SNL's Jesus Tells Tebow 'Take It Down a Notch,' 'Mormonism All True, Every Single Word'
NBC's Saturday Night Live this weekend predictably did a sketch mocking Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow for his faith.
What might have been lost on viewers was a not-so subtle endorsement of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney when Jesus Christ - played by Jason Sudeikis - said at the skit's close, "Mormonism - all true, every single word" (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):
As the sketch began, the Broncos had just won their surprising victory over the Chicago Bears last weekend, and Tebow - played by Taran Killam - was leading the team in prayer.
Enter Sudeikis who told the team that he indeed has been helping them in the fourth quarter of the last six games and demonstrated using stats how that's the only time he's assisting them.
This led Sudeikis to tell Killam that besides praying before games, he should stretch and read the playbook.
As the skit continued, Sudeikis told the team he prays to their marvelous kicker, Matt Prater. Prater, played by Adam Sandberg, said, "I didn't know that."
Sudeikis responded, "That's because I'm not in everyone's face about it" glaring at Killam.
As the audience laughed, it was clear SNL was taking a cheap shot at Tebow's public displays of his faith.
But that wasn't the last swipe, for as Sudeikis was getting ready to leave, he called Killam over and said, "I love you, but just take it down a notch, okay buddy?"
Before leaving, Sudeikis said what every Romney supporter - including those in the media that clearly want him to be President Obama's opponent next November - loved hearing: "By the way, Mormonism - all true, every single word."
As Mormonism is quite likely to be an issue in the campaign if the former Massachusetts governor wins the nomination, it appears the folks at SNL also want it to be Romney vs. Obama.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
No class...
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:35pm.
All A$$....
"Yea, and all that will live
Submitted by TruthMonger on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:31pm.
"Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." -2nd Timothy 3:12
Tebow and we who join in are in good shape...
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
It's a comedy show, so I can laugh.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:48pm.
It was kind of cute. If they had cut the cheap shots, it would have been funnier, and not so mean spirited, but, hey, it is SNL.
Now I'd like to see the gutless, cowardly, chicken Shiite writers and actors on the show take an equally "funny" comedy shot at, say, Islam. Why, the same guy could play Mohammy, and they could have him in the parking lot tailgate party eating bar-B-Q pork sliders, polish sausages, ham, etc, and maybe chasing cheer leaders around with stones.
Then Mohammy could get some little kid to take a football "bomb" over to Tebow for an autograph! It would be so funny, right?
Why not find out how many liberals have the "stones" and the sense of humor to put that on the air. I'm betting NONE!!!
No problem razzing Christians in general and Tebow in particular. The only bombs he throws are into the end zone in the fourth quarter.
Give me a break...
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:28pm.
I think it is pretty hilarious when members of a religion that is practiced by 80% of the U.S. population starts whining about how oppressed they are. The perpetual sense of victim-hood is astonishing. So you think SNL should make fun of Islam too? Well, first of all they are making fun of Tebow, not Christianity in general (pay attention.) If KURT FREAKING WARNER says Tebow might want to take it down a notch, I don't think it is that far out of line to make fun of this in a comedy sketch. Secondly, I personally would find it funny if they made fun of Islam. It might be from a lack of courage as to why they don't. Or it could be that when you make fun of a tiny minority in society, even if it is accurate, you kind of come off as an effing bully....not courageous.
Make fun of Islam and you get
Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:32pm.
Make fun of Islam and you get blown up or your head chopped off.
Ummm, yes
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 7:01pm.
You are totally right.....so what? As I stated, I would be totally fine if they did make fun of Islam. What does that have to do with them making fun of Tim Tebow. And if you or anyone else want to call them cowards. I think you should first post a video of you doing what you say they are afraid of, and be sure to put your name and where you work on there as well. Then you can go about calling someone else a coward.
!
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:02pm.
*
Geez, Rudy.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:20pm.
For a Red Sox fan, you surely don't call what I said , "whining," do you? If anyone could recognize whining, it would be a Red Sox fan.
Yeah, I jumped all over that 1.5 billion Muslim minority. Sorry about that. Those poor schmucks. They have to put up with all the mean old Jews and Christians who keep blowing them up in the streets for no good reason.
"It might be from lack of courage?" No doubt about it. If they were in danger of being killed for their comedy depicting Christians, they would drop it in a heartbeat, and whine about all the "bullying" that they are subjected to by those mean old Christians. Like all liberals, they are gutless bastards.
I have always been a Brady fan, but today, I'm pulling for Superman. If Tebow can pull this one off, it will be boohoo in Bean Town. Nothing gives me more pleasure than watching that bunch of whining fans cry.
Cowards?
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 7:42pm.
I meant whining in general from Christians who like to pretend they are a poor oppressed victim. Trust me, I have no affinity for Islam and it's far too many homicidal adherents. So in order for them to want to do comedy they have to be willing to get killed by Islamic nutjobs? Show me the conservative comics that are doing what the liberal ones won't. If you want to call them "gutless bastards" I suggest you make a public video of yourself mocking it yourself. For it to be a fair comparison though, you would need to include your name and where you work. Then you can go about calling people cowards. Until you step up and do so....it is just a lot of macho posturing.
P.S. Tebow isn't good enough to even be Brady's back up. He might be qualified to bring him water and towel him down......maybe.
Thats not what Brady said this morn
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:01pm.
* Brady's 1st 11 starts: 8-3, 207 YPG (pass + rush), 16 TDs *
Tebow's 1st 11 starts: 8-3, 231 YPG (pass + rush), 19 TDs
Hhmm,
Oh, and your Muslim worship wont save you
Wrong on both counts
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:33pm.
For you and the commenter below. Despite the RedSox handle...I actually do not live in New England and do not root for the Patriots. Just as a casual football fan though, if you think Tebow is the better quarterback....you are out of your effing mind!
Secondly, my "muslim worship"? Boy are you barking up the wrong tree. I think I plainly stated in the other posts I could care less if SNL makes fun of Islam as well. You might want to read more carefully before you say uniformed things. Personally I think Islam is a bunch of superstitious myths and nonsense....just like the rest of them.
red-shox-rudy, Ahhh....the
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:05pm.
red-shox-rudy,
Ahhh....the typical Christianphobe who covers himself by saying, "well yes, of course I am no fan of Islam", "but those evil Christians who can't stop crying over secular oppression. I mean geez, aren't you guys a majority in the USA?"
Why doesn't the media make fun of Atheist? Are they also afraid the media is going to blow them up?
And you missed the movie that was made a few years ago by Conservatives in Hollywood that made fun of Islam. You may also want to listen to Michael Medved, Michael Savage, Levin, etc. Conservatives who constantly make fun of and taken on Islam. You may want to listen to and watch Dennis Miller who also takes on and makes fun of Islam.
Your Liberal talking points do not have the Truth or Facts behind them.
So, hmmm...if we no attack by a minority is happening against a majority, why is it that public schools do not allow high school graduates to thank God during a graduation speech?
How come a public school student can't pray out loud in a public school? why can't he resite the 10 Commandments out loud? They don't even let them read the Bible in study hall!
why couldn't my son, last year when I had him a public school, sing Christmas songs while walking down the hall or in the Holiday School Concert?
Or how in countless small towns and large cities, atheists and secularist have a sh..t fit because oh my goodness, a Nativity Scene is put up and then a judge, after the ACLU sues, comes along and has he Nativity Scene removed or the words Merry Christmas removed.
and before you continue with your Liberal talking points, no, the Constitution was not written and implemented to protect the rights of the minority, as Liberals love to preach.
I suggest that you read the history of South Africa and how a minority oppressed and savaged a majority. Yes, minorities CAN and HAVE oppressed majorities in countless of places throughout human history.
Give me a break!
Submitted by Godlessons on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 4:31pm.
How about some truth or facts?
You have brought up some things that are just plain wrong. You either got misinformed, or you are lying. Either way, the truth should be told.
The courts have ruled that if a school allows what amounts to an endorsement of religion, whether by a student or not, that is unconstitutional. If a graduate wants to thank God during a graduation speech, he has to do it without the permission or prior knowledge of the school. If it is known about prior to the student doing it, it is against the law. The same goes for prayer, saying the 10 commandments, and singing Christmas songs. Students are not to be prevented from practicing their religion as long as it doesn't cause a distraction in the classroom.
As for singing religious songs, or Christmas songs, schools are not prohibited from having those songs either in a choir curriculum or in holiday presentations, and the idea that children would be prohibited from singing them on their own is a fabrication, at least where the law is concerned.
The fact is, you are reciting rhetoric that is either completely untrue or you are citing isolated situations where a school official incorrectly interpreted what the law says. That would not be a war on Christianity, but a misunderstanding of the law.
The reality is, if it weren't that religious nuts, especially Christians, keep trying to do things like teach creationism in science classes, or trying to have prayer in schools, while simultaneously discriminating against other religions everywhere else, there would be many fewer issues.
The reality is that Christians are feeling discriminated against because they are getting called on for their attempts to force everyone else to believe what they do, or at least force their religion and pseudoscience to be taught along side facts, and they are losing.
As for teaching religion in school, I and many atheists think that teaching religion in school is a good thing. That is to teach all religions at once. A religious history class that teaches the facts behind all religions, beyond giving historical context, would be good to get students to treat people that believe differently than they do with respect, and also to get students to realize that they are all fabrications, not just the ones they haven't been indoctrinated into.
Godlessons, Well, thank you
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 7:15pm.
Godlessons,
Well, thank you for reciting Left wing, anti-Christian, pretend is not happening propagand and rhetoric.
Next thing you'll do is go the same route as the previous anti-Christian poster and claim that majorities can't be stepped on by minorities. Save yourself the trouble and read up on history, start with the history of South Africa.
Pseudoscience? says who? you? Oh, yes, an arrogant Atheist who believes that he knows more than anyone else. Gosh, as if you were special, Atheism equals arrogance.
Hey, if it helps you sleep at night to believe what you believe, go for it. I am not forcing you to believe anything I believe in. Don't be so paranoid.
Liberallies
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 7:37pm.
"Pseudoscience? says who? you?"
Are you of the opinion that creationism is a form of science?
You have no idea what discrimination is.
Submitted by Godlessons on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 5:38am.
When was the last time you were an atheist? Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Have you ever been threatened or even physically attacked for your belief?
