#pratt

Point Refuted A Thousand Times

Ben Garrison #conspiracy #wingnut #fundie #quack #pratt grrrgraphics.com

The Central Bankers and their vile creation, the Federal Reserve, own our politicians. They own the courts. Notice when you go to court you’ll see the American flag in gold fringe. That means ‘Admiralty Law,’ or global corporate law—not our Constitution. We are part of the globalist corporate system, not the Constitutional common law system. That’s why our names on birth certificates are in all caps. We are ushered into the world as already being owned by the central bankers. We are born to serve them. Our God-given rights are ignored. We are their slaves and when we’ve outlived our usefulness we’re encouraged to die before we can get anything back. They do this by feeding us fluoride, GMO foods, corn syrup and junk foods to make us fat as well as all sorts of cancer-causing material in endless vaccines (soon to become mandatory). They also use their destructive cultural Marxism, which teaches us that human beings are meaningless blobs of matter. That makes the idea of abortion easier to take—as well as eugenics. Their planet must be protected from us, hence the malarkey known as ‘climate change.’ They want us to feel guilty for breathing and existing!

Evil is firmly in control and guess what? The evil doers want more. More money and more power. They won’t be stopped and nobody seems able or willing to stop them. One of the few real journalists out there, Julian Assange, is in prison and under torture for heroically revealing to the world what kind of Satanic people are running this sorry show on Earth.

David J. Stewart #fundie #conspiracy #pratt jesusisprecious.org

Evolution is the most obvious evil lie ever contrived by man. In the early 19th century Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744–1829) proposed his theory of the transmutation of species, the first fully formed theory of evolution. In 1858 Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace published a new evolutionary theory, explained in detail in Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859).[1] History exposes the Freemasons as being involved in the forced indoctrination of children with the ungodly bogus theories of evolution!

There is not a more Satanic evil in this world, than the attack on impressionable children's souls with the blatant lies of evolution. Any uneducated fool knows that humans did not evolve from gorillas! If men came from apes, then why are there still apes? It is a simple question. It doesn't require a rocket scientist to figure it out. Only a wicked person who hates God would want to deprive children of the inspired Word of God, and replace it with a bizarre science-fiction story. Romans 1:28a, “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind...”

Evolutionists are fools! 1st Corinthians 3:19, “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.” Our text Scripture says in Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” We further read the truth in 2nd Peter 3:5a, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old...” Anyone who accepts the lies of evolution are spitting on the Holy Bible! We have very clear teaching in the inspired Holy Scriptures, that it was God Who created the heavens and earth, and all therein. Jeremiah 32:17a, “Ah Lord GOD! behold, thou hast made the heaven and the earth by thy great power and stretched out arm...”

I just read something that didn't surprise me—31% of all Roman Catholics accept the lies of evolution.[2] It doesn't surprise me because Catholics don't even accept the Bible. Mark 7:9, “And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.” Kindly, heathen Catholics are no better than heathen evolutionists, who elevate manmade TRADITION over the inspired eternal WORD OF GOD! People either believe what man says about God, or what God says about man. God says evolutionists are corrupt!

church mouse guy #pratt #dunning-kruger baptistboard.com

Biological evolution has been proven to be mathematically/scientifically impossible. I have linked the May article in my signature. Put simply there are 20 amino acids that make up DNA and the average strand of DNA has 250 molecules of amino acids arranged in an exact manner. So the math is 20 x 20 x 20 x 20, etc. till there are 250 such multiplications, or 20 to the 250th power, Calculate that for all the types of DNA in the world and you can quickly see that it just can't be done. Mutations in DNA mean loss of information and can lead to early death. The fossil record clearly shows that all life forms were present in the Cambrian layer. Darwin just is scientifically impossible.

Ghost #wingnut #conspiracy #pratt ghost.report

Bernie Sanders Is Pro-Rape? Where’s the #MeToo Outrage?

image


While Bernie Sanders continues to tout his Socialist pipe-dream, his followers seem to not know or not care about Bernie Sanders’s views on rape. Ever since the #MeToo movement, the acceptable boundaries of flirting and sexual harassment has become smaller and smaller. Although allegations of decades old sexual abuse claims have brought down many powerful people in the #MeToo era, it seems Bernie Sanders is immune to the same level of scrutiny.

