Conquer Club

What do you guys think? Did Jesus say, "Blessed are those who turn their backs on orphans, for they are truly right wing cunts."? I can't find that verse in my bible, please help me out.

For those of you who don't know, Pat Robertson is a spiritual and intellectual leader of evangelical Christians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhyJpLIpRVA

Oh hey, I found the verse James 1:27, which says, "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress".

So how the f*ck do Republicans and other right wingers keep invoking the name of God when enacting their evil?

Fine, you win; Pat Robertson should adopt all the orphans in the world.

Pat Robertson Blames Atheists for Sikh Temple Shooting

Pat Robertson wants to kill Hugo Chavez because he controls oil

Who is Pat Robertson?

A celebrity Conservative Christian douchebag. He has a tv show that airs daily on ABC and CBN called "the 700 club" about God and he also runs a charity/ministry.

I remember his charity famously following the tsunami and offering help only to Christians or those who converted. This one poor old bastard on an island sold bags of milk for a living and desperately needed a new refrigerator to keep them cold. He converted.

Juan_Bottom wrote:A celebrity Conservative Christian douchebag. He has a tv show that airs daily on ABC and CBN called "the 700 club" about God and he also runs a charity/ministry.

I remember his charity famously following the tsunami and offering help only to Christians or those who converted. This one poor old bastard on an island sold bags of milk for a living and desperately needed a new refrigerator to keep them cold. He converted.

I looked him up. He's one of those crazy Christian coalition guys it looks like. I hate those people with the fire of a thousand suns. Like those guys that said 9/11 was because people were gay or something. Hate those people.

thegreekdog wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:A celebrity Conservative Christian douchebag. He has a tv show that airs daily on ABC and CBN called "the 700 club" about God and he also runs a charity/ministry.

I remember his charity famously following the tsunami and offering help only to Christians or those who converted. This one poor old bastard on an island sold bags of milk for a living and desperately needed a new refrigerator to keep them cold. He converted.

I looked him up. He's one of those crazy Christian coalition guys it looks like. I hate those people with the fire of a thousand suns. Like those guys that said 9/11 was because people were gay or something. Hate those people.

If you are serious in not knowing, then recognize that this guy has a HUGE following and a LOT of power, particularly in the south.

He founded the 700 club, for one.

He is a bombastic closed-minded, unthinking proponent of "I am the best interpreter of Christ's words". You dismiss him at your perile.

Juan_Bottom wrote:Pat Robertson Blames Atheists for Sikh Temple Shooting

He says Atheists are angry with god..........he just don't understand the meaning of Atheist does he!

f*ck orphans. Lazy sons of bitches. Us hard working Americans earned our parents.

Army of GOD wrote:f*ck orphans. Lazy sons of bitches. Us hard working Americans earned our parents.

I could only afford one.

Robertson: Gay Marriage is "Death Knell" of Democratic Party


Robertson: Gay Rights Advocates Should "Shut Their Mouth"

I like that he quotes Leviticus, which also says that he can't cut his hair or wear clothes made with many woven fabrics. Whoop-dee-doo

Juan_Bottom wrote:I like that he quotes Leviticus, which also says that he can't cut his hair or wear clothes made with many woven fabrics. Whoop-dee-doo

While pointing out the inconsistencies with Biblical interpretation is fun, it misses the point. A pious individual isn't going to change their beliefs or alter their mentality because someone they may see as the enemy pointed out a flaw to them. The real issue isn't the religion itself, but the extremists the attempt to superimpose those beliefs on others.

While you and I can dismiss that with a whoop-dee-doo (I FUCKING LOVE WHOOP DEE DOOS), it's going to fly right over the head of those who it would otherwise really affect. It's almost like a paradox,

"Open this chest with the crobar you will find inside"

-rd

PLAYER57832 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:A celebrity Conservative Christian douchebag. He has a tv show that airs daily on ABC and CBN called "the 700 club" about God and he also runs a charity/ministry.

I remember his charity famously following the tsunami and offering help only to Christians or those who converted. This one poor old bastard on an island sold bags of milk for a living and desperately needed a new refrigerator to keep them cold. He converted.

I looked him up. He's one of those crazy Christian coalition guys it looks like. I hate those people with the fire of a thousand suns. Like those guys that said 9/11 was because people were gay or something. Hate those people.

If you are serious in now knowing, then recognize that this guy has a HUGE following and a LOT of power, particularly in the south.

He founded the 700 club, for one.

He is a bombastic closed-minded, unthinking proponent of "I am the best interpreter of Christ's words". You dismiss him at your perile.