I was a believer for the majority of my life. I had no idea what atheists were subjected to until I became one. I have been discriminated against and even physically attacked simply for being an atheist that was bold enough to not hide it. I would never have believed it until I was at the receiving end. I had never met an atheist until I became one, so I had no idea how people act toward them.
I know atheists that fear every day that people will find out what they believe. People that will lose business if they are known to not believe. People that will lose their wives/children if it were known. People that will be fired from their jobs for getting found out. People who's children will be attacked or harassed if it is found out their father doesn't believe. Have you ever had to deal with any of that?
Don't you even start talking about how discriminated against you are. My brother can't let his wife know he is an atheist or she will divorce him. She has said as much to me. My girlfriend can't let it be known she is an atheist because she is a wedding photographer and people will not hire her if they know she doesn't believe. My son, who I never even talked to about religion, came home and told me how he was harassed and assaulted because he didn't know who Jesus was.
When every single person that you know that believes what you believe has a similar story, you can then complain about discrimination and liberal talking points.
Now, as for the psudoscience, ID has been shown to be creationism in a court of law, under a conservative Bush Sr. apointee. If you want to call it scientific, you need to overcome that little setback somehow. Maybe he was one of those liberal conservative atheist religious Bush Sr. apointees.
Well, let's just stop and examine something.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:52am.
It's easy to blow by, but it is at the heart of this first-person tale.
"I was a believer for the majority of my life."
No, you weren't. If you're not a Christian now, you weren't one then. You may have been a church-goer, curious, or someone who obeyed the surface rules to fit into the culture, but if you can easily and "boldly" say you aren't a believer now, you never were one in the first place.
Deception seems to be a key theme in the story you recounted. People being "found out" for deceiving spouses, friends, co-workers, and clients about their core belief system. That only makes sense, what with the self-deception involved in pretending you were a Christian when you weren't.
I don't even come close to endorsing they way you say you and others have been treated for your belief system; frankly, people who treat you that way may be deceiving themselves, as well. But upon further review, it's not just about what they do to you, it's also about what you're doing to yourself.
--Mike
You aren't saying anything new.
Submitted by Godlessons on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 10:20pm.
"If you're not a Christian now, you weren't one then."
This is known as the "No true Scotsman fallacy". Look it up.
This is just one of those things that Christians like to believe, since obviously nobody could have been a believer and then lose their faith. It scares them to think that it's possible that someone could believe and then realize it's all bunk. Sorry to tell you, but I once believed as strongly as I have ever believed anything. You may not like it, but who are you to tell me what I believed?
"People being "found out" for deceiving spouses, friends, co-workers, and clients about their core belief system."
What a load of self delusional garbage. Imagine being a wedding photographer where most weddings are religious weddings in a country where it's a big deal to bigoted Christians whether or not someone is a believer. How many people do you think would not hire you if you let it be known? What is it about me letting someone I just recently met know that I am an atheist that is deceptive? I am just as vocal about my atheism as I was previously about my theism. I don't deceive anyone about anything. Further, as for my brother, the deception doesn't create the situation he's in. The situation he's in requires the deception. He was a believer when he got married, and his wife wasn't terribly religious. Now she's over the top Tebow nuts and he's realized it's all crap. The only reason he hides it is because she is a wacko that would tear their family apart over something so stupid.
What about all those kids out there that let their parents know that they don't believe and are disowned, kicked out of the house, not allowed to speak to their siblings, etc.? What about JW's shunning people that fall away? Parents are actually required to not talk to their own children by that church.
Now, whether you think you endorse bigotry and violence against atheists, considering your statements, I would certainly say you are bigoted against us. The irrational anger about atheists, and the untrue accusations about atheists show that you are. If you don't believe you're a bigot, tell me whether or not you would ever knowingly vote for an atheist. How long did you hesitate before you lied to yourself and said you would? You might if all the other candidates were child molesters or something.
You further lied, or made an extremely deceptive statement about what your son is prevented from doing in school. This is another indication that you aren't looking for the truth, but looking to score points with those that aren't intelligent enough to question you.
On the issue of whether or not Christians are discriminated against, you will never win a battle of facts, as there is no war against Christians. There is only a war against giving Christians undue influence in the government controlled public sphere.
Truly self delusional
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 12:05am.
I don't give a flying fornication what you do or don't believe. What I do or don't believe seems to give you fits. Score one for me.
And what a load of crap about your brother. The answer to his "situation" is but one divorce attorney away. If she's the whacko, then he should seek counsel ASAP.
As far as voting for an atheist, most of us look for someone that most closely resembles our belief system, socially, economically, and yes, religiously. Straw man is your strong suit.
The only bigot I see here is the whiner crying about victimization. Look in the mirror. You'll then see the bigot too.
Stick with your hateful beliefs and enjoy it.
Submitted by Godlessons on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 9:05am.
Like it or not, the main source of hatred in the world is religion. Enjoy your participation in and endorsement of it.
Enjoy your hyperbole
Submitted by sentry_99 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 9:15am.
I always find it odd when an athiest blames an ill on something he doesn't believe in to begin with. I'm thinking you should probably blame human nature for all the hatred in the world.
We would prefer you do not participate and care not for your endorsement.
Stats don't back you up.
Submitted by Godlessons on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 4:55pm.
If it were just human nature, atheists would not be so underrepresented in prisons. Only 0.2% of prisoners are atheists, where there are between 4% and 13% of the population that is atheist outside of prison. Seems that human nature has a 2000%-6500% difference in representation. That's nothing to sneeze at.
Nonsense
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 6:25pm.
"Only 0.2% of prisoners are atheists...."
Any links or other proof to back up your statement of fact?
Here's a rebuttal that I found quite easily, and seems logical. I'm more then willing to follow any link you provide that backs up your claim.
But I'm not responding to you because I care about the whole Atheist vs Religion argument on this thread. I just don't like posts that state outlandish facts without backing up those so called facts with links or sources.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Kingfish...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 8:39pm.
I have no idea what the actual statistics are, but the data interpretation contained in your link reveals some serious flaws, some of which are pointed out in the comments.
Jer
NP at all, Jer.
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 9:47pm.
My intent wasn't to establish the actual statistics concerning the percentage of Atheists in prison. My intent was just to get the poster of the "factual" statistics to engage in a dialogue in an attempt to prove his contention. My true belief on the subject is that no one has any meaningful numbers on the factual statistics concerning the percentage of Atheists, Agnostics, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Taoists, Buddhists, etc, that are in prisons.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
On that point, Kingfish, I tend to agree with you.
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 9:48pm.
Jer
let me help with that*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 9:52pm.
Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not kill.....
There are no true Christians in prison as they enter. Perhaps a few when they leave.
And remindful of the "there are no atheists in foxholes"
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:06pm.
aphorism.
That said, I have seen plenty of very persuasive evidence of genuine religious conversions by many prisoners during the course of their incarceration.
Jer
Wrong Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 1:39am.
You saw the game played by inmates to persuade others that they are "reformed" and Holy and have "converted".
Pd...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 1:56am.
I don't doubt that what you describe has occurred many times. I'm not so naive that I would ever deny that reality. That said, I think a significant number have been sincere and honest conversions. But, I wouldn't dare to even hazard a guess as to the probable ratio of sham conversions to authentic ones.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 2:44am.
when and if you ever go beyond the "visiting room" in a prison i will take that statement seriously. I have worked two State Prisons and currently in a Federal Prison.
"a significant number have been sincere". Really Jer , That is just an opinion so please do admit it? and you prefaced that by saying " I think".That said, I think a significant number have been sincere and honest conversions. But, I wouldn't dare to even hazard a guess as to the probable
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/52482/1615368#ixzz1hKvf2If3
Jer i have even worked the only Death Row (Federal) in the country. Please do not assume and presume to know what these inmates are and what they do unless you come inside my walls.
I will destroy any and all myths perpetrated by TV and media if you just ask me.
Stop watching MSNBC`s show Lockup.
(EDIT) btw this was a lawyer as well.
http://theheatmag.com/illinois-attorney-indictment-on-charges-he-smuggle...
I
Of course it's an opinion, Pd...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 2:51am.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you aren't suggesting there has never been a single authentic religious conversion by an inmate in the history of the American penal system, are you? If you concede there has been at least one or more--because a denial of any whatsoever would seem to defy logic and common sense as well as empirical evidence--then the issue becomes one of "how many" rather than "not any".
I believe I can speak with some authority, but, admittedly nowhere near the authority of one such as you who has had considerable experience on the inside. So I certainly defer to your expertise in that regard.
Charles Colson, one of those convicted and imprisoned in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, became a devoted--perhaps a born-again--Christian during his incarceration and dedicated his life to the Lord's work and prison ministry in the years following his release. I don't think anyone would honestly contend his was a sham conversion.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:06am.
mind read much? You Know Exactly and Certainly that Charles Colson was a devout and born again Christian.
but you aren't suggesting there has never been a single authentic religious conversion by an inmate in the history of the American penal system, are you?
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/52482/1615377#ixzz1hL3wYDdN
You did contend that not me and also,
believe I can speak with some authority, but, admittedly nowhere near the authority of one such as you who has had considerable experience on the inside.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/52482/1615377#ixzz1hL4MIUj5
What authority?
Inmates that actually take GOD in their heart and soul and mind are very very very few. Please do not add your OPINION as what that was without any experience in what you say.
I have seen a few inmates take on the LORD, i have also worked Death Row as recently as 3 months ago and have seen them as the most "religious" and yet they are the most vile.
Look, Pd...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:12am.
I'm not trying to fight you on this . I'm trying to have a serious, but cordial discussion. You appear to be more interested in picking at nits, so I'll simply end things here.
Have a good night and a good day tomorrow.
Jer
In others
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:23am.
words you opened your mouth and inserted your foot about something you know really nothing about.
I had piss and feces thrown on me 4 days ago.
I am not trying to fight with you on "this" either, but please do not say and assume and opine the things you say without any real world experience.
Footnote re Colson...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:01am.
It seems his spiritual awakening came during the interim between his lawbreaking activities and facing arrest as a result of his crimes. He was subsequently sentenced to 1-3 years and served seven months.
Jer
By the way, "Locked Up Abroad"
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:07am.
is one of my favorite shows. I've watched every episode. It is an extraordinarily well produced docudrama.. However, I haven't seen any new episodes in quite some time and am wondering if the series has been discontinued.
