the conservative Republicans (despite all the BS talk of the GOPers.
In the House divided parable Jesus makes it pretty plain that politics and nations are false gods are worldly or of Satan, and so Jesus cannot possibly be liberal or conservative, but as God said: "I AM".
@MrIncomeProperty Then you'd be wrong. I work full time and I have a college degree. I guess you're the one who needs to open your eyes and not stereotype people.
@BlueFireWitch how did i stereotype you? you are a self-proclaimed socialist. i am a capitalist so that makes you my enemy economically. why should i work and give 80% of my fruits to you and others that decide not to work. obama is a socialist rat too. get your own damn rescources
@MrIncomeProperty How did you stereotype me? Well let's start by assuming that all socialists are lazy. I think you misunderstand completely what socialism is. I advocate social programs and yes, higher taxes for the wealthiest, because the wealthy profit off the poor so why shouldn't they support the poor with their taxes. I am not suggesting that the poor shouldn't work, but that the poor are underpaid for their production value. Also, Obama is no socialist. Do your research.
@BlueFireWitch Socialism doesnt work anyways. it encourgages the poor not to work. Then the rich quit making money and stop paying taxes. Obama is a socialist.
@MrIncomeProperty Socialism does work. It's capitolism that only supports success for the rich while leaving the majority of people as slaves to the rich. Obama is not a socialist. He's a moderate democrat. There's no evidence that he's a socialist. Implementing a social program does not make one a socialist. He very much supports a capitolist system of government. However, there's no evidence in countries with more social programs that they are in any way lazy.
@MrIncomeProperty Greece's problem was not their social programs, it's their lack of gross domestic product and corrupt government. As for other EU countries, most of them bounced back from economic distress before we did.
@BlueFireWitch Maybe they didnt have enough GDP to support the socialist welfare state? Socialism will not work in america. We need to end entitlement programs that support the lazy, i do agree with SS and disability tho. We can not continue this habit of paying people to do nothing. It is unsustainable!!! I think you are disillusioned to the facts of economic growth.
@MrIncomeProperty Their GDP was bad either way, I don't think it was just their social programs. If that was it, we'd see more problems with other more socialist countries.
Where do we pay people to do nothing? Socialism isn't about something for nothing. It's about supporting the workers and protecting them from oppression. In a capitolist society, the rich always try to screw the poor. Right now we're letting them by allowing companies to set wages below production values.
@BlueFireWitch If we dont compete with the global economy we starve. if we become a socialist state we starve. Alot of corporations are already shipping jobs out of this country because we are not very competetive. We have to be able to compete fairly and socialism is the opposite of that!
@MrIncomeProperty We're not competing with the global economy now. We produce nothing. In a socialist system, we produce more and consume more of our own goods. ALso, there are plenty of socialist states that compete in the global market.
@BlueFireWitch name one socialist state that is successful longterm. we have the largest GDP in the world. 5 times greater than even China, so yeah we produce stuff
@MrIncomeProperty There are alot of economies, for example in Europe, that implement a blend of socialism and capitalism that are doing way better than that US is right now. Despite the GDP, we have to borrow to keep that up. What matters more than the GDP is how many people prosper from it. Right now in the US, way too much of the GDP is kept at the top. Too much greed. But if you look at France, Germany, etc. they are all doing better than us.
@BlueFireWitch its obviously pointless to argue with you. my closing statement is that none of those countries are socialist, they are all capitalist. socialism does not work!!!!!!!! all it does is enslave the poor and ensure they never have a chance to rise through thr ranks to become wealthy even if they could, and it empowers the lazy and stupid by giving them "their fair share" which in reality is a mcdonalds job or welfare. In america hard work and smart risk taking are rewarded by cash
@MrIncomeProperty Wait a second, weren't we just arguing a few posts up about how the countries in Europe were too socialist? Of course they are capitolist, but they are SOCIAL CAPITOLIST countries. In other words, when the workers are supported by the government, you get maximum return. I am not against all manner of free enterprise, but responsible free enterprise.
@MrIncomeProperty Am I asking you to pay my bills? No. What I advocate for is social programs. We already have many of these. We pay for public schools to educate the youth and no one complains about it because we know that if we didn't have them, crime rates would rise and the definition between rich and poor would widen. We should have public healthcare because it will lessen disease rates, infant mortality and increase longevity. It's not about paying bills for others, but practicality.
@BlueFireWitch yes when you ask me to provide healthcare for a bunch of non nonworking leeches you are in fact asking me to pay other peoples bills!!!!!
@MrIncomeProperty Schoolkids don't work. Why are you not bitching about paying for their school? Or about paying for the fire department? Should we limit that to people who work?
@BlueFireWitch oh come on those are necessary programs that benefit me directly. thats why. how the heck does it benefit me to turn over 1/5 of the economy to the government and pay for lazy people to have healthcare that they should damn well get off their lazy ass and go earn themselves. you just bring up the same talking points over and over and it is useless to argue because you will never admit that you really jsut want to take something from someone else for yourself. move to the EU!!!
@MrIncomeProperty You characterize those people as lazy, but as I've already explained that's not the case. Just because someone doesn't have or can't afford healthcare doesn't mean their lazy. I work very hard for a living and I don't have it. Secondly, as I explained, it does benefit everyone because it raises the life expectancy, lowers disease rates and infant mortality.
@BlueFireWitch well if you do work that hard then you can in fact afford it, you just choose to spend your hard earned money on things you deem more important. so send me the bill right? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
@MrIncomeProperty You obviously didn't read the part about my pre-existing conditions. And I work very hard, but in this country, we have a bad economy, I can't afford to lose my job where I should be making more for what I do to find another one. They simply don't exist. You live in a fantasy world if you think that hard work automatically means you make lots of money. its a fact that the hardest working people make the least.
wanting the license to liquidate an inconvenient pregnancy. envy of anyone who is more successful, disdain or hatred of white people, the US or western civilization, disdain of economic freedom and disdain of christianity are among the motivations of those who label themselves liberal or progressive, while a classical liberal is anti-dogmatic. one really has to distort or cherry pick the gospels in order to fit Jesus into any rendering of the word liberal. Jesus is above political labels.
Jesus was neither liberal or conservative because he did not believe in politics and he said that politics only divides the people rather than unites them. To make any biased claim that Jesus was liberal or conservative is absolutely arrogance and I think offensive. All you people keep bickering about this stupid ass left vs right paradigm which is an out right lie. Get it straight people, Jesus was above politics and even spoke against different church denominations.
@LordoftheKaty It doesn't matter if you believe in it, I'm talking about the ideas that he believed in, which were very progressive. Also, Jesus had a politic title and encouraged people to pay their taxes. He wasn't above it, he was in the thick of it.
@BlueFireWitch But he did not encourage the Roman Empire to steal money through taxes from the people to the point of poverty which is how people lived back then. However, Jesus was against homosexuality and was strict in that you have to except him and God in order to go to heaven.
@LordoftheKaty No, he didnt' encourage theft, but then that's not the point is it? I mean, no one is being stolen from to the point of poverty in this country. As for Jesus, he never mentioned homosexuality. NEVER. He mentioned Saddom and Gammorah, but scholars disagree as to the cause of that disaster. Really, it's about rape, not homosexuality. Neither Liberal nor Conservative holds a specific religious view, so your last sentence is completely off point.
