Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 40
Quote# 32238

Obama was raised muslim and went to a muslim school as a kid, he only pretends to be christian now because it helps his image

ElijahFalling, Christian Forums 30 Comments [12/11/2007 1:54:36 PM]
Fundie Index: 0
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104382

(A user was talking about her mentally disabled daughter volunteering and going to public school)

I could train a rat to communicate more than your said daughter can, AND the rat wouldn't drool. Let's say I wanted to take my rat to your older daughter's class and have it go to school there, so resources will be taken away from your daughter's class to teach my rat how to minimally communicate, because to me it's a big deal for it to communicate even a little? You would say "No, because the rat is not capable of learning, it doesn't belong there! If YOU care about teaching it how to nod it's head when it's hungry, then YOU teach it that yourself at home. It's not going to learn writing and mathematics, so it has no place is school with my child!", and you'd be right.

I thought hard about this because someone earlier pointed out that they are disabled and thus a burden to society, but they still deserve education. While I am somewhat financially conservative, I don't believe in a pure free market society, so for example, if a fourth grade boy has a terminal disease that will definitely kill him within five years (aka, he'll never use his education to contribute financially to society), then I still think he deserves to sit in that fourth grade class. Why? Because he's capable of sitting in history class and learning history, and that's where he's supposed to be. But a turtle that will live to be 120 has no right to be sitting in that history class because he's not learning history, he's just sitting there. School is for people who are capable of learning on that level!

If the city offers your older daughter and everyone her age free swim lessons, and I show up with a kid who is allergic to water and demand that my kid get skydiving lessons, what would you say? Would it be fair for my child to take away a teacher from the swim class and take away huge amounts of $$$ so that my kid can learn skydiving? Would you be happy that now your child sits in a class with a much worse teacher-to-student ratio, and now there isn't the money to teach butterfly stroke? Because that's exactly what you're doing.

I love cats and am all for volunteering, but what your daughter does is not impressive at all. Petting the cats is the fun part! There is so much more that needs to be done like changing the litter boxes and washing their dishes, feeding them, cleaning them. I hardly call "petting" volunteering because it's not something anyone would ever get paid to do. Most small children love animals and would give up their allowances to be able to go pet kitties. The fact that you're proud of your daughter over this just shows how far removed from reality you are. If a normal child convinced her parents to take her to the shelter and let her pet the cats, would you say "well, aren't you lucky that your parents let you do that?!" or "wow, you really deserve respect for petting cats!"?

Your daughter is less of the amazing volunteer making-the-world-a-better-place, and more of your own beloved pet rat whose tricks you love, who you are forcing upon the public schools.

Itsfuntorun, Free Jinger 29 Comments [10/30/2014 3:18:50 AM]
Fundie Index: 22
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104381

[On a post discussing a Church having a "Koran Burning Day" most of the posters express disgust.]

To be honest, if they burn us flags and bibles then they should not get upset when we burn quarans.

Soban, Christian Messageboard 21 Comments [10/30/2014 3:18:11 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 41703

I was in class today and overheard some people I know talking about a show they went to, in which the band(I forget the name) encouraged hatred of Christians and spoke of 'eating Christians.' This got my blood boiling, but I remained silent. A 'friend' who I went to a Christian middle and high school with, but has sadly been greatly influenced by the sin of this world, relayed this information to someone he was sitting near. Knowing that I'm a Christian, he made sure to speak loud enough for me to hear about it and then made the comment, "If society permitted it, I would be glad to do that."

Even though it's sickening, isn't it ironic that these people who hold hatred against Christians are doing us the favor of fulfilling prophecy? And in the end, they'll be kneeling before the Lord that they hated so much.

le hibou sage, RaptureReady 25 Comments [6/27/2008 9:17:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104405

Ladies and gentlemen, here is why Pope John Paul II is the antichrist.

Rev 17:7 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.
Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
Rev 17:9 And here [is] the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, [and] the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

Please watch this video http://www.john1429.org/video/antichrist/Antichrist-128.html

That video explains almost everything that I would explain, but it does not go so far as to identify the antichrist, it only identifies the 1st beast of Revelation 13.

To help reduce confusion, it will help to keep this in mind:

God The Father, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit

Satan, antichrist, False Prophet

Satan tries to mimic God in every possible way in order to deceive people. God exists as 3 separate beings and Satan tries to duplicate that.

