“But for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,”
Said the President of the United States to a nation fulsomely fond of telling us that not only were our founding fathers fundamentalist Christians, but that our laws are really a re-statement of the Bible and that we are a Nation under God -- whatever that's supposed to mean.
Apparently it doesn't mean that a man with an African father who can't be considered a "real"American or a "real" Christian and most assuredly not a "real" president can presume to have such values in a country in which they have almost always been honored in the breach. Why that boy must think he's not only as good as the rest of us to whom America was given, but he must think he's Jesus himself if he presumes to quote from the book that belongs to us as white people.
"Someone needs to remind the president that there was only one person who walked on water, and he did not occupy the Oval Office.”said the reprehensible Orrin Hatch (Hypocrite-Utah) at the National Prayer Breakfast Thursday.
No Orrin, those Christian values you pretend to aren't any different than Muslim or Jewish values with respect to the love of justice and our fellow humans and mocking anyone for attempting to put them into action doesn't allow one to walk on water, even if one actually is Jesus of Nazareth. Walking on, wading through and bathing oneself in shit however makes you just another lump in the cesspool and whatever magic ceremony you perform or whatever special underwear you put on, you're an enemy of everything any good man stands for whether he be Jesus or Jefferson.
Jesus DID not walk on water.... it was JELLO...same stuff Ceil B DeMille used the the ten commandments. I think it was Lemon-lime flavor. With crushed Newts and coconut flakes.
ReplyDeleteThat explains a lot
ReplyDeleteCan't understand the thinking of the social conservatives, aka fundies. I don't normally copy and past from one site to another. The following comment (mine) is from a conservative blog I occasional pen an article for from time to time. It is about religious fundamentalism here in America and the dangers inherent in a theocracy. Which is what I believe the fundies are really after.
ReplyDeleteHere are my remarks. I believe they relevant to this post.
"Is it the intent of "social conservatives" to turn this once great democratic republic into a theocracy? Because if it is it goes against everything the founders stood for. Remember the Church of England, remember the witch burnings in Europe, the Salem witch trials? All in the name of preserving perverse and empty theology, all to preserve the powers of the pulpit. Think it can't or won't happen here in the U.S.A. Think again. Read some actual history. The founders sure as hell did.
What do you suppose will differentiate us from say the Islamic Republic of Iran if and ultimately when when this happens? No answer... I'm sure.
And conservatives like to claim Any Rand is their political guidance. How laughable.
We're facing the greatest threat to individual liberties and the very foundation of our republic. It is in the fascism of theological power lust to control us through guilt and and the unprovable belief in a better life AFTER we're dead.
Damn, whatever happened to the real America I admired through the enlightened intellect of the founding fathers and the vision they had for America. The one they set the nations infant feet on when they gave us the constitution. The greatest, and most just blueprint for self governance and liberty the world has ever known.
Sadly we seem all to ready and willing to throw it all away for what.................................. again, no rational answer is possible."
I may lose my "press pass" from that conservative site, but calling a spade a spade is, as I'm sure you would agree Capt. is often necessary.
“But for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,”
ReplyDeleteBut...but...that's SOCIALISM! And Jesus must have been smoking something when he said that, so it doesn't count. /frightened evangelical GOPer/
Captain, absolutely brilliantly!
ReplyDeleteCould have sworn I posted a relevant comment earlier. Must be mistaken.
ReplyDeleteOr, so much for free nonthreatening speech from fiscal conservative and social libertarian.
Oh well...
Matthew 25:40 is all we really need to know. "As you did to the least among you, so you do unto Me!"
ReplyDeletePleased to agree with you RN -- I think your first post took a while to appear, but it's there.
ReplyDeleteYes, Matthew 25:40 is central to Jewish Tradition of the era and probably derives from Hillel.
What some of today's versions derive from is a mystery to me.
It must surprise folks who actually read is that Jesus was far closer to being a Socialist than would be acceptable in America and of course Christian Socialism was a very common thing here once. Our Pledge of Allegiance was written by a Christian Socialist, but without mentioning God of course
Capt. Fogg,
ReplyDeleteHatch's remark is jaw-droppingly absurd -- these right-wingers wear their religion on their shirtsleeves, yet if the president so much as mentions religion, they jump all over him.
As I mentioned elsewhere, I think argumentum ad Obamanem should be added to the lexicon of fallacies. If the President days or does something, it's wrong - even if he didn't actually say or do it - or perhaps especially if he didn't say or do it.
ReplyDeleteAnd while we're at it, perhaps we should recognize the Newtonian pleading, which holds the accuser blameless for simultaneously doing something while trying to take someone else to court for doing it.
We should be grateful to the Republicans for adding to our vocabulary like this.
Newtonian pleading... LMFAO! A home run Capt.
ReplyDeleteBush aka Little Boots certainly pushed our vocabulary to new heights along with everything else!!
ReplyDeleteBush? Who's Bush. I don't remember any bush. . .
ReplyDelete