The liberals' official hostility to religion takes a strange new turn

[koshergrl]

It's fairly apparent here as well.

 

[Sunshine]

The collective mind of the liberal mob is not complex enough to grasp the concept of freedom, nor to understand the foundation of liberty that the founding fathers laid for this country.

Madison had it exactly right...the system doesn't work with a non-Christian populace.

The Bible is a government document, and actually has the King's name on it. Other governments have promoted Christianity. If you read the message of Christ and not that woman hating faggot the apostle Paul, it will be very clear why. I think governments who needed to keep a lid on things saw Christ's message as one that would create a docile and easily governed population. Particularly if the people were uneducated and could not read it for themselves.

This response is beyond words I cannot gather or assimilate.

Maybe you should study how the King James Bible came into existence. Or perhaps reflect upon why Christianity flourished under the rule of Constantine. Or at least understand that rulers have a 'what's in it for me' attitude concerning the affairs of state, even if religion is one of those affairs of state. Or I should say ESPECIALLY if religion is one of those affairs of state.

 

[The T]

It's fairly apparent here as well.

Indeed. Carbonated is a giant belch on these boards as well...and pretends he still matters.

 

[The T]

The Bible is a government document, and actually has the King's name on it. Other governments have promoted Christianity. If you read the message of Christ and not that woman hating faggot the apostle Paul, it will be very clear why. I think governments who needed to keep a lid on things saw Christ's message as one that would create a docile and easily governed population. Particularly if the people were uneducated and could not read it for themselves.

This response is beyond words I cannot gather or assimilate.

Maybe you should study how the King James Bible came into existence. Or perhaps reflect upon why Christianity flourished under the rule of Constantine. Or at least understand that rulers have a 'what's in it for me' attitude concerning the affairs of state, even if religion is one of those affairs of state. Or I should say ESPECIALLY if religion is one of those affairs of state.

Constatine...ROME...right?

The Bible...should never be about 'what's in it for me...' but how it should apply to all mankind from the top down, applied equally as the Founders saw it and acknowledged it with ALL things becoming equal in thier eyes, and wrote to that effect as opposed to what they had been subject to with the Crown who ordained themselves larger than what they actually were?

 

[The T]

How about it Sunshine? Make sense?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Our native americans?

Lol..actually, disease was responsible for more Indian deaths than any other cause. And do you know who ministered to them when they were dying by the thousands? Missionaries and (horrors) the Catholic church.

And if it weren't for abolitionists...primarily Baptists, it's possible (though not likely) that we'd still be in the slave trade.

Are you implying that Southern slaveowners weren't Christians? Maybe you should read a history book.

No, you idiot. I'm saying the abolitionist movement was a Christian one.

Primarily Baptist.

Perhaps you should read a book. Though I'm not sure it would do you any good, if you're incapable of understanding what you read.

So Christians in the North opposed slavery and Christians in the South owned slaves and defended the institution of slavery,

and that somehow proves that the abolitionist being largely composed of Christians proves that it was a Christian movement...

funny.

 

[francoHFW]

Thank god we have separation of church and state, despite the holier than thou doubletalk....

 

[Sunshine]

How about it Sunshine? Make sense?

Read a little history.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Funny to see the rightwing nuts droning on about this long after it's been proven that the OP is horseshit.

More evidence that you don't know the meanings of words, or understand what you read.

Or you're just a liar. Probably both.

Pay attention:

1. The franking rules ban all holiday greetings, not just Christian ones.

2. This has nothing to do with liberals.

3. These irrefutable points have already been made in the thread, and ignored by the rightwing imbeciles here.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How about it Sunshine? Make sense?

Read a little history.

He might if it were printed at the bottom of a bottle.

 

[The T]

How about it Sunshine? Make sense?

Read a little history.

My point being the Bible was meant for ALL mankind and not just the elites.

 

[The T]

How about it Sunshine? Make sense?

Read a little history.

He might if it were printed at the bottom of a bottle.

Nice comeback if it were true Oaf.

 

[The T]

Funny to see the rightwing nuts droning on about this long after it's been proven that the OP is horseshit.

More evidence that you don't know the meanings of words, or understand what you read.

Or you're just a liar. Probably both.

Pay attention:

1. The franking rules ban all holiday greetings, not just Christian ones.

2. This has nothing to do with liberals.

3. These irrefutable points have already been made in the thread, and ignored by the rightwing imbeciles here.

4. No one is offended by such greetings except idiots that make such unwarrented rules.

 

[Steelplate]

Funny to see the rightwing nuts droning on about this long after it's been proven that the OP is horseshit.

More evidence that you don't know the meanings of words, or understand what you read.

Or you're just a liar. Probably both.

Pay attention:

1. The franking rules ban all holiday greetings, not just Christian ones.

2. This has nothing to do with liberals.

3. These irrefutable points have already been made in the thread, and ignored by the rightwing imbeciles here.

You might call it "Frank-in-Sense"... get it?