Meh, I'm dismissing him. I'm not sure he has a lot of power given the relative uncraziness of our government (yeah, I said it).

PLAYER57832 wrote:You dismiss him at your perile.

did you seriously write that sentence

Pat Robertson is no different than a right wing Imam. They take their religion and distort it to fit their personal views. He stated a year or so ago that if your spouse has a debilitating disease like Alzheimer's you should divorce them because they are basically dead.

pimpdave wrote:For those of you who don't know, Pat Robertson is a spiritual and intellectual leader of evangelical Christians.

Is he? Or is that more he "was." He is getting old you know (in his 80's). His show, the 700 Club only has a 1 million daily viewship.

I just saw in the news today a example of a wonderful old Catholic Priest who also at one time had a large following who said something stupid. Of course his problem comes from an accident many years ago and not just due to advancing age, but the point exists. If Pat says something I don't think evangelical Christians are going to say "Amen" unless he actually says something they agree with, but not because he said it.

I would like to go back to the original video question. If a single woman has three adopted children, did she adopt them when single or previously married. If the former, why did she feel that she could take on the responsibility of caring for three children alone? These are just questions, because the answers can tell a lot about her general character. (And at what age did she adopt them?)

As a member of the Knights of Columbus, founded by Father Michael McGivney because he was concerned about the problems of early deaths of his parishioners resulting in widdows and orphans (because the widdow was too destitute to care for the children), the care of widdows and orphans is an exceptionally high priority for me. But actually adopting should be for those who are called to it.

So in that sense I disagree. Even with all the potential baggage being in a family is far greater than being in an institution.

tzor wrote:Even with all the potential baggage being in a family is far greater than being in an institution.

In general, I agree with your statement. Yet, children in abusive homes would probably disagree (I realize that's not so much an "orphan" issue, but it does apply).

And for those of you that don't think Pat Robertson has much of a following...the numbers don't lie. He absolutely does.

Woodruff wrote:In general, I agree with your statement. Yet, children in abusive homes would probably disagree (I realize that's not so much an "orphan" issue, but it does apply).

Yes, this is a case of the foster home system. Here too it is better to be placed in a foster family than an instution; not that the institution is bad (I actually have one such institution in my home town, funded by the Diocese of Brooklyn, originally it was an orphanage but now it is exclusively a foster child care agency that houses children not yet placed into homes) but that the family is even better. Clearly both are better than the abusive family.

Woodruff wrote:And for those of you that don't think Pat Robertson has much of a following...the numbers don't lie. He absolutely does.

Again, if you have some solid research I would love to read it. There is a big difference between a following for his media empire overall and for him personally. I am really interested in how many people actually believe everything he says.

tzor wrote:

Woodruff wrote:And for those of you that don't think Pat Robertson has much of a following...the numbers don't lie. He absolutely does.

Again, if you have some solid research I would love to read it. There is a big difference between a following for his media empire overall and for him personally. I am really interested in how many people actually believe everything he says.

I would imagine that is a rather difficult request to prove, frankly. But his viewership is consistently over a million, so I think it's reasonable to conclude that close to a million people (at least) agree with him/believe what he says.

rdsrds2120 wrote: While pointing out the inconsistencies with Biblical interpretation is fun, it misses the point. A pious individual isn't going to change their beliefs or alter their mentality because someone they may see as the enemy pointed out a flaw to them. The real issue isn't the religion itself, but the extremists the attempt to superimpose those beliefs on others.

Yes, and no. No because these folks are infecting our public schools.. and politics hugely.
So, we pretty much cannot ignore them.

Also, those within the church (as opposed to non-believers and the like), do have an obligation to at least challenge these things.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Yes, and no. No because these folks are infecting our public schools.. and politics hugely.

Whose schools? They certainly haven't been even remotely seen here on Long Island.

Whose politics? The general flow of the "conservative" part of the Republican Party has been almost mostly fiscal these days and very little "social." What social there is has less to do with "evangelistic" morals than with strongly ecumencial morals that are shared by a number of communities of different faiths. These issues, abortion and marriage as an institute of procreation, are not generally promoted by the Pat Robertson's of the country. (They are, in fact, strongly pushed by Catholic heirarchy who had, up until the church / state violations of obamacare been generally "liberal" in terms of fiscal policy.)

Not to mention the growing libertarians who'se policies are in direct opposition to a lot of their social issues, drawing their model from the athiest Ayn Rand (although Roman Catholic Ryan only draws his economic ideas from her, he is not per se a libertarian).