Jer
If you do watch
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:10am.
the show, what perspective do you get?
Always the inmates words and troubles.
Jer
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Sat, 12/24/2011 - 12:46am.
Just for you on MSNBC. They are getting ready to air an episode of Lockup Wabash. One of the prisons i worked at for three years, half of that in the S.H.U.
Enjoy
(edit) my wife loves locked up abroad as well. :)
Pd...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 12/24/2011 - 7:00pm.
Thanks for the heads up. And your wife obviously has excellent taste.
Jer
Sure there are Cajun.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:59pm.
But they aren't wearing orange jumpsuits. :-)
We Are The 53%
Are you not a sinner?
Submitted by Godlessons on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:37am.
If you can't be a Christian and sin, then you can't be a sinner and be Christian. I would then submit that by your definition nobody is a Christian.
Stats actually do back me up.
Submitted by sentry_99 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:42pm.
Ignoring your lack of sourcing for a moment. I will give you one I am almost positive about that, like you, I have no source for. 100% of prisoners at all levels (county jails, state prisons and federal prisons) are human.
The point you missed is that if you truly do not believe in God then all the "evils" you place at the feet of religion are actually the fault of the humans who invented them.
I usually give credit to atheists for being very logical and scientific in their approach to varous topics. You however are more anti-theist as you find it so easy to ignore the many social and economic reasons for crime and instead lay it at the feet of your chosen boogeyman.
No source? I guess your googlefu is weak.
Submitted by Godlessons on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 1:35am.
How about This one?
So, because people are human, we aren't allowed to criticize their propensity for crime, violence, and general evil based on their belief system? What about the fact that there are people out there committing crime in the name of their religion? I bet you wouldn't say that Muslims are just as likely to blow themselves up as Christians. They are both groups of humans after all.
The onus is on you to googlefu yourself
Submitted by sentry_99 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 2:24am.
The source is still weak as it doesn't prove anything beyond what people claim they believe. It shows nothing related to their crime or the reasons they commitited the crime. Do you believe that in a country where the majority of people were athiests, they would be the majority of prisoners? Do you suppose the majority of prisoners in say...Saudi Arabia identify as Muslim? If you see statistics that say a majority of inmates are minorities would you also say brown folks are responsible for "evil"? I don't think you would want to be a bigot about race so why be a bigot with religion?
If you really do believe what your saying though you should publish a paper to let all the criminologists, sociologist and psychologists know they are wasting their time. If a member of a criminal street gang mows down a few of his rivals over turf or drug competition and he proclaims himself to be religious, it was the religion that made him do it. Glessons has solved it.
Strawman after strawman
Submitted by Godlessons on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:14am.
You are totally misrepresenting what I said. I weighed the statistics against the statistics for the population as a whole. If there are 4% atheists in the general population, statistically, all things being equal, there should be 4% of the prison population as atheist. That's not what we see though. The fact that the majority of the population is Christian has nothing to do with what I said.
I also didn't say that the crime that was done by the people in prisons in the name of religion. I said that there are crimes that are done in the name of religion. If you can't tell the difference, I don't know what to tell you.
I was showing that it seems likely that the believers in prisons are less moral than atheists. This would also mean that believers in general are likely less moral as a whole than atheists.
You want to talk fallacies
Submitted by sentry_99 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:42am.
"I was showing that it seems likely that the believers in prisons are less moral than atheists. This would also mean that believers in general are likely less moral as a whole than atheists." Correlation does not imply causation.
"Like it or not, the main source of hatred in the world is religion. Enjoy your participation in and endorsement of it."
This is the idiotic statement that caused me to enter the conversation. You throw up some stats that prove what? They sure didn't help with that stupidity.
If it's stupid, answer a few simple questions.
Submitted by Godlessons on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 5:43pm.
What is currently the largest, most volitile and violent group in the world?
What groups are proponents of the most hatred toward other groups like homosexuals, atheists, ethnic groups and other similar groups?
Give an honest answer to those two questions and then tell me that I am wrong. I'll give you a hint, it's not atheists, communists, Republicans or Democrats.
Boy, you are stuck on stupid.
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 9:48pm.
You can give all the f**king hints you want, but it don't make anything you say true. You have been smacked around til the cows come home, yet you still come back for more.
You can say anything you want, but you have not proven one thing. You claim to not be a liberal, but everything about you screams liberal; your points of contention with no proof, you whining like a bitch about being a victim, your out and out hate for anything you don't agree with, your absolute lack of tolerance, your faux intelligence... I could go on all night, but I have a life.
If your representative of atheists, then I'd have to say ya'll are the biggest bunch of hate filled bigots to ever walk the planet.
Or maybe your just an asshole. Yeah, that's it.
LMAO
Submitted by Godlessons on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 11:02pm.
I gave support for what needed support. As for intolerance, I think one might wonder who's intolerant if they read what you have had to say in the very post you call me intolerant in.
Also, being against bigotry and hatred isn't liberalism genius.
You gave support for nothing
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 11:27pm.
Your one link was destroyed by Kingfish's link a rebuttal, wherein the true number atheist representation was closer to 20% when "unknown/none" was included.
And really, from 1925??? You ought to check you sources a little more closely there Einstein.
That would be the Islamic ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 11:09pm.
jihadists.
And ii is spelled vol - A - tile.
MD
I know what you THINK the answer is idiot
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sat, 12/24/2011 - 12:17am.
That's the probelm though. You think you know something you don't. I'm sure you could use your googlefu and find something that ties all the evil people in the world together besides religion such as...being right handed, male, brown haired.
Answer this question. If religion didn't exist, would we be living in a gleaming utopia right now? I'll give you a hint, South Park covered this brilliantly. So, are you in the AAA, the UAA or the UAL?
You still ignore my original point. If humans created religion, humans are responsible for the outcome of that. If we didn't fight over religion we would CONTINUE to fight over race, land and any number of differences that separate us.
Re to Godlessons concerning sources
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 7:30am.
Thanks for providing a source for your claim that 0.2% of prisoners are atheists. It enabled my searching the author of your source, Denise Golumbaski, Research Analyst, Federal Bureau of Prisons, and produced this excellent rebuttal of anyone who "cherry picks" the so called data contained in her letter.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Godle Communism the religion of Atheists, has the record on Hate
Submitted by upcountrywater on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:50am.
History is not your on your side.
You Didn't Build That.
Communism is not atheism
Submitted by Godlessons on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 5:04pm.
It would benefit you if you would actually do a little research about what communism is and why there was a problem between it and religion. If you think that atheism had anything to do with why communism was opposed to religion, you have another thing coming.
Communism is the religion. It is the thing that will save you, and belief in other higher powers constitutes a threat to communism. If your allegiance is split, you may stop believing in the higher power that is communism. This is the same reason that apostasy has been dealt with by death by so many monotheistic religions, including Christians.
This was certainly the readers digest version of it, but if you had a single clue about what you were talking about, you wouldn't have made that statement.
glessons, Yea yea yea the democrats never started the KKK
Submitted by upcountrywater on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 8:15pm.
Communism - Atheism and Amorality
Communism doesn't end with economic and political reform. By definition, it further demands the abolition of both Religion and the Absolute Morality founded upon Religion. The irony is that Communism supposedly attempts to enhance civility within society, but removes all notions of Absolute Morality, the very cornerstone of civility. Furthermore, after Communism is instituted by the people, the system becomes Totalitarian, resulting in greater oppression of the people it was designed to "serve." This fact is well documented throughout the history of Communist nations.
Fund raising for the First Atheist Church...will be breaking ground very soon.
Are you your own higher power?
You Didn't Build That.
You seem to be mistaken
Submitted by Godlessons on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:16am.
You seem to think I am liberal. I'm certainly not a liberal. I'm a Libertarian. There is a huge difference.
IOW
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 3:16pm.
"You're right Restless, I have nothing".
Short and pithy works best around here.
What makes you think you know where the IWIN button is?
Submitted by Godlessons on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 5:11pm.
You're an evil little bigoted troll, and I dealt with that as much as necessary. Don't think you win because I decided you're not worth my time. The two concepts are completely different.
Fractal wrongness is how I would describe your comments, and I have never had the power to fix stupid. If you seemed like you had the slightest bit of interest in understanding a different point of view, I would have spent more time trying to help you. As it sits, you are dogmatic and unable to understand simple concepts due to your compete inability to deal with possible cognitive dissonance.
Tell us more about "the stupid fish", O Superior Being.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 6:03pm.
"Now, with Christianity we see many forms of idol worship. The cross, the stupid fish, images of Jesus, Mary, saints, and even the Bible itself."
In typical militant atheist style, your seething hatred drives you to conflate reverence with idolatry, among your many other deranged views.
But I do I feel sorry for your son. It's obvious he struck out in life bigtime being stuck with a little shit like you for a father who doesn't even have the balls to bring up the subject of religion, as you've already admitted.
In ending, I hereby retract my previous dubiousness about your sad tales of being attacked/beaten. If you conduct yourself in normal everyday life the way you do here, it's a freaking miracle you're still walking the earth.
Merry Christmas, asshole.
What takes more balls?
Submitted by Godlessons on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 6:54pm.
You think I don't bring up religion because I'm afraid of it? I don't bring it up, because I want him to grow up without being told that X is true basically because his parents believe it. It takes more work and balls not to indoctrinate your children than it does to indoctrinate them.
As for me having hatred, I admit it. I have a hatred of anything that promotes credulity at its best and bringing an end to the world at its worst. I have hatred of anything that tells people that they are required to believe things that even children find unbelievable, and if they don't believe, they will be tortured for eternity. I have hatred of anything that limits our children's intellectual capacity by telling them that science is evil and has some evil motive, and instead of trusting what we can show to be true, we should instead trust things that make no sense and can't be shown to be true whatsoever, just because it's in a book written by desert sheep herders thousands of years ago.
If I shouldn't hate those kinds of things, I don't know what I should hate.
glessons What do you think of when you see the word Pinto?
Submitted by upcountrywater on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 8:33pm.
So 3 or 4 of the ten commandments are what ok? Nuthun new under the sun. Go right ahead and re-invent the wheel. So what else is going on, you a warmist ?
You Didn't Build That.
I'm not your psych, pal.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 8:45pm.
