Sin is the Foundation of the Democratic Party

[Daryl Hunt]

My Ignore List just grew by you and your hero.

ciao brutto

"Go from the presence of a foolish man." - The Holy Bible

Hey, you missed me.

 

[Agit8r]

The sin of covetousness is relentlessly pursued by Democrats who point out the "inequity" and spur "the poor" on to covet what "the rich" have. This is prohibited by the Holy Bible, the moral foundation of America, "One Nation Under God."

The second sin of bearing false witness against all who do not kowtow to covetousness and race baiting is another spoke in the Democrat wheel. "Racist, racist, racist." If you want more that you don't have, just steal it. Not your fault. It's the "racists'" fault.

"Having food and raiment, be content therewith." - The Holy Bible, admonishing us not to covet

The Democrats will never learn this lesson. They deceive even themselves.

View attachment 353257

So, why did the early Church share all their worldy possessions in common?

 

[ChemEngineer]

So, why did the early Church share all their worldy possessions in common?

Freely sharing what you have with those less fortunate is very different from coveting. How unfortunate that you don't even know the difference. People of faith are givers. People devoid of faith give far less, of everything, money, blood, volunteer time. This is well documented in Who Really Cares by Arthur C. Brooks.

 

[ChemEngineer]

The second sin of bearing false witness against all who do not kowtow to covetousness and race baiting is another spoke in the Democrat wheel. "Racist, racist, racist." If you want more that you don't have, just steal it. Not your fault. It's the "racists'" fault.

The next most common lie of Democrats is to call everyone else "fascist" and "Nazi."
Finally, there is the lie of "stupid." You're stupid and they're utterly brilliant.

Take away these three most common lies from them and they are speechless.

 

[Agit8r]

Freely sharing what you have with those less fortunate is very different from coveting. How unfortunate that you don't even know the difference. People of faith are givers. People devoid of faith give far less, of everything, money, blood, volunteer time. This is well documented in Who Really Cares by Arthur C. Brooks.

That's a really poor argument by Brooks. He includes giving to one's house of worship as charity, when in fact it is recreational spending.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Freely sharing what you have with those less fortunate is very different from coveting. How unfortunate that you don't even know the difference. People of faith are givers. People devoid of faith give far less, of everything, money, blood, volunteer time. This is well documented in Who Really Cares by Arthur C. Brooks.

That's a really poor argument by Brooks. He includes giving to one's house of worship as charity, when in fact it is recreational spending.

Obviously you have not read the book. I have.
1. People of faith give more to friends, to family, to secular institutions, to blood banks and they give more time freely than atheists and Leftists. This bothers you as facts always bother Leftists.
2. Giving makes people happier. Your selfishness makes you more miserable. It shows, even in your name.

 

[Agit8r]

Freely sharing what you have with those less fortunate is very different from coveting. How unfortunate that you don't even know the difference. People of faith are givers. People devoid of faith give far less, of everything, money, blood, volunteer time. This is well documented in Who Really Cares by Arthur C. Brooks.

That's a really poor argument by Brooks. He includes giving to one's house of worship as charity, when in fact it is recreational spending.

Obviously you have not read the book. I have.
1. People of faith give more to friends, to family, to secular institutions, to blood banks and they give more time freely than atheists and Leftists. This bothers you as facts always bother Leftists.
2. Giving makes people happier. Your selfishness makes you more miserable. It shows, even in your name.

Actually I bought that ebook just to debunk it.

"Those Stingy, Uncharitable Liberals"

Some myths take significant creative effort to invent. Arthur C. Brooks is evidently such a brilliantly creative force. While attempting t...

crackpotdoomscandal.blogspot.com

 

[IM2]

I don't know what planet you are from or what alternate universe but you pretty well described the party of the Rump. Nice attempt at deflection.

Under Obama, black welfare cases soared.
Under Trump, black unemployment went to a record low.
Stop lying. It's very destructive of you.

Your party's racism is well documented to this very day.
Robert Byrd, former Grand Kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan, "The Conscience of the Senate." Your Democrat.

The destructive racism of liberal Democrats

Under Obama we faced a depression he inherited.

Under trump we faced a growing economy he inherited.

Byrd is dead. The first black president was a democrat.

Republicans are still calling him a Kenyan.

 

[IM2]

You leave out the fact that the Klan 100% backs Rump. Gee, such a tidy thing to leave out.

Your ignorance is showing, and it isn't pretty.
There are very good Americans and there are very evil Americans and there is a huge swath in between. Hundreds of millions vote and support one party or the other. Evil comes in both parties.
YOUR PARTY is the party of slavery. Democrats supported slavery pre-Civil War.
Democrats filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Democrats fought integration for decades.
Democrats now pander to blacks strictly for their votes, and to maintain power.
For every racist supporting President Trump, there is a far greater number of race-baiters and haters on the Democrat side. Educators are now brainwashing impressionable youngsters into the Hate America narrative which you push.
The destructive racism of liberal Democrats
The destructive racism of liberal Democrats

Democrats started integration under Truman.
Southern democrats were the problem. So were southern Republicans.

The first black president was a democrat. You guys talk that shit about not owning slaves and how we were never slaves. Yet you talk about how blacks should be republican because of Lincoln. Using that same logic no black should be republican because the Democratic party is the party of Obama.