@BlueFireWitch Nevertheless, that is what God, who is Jesus' father says is wrong. Thus Jesus taught from what God wants us to do so then Jesus would be against the acts. Does he hate them, no he does not, as he said, "he who is without sin cast the first stone." Nevertheless, I really don't think this argument is helping anyone concerning if Jesus was a liberal or conservative. Let's be honest, is it really helping anyone? No it is not, in fact, the question itself is irrelevant to Jesus.
@LordoftheKaty Actually, there's no proof that God said that. SInce you can't prove your Bible is actually connected with any supreme deity and Jesus didn't say it. This video was a response to another video claiming that liberals were irreleglious.
@BlueFireWitch Actually you are wrong. Romans 1:26-27 “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet." So God does say it is wrong.
@LordoftheKaty Being against nature is different as we've proven that homosexuality exists within nature. We then have one of 4 logical choices. #1 Either the Bibile is wrong. #2. God is wrong. #3. You're God doesn't exist and the Bible was written by men. #4. This passage is not talking about homosexuality. You choose.
@BlueFireWitch The passage is talking about homosexuality, also, why do you think Sodom and Gamor were destroyed? Because of extreme homosexuality and men raping each other. Could the Bible be wrong? And yes it was written by man, but the scriptures come from what God taught us how to be and live. Also, if you deny the word of God and claim he does not exist, then why have the argument of whether Jesus was liberal or conservative? Because there you are renouncing them.
@LordoftheKaty Actually, there's no evidence to suggest that it was destroyed because of homosexuality. It was destroyed because of violent gangs. You see rape is an act of dominance, not an act of sexual attraction. Ask any sex therapist.
I believe Jesus existed, I just don't believe in your God. But there was probably a guy named Jesus who lived back then.
@BlueFireWitch Well there is one thing which I don't understand and would like you to explain. If you believe in Jesus and except his divinity, then how can you not believe in God, since he in fact was the son of God?
@BlueFireWitch I will hand this to you, it is true that there is no NT record of where Jesus explicitly stated that homosexuality is wrong, but He did in fact condemn the behavior. He did say, And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ “and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?’” (Matt. 19:4.)
@LordoftheKaty That doesn't say that all men shall do that. After all, Jesus didn't marry did he? Heterosexual relationships aren't for everyone. Jesus proved that.
@LordoftheKaty No, but he wasn't in a heterosexual relationship. But, then I wouldn't be the first to suggest that he was. Some say that there are gospels that were thrown out of the Bible because they contained homoerotic stories of Jesus and John.
@BlueFireWitch And 1 Corinthians 6:9, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.” So God does forbid it. Nevertheless in his eyes each sin is equal to any other, so does that make us better, no, it just means we are imperfect, and that is why Jesus died for our sins.
If Jesus Christ did exist, he certainly proposed maverick, new ideas, and went against the status quo at the time. He preached love and compassion. He ideas were drastic relative to the ideas in the world of Rome. By definition, he was a liberal.
Not only do you have no idea what you are talking about (when it comes to faith, and being a Christian), but you confuse wanting to defend yourself and being as you put it "pro-war". I can't speak for all Republican Christians, however Ican speak for myself being one. Jesus said he was not there to abolish his Fathers word but to fulfill it. What holds true in the old testament holds true in the new. I honestly get the impression that you have never even met a Rep. Christian.
on the idea of abortion and being wiccan i and that i believe in reincarnation, i feel that when a baby is in the whom it is the one who is deciding to terminate the pregnancy not the mother my theroy is that the baby is still in a higher being state and knows to some extent what will happen in his or her up coming life and if it is not what they wish to happen the end the pregnancy and start over
Well I don't think early termination of pregnancy is a big deal, first 8 wks, or so. But after there's a significant amount of brain activity, I believe it's a person. I don't think the baby chooses anything because it's something being done to it, not something that happens on it's own.
Now we are spliting hairs when we discuss when life begins, the point is someone is obviously behaving in a manner that leads them to a harmful situation. It's not just the baby that's the victim in an abortion, it also has long term physical and mental repercussions. When you mentioned in your vid that Republicans/Christians were pro-capital punishment, you were for the most part wrong, there is a huge rift between conservatives when it comes to that issue. Also remember that a period only ends
a sentence, it doesn't end a book. When Jesus spoke of the rich man, saying how a camel could sooner pass throug the eye of a needle, the point was that if God in the flesh asked you tou part with your money, and you couldn't, then you chose to serv another master besides him, but several times in the bible did person following God's word become blessed with wealth, family and health. Christians base their ideas off of the whole book, not 1 sentence in it.
I like Romans 2. After the verses usually used to bash gay people with (like the "basher" is less sinfull than the "bashee")... Paul says, "You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.....Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?"Guess they forgot?
Christians who do anything other than rebuke the sin, and not the sinner are hypocrites, this is true, but if someone claims to be Christian, and routinely has sex with someone of their own gender, and commits murder is living in sin. No true Christian ever forgot, some who claimed to be Christian never were.
You claimed that the word "homosexual" did not exist in biblical times. I gave you a Greek word in the New Testament for "homosexual." And it doesn't matter whether Jesus spoke about homosexuality or not. All Scripture is inspired, and Paul was chosen to be an Apostle by Christ after His ascension [Acts 9]. Also, Jesus affirmed the Old Testament, and the O.T. condemns homosexuality. Jesus also reiterated the biblical teaching of marriage between man and woman, the order of creation.
It's true, the word homosexual didn't exist in Biblical times. Also, It's true that Jesus never spoke of it. Actually, it does matter that Jesus never spoke of it. If it mattered that much to the living God you'd think that he'd mention it. But actually, Jesus was more concerned about Rich men getting to heaven. Shows his priorities. Check the title of the video.
Of course Jesus spoke against homosexuality in that He only speaks of legitimate marriage as being between a man and a woman (not a man and a man or a woman with a woman).
That's not speaking against homosexuality, at all. It's simply suggesting that marriage is for making children, which it was, back then. Married couples were expected to have kids.
Yes, and it is male and femal that produce kids isn't it? Not female and female or male and male. Even if you say same sex relationships can have children now it still requires the input of the opposite sex. Face it God's standard is male and female. If it wasn't you may not even have existed.
Also, ever noticed how even many gay couples tend to have one who acts male and the other female? Even they know the norm in their hearts.
What does Male and Female have to do with love? Seriously, are you so naive that you believe that all Homosexual relationships are fake? Just because a relationship doesn't produce children, doesn't mean it's not love.
Fake in that these realtionships often mimick hetrosexual relationships. In many instances one takes the male role and another the female. And left to their own devices such relationships will never produce offspring. In fact the human race would cease to be. Isn't witchcraft about fertility too?
By the way from what I have observed the majority of homosexual relationships appear to be riddled with promiscuity. You might not like to hear that but it's the truth and I think you would have to admit as such if you were being brutally honest.