But what I will tell you is that you need help because you are now driving on the wrong side of the double yellow.
You psychos are like locusts; you always seem to hatch at this time of year. I really don't care what you believe or don't believe, but like your militant compatriots, you just can't resist coming out of the woodwork to denigrate people who believe in anything other than nothing.
You couldn't even make it as a Wiccan.
And just for the record, you smug asshole, there are plenty of conservative atheists/agnostics here who NEVER EVER do what you're doing, and many are longtime respected members of NB. And for the record, I'll be hosting a bunch of my own family who are atheists on Christmas, and NOT A ONE ever behaves like the superior, condescending creep you're being now.
So go work on your own blog or picket the nearest nativity scene. And stop playing the the poor "I'm a victim" card. Nobody cares.
Agian, Merry Christmas.
Did you even see how this started?
Submitted by Godlessons on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:31am.
Someone was claiming that they were being prevented from being religious in public. I was showing him how it's not him that is being picked on, and you come in and presume to accuse me of bringing the victim thing up.
As for atheists that don't see the danger that religions pose, there are many of them. As for atheists that see it and are too timid to speak about it, there are even more. I have long ago stopped hiding the fact that I am an atheist. I am not a timid guy that worries what other people think of me. I just want people to know the truth in hopes that the more people that know the truth, the less there will be trying to kill me and everyone else.
This is what I picture
Submitted by Denny Crane on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 7:15am.
It's just an analogy, but a pretty good one.
We Are The 53%
Paranoid much? People are trying to kill you, Timothy?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 2:43pm.
Must be tough being an atheist in Utah, but I really doubt the evil Mormons are trying to assassinate you.
Get a grip.
IOW
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 7:19pm.
"You're right Restless, I have nothing".
Short and pithy works best around here.
Nice try
Submitted by Unsane on Sun, 12/25/2011 - 1:28am.
Actually, the main source of hatred in the world is envy.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
No, this is known as "reading the Bible for comprehension."
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:50am.
The fallacy is insisting that you really, really, really met all the criteria Biblically outlined to be considered a Christian, then violated one of the core components of the belief system.
That's known, colloquially speaking, as the "having your cake and eating it too" fallacy; you can't do both.
Let's work off the notion that you're male; obviously, you have to be someone's son. If you have a disagreement with your parent and declare "I'm not your child anymore," even going so far as to legally sever the ties between the two of you, have you really changed anything? Of course not--you're still your parent's child, regardless of your protestations to the contrary.
So it is with Christianity, being that it is a saving relationship, not a contract or an intellectual assent. If you, indeed, have such a relationship, it does not change; since you insist you don't have it now, you couldn't have had it in the first place, because it does not change.
How is it "bigotry" to choose not to vote for an atheist--someone whose worldview is antithetical to my own? Would you vote for an arsonist? A hoarder? A pedophile? You wouldn't? Wow, how "bigoted" of you!
And thanks, but I've exhibited no anger, "irrational" or otherwise. On the other hand, your statements give credence to the old saw that denial isn't just a river in Egypt. You blithely ignore violence done against Christians in various parts of the African continent and the Middle East (particularly Iran and even areas of Iraq), as well as in China--and that's just off the top of my head.
Whoever you are, you're kidding yourself about a lot of things. And that's just plain sad, because you're not just hurting yourself, but others around you. I pray that changes for the better.
--Mike
Duplicate post.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:42pm.
Apologies.
--Mike
godlessons, well, maybe if
Submitted by Liberallies on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:45am.
godlessons,
well, maybe if you came across a little less arrogant in your first post, what do you think?
And discriminated against, really? Do you know who I am, what I do, my background, whom I have or not have run into, whether or not I have been discriminated against? You don't.
News for you, YES I have been physically attacked, verbally abused, spat upon, my car destroyed, etc because of my Christian beliefs! Oh, but the poor, poor atheist, it only happens to you.
I am sorry to say this, but you need to stop playing the victim.
atheists are a minority, but a loud well funded and organized minority who enjoys taking stabs and jabs at believers, mainly Christians. This is a fact.
It has been this small minority which has been running all over to the courts and demanding that the minority beliefs be shoved down the throat of a majority. And guess what, you are winning in this, you are right.
Hey, but you can sleep comfortably in the knowledge that it has been atheist governments, atheists who have mass murdred many more 100s of millions of human beings than all religions combined.
Prayers in school removed, Bible Study removed, Christmas Carols removed, Nativity Scenes removed, etc, etc, etc. It is going so far that you have atheist groups going to courts and demanding that public displays of Christianity on private property be removed! You have atheist going to courts and demanding that ministers, rabbis, priests be charged with hate speech for speaking against homosexuality in their temples of worship, this is already the case in Canada!
And while this not yet happening in the USA, yet, in Europe and Latin American you have secularists and atheist governments shoving down the throat of religious private schools secular curriculums which mock God, which make fun of believers. I am Spanish and Venezuelan, in both of these nations atheist governments have been pushing religion, very succesfully, out of the public sector as well as out of the private sector.
if you want to talk about victims, talk to the 10s of thousands of Catholics which were mass murdered during the French Revolution at the hands of Atheists. The 10s of thousands of Catholics murdered at the hands of Atheists during the Cristero War in Mexico. Talk to the 10s of thousands of Catholics murdered at the hands of atheists during the Spanish Civil War. Shall I continue? Oh, but you feel like the poor victim. Talk to the 100s of millions of Believers, Jews, Christians, etc, which have been mass murdered at the hands of atheist in China, Russia, Cuba, N. Korea, etc, etc, etc. Give me a break!
The FACT is that where Atheist become a large part of a government, Christianity is shoved out of that nation and Atheists end up slaughtering countless upon countless of Believers. Please spare me your victimization speech.
The fact is that the United States of America is a nation where the majority rule, not the minority. But quite a few atheists want to turn the USA into a nation where the minority decisions have equal weight as the majority. With your thinking, shoot, why doesn't the individual who gets the least amount of electoral college votes become our President, right?
Again, pseudoscience, says who, you? Geez, you mean the same courts which scientifically decided that a black man was not a human being? Is this the courts you are talking about? Sorry, I have never put too much weight on the decision of individuals who think themselves to be gods merely and simply because they wear a black robe.
You are clueless as to what I believe when it comes to Creationism, ID and Evolution, but like a good closed minded and arrogant atheist you have assumed that because I am a Christian I have to believe in Creationism and/or ID. Why don't you drop your arrogands, so prevelant in most atheists, and start talking to me as a fellow human being.
Again, all you have proven to be is very, very arrogant individual who feels that he is a poor victim.
Oh boo hoo. You got your ass kicked
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 5:25pm.
Probably for being an arrogant prick more than being an atheist. Quit crying lambkin.
People get their asses kicked for any number of reasons. Quit playing the victim card. You are NOT a victim. You are NOT discriminated against.
As for your brother, he is obviously an idiot loser. Going into marriage under false pretenses, whether it be religion, sexual proclivity, or favorite color, is the fault of your brother, not his wife, and certainly not society. She is the victim there, as she was not afforded the opportunity to choose the best mate for her. She has been lied to, not your brother.
And you share some of the blame for your son. You do a disservice to him by not teaching about the culture of the society in which he lives.
Hmmm, seems you and your family bring a lot of what happens to you on yourselves.
Oh, by the way, Godlessons...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 5:33pm.
Welcome to NewsBusters.
Jer
More like 'welcome back to Newsbusters".
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 5:37pm.
Funny how NB has been called a bunch of idiots, a small time player in blog world, the laughingstock of the internet, etc... but these idiots can't stop coming back.
"There's the atheist... let's string em up, boys!"
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 5:47pm.
LOL. Where do you live, Pakistan?
Children being beaten, people being fired, businesses burned to the ground, wives leaving husbands...
Maybe you should enter the witness protection program and move out of that hellhole. That, or quit being such a drama queen.
Let's give him a chance to confess his sins...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 5:50pm.
and THEN string 'im up.
Jer
Funny SoL
Submitted by bkeyser on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 6:02pm.
I was going to just say "liar", but your comment is much more pithy.
Off to get the Windex for my screen now.
Godlessons
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 6:52pm.
Umm, who on earth are you dealing with? How does someone find out abut your disbelief? Is there a symbol you wear around your neck the way Jews wear a star of David or Christians wear a cross? Fired from their jobs? I call b.s. Employers CANNOT ask about your beliefs, and very very few care. They care about people who show up on time every day and get the job done. No one can be fired for their religious beliefs. Your son doesn't know who Jesus was? Really? My kids know who Muhhamad and Buddha is even though we don't practice those faiths.
You're trying the Obama tell a sad story routine, but it doesn't work here.
Godlessons
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 6:56pm.
As someone who has worked in a school I can vouch for the fact that Christmas songs are NOT allowed in schools.
Religion should not be taught in public schools, as schools must first teach children to read, write, and do math. U.S. history is currently subject to the political leanings of the left, versus sticking to the facts, so entrusting schools to teach religion would be a huge mistake.
red-sox, I never expected
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:54pm.
red-sox,
I never expected Tebow to win yesterday. It would have been great, but it did not happen.
However, I see how you avoided addressing the stats that were given to you. Easier to call things nonsense than address facts. Typical Liberal.
As a rookie, Brady did worst than Tebow. Give Tebow enough time in the NFL and he will be one of the greatest quarterbacks.
ahhhh, the truth comes out.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:03am.
It's Brady love. And jealousy that Tebow is getting the attention.
We Are The 53%
A few helpful corrections.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:16pm.
--Mike
Not really helpful, or correct for that matter.
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:23pm.
1. Webster's Dictionary: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices.
So maybe you have your own "special" little definition of Christianity, but the rest can probably agree that Christianity is a religion. If want to go round and round in ridiculous semantic arguments about what a Christian is, that may be a discussion for another post.
2. I honestly have no idea what you are getting at here. I am sure there are multitudes of people that don't fit whatever your particular flavor of Christianity is, but they probably say the same of you. What the hell does that have to do with this post?
3. Actually my estimation is spot on. Gallup, Pew research and all other surveys I have seen usually put the figure at 75-78%. So if you have another figure let's see it. So yeah, I rounded up a couple of percentage points....whatever.
4. So if SNL making fun of Tebow causes you take offense because you guy are in the same club.....Meh, that's a YOU problem. Don't watch it then.