In 1972, Bernie Sanders wrote a filthy rape fantasy piece for now defunct “The Vermont Freeman.” For those Bernie-Bros who are quick to dismiss the previous, not even Left-leaning Snopes could deny Bernie’s rape fantasy stories. In Bernie’s sick rape story, he writes:

“A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously”

In another part of the article, he gets even more disturbing by making pedophile-like statement:

“Do you know why the newspapers with articles like ‘Girl, 12, raped by 14 men’ sell so well? To what in us are they appealing?”

Unfortunately, this perverted article was dismissed by Bernie Sanders staff in 2015 as, “dumb attempt at dark satire in an alternative publication intended to attack gender stereotypes in the 1970s” that in “no way reflects his views or record on women.”

Ironically, the same Bernie Sanders “staff” who attempted to justify their boss’s rape stories, were later accused of sexual harassment a year later in 2016. The allegations were so serious that Bernie had to give a public apology for his staff’s sexual abusive conduct (3 years later in 2019).

https://youtu.be/ZFfwbnEfGww

Is it a mere coincidence that Bernie Sanders openly wrote rape stories, only to have his political staff conduct themselves in sexual abuse a year later? If the Left weren’t such disgusting hypocrites, they would have shunned Sanders in 2015 and saved the sexual abuse victims from being victimized by his staff in 2016. Moreover, now that Sanders is running for President in 2020, one can only assume that this kind of sexual abuse continues in his campaign since no real repercussions seems to happen to Bernie Sanders when it comes to rape and/or sexual abuse allegations.

I call on all Leftists to live up to your #MeToo standards and call on Bernie Sanders to drop out of the 2020 Presidential race; force Bernie to personally acknowledge his role in the promotion of rape and sexual abuse within his campaign operation. By the Left staying silent on Bernie Sanders, it only shows that Democrats don’t give a damn about #MeToo, sexual abuse or womens’ safety in general. It seems as if the only time Democrats care about sexual abuse allegations is when they can be politically exploited, which underscores their lack of true empathy of victimization.

If you are for Bernie Sanders, then you are pro-rape and sexual abuse; period!

Ghost

P.S. Bernie Sanders is such a hypocritical liar, he refuses to pay his staff the $15 an hour wage he touts on the campaign trail as the “should-be” minimum wage for America; what POS!

David J. Stewart #fundie #pratt jesus-is-savior.com

How do we show our appreciation to God for our freedoms? We teach our children that they originated from stardust, formed into slime and then somehow evolved from primitive mindless creatures into intelligent human beings. Only a complete idiot would even try to legitimize such nonsense. Only a mentally-ill person could believe that there's any truth to the bogus claims of evolutionists, especially considering that there's not even one credible shred of evidence to support it. The Bible makes more sense than any secular explanation for the origin of the universe... “In the beginning God” (Genesis 1:1a).

cadcoke5 #pratt #fundie disqus.com

"And if they're wrong, they're not wrong to the tune of 4 billion years plus." Actual tests show that these dating methods can be off by similar magnitudes.

Actually, the radiometric dating process shows a lot of inconsistencies. For example, if the entire earth were a giant diamond consisting of only Carbon 14, all of it would have decayed in the age that secularists assign to diamonds. Yet, it is there. True the C14 gives an "age" of 55,000, if we assume the current rate of C14 accumulation. Less radiation would inflate the age. So, unless we can calibrate theC14 formation rate, we can't really take these "ages" as valid. But, at the very least, it invalidates the billions of years normally assigned to diamonds.

Soft tissue has a comparable half-life type of decay rate. So, for the evolutionists, it is foolish to expect a dinosaur fossil to have soft tissue, yet it is there.

Since lava is supposed to start at 0 years, when it solidifies, we can compare known dates of lava formations, to what its radiometric dates give. But, when we do so, for lava that was known to erupt in less than 40 ago, we can get results over 3 million years, using the Potassium-argon method normally used for supposedly old samples. But, if the rock were to contain something that evolutionists expect to be from 3+ million years ago, it is assumed to be correct. There are various proposed solutions offered for the wrong dates for modern lava, but why are presumed older rocks immune from the same problems? Why should a method that tests wrong when we can verify it, be assumed to be right when we cannot verity it?

Josh Bernstein #conspiracy #pratt rightwingwatch.org

During his appearance on Bill Deagle’s radio program yesterday, radical right-wing commentator Josh Bernstein called on President Trump to order the military to arrest the heads of social media companies for supposedly censoring conservative voices on their platforms and warned that failing to do so will result in “millions of Americans” rising up to address the issue “by any means possible.”

