The Race for Pastor-in-Chief

http://en.wikipedia.com/wiki/norway

Norway,

Normandia War, France
Britain

Hitler, George Bush, Communism, Vatican,
Ford Company, Suudi Arabia, Petroleum, Russia

JApan, VAtican

Karl Rove,
Geologist FAther

World Trade Center Twin Towers

which languages are spoken in Norway?
(one of them is not African)

Dutch Disease
Dutch in Afghanistan

Embassy of Norway in Afghanistan was abandoned
and the staff of embassy passed to neighbours

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/donna_freitas/2008/02/secularismtalk_only_meaningful/all_comments.html

Levent, Levent, Levent,

Your constant gibberish only reinforces your breeding, birth and brainwashing in Islam.

Statistically you are also a Sunni following unfortunately flawed beliefs as noted below:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teach your children that such fictional things really exist.

2. Belief that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

The only religion I abhor is Communism. There are followers of most every religion that I consider to be sorry excuses for human beings and there are atheists some posting here that are also pretty much a waste of perfectly good oxygen.

But not every member of any religion is a louse and/or a rat nor is every atheist.

B-Man

Actually, I wasn't chiding the child, but I was chiding more mature adults with her same mindset. What I stated was that the child was actually more advanced than many adults. I have high hopes for her.

I imagine that someday she will vote for a candidate without regard for his religion or other racial or gender differences. I imagine that she will not see these differences as weaknesses or failures.

People start at square 1 and progress in the manner they regard other human beings - all of them, including this girl. And she has already moved beyond the level of millions of Americans much her senior.

It's interesting to see where America is now AT.

Race and gender have been the forefront of the Democratic race -- not completely absent -- as you would have expected if Dems were indeed BEYOND all that. It has been heated and bitter.

And religion has been at the forefront of the Republican race. It has been equally heated and bitter.

Be-A-Man:

It is my understanding that Mormons do not have "magical" underwear, but have special clothing that reminds them of their promises to God, which reminder can then protect them from the consequences of serious mistakes.

That doesn't sound like Magical Thinking to me.

Do you believe that Jews think they have "magical" foreskins, which must be removed for them to be able to recognize each other? Or do you just like to distort and mischaracterize their beliefs as well...?

BTW, I rather DO believe that there will be an equal number of Dems who do vote for their candidate DESPITE his/her race or gender.

REPLY TO PATRICK, who said:

"So it isn't that hard to understand why Christian Americans want a Christian President that has a proven track record of standing on his Biblically informed conscience."

You've had such a president for seven years. Are you telling us that you can look at the example and the track record of our current holy roller president, and, with a straight face, tell us that you would go out and vote for someone with the same credentials all over again? Why do you hate your country so, that you would saddle us with such a cretan once more?

I see from recent news reports that Ted Haggard has now joined the ranks of the unadulterated hypocrites who populate the evangelical movement. His church severed its ties to Haggard completely because the process of his "spiritual restoration" was incomplete. Meaning, I take it, that he had been caught red-handed engaging once more in the conduct that got him in trouble to begin with.

Question for all you holy rollers out there: How many of your wonderful Christian leaders have to join the ranks of the disgraced and defrocked before they are recognized as the rule and not the exception? Let me put this statement on the table: "The number of immoral, hypocritical scam artists among evangelicals that have been publicly exposed shows that they are simply the tip of the iceberg of what's really there."

Do you agree or disagree with that statement?

Many of us are at least suspicious that this constant stream of busted evangelical leaders proves the point of people like Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett that hardline evangelicals are not people with a superior moral conscience linked to an omnipotent God, but pathetic, misguided persons whose brains are locked in superstition and ignorance, several degrees removed from reality. Afflicted, in other words, with whatever it is that afflicts Britney Spears.

What is most remarkable about Rev. Gaddy's comments is the idea that such common sense and resonableness need to be spoken at all to restore some balance to the debate over religion and politics in America. Any American who takes issue with his outlook doesn't understand what being an American is all about.

To love. To be loved. To never forget your own insignificance. To never get used to the unspeakable violence and the vulgar disparity of life around you. To seek joy in the saddest places. To pursue beauty to its lair. To never simplify what is complicated or complicate what is simple. To respect strength, never power. Above all, to watch. To try and understand. To never look away. And never, never, to forget.

One more point...

There is a world of difference in simply supporting a black man or a woman, and supporting a candidate who believes in magic underwear, that the Garden of Eden is located in Missouri, that Jesus came to America, and that all dark skinned people are descendants of evil.

Carol,

To answer your question: 0%

Democrats are thrilled to have the most exciting and capable field of candidates in a generation. (And that includes John Edwards who has dropped out.)

Your question is strange. It seems to imply that it is you who would have these questions, much as the girl you are chiding.

I was at the Washington State Caucuses on Saturday and at my precinct's table there sat 13 people, several who were still going to let their preference for Mitt Romney still be known.