Your observation is not based on fact. Yes, there is promescuity in the homosexual community, but there are also committed relationships. There is also a lot of promiscuity in heterosexual relationships. So your point is irrelevant. Also, one of the contributing factors to promiscuous contact is usually that a person doesn't feel accepted by their parents or society, Perhaps it's the bigots like you who cause it.
When hetrosexuals get together it doesn't turn into an orgy, but when homosexuals get together in a gay club what tends to be the main focus of the night?
You want facts? Here's one you ignored: Men and menand women and women do not fit together sexually and cannot reproduce. Face it homesxuality makes an utter mockery of all the fertility rights of your pagan kin." Bigot"? Wonderd how long it would take before you fired insults at me. If you can't refute you hoot.
"{When hetrosexuals get together it doesn't turn into an orgy" You obviously lead a boring life if you don't believe heterosexuals don't have orgies. I've been to gay clubs, probably more than you. There is no orgy. Just because a couple can't reproduce doesn't mean they can't love each other. How's that for a fact.
You see how you "liberals", (meaning open minded) are? You start calling someone names like "bigot" simplybecause they disagree with you. If you didn't want people disagreeing with you, then why post such a sensative topic for possibly millions to see? If you stick to the facts, you might not have to descend into name calling, and other childish remarks. As a matter of fact it might negate them entirely.
@HopeForPeaceNow - Jesus said: 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?' Notice this is speaking about a man and wife and therfore, by implication, NOT man and man. Jesus was a Jew who believed the OT prohabitions against homosexual practices.
The concept of homosexual people having permenant partners was not an issue to address in 0030. Another Truth: "Why look at the log in your brothers eye?". Would you want your brother to have the power to forbid you to read a Bible? Forbid gathering? Why should you have the power to dictate someone else's life? Their lives belong to God, not you. You, therefore have no excuse, you who judge your brother, for you yourselves do the same thing. Do you show contempt for His Kindness
also, when these guys talk about religion & govt not mixing, who do they think the govt is? some foreign entity? no, it's we the ppl. so having govt make sure we get universal healthcare; that ppl arent starving; that ppl get some kind of foundation to keep us out of poverty; etc. isnt something so far fetched from jesus' teachings. 'give unto caesar' speech was jesus' answer as to whether ppl should pay taxes or not- asked by a sabatouer who wanted to trick jesus into making an anti-govt speech
i think the r/w xtians are pick-&-choose religionists. jesus said there's a new convenant to follow, his. that's why he didnt advocate killing your kid if he/she talks back to you & other such things in the old convenant. also, jesus didnt ban a whole lot of things. why? did jesus just forget to do so, cuz he was absent-minded? no. it's cuz he was a very tolerant guy & his whole concern was to take care & help ppl rather than tearing them down & keeping them down.
Actually, if you look, there are several quotes in the Bible in which Jesus advocates speration of church and state. Therefore, religion and politics didn't mix well then, they don't now. It's like mixing thermite and liquid nitrogen. It does not work out well for either party involved.
Liberal is not a political affiliation. It basically means that you belive that people and society should have a more liberal outlook and equal rights. It is possible for someone to be socially liberal and fisically conservative. (Libertarians.)
I think it is a tad silly to assume someones political leaning in a time when politics where compeletly different. Really the only two kinds of political climates that existed were Imperialism and Theocracy. Democracy did not have a big following really since the Greeks until the Romans eventually tried it out, but at the time of Jesus it would be hard to call Rome a democracy because Ceaser had complete power at the time.
It doesn't change the premise of the video that liberals are more "Christlike" than republicans. So regardless of the climate back then, if we compare him to the political climate today, he's a liberal.
I think it silly to made generalzations like that. I have known liberals who were the biggest assholes I have ever had the displeasure of meeting, and rebublicans who's actions I would define as "Christlike". (And vice-versa.) Is it really needed to catogorize people like that and instead look at the individual?
This video is great for spotting out fallacies. I can't possibly refute all fallacies being made here, but almost all--if not all I really didn't pay that much attention, just couldn't--her reasoning makes no logical arguments to draw her conclusions, which makes most if not all of her declarations mere opinions.
Is she entitled to have her opinion? Yes. Are we entitled to reject it on logical grounds? Certainly. The first fallacy is whether or not Jesus said anything, it begs the question.
Yeah I'm a socialist myself. People only find out who they really are via their social relationships, not authority or somebody deciding their lives for them.
No, it's "I'm the authority, and you are not" popping up, again! Once again, you have made my point for me! Thank you, Christian Blue Fire Witch! Oh, in case you did not know it folks, yes, Blue Fire Witch has been a closet Christian all this time! Careful, there's wolves about!
I would like to apoligize. I have made an error in trying to discuss the bible as if it were a text book. I am very sorry if I have given anyone the wrong ideas that the bible is anything less than the word of god. God loves you whether you like it not.
God is love. The point is not whether you want him to love you ( he loves you anyway) but whether you choose to accept his love. It isn't that men are deemed better or greater than women as men and women are seen as two parts of a whole. "Yin and Yang". The man actually having the greater responsibility to lay down his life for his wife.
if God loves me anyway, then he wouldn't send me to hell for not choosing and practicing christianity. and christian people wouldn't be hasseling me about my faith and trying to tell me that im gonna burn in hell because im not christian. God loves me anyway; tell that to your friends who seem to think otherwise
Because if he allowed you to go into Heaven, then wouldn't that be a flaw against his perfect law? You seem to think that God should change his laws and beliefs to suit you, not the other way around. Which ones the God in this again?
In conclution. Jesus is a non-conformist, homosexuality is not a moral issue but a disability, and an unborn fetus whether or not anyone feels it deservs to live is alive and can feel.
However, as the limbic system also governs all aspects of emotionality, in consequence, violence, mental illness, alcoholism, drug abuse, suicide, and other abnormalities are also common features of the "homosexual experience" (.both male and female homosexuals) suffer from an inordinant degree of pathology including bizarre sexual pathologies and propensities for engaging in bizarre and harmful sex acts
(3)Exposure of the mother to severe emotional stress. Stress hormones carried in the mother's blood may cross the placenta and interfere with testosterone production in the baby. (4)In some circumstances the immune system may react against the biochemicals necessary for sexual differentiation, identifying them as foreign substances and attacking with antibodies that destroy them. Ultimately this can also reverse sex orientation.
homosexuality is created by 5 different prosedures.(1)Direct alteration of hormones (by injection or castration) during foetal development. (2)Using drugs to block or augment the effects of androgens. The list of drugs which may at least partially divert masculinization of the brain include Depo-Provera, cyproterone acetate, barbiturates, diazepam and marijuana.
Romans 12:2 "Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind".
Homosexuality has been scientifically proven to be a physical brain disorder directly related to tryner syndrome and convicted repeat sex offenders.
An unborn fetus has a fully developed nervous system 3 weeks after conception and can feel everything being done to it. Abortion is also very harmful to a woman's body and can complicate future pregnancies.
Conservative Christians are the modern Pharisees.
Primus2X 4 weeks ago
Communist Vladimir Lenin wrote:
“A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could”
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
@Mr88playmaker There are plenty of spiritual socialists. So obviously this communist (which is different than a socialist) would be wrong.
