Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Christians on the MySpace attack. They're out to save the world.
porgie
Member Posts: 1,516
This is hilarious.
Evangelicals rallying against MySpace. Jesus, help us all.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/25/MNG6OHU6RR1.DTL
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I'm sorry, but this picture is just funny in sooooo many ways.
--------------------------------------
lol
Lol...
Strangely enough...This sounds like something that happens in those Islamic extremist countries...
Is that Colin Powell with the umbrella in the background?
Hahahahahaha!!! I love San Francisco. Drag queens coming out as nuns. Now that's throwing it in their face.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
OMG!!! LOL!!!
Who are these people? Maybe their employers health plan doesn't cover therapy.
Seriously though. What would make these right wing nuts happy? What do they want? Other than to create a war all over the world and bring about Armageddon.
=============================
It all seems so stupid
It makes me want to give up
But why should I give up
When it all seems so stupid
Let me get this straight...
They have a website.... to protest about a website ??
And why pick on Myspace... its just a collection of lonely people who just need someone to talk to and dont present a threat to anyone.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
what i find interesting is the extreme right wing, holds the constitution as an rule when it comes to their right to own guns. Where as guns are only implied in the constitution.....
but when it comes to people of different views and morals putting stuff on the net, television, or radio.
they ignore the Freedom of speech clause entirely and rebuke the constitution.
these right wings arent any better then the far left though....
98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you''re one of the 2% who hasn''t, copy & paste this in your signature.
That would be so awesome if Myspace got shut down. I'll support them just because I hate emo kids more than I hate extremist christians.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
Funny thing, alot of people hate myspace that aren't really contemporary christians. Anyways Luce, I've seen him on tv and he's got a position with Bush on helping people win the fight against illegal drugs and, unprotected sex. He's an ok guy but, alot of him does go a long way...lol.
I've seen Christians take alot of heat over the net, something like this was bound to happen. I remember in one gay parade a youth minister moved infront of the parade and, got on his knees started praying.
I hope they do well and do double their numbers in the coming year.
Professor Hubert Farnsworth - That question is less stupid but, you asked it in a profoundly stupid way.
This siggy is CGI that my cousin made in 4 hours.
Those aren't christians.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
what i find interesting is the extreme right wing, holds the constitution as an rule when it comes to their right to own guns. Where as guns are only implied in the constitution.....
but when it comes to people of different views and morals putting stuff on the net, television, or radio.
they ignore the Freedom of speech clause entirely and rebuke the constitution.
these right wings arent any better then the far left though....
I think you would find that the "right wing nuts" that are for preserving the right to bear arms are not the same crowd as the ones in the OP. You are lumping them together like some lump "gays", "environmentalists", and "socialists" together as all being the same "left-wing nuts." Both sides of the political spectrum have "extreme" organizations that don't necessarily agree any anyone one subject.
It is always interesting that the best way people deal with their dislike of another is through hate. Obviously if most of you are looking at these christians as idiots, then their rally didn't really have any impact on anyone but them selves did it? Generally protesters use negativity as their main vocal point in their arguement, which we all know being critical without offering a solution is quite meaningless.
I think most people today have some idea that we are all heading towards chaos, anarchy (in the popular view it has today), killing, destruction, and so on. Instead of having a view that we should attempt in all costs to progress our living standards for us and the future generations, we seem to like to feel that we are heading in a bad direction. Which maybe we are heading towards that direction, but I don't think that is it because of some religion or what someone has prophesized in the past, but rather because we have a mentality to not want to help others. We show these examples over and over, my father watching T.V. and critisizing it's message and content, hearing people in my classes saying that we are about to enter into an armeggon, movies being made showing that we are headed into a fascist nation and ideal system.
Then when no one is watching, we lie for our own gain, we waste resources, we talk violentally towards another being, and we attempt to critisize everything in hopes that we will come off as intelligent or right. But through ignorance how can anyone judge someone as being right?
Of course I will be critisized for contradicted myself, like I have so many times in the past. When in reality I do not find myself anywhere on the conservative-liberal line, not on the right, and not on the left. I do not feel I have to kiss ass to politicians and people, to gain favor on myself with lies and lack of knowledge. Yes I would consider that an attack, not on a single individual here but maybe to a group of people.
Whether you like it or not our laws are based on Judeo-Christian principles. Would you prefer to base our laws on other principles, lets try Hammurabi:
If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death.
If any one bring an accusation against a man, and the accused go to the river and leap into the river, if he sink in the river his accuser shall take possession of his house. But if the river prove that the accused is not guilty, and he escape unhurt, then he who had brought the accusation shall be put to death, while he who leaped into the river shall take possession of the house that had belonged to his accuser.