After listening to one young girls turns of phrase for awhile, I asked her if she were a Mormon. The way she recoiled made me wonder if my brain had miswired the question and I somehow asked her if she liked to torture kittens.

"No!" she breathed. And then she magnanimously stated, I'm voting for him despite the fact that he is a Mormon."

Given her youth, I really do congratulate her. Men and women twice her age haven't gotten to that point.

BUT, it made me acutely aware of where we are AT in America.

The girls words were, "...DESPITE him being a Mormon. Sorta like, "despite him being an axe murderer." Which translates to: "Everyone knows that Mormons are evil."

Hmmm.

I wonder where the Democrats are at, voting as they are for the first black or woman presidential candidate. I wonder what percentage of them are voting for their preferred candidate DESPITE him being black, or DESPITE her being a woman, and are feeling very self-congratulatory for overlooking these unfortunate shortcomings...?

Any candidate who states that religions have signficant flaws will get my vote i.e.

THE FLAWS:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably an embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT. http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

3. Mohammed, an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

4. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

Are religions based upon the interpretation that the Bible is the word of Devil included in the Interfaith Alliance?

All faith is in the Bible being the word of some supernatural being isn't it? Why sould tax breaks and the federal tithe not be available to all who faith the Bible?

This interpretation - http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul is what I'm talking about.

Maybe the supreme court should render a decision about whether it was God, Devil or just a "gods" tale, Moses making a deal with an alleged supernatural being on fire with the fire of hell? The court is now stacked in favor of that being God so what's to lose.

If we're going to amend the constitution then let's do it right. Religion is already official so why not bring that out of the closet, stop lying to ourselves. Don't you think?

Levent Alkan,

Your constant gibberish only serves to make us wonder if Turks qualify to be members of the intellectual community.

Hey JOZVEZ, who do you like now your Mormon boy bit the dust?

Mr. Gaddy you seem have a prejudice against Christians with such comments...

"As this somewhat wild campaign season continues, for the good of all Americans, I urge all of us to give up our obsession with a candidate’s religiosity and focus on what is really important: a candidate’s record on and promise of support for the Constitution."

So I am going to try to explain through the fog of your illiberality just why a man's spiritual foundation determines his decision capability.

Yahweh (God) says "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." So you should advocate for a candidate with a record that shows he "puts his money where his mouth is" as you have said. But what you seem willing to misunderstand is that Christians are not only allowed to, but should, advocate and vote for a candidate with a record of a Christian foundation: Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Pro-Faith, and Pro-Freedom.

So it isn't that hard to understand why Christian Americans want a Christian President that has a proven track record of standing on his Biblically informed conscience.

It is not obsession to use a common sense approach in determining the best choice for the President of United States, but, those with an opposing viewpoint, like you, seem bent on disallowing anyone else's decision but your own, using a Christian forum to silence opposition.

Thank fully we aren't so foolish as to fall for your tactics. Well hopefully anyway...

Rev Gaddy:

You wrote "I have witnessed more abuses of religion in this primary season than in any other election in recent memory." which is as disagreeable as you get. I think Pat Robertson getting an endorsement for "W" directly from God may be a little more abusive.

I could be wrong but it appears to me Robertson got that endorsement from Lucifer...the one that delivers the big money to those leading the multitudes to hell.

As "some" religions make it their business to reform the government maybe, and I read what you wrote to say this, maybe those religions could use a little reforming first. Sooner or later that reform will come from government. It's just a matter of noticing how "illegal" the activities of some churches truly are.

As it now stands no candidate for president will owe evangelicals the time of day. As Bush lathered ministries in tax money...political payback, McCain should be inclined to do the reverse payback, tax reform--plug up religious loopholes.

Like Huckabee says, it ain't over yet. We can bet Lucifer is working hard for him. Without tax money Lucifer will must to pay His own way for a change.

When it come to political and religious contests there's a devil of one kind or the other on every contestant's side isn't there? Huck just has the big guy on his side, Lucifer, the one that would be God. Maybe a vote for Huck is a deadly sin?

GaryD

I am stunned to say
that in this case,
I agree with you.

Them good ole days weren't so dang good.

And remember, I was here 100 years ago.
I'm just not here now.

We've got a universe out of sorts is all the tornadoes are saying, sorry.

Mr. Gaddy if you think political discourse is any worse now than it has ever been you need to do a much more thorough study of political History.

The only difference between now and a hundred years ago is that it isn't nearly as raunchy and is a lot cooler and more calculated.

I know that a lot of people have lost their lives in the recent tornados in the south and that the loss is nothing to be flippant about; however, following Christian logic, aren't the tornados in the south God's message to Huckabee that he doesn't want him to be the president.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/nicholas_t_wright/2008/02/what_will_replace_secularism/all_comments.html