BlueFireWitch 7 months ago
"Religion is the basis and Foundation of Government."
--James Madison (Father of the U.S. Constitution)
"America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."
--Josef Stalin (Communist dictator)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
"World dictatorship can be established only when the victory of Socialism has been achieved in certain countries or groups of countries … [and] when these federation of republics have finally grown into a world union of Soviet Socialist Republics uniting the whole of mankind under the hegemony of the international proletariat organized as a state."
--Josef Stalin (Communist dictator)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
There are 3 forms of government competing for world dominance:
1. Secular/Atheist/Communist model where HUMAN rulers decide your "rights & freedoms" with NO guarantee because what man gives man can take away. Our founders call this "TYRANNY of men."
2. Sharia: The Quron is your constitution and HUMANS rule over you.
3. Judeo-Christian (USA) model: GOD is our sole granter of rights & liberties, power comes from GOD to us individually, we are sovereign and the government is our servant.
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
There is a practical LEGAL reason why God (who is the sole legal granter of our rights and liberties) is acknowledged in all 50 U.S. state constitutions.
It is UN-American to trust in man.
The minute we'd allow the communists us to pluck our rights & liberties out of God's hand, and have them placed into the hands of men, they automatically CEASE to be unalienable i,e no longer guaranteed.
Our model of Government is why America is EXCEPTIONAL.
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not on the power of government...[but] upon the capacity of each and every one of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."
--James Madison (Father of the U.S. Constitution)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
"RELIGION, MORALITY and KNOWLEDGE are NECESSARY to GOOD GOVERNMENT, the PRESERVATION OF LIBERTY, and the happiness of mankind."
-- United States Supreme Court, 1892
"RELIGION must be considered as the FOUNDATION on which THE WHOLE STRUCTURE RESTS. In this age there can be no substitute for CHRISTIANITY; the great conservative element on which WE MUST RELY for THE PURITY and PERMANENCE of free institutions."
-- House Judiciary Committee, 1854
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
"We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."
—Nikita Khrushchev (on the demise of America)
"We will bury your grand-children without firing a shot."
--Khrushchev (on turning the West communist from within)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
"I am for SOCIALISM, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself...I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. COMMUNISM is the goal."
- Roger Noah Baldwin (Founder of the ACLU)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
"The Bible is the cornerstone of liberty."
--Thomas Jefferson
“My object in life is to dethrone God and destroy Capitalism. We are ruthless and ask no quarter from you. When our turn comes we shall not disguise our terrorism. The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to Socialism.”
— Karl Marx (Father of Communism, atheist)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
:Man will be ruled either by God or by tyrants."
--Ben Franklin
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
“Now ALL ACTS OF LEGISLATURE apparently contrary to natural right and justice, ARE, IN OUR LAWS, and must be in the nature of things, considered as VOID. The laws of nature are THE LAWS OF GOD; whose authority can be superseded by NO power on earth. A LEGISLATURE must NOT obstruct our obedience to Him from whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions which contradict His [God’s] laws, we are in conscience bound to disobey.”
--George Mason (Father of the Bill of Rights)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
“Give me your four year olds, and in a generation I will build a Socialist state. Destroy the family, you destroy the country.”
— Vladimir Lenin (Communist Dictator)
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
@Mr88playmaker Any political scientist will tell you there's a difference.
BlueFireWitch 6 months ago
@Mr88playmaker capatalisim destroys family and the state for the benefit of big business men like the adultere newt gingridge
subbtopp 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
--Jesus Christ
"If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.(meaning accursed).
--The Holy Bible 1Cor.16:22
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
Karl Marx, the father of communism, said, “Communism begins from the outset with atheism.”
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
Comment removed
Mr88playmaker 7 months ago
I had a history teacher once that thought Jesus was a liberal. I am a Christian and the way my teacher described it made sense.
MoJacques 7 months ago
Jesus would be liberal. Long hair, hangs out with the porr.
IHABC8 8 months ago
Jesus said that if you don't believe in Him you are going to hell. He was not a liberal.
howser12 9 months ago
@howser12 That has nothing to do with his political views.
BlueFireWitch 9 months ago
@howser12 so you say doesnt mean its true
subbtopp 1 month ago
did christ say he is the only son of god? aren't we all children of god? what makes christianity a more credible religion than any other religion? Are any religions right? Why do science and religion clash? Do the BOTH have major flaws? Politics: Can either side have all the right answers? Why does faith have to be blind?
Bullpuma 10 months ago
Secondly, all of those laws are types and shadows of Christ. They have spiritual connotations for us today.
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 Christ said that he fulfilled the old laws.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
@BlueFireWitch Remember when He didn't stone the woman who was caught in adultery? The Law said to stone such a woman; but Jesus came to show MERCY, and He became a RANSOM.
Christ fulfilled the Law - He fulfilled the prophecies in the Law and Prophets.
Apostle Paul says the Laws pointed to Christ.
Isaiah says "lest they turn and understand with their heart". Apparently, science recently found out that the heart has a brain of its own - separate - and it communicates thru the frontal lobe.
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 that doesn't make the laws scientific, it makes them mythological.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
@BlueFireWitch Well, make your decision: the time of trouble is here.
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 Time of trouble? Ahh, more Christian mythos. I am a Neo-Hellenist. Despite this video speaking about your mythological character, I don't actually believe in Jesus, nor do I think he was the son of any god. Nor do I think that his birth or supposed resurrection has any importance or impact on my life. I am a Neo-Hellenist. Our saviors are much older, your stories mimic ours. It's like Coke Classic vs New Coke. Coke Classic hands down.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
Well, that is relative. To YOU it is not an abomination; however, to GOD, those are HIS FEELINGS. It doesn't matter what you feel about it. He FEELS it is. In His land, where His Laws were known, He would not have a witch since they pray to other gods (and He knows that He is the only God). Basically, He is addressing "anything that flies". About stoning - God sent Jesus to save all of us, or we should all be stoned for breaking the 1st command -- to love Him with all our spirit soul and body.
1156511 11 months ago
Actually, in the Laws of Moses, they are told the scientifically sound advice not to eat pork (among other things), nor bottom-feeders. They are also told to work the land 6 years and then let "her" rest. In Job, it talks about many things that science is only recently finding out are true - such as the "floodgates of the deep"... I saw a documentary that came out some years ago that "happened" upon a strange: sight: a "shore" at the bottom of the ocean to another "body" of water. Delusion?
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 Homosexuals are an abomination and stoning witches=not scientifically sound. Women being unclean during their time of the month=not scientifically sound. Calling bats birds=not scientifically sound.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
Okay, then... the coming together of the sperm and the egg ("and the two shall become one flesh") is comparable to a seed that is put in fertile soil, and watered... if the right conditions continue (if it is well-taken care of), it will become a tree; the way to prevent a tree from forming out of it would be to dig it up and tear it to peices - this is comparable to digging into the uterus, and tearing out/destroying WHAT WILL BE A HUMAN. In either case, you destroyed something substantive.