 

[Samson]

Looks like the PC police have threatened members of the House of Representatives against wishing constituents a "Merry Christmas," if they want to do so in a mailing paid for with tax dollars.

Members who submit official mailings for review by the congressional franking commission that reviews all congressional mail to determine if it can be "franked," or paid for with tax dollars, are being told that no holiday greetings, including "Merry Christmas," can be sent in official mail.

"I called the commission to ask for clarification and was told no 'Merry Christmas.' Also told cannot say 'Happy New Year' but can say 'have a happy new year' – referencing the time period of a new year, but not the holiday," said a Hill staffer who requested anonymity.

* * * *

Congressmen can't say 'Merry Christmas' in mail | Campaign 2012 | Washington Examiner

At this point, I'd ask "are you fucking kidding me?" But why bother? I already know they're serious.

Seriously absurd.

I thought we were broke? Which of our elected officials thinks we can afford postage for Christmas cards in the first place???? Where is the outrage from the Republcians demanding to know how this will be paid for??

Unlike you, I bothered to read (or, rather, am ABLE TO READ) the article sited in the OP:

As with all things Democrat, Ethics rules in the Dem-controlled Senate are much more relaxed. Franking is no exception:

a response from the Senate Ethics Committee, which handles franking issues for the upper chamber. Looks like senators can say things congressmen can't because the Senate franking regulation say this:

"Senators may not use the frank to mail holiday cards. However, Senators may use officially related funds to mail holiday cards to constituents..."

Harry Reid must have written that himself.

 

[ABikerSailor]

News to you? I suggest reading history books then.

Riiight.

If what you say is true...I suppose religion was integral with how we treated our Native Americans and how we held slaves.


Goodie.

Our native americans?

Lol..actually, disease was responsible for more Indian deaths than any other cause. And do you know who ministered to them when they were dying by the thousands? Missionaries and (horrors) the Catholic church.

And if it weren't for abolitionists...primarily Baptists, it's possible (though not likely) that we'd still be in the slave trade.

Much of which was given to them by the European settlers.........

On June 29, 1763, a week after the siege began, Bouquet was preparing to lead an expedition to relieve Fort Pitt when he received a letter from Amherst making the following proposal: "Could it not be contrived to send the smallpox among the disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them." [1]

Bouquet agreed, writing back to Amherst on July 13, 1763: "I will try to inoculate the bastards with some blankets that may fall into their hands, and take care not to get the disease myself." Amherst responded favorably on July 16, 1763: "You will do well to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets, as well as every other method that can serve to extirpate this execrable race."[2]

As it turned out, however, officers at the besieged Fort Pitt had already exposed the Indians in just the manner Amherst and Bouquet were discussing. During a parley at Fort Pitt on June 24, 1763, Captain Simeon Ecuyer gave representatives of the besieging Delawares two blankets and a handkerchief from the smallpox ward "out of regard to them" after the Delawares pledged to renew their friendship.[3] While the exact meaning of his phrase was unclear, a later invoice appears to clearly establish the purpose was transmittal of smallpox.[4]

Siege of Fort Pitt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sure.........Europeans "ministered" to them after they infected them.

And then........let's talk about fire water.

 

[Samson]

Sure.........Europeans "ministered" to them after they infected them.

And then........let's talk about fire water.

Yeah, Firewater: that's the stuff they serve at the Cherokee Casino in Oklahoma City for $10 a shot.

 

[NYcarbineer]

More evidence that you don't know the meanings of words, or understand what you read.

Or you're just a liar. Probably both.

Pay attention:

1. The franking rules ban all holiday greetings, not just Christian ones.

2. This has nothing to do with liberals.

3. These irrefutable points have already been made in the thread, and ignored by the rightwing imbeciles here.

You might call it "Frank-in-Sense"... get it?

Ah the Myrrh-th and Merriment of Christmas! It's pure Gold!

 

[NYcarbineer]

More evidence that you don't know the meanings of words, or understand what you read.

Or you're just a liar. Probably both.

Pay attention:

1. The franking rules ban all holiday greetings, not just Christian ones.

2. This has nothing to do with liberals.

3. These irrefutable points have already been made in the thread, and ignored by the rightwing imbeciles here.

4. No one is offended by such greetings except idiots that make such unwarrented rules.

The rules are about not using tax dollars to send mail that isn't official business.

 

[Samson]

Pay attention:

1. The franking rules ban all holiday greetings, not just Christian ones.

2. This has nothing to do with liberals.

3. These irrefutable points have already been made in the thread, and ignored by the rightwing imbeciles here.

4. No one is offended by such greetings except idiots that make such unwarrented rules.

The rules are about not using tax dollars to send mail that isn't official business.

Rules are different for the Democrat-Controlled Senate.