If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death.
If he satisfy the elders to impose a fine of grain or money, he shall receive the fine that the action produces.
If a judge try a case, reach a decision, and present his judgment in writing; if later error shall appear in his decision, and it be through his own fault, then he shall pay twelve times the fine set by him in the case, and he shall be publicly removed from the judge's bench, and never again shall he sit there to render judgement.
If any one steal the property of a temple or of the court, he shall be put to death, and also the one who receives the stolen thing from him shall be put to death.
If any one buy from the son or the slave of another man, without witnesses or a contract, silver or gold, a male or female slave, an ox or a sheep, an ass or anything, or if he take it in charge, he is considered a thief and shall be put to death.
If any one steal cattle or sheep, or an ass, or a pig or a goat, if it belong to a god or to the court, the thief shall pay thirtyfold; if they belonged to a freed man of the king he shall pay tenfold; if the thief has nothing with which to pay he shall be put to death.
If any one lose an article, and find it in the possession of another: if the person in whose possession the thing is found say "A merchant sold it to me, I paid for it before witnesses," and if the owner of the thing say, "I will bring witnesses who know my property," then shall the purchaser bring the merchant who sold it to him, and the witnesses before whom he bought it, and the owner shall bring witnesses who can identify his property. The judge shall examine their testimonyboth of the witnesses before whom the price was paid, and of the witnesses who identify the lost article on oath. The merchant is then proved to be a thief and shall be put to death. The owner of the lost article receives his property, and he who bought it receives the money he paid from the estate of the merchant.
If the purchaser does not bring the merchant and the witnesses before whom he bought the article, but its owner bring witnesses who identify it, then the buyer is the thief and shall be put to death, and the owner receives the lost article.
If the owner do not bring witnesses to identify the lost article, he is an evil-doer, he has traduced, and shall be put to death.
If the witnesses be not at hand, then shall the judge set a limit, at the expiration of six months. If his witnesses have not appeared within the six months, he is an evil-doer, and shall bear the fine of the pending case.
If any one steal the minor son of another, he shall be put to death.
If any one take a male or female slave of the court, or a male or female slave of a freed man, outside the city gates, he shall be put to death.
If any one receive into his house a runaway male or female slave of the court, or of a freedman, and does not bring it out at the public proclamation of the major domus, the master of the house shall be put to death.
If any one find runaway male or female slaves in the open country and bring them to their masters, the master of the slaves shall pay him two shekels of silver.
If the slave will not give the name of the master, the finder shall bring him to the palace; a further investigation must follow, and the slave shall be returned to his master.
If he hold the slaves in his house, and they are caught there, he shall be put to death.
If the slave that he caught run away from him, then shall he swear to the owners of the slave, and he is free of all blame.
If any one break a hole into a house (break in to steal), he shall be put to death before that hole and be buried.
If any one is committing a robbery and is caught, then he shall be put to death.
If the robber is not caught, then shall he who was robbed claim under oath the amount of his loss; then shall the community, and . . . on whose ground and territory and in whose domain it was compensate him for the goods stolen.
If persons are stolen, then shall the community and . . . pay one mina of silver to their relatives.
If fire break out in a house, and some one who comes to put it out cast his eye upon the property of the owner of the house, and take the property of the master of the house, he shall be thrown into that self-same fire.
If a chieftain or a man (common soldier), who has been ordered to go upon the king's highway for war does not go, but hires a mercenary, if he withholds the compensation, then shall this officer or man be put to death, and he who represented him shall take possession of his house.
If a chieftain or man be caught in the misfortune of the king (captured in battle), and if his fields and garden be given to another and he take possession, if he return and reaches his place, his field and garden shall be returned to him, he shall take it over again.
If a chieftain or a man be caught in the misfortune of a king, if his son is able to enter into possession, then the field and garden shall be given to him, he shall take over the fee of his father.
If his son is still young, and can not take possession, a third of the field and garden shall be given to his mother, and she shall bring him up.
If a chieftain or a man leave his house, garden, and field and hires it out, and some one else takes possession of his house, garden, and field and uses it for three years: if the first owner return and claims his house, garden, and field, it shall not be given to him, but he who has taken possession of it and used it shall continue to use it.
If he hire it out for one year and then return, the house, garden, and field shall be given back to him, and he shall take it over again.