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 We all know that they weren't talking about sperm and egg in that metaphor. The science behind it was unknown at the time. Ok, so is taking a seed out of the ground the same as chopping down a tree? Absolutely not. Because it's not a tree until it takes on the characteristics of a tree, before that it's just a seedling.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
@BlueFireWitch When you say "we"... I don't believe like you. I believe God knows all; therefore we TRUST HIM - science is humans finding out what is true on their own: trusting God is like a bridge between "not knowing" and "knowing" without science - like a father gives knowledge to his child.
Without seedlings, there would be no trees. Trees are nothing but grown-up seedlings. Human beings are nothing but "grown-up first-trimester babies". The first-trimester baby is the establishment.
1156511 11 months ago
@115651 So if you want to believe something that's obviously not true, then fine. But it's obviously not true because the ancient Jews didn't know about those scientific truths, if they did, they would have wrote about them. Also, ask any Biblical scholar and they'll tell you they weren't speaking of sperm and egg. They didn't know that eggs inside women existed. Didn't and there's no proof that they did. So to believe that is absolute delusion.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
What do you mean "life begins in the second trimester"? Both the sperm and egg are alive individually before they ever are made one flesh.
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 Actually, they are only cells before joining. What I mean is that the cluster of cells doesn't take on the characteristics of human life until the second trimester. However, I would revise that to say that there is no human characteristics before 8 weeks.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
But aren't even Leonardo DaVinci's unfinished/unformed works of art considered precious 'works of art'? They are still very valued... in the same way, even though the baby doesn't appear to have what WE CONSIDER to be ''human'' characteristics... do you get where I'm coming from? What enables the baby to come to be? The coming together of the sperm and egg... like Leonardo's putting ideas to paper enables a completed painting... do you agree, or no?
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 That's like comparing apples to oranges. A work of art is a figurative term, not a scientific term. The argument is emotional and not based on rational thought.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
@BlueFireWitch What do you mean the argument is emotional?
1156511 11 months ago
@1156511 Just what I said, it's not based on rational thought, just the notion that somehow you can compare a human to a painting or rhetorical phrase. The decidedly scientific notion of what is human life, versus the decidedly rhetorical notion of what constitutes a "work of art." The two, as I said, cannot be compared because they come from two different schools of thought. They cannot be adequately compared and the thought that they can, only constitutes an emotional connection.
BlueFireWitch 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I saw a a bumper sticker that said "Jesus is a Liberal," and literally almost threw up. Jesus does not believe in killing defenseless babies in the womb, homosexuals doing impure sexual acts that are not natural, and he would never allow evil terrorists back into a country that they want to blow up and kill as many people as possible.
Jakepod34 1 year ago
Christ's opinion is absolute, so is Christ's opinion liberal when He says not to be partial to the poor but to judge truthfully? Is Christ's opinion conservative when He says to forsake money? What exactly is Christ's opinion? It's neither liberal nor conservative...but it is absolute!
IDNeon 1 year ago
@IDNeon There is no such thing as an absolute opinion.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
For the perspective of a theologian who has founded the "Liberals Like Christ" movement, Google those words and look for his pages on "Christlike" to see how liberal Jesus was. Also Google his "JesusnoRepublican" page to see how UNChristian the Republican Party is. His "FamilyValuesParty" page shows how much more like Jesus and his teaching the liberal Democrats are IN FACT than are the conservative Republicans (despite all the BS talk of the GOPers.
Rayosun4 1 year ago
In the House divided parable Jesus makes it pretty plain that politics and nations are false gods are worldly or of Satan, and so Jesus cannot possibly be liberal or conservative, but as God said: "I AM".
IDNeon 1 year ago
@IDNeon Everyone has an opinion, hence everyone falls under one label or another. Regardless if you are political, you have an opinion.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
1 cor. 6:9. The bible is Gods word. Jesus might of well had said it.
tigersport17 1 year ago
@tigersport17 Jesus didn't say it because there was no Bible then, silly. The original intention of the Bible was not to be inerrant.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
the fact you are socialist makes me believe you are to lazy to work therefore to stupid to understand
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty Then you'd be wrong. I work full time and I have a college degree. I guess you're the one who needs to open your eyes and not stereotype people.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch how did i stereotype you? you are a self-proclaimed socialist. i am a capitalist so that makes you my enemy economically. why should i work and give 80% of my fruits to you and others that decide not to work. obama is a socialist rat too. get your own damn rescources
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty How did you stereotype me? Well let's start by assuming that all socialists are lazy. I think you misunderstand completely what socialism is. I advocate social programs and yes, higher taxes for the wealthiest, because the wealthy profit off the poor so why shouldn't they support the poor with their taxes. I am not suggesting that the poor shouldn't work, but that the poor are underpaid for their production value. Also, Obama is no socialist. Do your research.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch Socialism doesnt work anyways. it encourgages the poor not to work. Then the rich quit making money and stop paying taxes. Obama is a socialist.
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty Socialism does work. It's capitolism that only supports success for the rich while leaving the majority of people as slaves to the rich. Obama is not a socialist. He's a moderate democrat. There's no evidence that he's a socialist. Implementing a social program does not make one a socialist. He very much supports a capitolist system of government. However, there's no evidence in countries with more social programs that they are in any way lazy.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch look at greece and other EU countries with generation of welfare families. is it wirking there?
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty Greece's problem was not their social programs, it's their lack of gross domestic product and corrupt government. As for other EU countries, most of them bounced back from economic distress before we did.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch Maybe they didnt have enough GDP to support the socialist welfare state? Socialism will not work in america. We need to end entitlement programs that support the lazy, i do agree with SS and disability tho. We can not continue this habit of paying people to do nothing. It is unsustainable!!! I think you are disillusioned to the facts of economic growth.
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty Their GDP was bad either way, I don't think it was just their social programs. If that was it, we'd see more problems with other more socialist countries.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
Where do we pay people to do nothing? Socialism isn't about something for nothing. It's about supporting the workers and protecting them from oppression. In a capitolist society, the rich always try to screw the poor. Right now we're letting them by allowing companies to set wages below production values.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch If we dont compete with the global economy we starve. if we become a socialist state we starve. Alot of corporations are already shipping jobs out of this country because we are not very competetive. We have to be able to compete fairly and socialism is the opposite of that!