So here are the key verses that identify Pope John Paul II as the antichrist:
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, [and] the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

A person needs to know a little history to understand this, but in 1929, the Vatican and Italy signed the Lateran Treaty which made Vatican City a separate nation. Nations are ruled by kings, presidents, etc. The Pope is the head of the Catholic church and thus became the king of Vatican City.

If you go here: http://www.wordiq.com/definition/List_of_popes
you will find an outdated list of all of the Popes, but you will see that Pope Pius XI was the Pope at the time that the Lateran Treaty was signed, which made him the 1st king.

OK, look at Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is,

Start counting Popes and you will see that Pope John Paul II is the 6th Pope and notice the verse "AND ONE IS". God made certain that there was a distinction given in Scripture. God could have said "4 have fallen........", but He made the 6th king distinctive from the rest.

Then Rev 17:10 says: [and] the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

Pope Ratzinger is "the other" Pope, and God says he will continue for a short time. I don't know exactly how short a time, but Pope John Paul II reigned for about 27 years, so I suspect that Pope Ratzinger will reign for 13 years or less.

Now this is where the antichrist appears in this verse:
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

The beast that was: John Paul II

and is not: John Paul II died in 2005

even he is the eighth, and is of the seven: this means that one of the Popes is coming back. (for people who are still confused, think of a 7 person softball team and the batting rotation. After everyone has batted once, the first batter comes to bat again, although in this case, the rotation goes to John Paul II)

Does anyone even remember who was Pope before John Paul II? I learned from "momof4survivor" that John Paul II's picture is in a new Bible that she bought, which means that he is still being promoted to the public. He was the most travelled Pope, the most well known, and the most liked Pope in recent memory. Furthermore, the Bible clearly singles him out "AND ONE IS".

Now I have said to you that Satan tries to duplicate everything that God does in order to deceive as many people as possible. When John Paul II appears to come back, it will be Satan trying to duplicate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. John Paul II will NOT be coming back because the Bible says in this verse:

Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment

This can mean only one thing.... a fallen angel will be impersonating Pope John Paul II.

Kevin Dunn, Kingmannafta 26 Comments [10/31/2014 8:43:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Yossarian Lives
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104407

Ken Hamms Ark Park is sinking.

The trouble began when the park, officially called Ark Encounter, listed its employment opportunities in August. Nestled among the requirements for all job applicants were three troubling obligatory documents: “Salvation testimony,” “Creation belief statement,” and a “Confirmation of your agreement with the AiG statement of faith.” (AiG is Answers in Genesis, Ham’s ministry and Ark Encounter’s parent company.) These first two requirements are problematic enough: The park is quite openly instructing all applicants to pledge that they personally believe in creationist Christianity. If an applicant has other beliefs, her application to Ark Encounter isn’t welcome.

Wisely, the Kentucky Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet, which oversees the dispersal of tax incentives, halted its funding after it saw Ark Encounter’s employment application. Bob Stewart, secretary of the cabinet, wrote to Ham that “the Commonwealth does not provide incentives to any company that discriminates on the basis of religion and we will not make any exception for Ark Encounter, LLC.” Before funding could proceed, Stewart explained, “the Commonwealth must have the express written assurance from Ark Encounter, LLC that it will not discriminate in any way on the basis of religion in hiring.”

In a brash and legally baffling move, Ark Encounter decided to fight back. Mike Zovath, Ark Encounter’s executive director, told reporters that Kentucky was “requiring us to give up our religious freedom and our religious rights,” and denied the validity of the state’s concerns. Given that the tax credits are still subject to final approval—and that approval is contingent upon Ark Encounter not breaking the law—one might expect Ham and his cohorts to simply comply with the state constitution. But they seem committed to the belief that their religious freedom gives them a right to take state funds with one hand and push away non-Christians with the other.