“What President Trump needs to do is he needs to arrest the heads of Google, Twitter, and Facebook and shut down Silicon Valley,” Bernstein declared. “I would go in with the federal government and shut it down because what they are doing is illegal. They are usurping the First Amendment’s freedom of speech. They must be shut down. And if not, we need to figure out a way to get them gone.”

“The federal government needs to get involved and if they have to send the military in and drag these MFers out by their hair, that’s what needs to happen,” he added. “They are not going to sit here and destroy the freedom of speech in America and our Constitution that we have fought for and bled for and died for for hundreds of years. We are not going to let it happen. And I will tell you right now, if they continue to do this, they are going to have a major problem, not just from people like me but millions of Americans that are not going to put up with this. Let me tell you, we will take care of this by any means possible.”

Reynolds #pratt #fundie baptistboard.com

Darwin didn't really jump the gun. He proposed a theory. He himself readily admitted his theory was based on a simple cell and that his theory would be false if the cell were proven to be complex.
His theory was in fact based more in socialism, his extreme racist version of it, than science.

Angerfist #fundie #pratt disqus.com

"Now, that some sects of Christianity have issues with the LGBT crowd is not a surprise. But to be deliberately dishonest and suggest that they have embraced pedophiles is utterly revolting, completely despicable."

I find it odd that people who advocate for no objective morals regarding sex act the complete opposite when it comes to pedophelia. The same people who say we should not judge others based on sexual predisposition turn and judge those with sexual predispositions. The same people who say we should not impose sexual morals on others turn and impose objective sexual morals on others. The same people who say we should not be so bigoted turn and act like bigots.

What is completely missed by liberals, the moment you embraced subjective morality and embraced sexual perversions with homosexuality, you paved a wide road for pedophelia.

Its a logical conclusion, not a hate filled one.

The only way to oppose pedophilia is by asserting sexuality has a certain purpose being desire and should be guided by certain objective morals.

Robycop3 #pratt baptistboard.com

I have a simple question for evolutionists - If the amoeba, the simplest animal, evolved into the paramecium, a more-complex animal, which evolved into the volvox, a multi-celled animal, til finally animal life evolved into us, then, WHY ARE THERE STILL AMOEBAE???????????? Shouldn't they all have become paramecia by now ?

Mark Bradshaw #fundie #homophobia #pratt disqus.com

(Excerpts of a conversation in progress - some content removed because context can’t be provided)

“No, because rapists and murderers are not consenting, they're abusing others. Once again, you do not understand informed consent.” ----- I do understand what informed consent it. But you still haven’t cited why informed consent makes behavior moral or not.

“No, because you do not understand the concept of consent.” ---- I do. And a child can provide consent. Your hang-up is “legal” consent. If the legal system has no definition of age required for consent, is having relations with an 8 year old moral or immoral? And why?

“You fail to understand the difference between consent and abuse.” ----- You’ve shown NO connection between the two. You’ve FAILED to show why a child cannot give consent – other than “It’s the law”. So, I ask again, since slavery was legal, is slavery moral?

“If they find nothing wrong with rape or murder, yes their morals are wrong.” ----- HOW can you make this claim that their morals are wrong?

“All right, go ahead and abuse a child.” ----- Again, HOW is it abuse if (the child) consents?

“Says the law. Age of consent laws exist for a reason.” ----- So, the law is the arbiter of what is/isn’t moral? I guess slavery was moral, right? What about countries/societies that don’t have laws regarding age of consent – are relations with children moral in those instances?

“And you have elected to believe your denomination is right and the rest are wrong.” ----- Not “the rest” – just those who reject God and His word. But the same could be said of YOU, right? You reject anyone that doesn’t believe the same way you do. How is that any different than what you accuse me of doing?

“- No, I'm asserting that you have what everyone else has - an interpretation, which means you're just as wrong as everyone else and no one can agree about things because you're all so sure you've chosen the 100% correct understanding.” ----- Upon WHAT AUTHORITY can you claim that I am wrong? How can YOU be sure that YOU’VE CHOSEN the “correct” morals? You cannot even cite an authoritative source for those morals.

“You're trying to give it the answer you want, but you can't do that.” ---- I am using how words are defined.

“People don't commit murder because they believe it's acceptable...come on. They do it out of desperation in their situation and because they no longer care and have lost the ability to reason.” ----- So, now you are a psychologist and can claim to know the motivations of every murderer?