5. Not really sure what you are getting at with this one either. SNL makes fun of all sorts of people, some of whom I like, some I don't. So what? That's what it means to be a public figure in our society. He can either be a big boy and deal with it, or take his ball and go home.
Most Americans are Christian
Submitted by redfish on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 9:44pm.
Most Americans are Christian by heredity only, meaning they don't practice their religion, don't attend church, and don't believe in traditional Christian moral values. The people who actually practice the religion and take it seriously are in a minority, yes.
The majority of Americans have just as much in common with atheists as they do with religious, observant Christians. That's why religious Christians are the butt of jokes. It's not complicated. Still, the standard is its okay for atheists to whine (and gay groups), but not religious Christians, though both are in the minority.
Haha, riiiiiiight
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:23pm.
Whatever you have to tell yourself you are a poor oppressed minority. Seriously though, that is the most asinine "reasoning" I have ever heard. By the way, "gay groups" are not a religion, in fact 70% are Christian. I am sure you will probably give me some idiotic reason why gays aren't "real" Christians...not like you.
So, in other words, you are
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:08pm.
So, in other words, you are not a student of history. You have never studied how throughout human history, minorities have oppressed majorities.
I suggest that you start with the history of South Africa.
and you aren't crying about victimhood mentality, are you? This is what you and your friends thirve on.
it is true that very few
Submitted by TruthMonger on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:12pm.
it is true that very few people can pick up their own cross and carry it, but a "true" Christian is not for us to judge - so it is better to err on the side of caution - like Tim Tebow...this is what bothers the chaff when it is separated from the wheat...
...the question of "true Christianity"
http://bible.cc/matthew/7-23.htm
http://bible.cc/matthew/3-12.htm
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
70% are Christian??
Submitted by NC Cop on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:23pm.
And that's a fact? Where exactly did you get that gem???
Yesssss
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:30pm.
A number of polls and surveys put the number right in that ballpark. The latest being the Barna Group survey. Try venturing out of your self-reinforcing little bubble every now and then. I hate to break it to you but REALITY has a liberal bias.
Sure it does, of lover of polls
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 5:35pm.
Seems reality actually has a conservative bias.Suck on that for awhile.
Explanation required
Submitted by Unsane on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 10:17pm.
And as I ALWAYS ask idiots who say "REALITY has a liberal bias", PLEASE explain why the Second World is no longer with us in large part.
Also, please explain what is going on in Europe right now.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Wow, really?
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 5:09pm.
Whoever you are, "Rudy," if a dictionary is the far horizon of your theological inquisitiveness, you have a problem.
--Mike
Yep...really
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:37pm.
It is about all I need. It is also all I need to find definitions for unicorns, fairies and leprechauns. I find no use in widening my theological horizons on superstitious fairy tales. Knock your self out though if it floats your boat.
"4. So if SNL making fun of
Submitted by NC Cop on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 9:37am.
"4. So if SNL making fun of Tebow causes you take offense because you guy are in the same club.....Meh, that's a YOU problem. Don't watch it then."
And if the fact that Newsbuster wishes to discuss this topic bothers you, don't come to the site. Problem solved for everyone.
Haha
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:48pm.
I know....but I can't help it. I just love how one differing opinion in your little playground seems to send you into such a tizzy.
Laughable
Submitted by Unsane on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 10:20pm.
Just as hate-filled, perpetually angry Statist/Socialists cannot at ANY cost tolerate a single conservative idea or opinion and, because Statist/Socialists like yourself are intellectually bankrupt, wish to cover that up by DEMANDING anyone who disagrees with them SHUT UP.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Whole batch of wrong
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 12:40am.
Seriously, this is almost too funny now.
1. I know it is an epitaph idiots like to throw around, but I am not a "Statist/Socialist." People in our country have been arguing about the size/role of the federal government since Hamilton and Jefferson first went at it. Throwing around childish insults like commie and socialist may win you points with the crowd here on this site, but that doesn't change the fact that it is pretty moronic.
2. If I couldn't stand any conservative idea or opinion....why would I post here? I don't need to stay in my little Faux News/Newsbusters ideological bubble.
3. Who demanded you to shut? Ummm, I never did. The poor little victim game that you conservatives play is laughably pathological.....downright absurd.
Merry Christmas, rudy
Submitted by Unsane on Sat, 12/24/2011 - 10:16pm.
1. Considering your love of His Majesty The Shahinshah and Queen Michelle, and how you explode with absolute rage anytime they are criticized on this site, I am more than within my rights to call you a Statist/Socialist. Not to mention your very own statements like "Reality has a liberal bias!" (Which you still refuse, as I notice, to address that little quandary that if your statement were true, the Second World would be considerably larger today, yet it is a shadow of its former self.) If you have a problem with that - and doubtless you do, considering how your skin makes onionskin paper look like a block of lead - I suggest you do a lot of soul searching and carefully re-examine your beliefs. Your feeble attempt to hide behind the ages old debate over the size/role of government does not change the fact that you won't be content until every single American has turned over ALL of the economic and political freedoms to the government, so we can be ruled, just as you want.
2. Your postings, which show you are filled with barely controllable RAGE at the fact that conservative opinion exists, tell me all I need to know about how you feel about conservative opinions and ideas. Besides, this sentence here is telling: I don't need to stay in my little Faux News/Newsbusters ideological bubble. Your steadfast refusal to debate actual ideas here is more than enough to show me how intellectually bankrupt and proudly immature you are, but then, you type that sentence, which bolded, which tells me you are only interested in stereotypes of conservatives. I, for instance, can't tell you the last time I saw Fox News. I watch far more CNBC, and CBC, for that matter, than I do Fox News. I get my news and information from a wide variety of sources, including a news magazine which, by its own admission, is ruled by Leftists on its editorial board.
But, slipping into your "point #3", I don't see anyone playing a victim card. I stated a fact. It pisses you off to no end that Americans aren't forced daily to watch MSNBC and only MSNBC (or whatever other Left-wing outlet you fancy). If you SERIOUSLY cared about conservative opinion, you would watch Fox News, at the very least to see what the enemy is thinking. See, what you hate the most about Fox News is that Fox News doesn't treat conservatives as some evil illegitimate ideology like your favorite channels do. At least that's the impression I always get, and got when I was once a regular viewer. Oh, the reasons why I stopped watching Fox News long ago will not appeal to you, and will definitely force you to reconfigure the absurd way at which you look at an ideology you cannot even begin to understand - but I don't believe in throwing pearls before swine.
You are a very angry little man who is getting more exponentially angry every day because 1) this isn't a Socialist babying Nanny State like what exists (and is currently failing) in Western Europe and 2) there are people like me who like it that way and wish it to remain that way; this means you get off your ass and work for what it is that you want. I haven't seen a more angry, hate-filled poster here in quite some time.
Try and have a Merry Christmas.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
They should keep their filthy hands off sacred subjects
Submitted by lgeubank on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:28pm.
Why can't those cretins just tell their little funnies, and keep their filthy hands off things that many people revere and hold holy? Do they have to try to drag everything down into their sewer?
Are you sure
Submitted by Heather Radish on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:52pm.
they're capable of writing "funny" without bashing? Good comedy writing takes talent and skill honed through years of hard work.
...so imagine Mrs. Tebow had aborted her son as suggested (that's what really sets them off--can't let women think their baby has the potential to be awesome if they let it be born!). The SNL crew would have had to fill those minutes last night with something else altogether. What do you think they would have written about? Given past performances, I'm pretty sure they'd have filled it by bashing something. Trig Palin, home-schooling, the Tea Party...
Everyone here knows I'm a huge Tebow fan
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:33pm.
And I thought it was pretty funny. SNL took some shots, but they weren't that bad (although the imitation was not that good at all).
The Belichik horns had me cracked up. Considering Tebow's play thus far (and not getting cranked up until late in the game), the fourth quarter comments were on point.
I suppose the question would be, is Tebow offended? I would guess not. I think he sees this whole media craze right now as a means to an end.
Thanks for putting this here, NS. I'd never have seen it otherwise.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Just Curious
Submitted by Firmworm on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:40pm.
Why wouldn't the NFL or the Broncos go after SNL regarding trademark infringement?
2. Trade and Service Mark Rights
We (or our affiliates) and our member professional football clubs own all rights in the product names, company names, trade names, logos, product packaging and designs ("Trademarks") of the National Football League and such member clubs, and third parties own all Trademarks in their respective products or services, whether or not appearing in large print or with the trademark symbol. Unauthorized use of any such Trademarks, including reproduction, imitation, dilution or confusing or misleading uses, is prohibited under the trademark laws of the United States and other countries. You are expressly prohibited from using or misusing any Trademarks, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, and nothing otherwise stated or implied in the Services confers on you any license or right to do so.
Probably because of fair use
Submitted by Ken Shepherd on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:17pm.
Probably because of fair use exemptions which apply for purposes of parody:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm
10. What defenses are there to trademark infringement or dilution?
Defendants in a trademark infringement or dilution claim can assert basically two types of affirmative defense: fair use or parody. Fair use occurs when a descriptive mark is used in good faith for its primary, rather than secondary, meaning, and no consumer confusion is likely to result. So, for example, a cereal manufacturer may be able to describe its cereal as consisting of "all bran," without infringing upon Kelloggs' rights in the mark "All Bran." Such a use is purely descriptive, and does not invoke the secondary meaning of the mark. Similarly, in one case, a court held that the defendant's use of "fish fry" to describe a batter coating for fish was fair use and did not infringe upon the plaintiff's mark "Fish-Fri." Zatarain's, Inc. v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1983). Such uses are privileged because they use the terms only in their purely descriptive sense.
Some courts have recognized a somewhat different, but closely-related, fair-use defense, called nominative use. Nominative use occurs when use of a term is necessary for purposes of identifying another producer's product, not the user's own product. For example, in a recent case, the newspaper USA Today ran a telephone poll, asking its readers to vote for their favorite member of the music group New Kids on the Block. The New Kids on the Block sued USA Today for trademark infringement. The court held that the use of the trademark "New Kids on the Block" was a privileged nominative use because: (1) the group was not readily identifiable without using the mark; (2) USA Today used only so much of the mark as reasonably necessary to identify it; and (3) there was no suggestion of endorsement or sponsorship by the group. The basic idea is that use of a trademark is sometimes necessary to identify and talk about another party's products and services. When the above conditions are met, such a use will be privileged. New Kids on the Block v. News America Publishing, Inc., 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992).
