ok, now I know a lot of you think this didn't turn out well.....
- Thread starter Damn True
- Start date
Silver said:
Who runs the soup kitchens, the salvation army, the medical aid missions to central america etc....
You just made that up didnt you?Changleen said:Some people actually think Bush is a messenger of God.
I know a lot of Christians and listen to Christian radio about 25% of the time I'm in the car. I have never ever heard anyone deify GW. Please SHOW me evidence of this.
Only religious people.Damn True said:
(UNICEF, the United Way, Doctors without Borders, Peace Corps, MS charities, food banks, Cancer Societies. You're right, only religious people do good in this world. I hear around Christmas time belivers in Santa Claus give out a lot of presents, too.)
C'mon, that's as dumb as saying all Catholic priests are child molesters.
Changleen said:
SWEET, I have been waiting for one of you to bring this up.
GOTCHA! I also listen to Err America and the left (keep an eye on the enemy and all that)
The polls the media are quoting the same infamous "exit polls" that were used to predict the Kerry landslide early Tuesday afternoon.
Stick with me now......so if they were entirely innacurate in determining the outcome of the presidential election, how is it that they can be considered accurate for anything else?
Silver said:
....and as dumb as saying that the teachings of Jesus don't jive with the actions of Christians?
Actually just Google it for yourself - It's quite a widespread belief by the look of it.
Bush has actually even described himself as much to some audiences.
http://www.leanleft.com/archives/003393.html
Bush has actually even described himself as much to some audiences.
http://www.leanleft.com/archives/003393.html
They don't, not the way the Republican Party would have you believe. (Unless you're a hardcore Calvinist, perhaps...)Damn True said:
How many people do you know that live like Christ? I don't know many who gave up their riches to follow him...there seems to be a lot of Christians with multiple luxury cars and big churches around here.
This thread is so ****ing stupid. I cant beleive I just woke up from my 2nd nap today and read it all.
Neither Bush nor Kerry supported dam gay marriages. Its a moot point IMO. There will be no constitutional ban on Gay marriage or Abortion. It will never happen and you all know it.
Bush was elected on his moral standing, which also happens to be the moral standing of obviously more than half the voters. Why is it bad for a candidate to express the views of his voters? Isnt that his job? .....what's that? Dont like the voters? Well awwwwww too bad, because its a democracy and that's how it went. I guess you can keep bitching but alot of good its going to do you.
So the followers of Christianity arent ACTUALLY following the teachings of christ? Well, sure we can come up with some examples of the catholic church ****ing up here and there, but I'd say that Christian groups undoubtedly perform at least 75% of the volunteer and charity work that goes on in this country. IMO, far more good than bad comes from it. Its just a matter of numbers to me.
Muslim Extremists Vs. Christians? Well changleen, if you dont believe in god, you must at least believe in nature. And in nature, as the saying goes, might = right. Conflicting ideals have been clashing since man began and will continue to until we blow ourselves up. Why do I support the American side? And why do most people in America? Because our ideals are aligned that way. We're not going to become muslims ourselves, so our only choice is to defend it. Whether in Christs or in nature's name, we're on the right side in our opinion.
Neither Bush nor Kerry supported dam gay marriages. Its a moot point IMO. There will be no constitutional ban on Gay marriage or Abortion. It will never happen and you all know it.
Bush was elected on his moral standing, which also happens to be the moral standing of obviously more than half the voters. Why is it bad for a candidate to express the views of his voters? Isnt that his job? .....what's that? Dont like the voters? Well awwwwww too bad, because its a democracy and that's how it went. I guess you can keep bitching but alot of good its going to do you.
So the followers of Christianity arent ACTUALLY following the teachings of christ? Well, sure we can come up with some examples of the catholic church ****ing up here and there, but I'd say that Christian groups undoubtedly perform at least 75% of the volunteer and charity work that goes on in this country. IMO, far more good than bad comes from it. Its just a matter of numbers to me.
Muslim Extremists Vs. Christians? Well changleen, if you dont believe in god, you must at least believe in nature. And in nature, as the saying goes, might = right. Conflicting ideals have been clashing since man began and will continue to until we blow ourselves up. Why do I support the American side? And why do most people in America? Because our ideals are aligned that way. We're not going to become muslims ourselves, so our only choice is to defend it. Whether in Christs or in nature's name, we're on the right side in our opinion.
Im not sure about the others, i am just pointing out that both candidates are retarded and if they should have the right to marry their wives, anyone should have the right to marry their partners, no matter their sex.
about christian organizations performing 75% of the charity work..bull****.
about christian organizations performing 75% of the charity work..bull****.