Ken Hamm/Mike Zovath, Salon.com 21 Comments [10/31/2014 8:43:53 AM]
Fundie Index: 10
Submitted By: Mister Spak
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 47526

The world hates, despises, abhors the followers of Jesus.
They will take great joy in our quick exit.
Attention span to anything important is about 2 seconds, it won't take much to divert attention to other things.
Honestly, I don't think millions will disappear.
I think the number of true believers is growing smaller in this country.
Numbers of true believers in third world countries is growing.
But they are mouths to feed and a pain to the rest of the world, the world will be glad to be rid of them.

fishersofmen, RaptureReady 43 Comments [9/16/2008 9:01:36 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104423

I feel sorry for older women (e.g. as interviewed by Sylvia Ann Hewlett) who’ve come to the overdue realization that feminist brainwashing has cheated them out of children and a husband. But I feel no sympathy for Maureen Dowd types who are incapable of introspection by age 50. She doesn’t understand that her confused ideology is what’s left her alone.

gc, GNXP 20 Comments [10/31/2014 8:48:15 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 7336

The scientific evidence supporting the Bible is increasing while evidence supporting evolution is decreasing. Everything from piltdown, java and nebraska man has been proven a hoax by paleontologists, not Christians. Paleontologists admit that the fossil records does not support evolution. The atheistic view of the world is crumbling. Sceinctist know it but are affraid to admit it because they would kicked out of there circles. Since atheist are always saying there is no God, prove it. Give me something that proves it. I atleast have the Word of God. What does an atheist have. What does evolutionist have except maybe a pigs tooth from nebraska.

thirsty, Christian Forums 15 Comments [6/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104386

God is the primary cause of all pain, and He usually uses some secondary cause to inflict it on us. Humans and demons often play the role of secondary causes. For example, God sees my rapist going on the hunt for his next victim. The man has chosen his course, God has not forced him into it. But God now chooses to lead the man directly to my bedroom instead of sending him to some other woman or entirely blocking his path.

Anna Diehl, The Pursuit of God 20 Comments [10/30/2014 3:19:32 AM]
Fundie Index: 15
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104387

To God, the cutting words I let fly out of my mouth in an argument are as bad as molesting any child. There is no such thing as an excusable sin. Oh yes, we justify our sins all day long and expect God to judge us according to our internal motivations and the pressures we were under while we demand that He judge others harshly based only on their final actions. This is hardly Christlike. God knows that humans always have reasons for the things they do—reasons that make sense to them. The child molester keeps assaulting children for the same reason the caffeine addict keeps frequenting coffee shops: both are driven by strong internal hungers that they feel they cannot control. It’s easy enough for us to say “just stop” to the molester, but at the same time we refuse to “just stop” drinking caffeine or watching television because we secretly know we can’t. We’ve become slaves to our biological desires just as much as the molester has and we feed our addictions far more often than he does, yet we still argue that the molester is in a completely different category. This is hypocritical, self-serving judging that will not get us any nearer to Christ. To gain intimacy with God, we must learn to see sin and sinners from His perspective, and we won’t do this until we see Him as the ultimate cause of all pain.

Anna Diehl, The Pursuit of God 20 Comments [10/30/2014 3:19:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104394

Jesus says to turn the other cheek and love them. He also says to dislike the sin, but to love the sinner. Indeed, I can't find any passage in the New Testament where Jesus is vengeful or angry, except when dealing with the moneychangers in the temple. Disappointed, yes, as in his disappointment with "Doubting" Thomas (who may actually have been his twin brother, Didymus Thomas) and with Peter, at times, but no actual rage.

However, the Koran does say to kill the sinner. Period.

Something I keep seeing here is that people try to say, "Well, Christianity is evil, too." No, not really. There is what the holy book says, and how it is interpreted. No one can deny the Christianity has been applied and misinterpreted poorly, at times. No one. However, that's what it was, a misinterpretation. Again, I can find no place in the New Testament where Jesus commands his followers to kill. Far from it. He teachers tolerance and accommodation ("Render unto Caesar...").

In contrast, the Koran does no such thing. It is chock full of violence, threats, and examples of killing, enslaving, etc. It isn't a matter of interpretation - its there in black and white.

This website does a pretty good job of breaking down and explaining the verses containing violence in the Koran, especially those against infidels: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm . It also attempts to read these verses in context, pointing out where things aren't quite so open to interpretation, but instead are commands to kill.

Check it out with an open mind.

Aptivaboy, Starship Modeler Discussion Forums 39 Comments [10/30/2014 3:28:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104399

It's kind of funny how all of you are making fun of God right now, but you'll see. Remember September 2011? Obama was called the Antichrist by a heckler. Everyone just BOOED at the heckler, having NO LOVE for Jesus when he was yelling PRAISE JESUS THE CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH!