Finally, certain parodies of trademarks may be permissible if they are not too directly tied to commercial use. The basic idea here is that artistic and editorial parodies of trademarks serve a valuable critical function, and that this critical function is entitled to some degree of First Amendment protection. The courts have adopted different ways of incorporating such First Amendment interests into the analysis. For example, some courts have applied the general "likelihood of confusion" analysis, using the First Amendment as a factor in the analysis. Other courts have expressly balanced First Amendment considerations against the degree of likely confusion. Still other courts have held that the First Amendment effectively trumps trademark law, under certain circumstances. In general, however, the courts appear to be more sympathetic to the extent that parodies are less commercial, and less sympathetic to the extent that parodies involve commercial use of the mark.
Which is also true of copyrighted materials like books, novels, plays, movies, songs, etc.:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-a...
Parody
A parody is a work that ridicules another, usually well-known work, by imitating it in a comic way. Judges understand that, by its nature, parody demands some taking from the original work being parodied. Unlike other forms of fair use, a fairly extensive use of the original work is permitted in a parody in order to “conjure up” the original.
Yep
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:11am.
Also since NBC produces SNL and broadcasts NFL games, they probably have permission to use the trademarks.
We Are The 53%
If this made you mad...
Submitted by kevinsmith5 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:44pm.
Howard Kurtz segment today on Un-Reliable Sources probably just about killed you. I know my wife thought i was gonna have a heart attack when Kurtz and all his guests referred repeatedly to Tebow's "anti-abortion Super Bowl ad"....that never mentioned abortion.
Call CNN
Submitted by kevinsmith5 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:55pm.
And tell them Kurtz should have to issue a correction/retraction of what he said about Tebow's Super Bowl ad. I already did- 404-827-1500
That awful Tim Tebow has some
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:58pm.
That awful Tim Tebow has some nerve -- supporting his mom's decision not to abort him. Then... daring to star in an ad about it.
Who the heck does he think he is?
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Is mormonism true? FIND OUT:
Submitted by stage9 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:15pm.
DNA VS THE BOOK OF MORMON
http://sourceflix.com/dna-vs-the-book-of-mormon/
The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon
http://sourceflix.com/the-bible-vs-the-book-of-mormon/
The Bible vs. Joseph Smith
http://sourceflix.com/the-bible-vs-joseph-smith-official-release/
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner." — Malcolm Muggeridge
all anti-mormon links...
Submitted by ds7 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:42pm.
you want to find out about the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints go to: lds.org or mormon.org.
Gordon B. Hinckley, prior President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1995-2008), said:
“We are Christians in a very real sense and that is coming to be more and more widely recognized. Once upon a time people everywhere said we are not Christians. They have come to recognize that we are, and that we have a very vital and dynamic religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. We, of course, accept Jesus Christ as our Leader, our King, our Savior...the dominant figure in the history of the world, the only perfect Man who ever walked the earth, the living Son of the living God. He is our Savior and our Redeemer through whose atoning sacrifice has come the opportunity of eternal life. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pray and worship in the name of Jesus Christ. He is the center of our faith and the head of our Church. The Book of Mormon is Another Testament of Jesus Christ and witnesses of His divinity, His life, and His Atonement.”
MSM been saving up for 4 years.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:43pm.
They got cut short four years ago, when McCain bagged the RNC choice.
2012, is going to be a media frenzy, the likes of which we've never seen.
You Didn't Build That.
Plan9,
Submitted by Trix Rabbit on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:04pm.
One more pedantic and tautological screed made my non-Mormons who know nothing about the LDS faith, and endorsed by ex-Mormons who think that they do.
Save the twaddle for someone who cares. You won't win any converts with this way.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
Stage9...you are exactly who
Submitted by Pewah on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:17pm.
Stage9...you are exactly who the left is referring to when they talk about hate on the part of the religious right.
Uh, so linking to videos that
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:07pm.
Uh, so linking to videos that show scientific and historical evidence against Mormonism equals hatred? To me, it seems he's just trying to show you the truth.
Let's not go down that road again, people.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:22pm.
The business about Mormonism not being a part of Christianity is old news. Asked and answered, over and over and over again.
And it's not "hate" to identify differences, folks. So let's not revisit, all right?
Yipes...
--Mike
Please, Reverend Mike...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:16pm.
Won't you preach your "Mormons Are Not Christians" sermon again--especially for the NewsBusters newcomers and naifs?
It never gets old.
Jer
Did it not register the first time?
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 5:13pm.
You act, Jer, as though I've pulled the observation out of the ether.
It's a really simple thing to comprehend, if you spend any time at all looking at the two belief systems.
--Mike
You're on the right track, Mike...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 5:43pm.
I do think you pulled the observation out of some place, but not ether.
Jer
Fascinating, Jer.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 9:23am.
Try discussing the issue without letting your comments devolve too much more, if you're inclined to continue.
--Mike
Forgive my impertinence, Mike...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 4:46pm.
but when you jump right out of the box with the smugly self-righteous and relentlessly noxious 'Mormons are sham Christians' meme while brushing aside any potential objection with "the debate is over, the averment is proved" certitude, the devolution of the issue has already reached rock bottom.
Jer
It's not hate to identify differences.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 5:31pm.
Neither is it self-righteousness.
It is, however, repetitive to personally attack someone, as you do, for observing glaring, self-evident differences between belief systems.
Is Ron Paul conservative?
Is Newt Gingrich liberal?
Is Barack Obama socialist?
Is it "smugly self-righteous" to question anything any public figure has to say about himself or his worldview?
Or just the stuff you don't approve of being questioned?
--Mike
No, Mike, it is not hate to identify differences,
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 6:32pm.
nor did I suggest otherwise.
But your anti-Mormon screeds have gone well beyond the reasonable inquiries adduced by a curious intellect interested in a fair and honest theological debate. You have arrogated to yourself the role of both prosecutor and judge, ruled the seminal question "asked and answered", and rendered a final verdict from which there is no appeal.
I object to your tactics, not to your character or integrity or commitment to your faith.
Jer
Yes, Jer, you did.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:19am.
Repeatedly.
The "screeds" come from people who want to mischaracterize honest evaluations and comparisons as some sort of nefarious plot. I haven't referenced any personal opinion, but merely provided information from the sources themselves--information which is incongruent.
If the facts bother you, I'm sorry to hear that.
--Mike
I'm sure most Nazi's thought
Submitted by Pewah on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:26pm.
I'm sure most Nazi's thought "Der ewige Jude" was a great documentary...rich in its objectivity.
Let me repeat myself, for clarity's sake.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:44pm.
Identifying differences in belief systems is not hate.
Pretending it is--even bringing in Godwin's Law and going all Nazi-analogy to do so--is misguided and overwrought.
--Mike
So showing, for instance,
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:45pm.
So showing, for instance, that Native Americans are not genetically related at all to the Hebrew people is equal to Nazism? Give me a break.
No, not similar as an
Submitted by Pewah on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:16pm.
No, not similar as an ideology, but the videos made by your hate mongering clergy are VERY MUCH like something Goebbels would have used.
1. Order multiple copies to use in your witness to Mormons, and to promote the film in your community.
2. Host a local showing of the documentary (not restricted to pastors).
3. Forward our release email to 10 or more of your friends (for those on our mailing list).
4. Share this post on your facebook, twitter, myspace, etc., with the “share” icon at the bottom of this post!
5. Embed the trailer on your own website or blog with the code below:
You have blessed us so much! Thank you for all your support, now lets spread this tool as far and wide as possible to uncover the falacy of Mormonism, and reveal the glory of God in Jesus Christ!
Stating the scientific fact
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:13pm.
Stating the scientific fact that Native Americans are descended from Asians and not Israelites is hate mongering. Really? Is the Mormon church that pathetic that they can't respond to a scientific fact and so call it hate? When will you people face the fact that the Book of Mormon is not true? Joseph Smith was a deceiver. Sure, people don't like hearing that what they've believed is wrong, but telling you some facts is not the same as hatred. Rather, the spreading of truth is an act of love.
There's our little "I'm the
Submitted by Pewah on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 9:42am.
There's our little "I'm the only true Christian and your faith sucks". You would make a great Muslim fundamentalist...you already know how to be closed minded and hate. Oh, and your contempt likely offends God.
I'm not sure what the BOM
Submitted by TruthMonger on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:28pm.
I'm not sure what the BOM says but the Bible says that satan just loves to see this kind of arguing going on
Salavation is supposed to be good news
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
Some of us have paid attention to both books.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 5:20pm.
And they're incompatible.
It isn't "hate" to observe the differences in the belief systems.
And between those two, only one of them is "arguing"--and it's not DSS.
Salvation in Jesus Christ is the Good News, indeed. Which is why it's important to repudiate disinformation when it's disseminated; the enemy, TM, enjoys falsehoods being passed off as Truth.
--Mike
I have not expressed any
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 4:28pm.
I have not expressed any contempt. You are reading into my posts that which is not there. And comparing me to a Muslim fundamentalist? Just because I believe you to be wrong means that I am the same as a suicide bomber? Is this the best argumentation Mormon apologists have? Name calling? That's not very Christian of you. And acknowledging that there can only be one true faith is not close-mindedness, it is logical. If God revealed his truth to us, there can only be one version of the truth, as anything else contradicts with it. The evidence I've seen shows that the Book of Mormon cannot be true. That is not the same as hatred. If all Mormon apologists do the same as you--ignoring the evidence and calling the opponent names--I feel sorry for you.
Pewah,
Submitted by Trix Rabbit on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 9:03pm.
Leave this one alone and pay no attention to their sophomoric attempts to downgrade the religion of someone else - under the guise of love and concern.
If you argue with the apes of wrath, you will be called a "hater" and the one named Mindy Bratton will get his underwear in a knot, go crying to the admins, and have you removed from NB.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
At least you're consistent.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 12:40pm.
In making posts (from behind the tall grass of your pseudonym) that possess an abject lack of objectivity, that is.
It's comforting, in a way, to know that cold, uncomfortable facts will never get in the way of your slinging a few brickbats when you're so inclined.