EVERY church I have ever heard of does Charity work. Tell me another group that does even a fraction of what churches do, please?Transcend said:
Already mentioned but..UnICEF, doctors without borders, about every single UN group, united way, american red cross, american legion, people to people, heart to heart...shall i go on? Stop being a self righteous moron.BurlyShirley said:
The few first groups alone do more then most community churches combinec could ever hope to do in a life time.
And all without hanging eternal damnation over your head.Transcend said:
I hate to keep banging this drum, but the Catholic Church tells people in Africa that condoms don't help prevent AIDS. Those motherfvckers (starting from the Pope on down) deserve to rot in the hell they believe in for that alone.
Im an athiest, first off asseyes.Transcend said:
But secondly, none of those groups are even remotely close in size to the church not even close. Not close at ALL. Id also venture to guess that many are part of those organizations because of their spiritual beleifs, which only goes to further the influence of the church on helping out. Quit demonizing something that IS inherintly good. What a few ****-ups do should not ruin the entire cause. You are being so short-sighted its rediculous.
Also Tranny,
Just to put this in scale, in the town I live, Id guess the poulation is 50-60,000. There are easily more than 50 churches in the area. ALL of which do charity work. There is no doctors w/out borders office here. And also notice that I said 75% of the charity work IN THE US. Not abroad.
Just to put this in scale, in the town I live, Id guess the poulation is 50-60,000. There are easily more than 50 churches in the area. ALL of which do charity work. There is no doctors w/out borders office here. And also notice that I said 75% of the charity work IN THE US. Not abroad.
Just to clarify, Jesus was never in a "sticky" situation - as a rabbi with authority (Hebrew is S'mikah) He could (and did) make new interpretation of the Torah (one of only about 10-12 in the 1st century that could do that), which obviously did not "line up" with what the religious authorities thought it should (read Matthew 23). There was nothing sticky about that, He had the rabbinic authority to do it and they knew it (read Matthew 21 they ask Jesus where He got His authority.........they knew but didn't want to answer).Silver said:
Note: I did not say Jesus had rabbinic authority to make new interpretation of Torah because "He was God" (a cop out in "your alls" book) I use the Jewish rabbinic system that He was apart of and is described in the Bible.
From what I have read, I gathered that Jesus cured the sick with no expectation of monetary reward. Things are a little bit different today.Damn True said:
Toshi said:
I know this isn't an exact approximation of the average democrat's IQ, but still relevant: http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm
that's interesting but i don't trust it one bit. the guy admits openly that he didn't do any fact checking on it, and relied instead on it being in the economist. given the shoddy state of journalism it may well have be completely fabricated by some 3rd website...Discostu said:
Burly you are probably right. Churches most likely do 75% of the charity work in PODUNK TENNESSEE.BurlyShirley said:
Charity work is great, and I commend any churchmembers that devote their time to others without expectation of reward, but seriously, at least TRY to back up your statistics. I don't even know if you mean time or money donated.
to the first part - more like 100%ohio said:
second part (not tryng to get you to go to church or anything) - go to a church and you'll find out the MAJORITY of churches in your or anyone elses do the MAJORITY of charity work in that community, whether that be donating money to charitable causes that perform WORK or doing the WORK themselves
i don't see what all the arguing is about anyway your on the internet so your probably not benefiting from any of the charity thats being performed around you. i'm conservative i'm a christian far from Christ-like (not even remotely comparable) and i'll tell you one thing to give you a point. the majority of the PEOPLE doing the charity regardless of whether or not they are involved through churches are liberal in mind. pretty soon the U.S. is going to be over run with liberal thinkers and the only military we will have is homeless dirt poor bastards that don't have anything better to do and don't give a rats ass about freedom then we will be ran off the planet by power hungry countries that we in the past defended our founding fathers ideas of freedom against.
Andyman_1970 said:
Wrong.Damn True said:
The sampling affected the outcome, so obviously the Pro-Kerry folks were sampled more frequently.
However when you ask them which side you voted for and how they felt on the issues - then you have qualified the issues based on the demographic. Therefore that part of the exit poll would have been accurate.
From the OC Weekly, 09/17/04:BurlyShirley said:
Why does the Vatican have such a beautiful palace with so many priceless NON-RELIGIOUS artifacts?BurlyShirley said:
Im sorry, exatly how does this apply to the fact that Churches do an ass-ton of Charity work, mr. Hardcore punkrocker moshpit?Slugman said:
Slugman said:
Uhhhh what?