Obama's reaction? "I-I-I believe in t-the L-L-Lord- Hey, did he forget his jacket?

See how he stuttered in FEAR when he said that? he's the ANTICHRIST!

LovingJesus, fstdt.com 45 Comments [10/30/2014 3:37:21 AM]
Fundie Index: 28
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104402

To be honest, I never understood why people compared the herbivore men in japan with mgtow/redpill etc in the west. I think the causes are fundamentally different. Japanese, as a group, simply are shy and have high anxiety levels. How much of that is cultural and how much is genetic I will let you guess, but either way the result is the same. Extreme timidity prevents marriage and children.

In the west the similar effect, but with a completely different cause. Westerners as a group aren't nearly as timid as that. The are simply responding to the incentives rationally and maximizing their benefit and minimizing their risk. Because of the poor structuring of incentives, you have less marriage and less children.

In china they had a 1 child policy and a cultural bias against daughters, which led to infanticide. So now you have 40 mil more men than women. A shortage of women, not men, is what decreases a demographic.

The only thing common to all is mass education that includes females, but doesn't make them focus on skills and knowledge important for being mothers. Maybe this is the root cause of Japan's and the west's problems, but the factor's above contribute just as much or more in my opinion.

Nemester, r/DarkEnlightenment/ 7 Comments [10/31/2014 8:42:47 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104403

I disagree that feminism can't explain the same problem in Japan, even when that society is more patriarchal. The explanation for the decrease in the fertility rate is essentially the same. Lots of women are entering the work force and having careers, while men are left to play second fiddle and lose the supporter and mother of their children they need to have a family. In japan, this process has been somewhat accelerated due to the fact that it is so patriarchal, and being a wife means have no career whatsoever.
Myself, I'm not that concerned with the drop in the birth rate.

davidchester, r/DarkEnlightenment/ 13 Comments [10/31/2014 8:43:02 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 6921

If you are attracted to a member of your own sex you are a homosexual piece of crap. If that person is a person under the age of accountability you are a homosexual 'pedophile.' Most (if not all and the evidence seems to support this) homosexuals are pedophiles just as there are a few heterosexual pedophiles.[...] if you ever molested anyone under the legal age of adulthood in the country you committed the crime then you are a pedophile and if that/those children were the same sex as you then you are a homosexual pedophile. This is why you perverts are trying to lower the legal age of 'consent' in some cases as low as the age of 10. It's your perverted hope that that fresh meat will then become legal and you all won't be exposed as the perverts you are.

Eric, VoyForums 21 Comments [4/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104410

I write about this a lot. Women and men inhabit different universes and the reason for that is biological.

Of course I supported women’s liberation as a child of the 60’s. But it opened a Pandora’s Box and most feminists now are just lunatics. It’s not a sane movement if it ever was.

Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Jewish women are way smarter than Asian chicks but Jewesses were raised under feminism and I understand that they are typical Western hellions.

Before women were like animals in the zoo. Sure, you can make modern zoos as humane as possible, but the animals are still in the zoo. They are not free. Prison is comforting, but at the end of the day, you are in jail and you are not a free man or animal. It wasn’t right to lock women or Blacks or gays in zoos or metaphorical prisons as we did.

Women, gays and Blacks were at best anthropological curiosities. You know, maybe it is fun to feed them and watch them in their cages, but you don’t exactly what them roaming free and really we straight White males are humans and those others are just zoo animals, so they are inferior.

The Liberation Movements of the 1960’s opened up the zoos in which we kept half the population, the queers, the Blacks and the rest. But now really we have the equivalent of lions and tigers running loose in our streets and you can’t call anyone to come capture these dangerous animals because it’s against PC.

Women nowadays are unleashed. They are untamed and feral. Feral women is not a pretty picture. It’s great for some guys and it’s crap for most. They revert to Cavewomen and practice hypergamy and other natural things that civilization was set up to keep in check in order to create a livable society. Women’s Liberation has led to Roissy, PUA’s, the Men’s Movement, Game Theory, the rise of the Republican Party and lots of other strange things. Women hate most of these things, but the truth is that they are children that women birthed.