Mostly unfortunate, but, still, oddly comforting.
--Mike
Welly, well, Mindy!
Submitted by Trix Rabbit on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 9:56pm.
Thank you for answering! I knew you wouldn’t let me down!
After many weeks of pondering the question of your antipathy toward the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I have come to a concrete conclusion - and I understand your hatred.
I’m sure it’s very disheartening and frustrating to one’s self-confidence, to cast aspersions against the Mormons when your “facts” did not come from personal research - kinda like what I have done - but indisputably came from anti-Mormons such as Ed Decker, “Dr.” John Ankerberg, “Dr.” Walter Martin, the Tanners, etc.
The Baptists are losing adherents and membership is at the lowest rate since the 1950s. (New York Times, Washington Times, Houston Chronicle, USA Today). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, on the other hand, is, according to the National Council of Churches, listed as the fourth largest in the US and Canada. At this present rate of attrition, there will be less people to fill the collection plate and you, Mindy, will be out of a job. And just how are you going to feed, clothe, and shelter yourself and your family on your tenuous acting career?
As for “hiding” in the tall grass of my pseudonym, why does that bother you so? Do you have a certain animus against those who use an alias such as Boz, George Orwell, Saki, (Dickens, Eric Blair, and H.H. Munro, respectively)? My name is my business and my friends know it.
And finally, for the risible assertion that I sling brickbats. No, I do not. I use napalm.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
It's easy for you.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:24am.
To misrepresent honest concern and factual presentations as "hate."
To lie about the sources of information.
To behave irresponsibly, knowing you're well-hidden.
And to overstate your own effectiveness.
So much simpler for you that way, eh, TR?
--Mike
Sorry Mindy,
Submitted by Trix Rabbit on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 7:55pm.
I find no concern, honest, dishonest, or otherwise in anything you have ever written.
Don't know how to tell you this ace, but your piece is simply one more in a long series of poses, –attitudes if you will; an uninterrupted line of snarky gestures, unfettered by the unpleasant taste of facts or truth. You really ought to do due diligence to your Pharisee-ism by researching your targets objectively and unemotionally before surgically dispatching them.
Your is criticism of the LDS faith and cheerleading for plan9 is without nuance or substance. Not unlike a spoiled child yelling “Nyah nyah! You’re stupid!”, followed by the obligatory sticking out of the tongue.
No lies about the research. If you're not feeling too dilatory, look up the sources yourself.
And finally, Mindy, you seem extremely obsessed by the fact that I use a different moniker. Well, let me state, and without facetiousness, that the reason I use "Trix Rabbit" is because I have never felt the necessity to pimp my name and likeness in order to score a job or an acting gig.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
Evidently you use a pseudonym, whoever you are...
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:57am.
...because it makes it much easier for you to write in ways you'd never speak publicly.
You know, because you'd have to stand behind your words and all.
--Mike
Tell you what, Mindy
Submitted by Trix Rabbit on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:41pm.
The next time I am in Birmingham, I will stop in and see you - just so that I can tell you to your face that I stand by everything I say - and to make sure that you do the same.
Are you really up for it?
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
I've always enjoyed that in the past!
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 10:45pm.
And I would very much like to meet you, next time you're in the area. And that goes for every other regular here.
Seriously. I'm sure it would be great fun! Just let me know.
--Mike
Consider it done.
Submitted by Trix Rabbit on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 12:05am.
Consider it done.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
Are all Mormons this absurd?
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 3:00am.
Are all Mormons this absurd? Any criticism of their religion automatically equals hate? Pointing out the scientific fact that the Native Americans aren't descended from Israelites isn't any more hate than pointing out the historical fact that the Millerites were wrong about Christ returning in 1844. Trying to spread your beliefs to others is not hatred either. If a Christian tries to convert a Muslim, for instance, does that mean the Christian hates Muslims? Of course not. A lot of Mormons I've seen thus far seem to use this tactic that anyone pointing out a fact that puts their faith in question is a hate monger!
Darks Shadow Show...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 3:24am.
I think, and hope, your comment would be framed a bit differently if you had been around during some of the more vehement Mormon-bashing, delivered under the imprimatur of doctrinal "truth".
Jer
Ahhh, good times
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 3:35am.
Good times....
Well I never said it wasn't fun...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 3:39am.
Jer
It's not thin skin
Submitted by Denny Crane on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 11:27pm.
It's the fact that this road has been walked down many times here. And it always starts as "innocently pointing out some fact" and it turns into flame wars that are specifically forbidden on NB. There are many other places for the haters to ply their hate. And make no mistake, it is hate wrapped up in pretty little words.
When a Christian tries to convert a Muslim, they do it by pointing out the truths in Christianity, not by trying to disprove Islam.
The main contention is the haters that refuse to allow "Mormons" to say they are Christians. And any argument turns to all those anti mormon hate sites that try and use science to disprove something. Simply because a few "Christians" refuse to leave it alone.
We Are The 53%
So anyone who disagrees with you on this topic...
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:42am.
...can't have honorable motives? It can't be compassion "wrapped up in pretty little words"?
And yeah, that LDS.org is a real "anti-Mormon hate site," isn't it? Amazing that people use it at all--to demonstrate the differences between Mormonism and Christianity, that is.
Phew. Once again, people like you are "calling out" people like me. Now, where have I seen that phrase before? Hmm...
--Mike
Sorry stuffed shirt.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 7:20am.
But stage9 did not link to LDS.org. And you replied to me first.
Could it be compassion? Sure, but your history has proven that it's not.
We Are The 53%
Ah, history.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 1:13pm.
Anyone can scroll through this thread (along with previous threads that touch on this subject matter) and see facts and information be met with schoolyard name-calling and acrimony, and see remarks on an issue brought up in the original article be met with personal attacks that are specifically discouraged by site management. Even the opposing responses to stage9's video links (which are about as "hateful" as vanilla ice cream) are loaded with nasty comments, and free of any actual analysis of the material presented. You know, like "At fifty seconds into the first clip, when the narrator says that astronauts are rearranging the lunar surface into a portrait of Joseph Smith--well, that's just wrong."
History is an objective thing. The objective evidence shows there are several participants who offer little else; it would be great if they would give it a rest and just discuss issues.
--Mike
Actually, NB has a policy and
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 2:28pm.
Actually, NB has a policy and rule that those who claimed to be the best Christians love to break. No NB poster is suppose to attack or question the validity and theology of any other religion.
Why is it that those who claim to be the most Christian hate to give unto Caeser what is Caeser and to God what is God's.
How will it harm God, your flavor of Christianity to follow this NB rule?
The saddest part of all, that a few of these individuals love to come down on others for breaking the language policy of NB, but they have zero problem breaking NB rules when it suits their personal needs.
It is sickening how a handful of NBers constantly go after every single Christian religion that does not agree with their peronsal flavor of Christianity.
Did you read the headline of the article?
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 5:22pm.
You know--all of it?
--Mike
Mike Bratton, Did you read
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 7:08pm.
Mike Bratton,
Did you read the purpose of Newbsuters? You know, all of it?! To expose Liberal Media Bias! This article is about media bias, NOT about the validity and theology of Mormonism.
There are countless of websites that deal with religion where you can post your personal opinion that Mormonism is not Christian. But per NB policy, this is not one of them. If you have a problem with this policy, take it up with management.
After you, Lib.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 12:47pm.
And when I post a "personal opinion" on a theological matter, it will be labeled as such.
But I'll ask you again. Did you read the headline of the article? Or the article itself?
Or did you have a knee-jerk "Oooh, you can't talk about anything like that!" response, even if it's part of the article in question?
Romney is a poor choice for the Republican nomination on a number of fronts, without even having to consider his religious beliefs. However, when others bring them up in the midst of political discourse, figuratively sticking one's fingers in one's ears and pretending that misrepresentations about his religious beliefs aren't is just plain puerile.
--Mike
Mike, did you read the
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 1:31pm.
Mike,
did you read the purpose of NB? or did you have a knee jerk reaction to the word Mormonism and immediately felt the need to tell everyone on NB that Mormonism is not a Christian religion.
The article says nothing pro or against Mormonism, the most it says that if Romney wins, his religion, Mormonism, will come into question.
this article, this site is about media bias. Mr. Sheperd can correct me if I am wrong, but this article is about SNL bias, about media bias.
Denny Crane cut and pasted the no religion bashing on NB rule down below. Please click his link and read up on NB policy and rules regarding this matter.
There are literally thousands of websites where you can express your opinion against Mormons and their religion. NB is not one of them, it is forbidden, get it yet?
The bashing of religions by a small, but loud group of NB posters is stupid at best
You still haven't answered my question.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 4:45pm.
Unfortunate, but not unexpected.
Again, I asked posters to avoid the religious compare-and-contrasts. Quoting my own self thusly, and like so: "Let's not go down that road again, people. The business about Mormonism not being a part of Christianity is old news. Asked and answered, over and over and over again."
And Boston Legal over there (again, I'm a big fan of Mr. Shatner's) can cut and past to his heart's content, but if he doesn't read what he references, what good is it? Quoting Mr. Sheffield thusly, and like so: "Comments attacking particular religions/sects on blog posts addressing media bias against that religion/sect will not be allowed." When it becomes an "attack" to highlight objective differences between two worldviews (particularly differences sourced from the adherents themselves), then we can all pack our laptops and depart, because responsible free speech will be a thing of the past.
Mr. Sheffield, in the same policy, made this statement: "Persistent 'calling out' of others within the forum will not be allowed." Referring to stage9's original link-laden post as "anti-Mormon" , "pedantic," "tautological," "twaddle," and "Nazi" would appear to fall into that category, as would references to pulling facts out of one's intestinal tract, and people who note such differences being "stupid," the "apes of wrath," "closed minded," and "Mormon haters."
"A differs from B."
"Ah, then you're a B-hater! You closed-minded, anti-B ape, you!"
"No, A differs from B. A will tell you that it is different from B, and B.com outlines its own differences with A."
"Pedantic Nazi twaddle!"
See the discrepancies here?
Now, why would this SNL sketch, so busy harassing Tim Tebow, slip in an "endorsement" reference to Mormonism at the end of the sketch? Well, as Noel noted, "...Mormonism is quite likely to be an issue in the campaign if [Romney] wins the nomination". Since he also, correctly, observed that there are "those in the media that clearly want him to be President Obama's opponent next November," it would be an excellent idea to be ahead of the issue, and be able to speak intelligently to the equivocations Romney (along with the liberal media) has and will make about his belief system vis-a-vis Christianity.