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty We're not competing with the global economy now. We produce nothing. In a socialist system, we produce more and consume more of our own goods. ALso, there are plenty of socialist states that compete in the global market.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch name one socialist state that is successful longterm. we have the largest GDP in the world. 5 times greater than even China, so yeah we produce stuff
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty There are alot of economies, for example in Europe, that implement a blend of socialism and capitalism that are doing way better than that US is right now. Despite the GDP, we have to borrow to keep that up. What matters more than the GDP is how many people prosper from it. Right now in the US, way too much of the GDP is kept at the top. Too much greed. But if you look at France, Germany, etc. they are all doing better than us.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch its obviously pointless to argue with you. my closing statement is that none of those countries are socialist, they are all capitalist. socialism does not work!!!!!!!! all it does is enslave the poor and ensure they never have a chance to rise through thr ranks to become wealthy even if they could, and it empowers the lazy and stupid by giving them "their fair share" which in reality is a mcdonalds job or welfare. In america hard work and smart risk taking are rewarded by cash
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty Wait a second, weren't we just arguing a few posts up about how the countries in Europe were too socialist? Of course they are capitolist, but they are SOCIAL CAPITOLIST countries. In other words, when the workers are supported by the government, you get maximum return. I am not against all manner of free enterprise, but responsible free enterprise.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch pointless to argue, you are wrong, its that simple
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty If that were true, you'd be able to prove it.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch i blah blah, pay my bills
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty Am I asking you to pay my bills? No. What I advocate for is social programs. We already have many of these. We pay for public schools to educate the youth and no one complains about it because we know that if we didn't have them, crime rates would rise and the definition between rich and poor would widen. We should have public healthcare because it will lessen disease rates, infant mortality and increase longevity. It's not about paying bills for others, but practicality.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch yes when you ask me to provide healthcare for a bunch of non nonworking leeches you are in fact asking me to pay other peoples bills!!!!!
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty Schoolkids don't work. Why are you not bitching about paying for their school? Or about paying for the fire department? Should we limit that to people who work?
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch oh come on those are necessary programs that benefit me directly. thats why. how the heck does it benefit me to turn over 1/5 of the economy to the government and pay for lazy people to have healthcare that they should damn well get off their lazy ass and go earn themselves. you just bring up the same talking points over and over and it is useless to argue because you will never admit that you really jsut want to take something from someone else for yourself. move to the EU!!!
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty You characterize those people as lazy, but as I've already explained that's not the case. Just because someone doesn't have or can't afford healthcare doesn't mean their lazy. I work very hard for a living and I don't have it. Secondly, as I explained, it does benefit everyone because it raises the life expectancy, lowers disease rates and infant mortality.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch well if you do work that hard then you can in fact afford it, you just choose to spend your hard earned money on things you deem more important. so send me the bill right? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty You obviously didn't read the part about my pre-existing conditions. And I work very hard, but in this country, we have a bad economy, I can't afford to lose my job where I should be making more for what I do to find another one. They simply don't exist. You live in a fantasy world if you think that hard work automatically means you make lots of money. its a fact that the hardest working people make the least.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch well i hope you get your insurance even if i have to pay for it. have a good one
MrIncomeProperty 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty I will when the Obamacare plan gets rid of pre-existing conditions. Or if I move to France :)
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@MrIncomeProperty he's far from it, if anything he's centre-right wing
MentalBadger 1 year ago
wanting the license to liquidate an inconvenient pregnancy. envy of anyone who is more successful, disdain or hatred of white people, the US or western civilization, disdain of economic freedom and disdain of christianity are among the motivations of those who label themselves liberal or progressive, while a classical liberal is anti-dogmatic. one really has to distort or cherry pick the gospels in order to fit Jesus into any rendering of the word liberal. Jesus is above political labels.
ellwyn 1 year ago
Jesus was neither liberal or conservative because he did not believe in politics and he said that politics only divides the people rather than unites them. To make any biased claim that Jesus was liberal or conservative is absolutely arrogance and I think offensive. All you people keep bickering about this stupid ass left vs right paradigm which is an out right lie. Get it straight people, Jesus was above politics and even spoke against different church denominations.
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty It doesn't matter if you believe in it, I'm talking about the ideas that he believed in, which were very progressive. Also, Jesus had a politic title and encouraged people to pay their taxes. He wasn't above it, he was in the thick of it.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch But he did not encourage the Roman Empire to steal money through taxes from the people to the point of poverty which is how people lived back then. However, Jesus was against homosexuality and was strict in that you have to except him and God in order to go to heaven.
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty No, he didnt' encourage theft, but then that's not the point is it? I mean, no one is being stolen from to the point of poverty in this country. As for Jesus, he never mentioned homosexuality. NEVER. He mentioned Saddom and Gammorah, but scholars disagree as to the cause of that disaster. Really, it's about rape, not homosexuality. Neither Liberal nor Conservative holds a specific religious view, so your last sentence is completely off point.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch Nevertheless, that is what God, who is Jesus' father says is wrong. Thus Jesus taught from what God wants us to do so then Jesus would be against the acts. Does he hate them, no he does not, as he said, "he who is without sin cast the first stone." Nevertheless, I really don't think this argument is helping anyone concerning if Jesus was a liberal or conservative. Let's be honest, is it really helping anyone? No it is not, in fact, the question itself is irrelevant to Jesus.
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty Actually, there's no proof that God said that. SInce you can't prove your Bible is actually connected with any supreme deity and Jesus didn't say it. This video was a response to another video claiming that liberals were irreleglious.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch Actually you are wrong. Romans 1:26-27 “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet." So God does say it is wrong.
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty Being against nature is different as we've proven that homosexuality exists within nature. We then have one of 4 logical choices. #1 Either the Bibile is wrong. #2. God is wrong. #3. You're God doesn't exist and the Bible was written by men. #4. This passage is not talking about homosexuality. You choose.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch The passage is talking about homosexuality, also, why do you think Sodom and Gamor were destroyed? Because of extreme homosexuality and men raping each other. Could the Bible be wrong? And yes it was written by man, but the scriptures come from what God taught us how to be and live. Also, if you deny the word of God and claim he does not exist, then why have the argument of whether Jesus was liberal or conservative? Because there you are renouncing them.
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty Actually, there's no evidence to suggest that it was destroyed because of homosexuality. It was destroyed because of violent gangs. You see rape is an act of dominance, not an act of sexual attraction. Ask any sex therapist.
I believe Jesus existed, I just don't believe in your God. But there was probably a guy named Jesus who lived back then.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty I'm not arguing the divinity of Jesus, that's beside the point. The point is what he stood for.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch Well there is one thing which I don't understand and would like you to explain. If you believe in Jesus and except his divinity, then how can you not believe in God, since he in fact was the son of God?
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty I never said I thought he was divine. I said I believed he existed.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch I will hand this to you, it is true that there is no NT record of where Jesus explicitly stated that homosexuality is wrong, but He did in fact condemn the behavior. He did say, And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ “and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?’” (Matt. 19:4.)
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty That doesn't say that all men shall do that. After all, Jesus didn't marry did he? Heterosexual relationships aren't for everyone. Jesus proved that.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch Are you implying that Jesus was gay?
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty No, but he wasn't in a heterosexual relationship. But, then I wouldn't be the first to suggest that he was. Some say that there are gospels that were thrown out of the Bible because they contained homoerotic stories of Jesus and John.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
@BlueFireWitch And 1 Corinthians 6:9, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.” So God does forbid it. Nevertheless in his eyes each sin is equal to any other, so does that make us better, no, it just means we are imperfect, and that is why Jesus died for our sins.
LordoftheKaty 1 year ago
@LordoftheKaty You're not getting the point. Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality. None of the things above say anything about being gay.
BlueFireWitch 1 year ago
Jesus was a Communist!!!!!