Robert Lindsay, Beyond Highbrow 19 Comments [10/31/2014 8:44:10 AM]
Fundie Index: 9
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104413

As Christians we need to learn to think objectively. We need to question EVERYTHING that man tells us, even the Bible. Remember, I just said to question what MAN tells us. I'm not saying to question the Holy Bible. You can trust God. I am saying to question what MAN tells you from the Bible, because men could be lying or have it wrong, perhaps sincerely, but still wrong. I don't even trust my own opinions, so I'm going to follow the Word of God, whether it makes sense to me or not. God is never wrong! As Pastor John Wilkerson says, “Everything that God does is right!” I like that. Yes Sir, everything that God does is right!

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Precious 36 Comments [10/31/2014 8:44:48 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104414

Joe and Lucy have sexual intercourse. Because neither Joe nor Lucy have ever been married, they commit the sin of fornication. If they repent, God will forgive them.

Joe and Janey get married and vow to love and cherish each other until death do they part. Joe and Janey have sexual intercourse and the marriage bed is undefiled. There is no sin in their sexual relationship because they are married. It is their commitment to each other for life that makes them married, not their having sexual relations.

Joe and Janey obtain a divorce from the state. Later Rocky finds Janey, a divorced woman. They make vows promising to love and cherish each other until death do they part. Their "marriage" is legal under the state, but God sees them as adulterers. Janey has already made a lifetime commitment to love and cherish Joe. If she has sexual relations with another, she violates her marriage covenant and commits adultery.
Rocky also commits adultery when he marries Janey because she is divorced from her husband. Jesus says, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery" (Luke 16:18).
Through the marriage vows, God has made Janey one flesh with Joe and what God has joined together let no man tear apart (Matthew 19:6). Janey was not free to marry Rocky. She is still married to Joe until Joe dies. If Janey and Rocky repent of their adulterous relationship and sin no more, God will forgive them.
If Janey wants to return to God's favor, she has two choices: remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband (1 Corinthians 7:11).
If Rocky wants to return to God's favor, he must separate from Janey. Assuming Rocky has never been married, he is free to marry another because his marriage to Janey was not marriage in God's eyes.

When Joe and Janey were married, they were young and foolish. Neither believed in Jesus Christ. Yet they did make a solemn commitment to be faithful to each other "until death do us part." There is a price to be paid on judgement day if that commitment is violated by marrying another.
Joe and Janey also bought a house and made a commitment to pay a 30-year mortgage. If the terms of that mortgage are not met, there is a price to be paid. They cannot just make the excuse that they were young and foolish and be relieved of their commitment. No, they will have to uphold their commitment or lose the house.
When we get married, it is not just a 30-year commitment. It is a commitment for life. As the years go by, we may find our spouse less than ideal. Many problems arise and we see other potential partners who are far better suited to our tastes. But unlike the 30-year mortgage, we cannot close out the first obligation (marriage) and step into a new one.
If you are married to an unbeliever, but they are willing to live with you, you are not to obtain a divorce (1 Corinthians 7:12-13). If the unbeliever departs, let them go. You are not forced to live with them (1 Corinthians 7:15). However, nowhere in scripture does it say that once they have departed, you are free to marry another.

Embassy of Heaven Church, Pamphlets: Permanency of Marriage 32 Comments [10/31/2014 8:45:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 14
Submitted By: ConcernedCultist
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 7486

I CAN CAST OUT DEMONS!!!!!!!!!!!!! I literally Have done it before, and have personally eye-to-eye witness of seeing it. Many ppl have done this before throughout history. note demons are NOT fictional characters with a stupid red-costume and pointy horns and a store bought pitchfork. It is not some demon that you have heard of in your Onimusha warlords game... Because of the evidense of demons and evil spirits possessing, opressing people etc... that is another reason why i cannot take back my 'faith' if you want to call it. but EVIDENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JesusFreakGuy, POD Warrior Forum 3 Comments [7/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 38992

Pokeman is a gateway. (Sorry for those that are a fan).

I used to converse with a wiccan online. I would witness and she would listen, but sadly, to my knowledge, she has never come out of the wiccan religion. She used to teach a 'childrens wiccan class'. She would use the Pokeman cards to teach how to be introduced to your familiar and to do magic spells.