If a chieftain or a man is captured on the "Way of the King" (in war), and a merchant buy him free, and bring him back to his place; if he have the means in his house to buy his freedom, he shall buy himself free: if he have nothing in his house with which to buy himself free, he shall be bought free by the temple of his community; if there be nothing in the temple with which to buy him free, the court shall buy his freedom. His field, garden, and house shall not be given for the purchase of his freedom.
If a . . . or a . . . enter himself as withdrawn from the "Way of the King," and send a mercenary as substitute, but withdraw him, then the . . . or . . . shall be put to death.
If a . . . or a . . . harm the property of a captain, injure the captain, or take away from the captain a gift presented to him by the king, then the . . . or . . . shall be put to death.
35.....
no? Doesnt sound very nice does it.
Some of you are walking-talking cliches. BTW, the Koran reads like the Hammurabi Code.
U.S. laws aren't as biblical as you would believe. Many of the founding fathers weren't all that Christian, they just wanted to make a working government. Jefferson was an animist who went to church to blend in (his own admition). Franklin was a member of the Hellfire club, a group of well-to-do gentlemen who did the kinds of things behind closed doors you'd expect a group by that name to do.
The point? It doesn't really matter. Even if the country were based on a direct biblical blueprint, things change. The framers of the constitution were white, all of them. They designed the original system. Does that mean that only white people should have a role in government, because that's the way it was?
I can't trust a group like this, because I've seen them before. They cloak hatred in positive attitude. They work from the top down instead of the bottom up like your average mob of people. By that I mean they impose their views through official means. They try to censor everything that offends them. They'll get Senators and Congressmen on their side and use them to get their way. Sure, they won't stop you from doing what you want through force of arms, but through censorship they'll take away your privilages just as quickly.
You can't change someone's mind by taking away their chance to choose.
That sounds alot like the Old Testament, nerf.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
Our constitution was influenced by Christian values, but not put into law directly from them. The ten Commandments are more natural human laws rather then religious laws. If we were to have taken Christian values more closely into impact on our laws, then we would not have a court system, we would not offer religious freedom because we would then have to only worship one God. I am not saying that some of these beliefs are not in our rights, but not all of them are. The only way you can say that our system is non secular, is if all of our laws are the same as Christinanity.
There is nothing wrong with these values, but they are more similar to basic common sense that each human individual has. If you were to be raised never being exposed to religious ideas, I think you would still know what is more right and wrong.
There's a quote I once saw on someones sig/quote panel here at MMORPG.com, "Common sense is no longer common."
People that have a guidebook to life and morality can barely hold by it. People that don't even acknowledge any guidebook, would not even aspire to hold by it.
People no longer do what's best. They do what feels best.
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
Those aren't christians.
Oh sorry, I forgot Christians are an exclusive group.
Professor Hubert Farnsworth - That question is less stupid but, you asked it in a profoundly stupid way.
Not really...no.
Originally posted by 9216544
There is nothing wrong with these values, but they are more similar to basic common sense that each human individual has. If you were to be raised never being exposed to religious ideas, I think you would still know what is more right and wrong.
There's a quote I once saw on someones sig/quote panel here at MMORPG.com, "Common sense is no longer common."
People that have a guidebook to life and morality can barely hold by it. People that don't even acknowledge any guidebook, would not even aspire to hold by it.
People no longer do what's best. They do what feels best.
You may be right. You probably are. But the way I look at it the world is just in a transitory state. And when changes come about most of the time it creates a kind of pendulum. The change may swing to one end, maybe a radical end. Then people who long for the "good old days" will gain some control back and the pendulum will swing back to their side for a while. After it's all said and done it will come and rest in the middle. The sensible side of change will take over.
Look at the civil rights movement as an example. You had radical groups back then. They were opposed by the staunch old timers. But it all evened out and sensibility takes over eventually.
As far as today's religions go, I wonder if we're at the beginning of either their ends or at least dramatic changes. Our society is evolving. We're becoming more connected and sharing of new ideas and ways of thinking is being done more easily and more freely. Look at the growth of science and logical thinking. How much has that changed our perception of the world?!?!?!
I wonder what it was like when the Greek religions started to come to an end. What happened when people started questioning whether Zeus was really there or not.
Personally, I feel that the only religion in the world that has the potential to survive is Buddhism. It can completely mesh with the emerging new ideas of our society. Science is finding things all the time that contradict with religions like Christianity. But Buddhism seems like it was made for science and the growth of a society.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
Unless you had a time machine, travelled back into time to join the tribe of Israel to wander the desert under Moses for 40 years, then those laws dont apply to you.
^^Im saving this comment for the hopelessly predictable liberal cliches to come.^^
--------------------------------------