Do unto others has you would have them do unto you, that's Communism in the simplest form! Note I said Communist, not Marxist or Fascist!
kryckeestrooff 1 year ago
If Jesus Christ did exist, he certainly proposed maverick, new ideas, and went against the status quo at the time. He preached love and compassion. He ideas were drastic relative to the ideas in the world of Rome. By definition, he was a liberal.
friedie1jeff 1 year ago
Not only do you have no idea what you are talking about (when it comes to faith, and being a Christian), but you confuse wanting to defend yourself and being as you put it "pro-war". I can't speak for all Republican Christians, however Ican speak for myself being one. Jesus said he was not there to abolish his Fathers word but to fulfill it. What holds true in the old testament holds true in the new. I honestly get the impression that you have never even met a Rep. Christian.
critter505 2 years ago
on the idea of abortion and being wiccan i and that i believe in reincarnation, i feel that when a baby is in the whom it is the one who is deciding to terminate the pregnancy not the mother my theroy is that the baby is still in a higher being state and knows to some extent what will happen in his or her up coming life and if it is not what they wish to happen the end the pregnancy and start over
oopo12 2 years ago
Well I don't think early termination of pregnancy is a big deal, first 8 wks, or so. But after there's a significant amount of brain activity, I believe it's a person. I don't think the baby chooses anything because it's something being done to it, not something that happens on it's own.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
In saying that the baby infulences the mothers decision
oopo12 2 years ago
Now we are spliting hairs when we discuss when life begins, the point is someone is obviously behaving in a manner that leads them to a harmful situation. It's not just the baby that's the victim in an abortion, it also has long term physical and mental repercussions. When you mentioned in your vid that Republicans/Christians were pro-capital punishment, you were for the most part wrong, there is a huge rift between conservatives when it comes to that issue. Also remember that a period only ends
critter505 2 years ago
a sentence, it doesn't end a book. When Jesus spoke of the rich man, saying how a camel could sooner pass throug the eye of a needle, the point was that if God in the flesh asked you tou part with your money, and you couldn't, then you chose to serv another master besides him, but several times in the bible did person following God's word become blessed with wealth, family and health. Christians base their ideas off of the whole book, not 1 sentence in it.
critter505 2 years ago
I like Romans 2. After the verses usually used to bash gay people with (like the "basher" is less sinfull than the "bashee")... Paul says, "You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.....Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?"Guess they forgot?
HopeForPeaceNow 2 years ago
Christians who do anything other than rebuke the sin, and not the sinner are hypocrites, this is true, but if someone claims to be Christian, and routinely has sex with someone of their own gender, and commits murder is living in sin. No true Christian ever forgot, some who claimed to be Christian never were.
critter505 2 years ago
Saint Paul condemned homosexuality (Greek, arsenokoites), in 1Cor.6:9. There is a New Testament Greek word for it in biblical times.
Apologist117 2 years ago 2
Paul does not equal Jesus. Some would suggest that Paul was a Heretic.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
You claimed that the word "homosexual" did not exist in biblical times. I gave you a Greek word in the New Testament for "homosexual." And it doesn't matter whether Jesus spoke about homosexuality or not. All Scripture is inspired, and Paul was chosen to be an Apostle by Christ after His ascension [Acts 9]. Also, Jesus affirmed the Old Testament, and the O.T. condemns homosexuality. Jesus also reiterated the biblical teaching of marriage between man and woman, the order of creation.
Apologist117 2 years ago
It's true, the word homosexual didn't exist in Biblical times. Also, It's true that Jesus never spoke of it. Actually, it does matter that Jesus never spoke of it. If it mattered that much to the living God you'd think that he'd mention it. But actually, Jesus was more concerned about Rich men getting to heaven. Shows his priorities. Check the title of the video.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
Of course Jesus spoke against homosexuality in that He only speaks of legitimate marriage as being between a man and a woman (not a man and a man or a woman with a woman).
ARudeAwakening4U 2 years ago
That's not speaking against homosexuality, at all. It's simply suggesting that marriage is for making children, which it was, back then. Married couples were expected to have kids.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
Yes, and it is male and femal that produce kids isn't it? Not female and female or male and male. Even if you say same sex relationships can have children now it still requires the input of the opposite sex. Face it God's standard is male and female. If it wasn't you may not even have existed.
Also, ever noticed how even many gay couples tend to have one who acts male and the other female? Even they know the norm in their hearts.
ARudeAwakening4U 2 years ago
What does Male and Female have to do with love? Seriously, are you so naive that you believe that all Homosexual relationships are fake? Just because a relationship doesn't produce children, doesn't mean it's not love.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
Fake in that these realtionships often mimick hetrosexual relationships. In many instances one takes the male role and another the female. And left to their own devices such relationships will never produce offspring. In fact the human race would cease to be. Isn't witchcraft about fertility too?
ARudeAwakening4U 2 years ago
By the way from what I have observed the majority of homosexual relationships appear to be riddled with promiscuity. You might not like to hear that but it's the truth and I think you would have to admit as such if you were being brutally honest.
ARudeAwakening4U 2 years ago
Your observation is not based on fact. Yes, there is promescuity in the homosexual community, but there are also committed relationships. There is also a lot of promiscuity in heterosexual relationships. So your point is irrelevant. Also, one of the contributing factors to promiscuous contact is usually that a person doesn't feel accepted by their parents or society, Perhaps it's the bigots like you who cause it.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
When hetrosexuals get together it doesn't turn into an orgy, but when homosexuals get together in a gay club what tends to be the main focus of the night?
You want facts? Here's one you ignored: Men and menand women and women do not fit together sexually and cannot reproduce. Face it homesxuality makes an utter mockery of all the fertility rights of your pagan kin." Bigot"? Wonderd how long it would take before you fired insults at me. If you can't refute you hoot.
ARudeAwakening4U 2 years ago
"{When hetrosexuals get together it doesn't turn into an orgy" You obviously lead a boring life if you don't believe heterosexuals don't have orgies. I've been to gay clubs, probably more than you. There is no orgy. Just because a couple can't reproduce doesn't mean they can't love each other. How's that for a fact.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
You see how you "liberals", (meaning open minded) are? You start calling someone names like "bigot" simplybecause they disagree with you. If you didn't want people disagreeing with you, then why post such a sensative topic for possibly millions to see? If you stick to the facts, you might not have to descend into name calling, and other childish remarks. As a matter of fact it might negate them entirely.
critter505 2 years ago
"Jesus spoke against homosexuality"
Which specific Scripture are you referring to?
Do you follow Romans 2? "You therefore have no excuse...for you do the same things..."...
Are YOU perfect, as you leave your comment?
HopeForPeaceNow 2 years ago
@HopeForPeaceNow - Jesus said: 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?' Notice this is speaking about a man and wife and therfore, by implication, NOT man and man. Jesus was a Jew who believed the OT prohabitions against homosexual practices.