Mrsppmrxky, RaputreReady 50 Comments [5/9/2008 9:17:19 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Miri
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104404

Yes, I am; spiritually, physically, and legally married....a marriage based on true validity of God's model for marriage. Unfortunately, same-sex addicts desire their lusts to be counted as a reason to selfishly change the meaning of marriage. God doesn't see it their way, according to His Word. It is not enough for one small group to covet what another group has simply so they can think themselves to be "equal". They are not equal no matter how hard they try. There is no possibility of procreation out of their pretense. Same-sex addicts abuse the privilege to make themselves feel warm and fuzzy. Bunny slippers could have given them the same effect.

Marriage is for a man and a woman together. Anything else is just a bootleg caricature of what God created. Same-sex addicts tried to rape angels a long time ago...now they are doing the same thing to marriage. Nothing has changed, even after all these years. Sad.

Princess Sheilyia, Charisma News 21 Comments [10/31/2014 8:43:15 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 104424

In the secular worldview, why should a person love his neighbor (one chemical accident) more than a can of motor oil (another chemical accident)? In a secular worldview, would it be morally commendable for a person to sacrifice his own life to save his grandmother - and if so, why?]

Jason Lisle, Jason Lisle's blog 42 Comments [10/31/2014 8:48:21 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
Submitted By: Tony
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 86309

(Elitist Assholes Say the Darndest Things?)

First, the federal government would create a government “brand” of essential food items such as milk, cheese, meat, cereal, vegetables, bread, peanut butter, beans, juice, soup, baby formula, diapers, etc., and would package the items with simple black-and-white labels and basic descriptions. The word “Government” would be stamped across the top in bold letters so everyone would know it was a welfare item. These items could be manufactured by major companies through government contracts, thus not creating a net loss to private industry. Because competition is not an issue, taste and quality, with the exception of the baby formula and baby food, would not be a top priority. Snacks, soda, cigarettes and beer would not be available through the program.

Second, the government would lease existing store fronts and set up “government stores.” There are typically several grocery store locations that have gone out of business in any given area; these would make ideal settings for the new government stores. The number of store locations would be chosen based on the size of the area and its number of food stamp recipients. The stores would be placed on public transportation routes for convenience.

Third, and most importantly, all food stamp recipients would be required to spend their government dollars at these stores. Private grocery stores and chains, such as Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, would no longer be allowed to accept EBT cards, and the money loaded on the cards could not be withdrawn and used for any other purpose. Each card would have a set dollar amount sizable enough to purchase essential items from the government store. For example, a family of four could expect to receive enough government-brand beans, rice, bread, milk, cheese, meat, cereal and vegetables to last a month with careful planning. In other words, they must be ready to stretch a food budget. Families with babies would get a month supply of formula, baby food and diapers.

Fourth, anyone who accepts government aid would have to submit to a monthly tobacco and drug test. Food stamp recipients are, after all, wards of the state. They are slaves to the government and should be reminded of that fact. If a recipient is found to have tobacco or drugs in his system, he would be dropped from the program. People on government aid would also lose the privilege of voting. That way they couldn’t vote for greater benefits or easier terms (most of them don’t vote, but now they couldn’t).


My reform measures might seem draconian to some (and the antithesis of the free market), but they would hopefully have the desired result of reducing food stamp rolls so we could eventually eliminate the program and let the states handle the issue. Before accepting food stamps, people would have to carefully consider whether they want to face the loss of voting privileges, the humiliation of shopping at government stores and using government food, the inability to smoke or do drugs and the added inconvenience of having to make two or three stops for their groceries should they choose to buy snacks with their own money. Plus, tax producers would no longer have to knowingly be face to face with people at the check-out who are on government assistance but have nicer cell phones and accessories than they do.

There should be humiliation and pain in government assistance. Every time someone accepts food stamps, they are spitting on the principles of independence, and they, not the taxpayers who fund the program, should be reminded of that fact.

Brion McClanahan , Daily Caller 88 Comments [3/13/2012 3:27:48 AM]
Fundie Index: 73
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 29940

When God gave the Law to Moses, He was very clear about the fact that if two (of the same sex) lie together, or "know" each other as man knows a woman, then those two were to be put to death, because "it is an abomination to God." God also destroyed the cities of the plains (Sodom and Gomorrah and a couple of others) because of their proclivity to homosexual behavior.


Now this does NOT mean that God doesn't love homosexuals.

Raptureready, Raptureready.com/faq 53 Comments [10/12/2007 12:51:43 PM]
Fundie Index: 8
WTF?! || meh
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 40