However, that cannot happen here if even the most dispassionate observation on this issue--that doesn't violate NewsBusters rules--is continually met with waves of impulsive, off-topic bluster--that does.
--Mike
Mike, I believe that Jer
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 7:00pm.
Mike,
I believe that Jer said it best, "But your anti-Mormon screeds have gone well beyond the reasonable inquiries adduced by a curious intellect interested in a fair and honest theological debate. You have arrogated to yourself the role of both prosecutor and judge, ruled the seminal question asked and answered, and rendered a final verdict from which there is no appeal."
If you feel so strongly about NB posters violating NB policies, please by all means contact management and let them know what is going on.
All I am saying is, telling everyone here, as you have frequently done when it comes to Mormonism, that Mormons are not true Christians and then you give a litany of reasons as to why, is simply not allowed.
Once more, as clearly as I can say this...
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:41am.
...and since you brought it up...
What violated, and violates, policy around here is the barrage of attacks from people who want to frame a discussion of an issue as "hate," feeling it gives them cover to engage in schoolyard name-calling in lieu of actually addressing the issue.
I've already responded to Jer's mistaken post, but let me respond specifically to yours: In the last go-round, when this topic was brought up, no one from "management" engaged me at all for what I posted; from what I understand, there was at least one suspension given out, to someone who shares both your unsupportable stance and your methodology in responding.
If I may, let me suggest you refrain from future fallacious appeals to authority. I'm discussing an issue that Noel himself said will come into play if Romney acquires the Republican nomination, an issue that he brought up because of an example of liberal media bias that had SNL's writers suggesting that an evangelical Christian would be chastised for his faith by a "Jesus" who prays to someone else and--in a completely unrelated matter--just had to endorse Mormonism before his departure.
--Mike
Oh look Mormon hate.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:19am.
This is one of the main reasons that the DNC want Romney to be the candidate. They can then whip up enough Mormon hate to get those that think they are Christian and think that Mormons aren't to fight so much and hand the presidency back to the golfer in chief.
We Are The 53%
Please, Denny. Define the "hate" for us.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 5:24pm.
You know, with specifics. Quotes, and the like.
Show us all the bloody, gory, visceral hate involved in observing that one belief system, despite the protestations of its adherents, is incompatible with another one.
--Mike
Whazdat stuffed shirt?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 10:58pm.
You want to get into another stoopid argument because YOU don't believe that the LDS church is Christian?
The Mormon hate is right there for people to click on. Hate wrapped up in pretty little words is still hate.
Is it incompatible with your definition? Sure. But that doesn't mean that members of the LDS church aren't Christian, they just aren't Christian in your eyes. But your eyes aren't the ones that matter.
We Are The 53%
Hey stuffed shirt, here you go.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 11:06pm.
Pursuant to NewsBusters policy as outlined by Matthew Sheffield, blatant criticism of religion, grounded in scripture or not, is off limits.
We Are The 53%
Gee, thanks, T.J. Hooker.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 12:58pm.
(And I say that as a major fan of Mr. Shatner's.)
People can comment on remarks made in an article. And in case you missed it, I asked people--right off the bat--not to travel this well-worn path of discussion. "Asked and answered." No need to revisit it.
The problem arises when people such as yourself mislabel factual information as personal opinion. And, you know, "hate."
Does that misbehavior of yours have to be codified before you'll get it right?
--Mike
Mike, Whether it is a fact
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 1:35pm.
Mike,
Whether it is a fact or not is irrelavent. What is relevant is that going after the validity and theology of someone elses religion is against NB policy. Get it yet?
The article above is neither pro-mormon or against mormons. It is about media bias.
Scroll up, Lib.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 4:49pm.
If you would.
Thanks in advance.
--Mike
Funny thing about those opinions labeled as facts
Submitted by Denny Crane on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 12:41am.
If you look at some facts and ignore others you can come to any conclusion.
You asked people not to go down that path? Well stage9 didn't listen.
Here is a question for you. Can you prove Jesus turned water into wine? No? You can't? Well it looks like science just proved the bible false. See how that works?
Just because you fail to see the hate in those links, doesn't mean that it isn't there.
We Are The 53%
And the funny thing about your labels, T.J., is that...
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:49am.
...you can slap them on facts and information until you just can't slap any more.
--Mike
TJ?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 11:33pm.
Is there some reason you are calling me by a completely different character?
Or is it just the natural hypocrisy that you are so good at.
We Are The 53%
They all reference Mr. Shatner, thanks.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 3:46am.
As I've mentioned more than once.
But even that gets some nonsensical name-calling as a response?
It's "naturally hypocritical" to call "Denny Crane" "T.J. Hooker"? Wow.
Talk about overreaching...
--Mike
The hypocrisy stuffed shirt.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 7:25am.
Is you talking about slapping labels at the same time labeling something different.
We Are The 53%
Because that's really your name?
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Fri, 12/23/2011 - 1:20pm.
Yes, the heights of hypocrisy, to refer to someone's fake name with a related fake name as an attempt to bring some levity to an overwrought situation by referencing one of my favorite actors.
Perhaps you should have a long talk with the poster who, try as he might, simply can't get my first name right.
See how that goes before jumping at me for paying homage to William Shatner via your pseudonym.
--Mike
Stage9, Please be aware that
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:58pm.
Stage9,
Please be aware that NB has a standing policy for all NBers that attacking a religion, questionining the validity and theology of any religion is not permitted.
The "Mormonism All True" line
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:41pm.
My take on the "Mormonism all true" line at the end of the sketch: I didn't see it as an endorsement of Romney. It seemed to me as though they threw that line in there trying to get another cheap laugh, but there was absolutely no response from the audience. The joke bombed.
Four years ago, when there was a lot more scrutiny about Romney's faith, that joke may have gotten a laugh. But not now. If cracks about Mormonism can't get a laugh on SNL, maybe there is some hope that when the MSM inevitably questions Romney's religion, that line of "questioning" will fall flat, also.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
I didn't watch it...
Submitted by Too Old To Be Cool on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:06pm.
...the original Willy Wonka was on ABC Family.
Classics never die.
Oompa Loompa
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:14pm.
Same here. Love the Oompa Loompas. And Johnny Depp couldn't come close to Gene Wilder.
I got tired of wondering where they filmed all those scenes, so I looked it up online this morning. Turned out it was in Bavaria.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Most of the time remakes are
Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:41pm.
Most of the time remakes are crap. I watched about 5 minutes of 3:10 to Yuma. It was a shame what they did to Glenn Ford's great performance. I don't recall him uttering one cuss word in the orginal. Haven't seen True Grit but I know it can't be as good as the orginal. Nobody but John Wayne could have delivered the line "fill your hands you SOB." The remake of Parent Trap was garbage to me. If tehy ever try to make a remake of Ole Yeller or High Noon I hope the studios burns down. Yes I cried when Ole Yeller died.
Two movies that can make men cry (permissibly)
Submitted by Unsane on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 5:57pm.
There are two movies that every man is permitted to cry while watching:
1) Old Yeller
2) Brian's Song
I further submit that if you DON'T cry watching the former, than you qualify as an a**hole, no matter what gender.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
I cried watching Twilight
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:21am.
The agony was too much to bear.
Just kidding, I'm not stoopid enough to actually watch that.
We Are The 53%
Whew!
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 4:45pm.
And here I was, just about to yank your Man Card...
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
. . . and "Shane".
Submitted by Free Stinker on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 1:53pm.
. . . and "Shane".
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Where's the funny sketch about "MOOOOSLUMS"...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:46pm.
...and "ISSSLAM"??? What's the matter SNL? Are you afraid to make fun of their religion? What are a few carbombs in the parking garage at "30 Rock", don't be afraid of being kidnapped and beheaded. You can have Alec Baldwin guest host and dress up like MOOOHAMHEAD...HEE HEE HEE, what a riot that would be...
The person at Yahoo who put
Submitted by Darks Shadow Show on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 3:58pm.
The person at Yahoo who put it up there had the gall to call it "edgy". As if Christianity isn't mocked every day of the week on many shows and movies. As if they don't take jabs at believers all the time. Ridiculous.
Noel...I'm surprised that you
Submitted by Pewah on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:06pm.
Noel...I'm surprised that you would take a blatantly sarcastic line towards Mormonism and read it as an endorsement of Romney? You sound a little too tightly wound up against a Mormon being in the White House maybe?
Just talking about a baby
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:14pm.
being born is anti-abortion.
You didn't know that?
\sarc
Motherbelt, As I have
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 2:00pm.
Motherbelt,
As I have learned with pro-abortionist. They are pro-life. Yes sir they are....when it comes to their birth. However, they are pro-abortionists for the birth of everyone else.
Remember folks, S.N.L. is on N.B.C.
Submitted by djwolf12 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 5:55pm.
Well, we can only hope that when all of these faux comedians die and are at the pearly gates, christ himself will bring a tv out to make them watch their so-called "sketches", and have them explain to him what these skits actually mean and why people should think they are actually "funny".
Tim Tebow Absolute Truths
Submitted by Hero Squad on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:32pm.
I thought it was a reasonably funny approach by SNL. I dig Tim Tebow... and I love digging a little into my non-faith-based friends about how he is using divine powers to win every week (especially those of the Patriots-fan variety.)
In the spirit of fun along those lines, I created a fun little facebook page, sort of in the vein of the classic "Chuck Norris Facts." I call 'em "Tim Tebow Absolute Truths."
For example:
"Absolute Truth #8: Contrary to some reports, Tim Tebow cannot turn water into wine. However, he did often turn beer into Gatorade at Florida frat parties."
http://www.facebook.com/TimTebowAbsoluteTruths
*
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
Long time no see, Hero
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:23am.
Here's a well known one (to Gators, anyway).
Fact: Superman wears Tim Tebow underwear.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Jesus Signs with Denver Broncos
Submitted by GlenStanish on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 6:07pm.
According to the Daily Rash, Jesus signed a multimillion dollar contract with the Denver Broncos. Broncos owner claims it will get them an AFC playoff berth. http://www.thedailyrash.com/jesus-christ-signs-100-million-contract-with...