ARudeAwakening4U 2 years ago
The concept of homosexual people having permenant partners was not an issue to address in 0030. Another Truth: "Why look at the log in your brothers eye?". Would you want your brother to have the power to forbid you to read a Bible? Forbid gathering? Why should you have the power to dictate someone else's life? Their lives belong to God, not you. You, therefore have no excuse, you who judge your brother, for you yourselves do the same thing. Do you show contempt for His Kindness
HopeForPeaceNow 2 years ago
also, when these guys talk about religion & govt not mixing, who do they think the govt is? some foreign entity? no, it's we the ppl. so having govt make sure we get universal healthcare; that ppl arent starving; that ppl get some kind of foundation to keep us out of poverty; etc. isnt something so far fetched from jesus' teachings. 'give unto caesar' speech was jesus' answer as to whether ppl should pay taxes or not- asked by a sabatouer who wanted to trick jesus into making an anti-govt speech
rumpole33 2 years ago
i think the r/w xtians are pick-&-choose religionists. jesus said there's a new convenant to follow, his. that's why he didnt advocate killing your kid if he/she talks back to you & other such things in the old convenant. also, jesus didnt ban a whole lot of things. why? did jesus just forget to do so, cuz he was absent-minded? no. it's cuz he was a very tolerant guy & his whole concern was to take care & help ppl rather than tearing them down & keeping them down.
rumpole33 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Jesus was an ass
Botany101 2 years ago
Actually, if you look, there are several quotes in the Bible in which Jesus advocates speration of church and state. Therefore, religion and politics didn't mix well then, they don't now. It's like mixing thermite and liquid nitrogen. It does not work out well for either party involved.
rocknrollguru23 2 years ago
Just because someone advocates separation of church and state does not mean they have no political affiliation.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
Liberal is not a political affiliation. It basically means that you belive that people and society should have a more liberal outlook and equal rights. It is possible for someone to be socially liberal and fisically conservative. (Libertarians.)
rocknrollguru23 2 years ago 2
It's an assumption of political leaning actually. I never said it was a political affilitation. I know what it means. :P
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
I think it is a tad silly to assume someones political leaning in a time when politics where compeletly different. Really the only two kinds of political climates that existed were Imperialism and Theocracy. Democracy did not have a big following really since the Greeks until the Romans eventually tried it out, but at the time of Jesus it would be hard to call Rome a democracy because Ceaser had complete power at the time.
rocknrollguru23 2 years ago
It doesn't change the premise of the video that liberals are more "Christlike" than republicans. So regardless of the climate back then, if we compare him to the political climate today, he's a liberal.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
I think it silly to made generalzations like that. I have known liberals who were the biggest assholes I have ever had the displeasure of meeting, and rebublicans who's actions I would define as "Christlike". (And vice-versa.) Is it really needed to catogorize people like that and instead look at the individual?
rocknrollguru23 2 years ago 2
I do not believe religion and politics should be compared. I am a rare conservative wiccan but I do not preach my opinion as "the only way".
TheIrishWitch 2 years ago
This video is great for spotting out fallacies. I can't possibly refute all fallacies being made here, but almost all--if not all I really didn't pay that much attention, just couldn't--her reasoning makes no logical arguments to draw her conclusions, which makes most if not all of her declarations mere opinions.
Is she entitled to have her opinion? Yes. Are we entitled to reject it on logical grounds? Certainly. The first fallacy is whether or not Jesus said anything, it begs the question.
TheD2D21 2 years ago
Yeah I'm a socialist myself. People only find out who they really are via their social relationships, not authority or somebody deciding their lives for them.
s0lidifieds 2 years ago
What a stupid bitch.
If it is not alive befriore the second trimester then there would be no reason to kill it in the first place.
Dumb bitch.
crutmauler 2 years ago
That makes no fucking sense. You can't kill something that didn't live.
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No, it's "I'm the authority, and you are not" popping up, again! Once again, you have made my point for me! Thank you, Christian Blue Fire Witch! Oh, in case you did not know it folks, yes, Blue Fire Witch has been a closet Christian all this time! Careful, there's wolves about!
SFsc616171 2 years ago
WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA AND JESUS!?!
burnzorz 2 years ago
I would like to apoligize. I have made an error in trying to discuss the bible as if it were a text book. I am very sorry if I have given anyone the wrong ideas that the bible is anything less than the word of god. God loves you whether you like it not.
rainchild41 2 years ago
I believe in God, but I also believe in Goddess. So why would I not want God to love me?
BlueFireWitch 2 years ago
God is love. The point is not whether you want him to love you ( he loves you anyway) but whether you choose to accept his love. It isn't that men are deemed better or greater than women as men and women are seen as two parts of a whole. "Yin and Yang". The man actually having the greater responsibility to lay down his life for his wife.
rainchild41 2 years ago
if God loves me anyway, then he wouldn't send me to hell for not choosing and practicing christianity. and christian people wouldn't be hasseling me about my faith and trying to tell me that im gonna burn in hell because im not christian. God loves me anyway; tell that to your friends who seem to think otherwise
camillaheartsyou 2 years ago
Because if he allowed you to go into Heaven, then wouldn't that be a flaw against his perfect law? You seem to think that God should change his laws and beliefs to suit you, not the other way around. Which ones the God in this again?
critter505 2 years ago
.... What if i dont want his "love"? ....
Maybe he should stop loving us so much, and start loving people in third world countries.
MBOfilms 2 years ago
There called "missionaries".
rainchild41 2 years ago
In conclution. Jesus is a non-conformist, homosexuality is not a moral issue but a disability, and an unborn fetus whether or not anyone feels it deservs to live is alive and can feel.
rainchild41 2 years ago
just one question...
If homosexuality is a disability, where the hell's my disability benefits and paycheck?
*holds out hand*
sweetcyanide218 2 years ago
and your medical care.
rainchild41 2 years ago
Wow rainchild you got some time on your hands. tl;dr
rhianoran 2 years ago
I drive truck over the road. Truck is in the shop. I probably wont be on line much after thursday.
rainchild41 2 years ago
However, as the limbic system also governs all aspects of emotionality, in consequence, violence, mental illness, alcoholism, drug abuse, suicide, and other abnormalities are also common features of the "homosexual experience" (.both male and female homosexuals) suffer from an inordinant degree of pathology including bizarre sexual pathologies and propensities for engaging in bizarre and harmful sex acts
rainchild41 2 years ago
(3)Exposure of the mother to severe emotional stress. Stress hormones carried in the mother's blood may cross the placenta and interfere with testosterone production in the baby. (4)In some circumstances the immune system may react against the biochemicals necessary for sexual differentiation, identifying them as foreign substances and attacking with antibodies that destroy them. Ultimately this can also reverse sex orientation.
rainchild41 2 years ago
homosexuality is created by 5 different prosedures.(1)Direct alteration of hormones (by injection or castration) during foetal development. (2)Using drugs to block or augment the effects of androgens. The list of drugs which may at least partially divert masculinization of the brain include Depo-Provera, cyproterone acetate, barbiturates, diazepam and marijuana.
rainchild41 2 years ago
Romans 12:2 "Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind".
Homosexuality has been scientifically proven to be a physical brain disorder directly related to tryner syndrome and convicted repeat sex offenders.
An unborn fetus has a fully developed nervous system 3 weeks after conception and can feel everything being done to it. Abortion is also very harmful to a woman's body and can complicate future pregnancies.
rainchild41 2 years ago
lol wut
rhianoran 2 years ago