So the portions of the exit polls that support your argument are accurate, but the portions that contradict are not?
Neato!
I'm sorry did I use too many big words?Damn True said:
The sampling of left vs. right was inaccurate b/c they sampled more left than right. We all know that.
When they asked people which side they voted for AND which issue mattered to them - that excludes the sampling error. Granted that lowers the accuracy since they sampled a lower percentage of the right. However the trend is still accurate.
What about the census? I'll dig for it, but someone posted a great link to USA Today and Election demographics. The split was about 50/50 when it came to things like education, but when it came to the christian religious groups - most went bush....thus voting mainly for moral values.Damn True said:
Also - I'd really like to see what poll you read prior to the election that said Kerry would win, most I found predicted a close race with Bush leaning towards the winner seat.
Couldnt moral values mean things like not voting for a guy who at one time throws his medals over the white house fence, and now acts like a war hero? Couldnt moral values mean voting for a guy who actually believes what he says and doesnt just pander? Im not saying you're wrong, but dont you think we're being a tad closed minded about what moral values are here?Jr_Bullit said:
You're right BS - there are lots of churches in the world who have earned the right to be given a good name...and churches tend to be very public about the good works that they do. I would say on average, there are more good churches doing good deeds then bad ones.BurlyShirley said:
That is not to say, however, that churches are the only entities that do good things for others, the only ones to participate in charity work, the only ones who care to see communities succeed.
And, just saying what you have observed, does not prove one way or another that churches do "so much" more than any other organization. How does one quantify aid anyways?
Does the poor man who donates his last few bucks do less than the rich man who donates a few grand? Does the guy who works 60+ hours a week supporting his family and donates a couple hours after church on sunday do less than the stay at home mom/dad with teenagers who spends a few of his/her lunchtimes in a soup kitchen?
Sure they can, if that's what you believe. They can also mean voting for a guy who served his country first, and spoke his mind second. They can mean not voting for the one who was too chicken**** to perform his adult responsibilities. They can mean voting for a guy who doesn't give the country lip service and promises from one hand, while reaming the country up the ass with the other. It's not being closed minded, it's actually reading through all the literature out there, not just the literature that props up the one who puts on a cowboy hat just for the sake of appearances.BurlyShirley said:
Also - based on your post, you would indicate you believe people actually spent the same kind of quality time you apparently have trying to make their decision - but when the election demographics very clearly show the difference lies in those who identify themselves as devout christians...seems to me it comes back to religious moral values - not ones that deal with integrity or character or intelligence.
You're right. And I think just about everyone read Kerry like an open book. His wearing a Carhartt jacket is no different than Bush's cowboy hat. The difference is that we can look at Bush's record and get a feeling that he says what he means. With Kerry, well, his record spoke opposite his mouth. 51% saw it IMO.Jr_Bullit said:
I'm talking about the exit polls that predicted a Kerry landslide early Tuesday afternoon. (Republicans were aparently AT WORKJr_Bullit said:
) Thankfully this time the major US networks avoided talking about them, but the net-news rescources, and foreign media was spraying it from the highest mountain that Kerry was anhilating Bush. Well, turns out that those exit polls were rubbish in regard to predicting the election, however, the portions of the data that support (in as shakey a fashion as possible) are being touted as gospell.I'm not denying that they do charity work. But it's like the United Way from a couple years ago... for every 1.0 dollar that they took in, only 0.20 went to a charity. Meanwhile the ceo was raking in a huge salary and stealing from the fund. Same deal with the church, they do more for themselves than they do for others. That would be fine if they were a business and were just donating out of the goodness of their heart, but they are supposed to be about helping OTHERS.BurlyShirley said:
You do realize that in the states won by Bush, catholics are FAR in the minority when it comes to the Christian demographic. What the pope does means about as much to a methodist as what the Dhali Lllama does.Slugman said:
So if you are using the phrase 'THE CHURCH" in referance to operating costs of their charity works I am assuming that you have examined the books of religious group between the Vatican and the neihborhood congregation that meets in a grade school gym down the street.
a) you can't possibly have a handle on this data so dont quote it as fact
Check this out to see how a lot of "not for profits" do in terms of their operations ratio
http://www.smartmoney.com/mag/index.cfm?story=dec01-charities
a) you can't possibly have a handle on this data so dont quote it as fact
Check this out to see how a lot of "not for profits" do in terms of their operations ratio
http://www.smartmoney.com/mag/index.cfm?story=dec01-charities