“I love the way you think any two people on earth can just make the decision to copulate and it's going to work out peachy.” ----- When did I ever assert that any behavior will “work out peachy”? Why do you insist on asserting that I’ve said things I haven’t actually said?

“Desires you feel you have the right to tell people to squash because of your religion.” ----- FALSE. All that I’ve simply stated is that homosexual behavior is immoral. People “squash” emotions and desires all of the time.

“Not confused at all. I never said our parents got everything right.” ----- Yet you DID say that you learn your morals from your parents – that your parents are your moral authority.

“We get older and our brains develop and we learn for ourselves what good morals are.” ----- “Good” based upon WHAT? You are essentially saying that YOU are your own moral authority. If someone’s morals allow for murder or rape, is that acceptable? If not, then upon WHAT AUTHORITY can one assert something is good/bad, moral/immoral?

“that as we learn to think for ourselves that we don't need a holy book to tell us what's right and wrong.” ---- Upon WHAT BASIS can you determine something to be right or wrong, moral or immoral? You haven’t answered that simple question. You keep going on and on about “learning what is right and wrong”, yet have NEVER cited a source for what is right and wrong. If someone grows up learning that murder and rape are moral, how can you say that murder and rape aren’t moral?

“This is the last time I'm going to humor you on this subject since you don't know and have no desire to know the difference between consent and abuse.” ----- Again, you continue to FAIL to cite an authoritative source for why abuse is wrong, or where not providing legal consent is a qualifier of abuse. You have FAILED to show why, in a society where there is no law regarding age of consent, it is immoral to have relations with a child who has consented.

“We take rapists and murderers out of circulation when they engage in this behavior because it's abuse and it's illegal.” ----- But WHY are those acts immoral? Why are “abuse” and “illegal behavior” immoral? WHAT AUTHORITY asserts that these acts are immoral?

“We don't do the same with homosexuals because they decide to engage in a sexual act because it's not abuse. No one gets hurt.” ----- Whether one gets hurt or not doesn’t determine morality.

“Yes. Age of consent laws aren't absolutely perfect and no two countries draw the lines in the same places, but they do the best they can.” ----- So, if a country/society define no legal age limits on consent, having relations with a 6 year old is acceptable/moral?

“The 20 year old man goes to jail. Quite rightly.” ---- What about in countries that don’t have any limits on age of consent? Is that 20 year old man having relations with a 6 year old girl moral or immoral?

Wilsonword #moonbat #pratt dailykos.com

An estimated 94 to 100 million souls lost their lives, killed by Communist regimes. The U.S.S.R. gets much focus but Communist genocides in Asia wiped out millions also. Economic and political systems are intertwined so deeply. It is too simplistic to say Communism did not really fail because it was never truly implemented as it was originally meant to be.

The two points you make are not logically connected.

a. milions died in those so called communism regimes.

b. its too simplistic to say communism did not really fail because it was never truly implemented.

You dont make any kind of connection between those two. How does A mean B is true? We could far more convincingly say the opposite: that A happened BECAUSE of B. Millions died because it was not real communism, since real communism does not have the violent coercion and murder of millions of people on the whim of one absolute ruler as an central aim or method.

ANY system that has ‘the violent coercion and murder of millions of people on the whim of one absolute ruler’ is not communism. It loses its right to call itself communism right away on just that one aspect. Since a key and unalterable aim of communism is “…the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all" - Communist Manifesto, Section 2 (Marx and Engels)

Yes, quite the opposite of what we are normally told, the basic aim of communism is: FREEDOM. So, Stalin and Mao etc were state dictators, not communists. Because they deliberately suppressed the freedom of their own people, directly against basic communist principles. It seems pretty clear…

(though, actually, we cant leave it just at that - there are various things that need be taken into account when we consider what actually happened in Russia and China then).

church mouse guy #pratt #fundie baptistboard.com

That's not talking about evolution. It means firstly that dogs have puppies and cats have kittens. It also means secondly that horse is a kind and specific breeds of horses are still horses. It was recently ruled that an Australian dingo is not a dog, because the creature cannot be domesticated although genetically it may belong to the dog family.

church mouse guy #pratt #fundie baptistboard.com

It is the American left that clearly does not want free speech. They think that free speech obstructs their agenda of a leftist dictatorship and they think that free speech is not a God-given right. The Masters of the Universe have sided with the American left. Also, the American left has sided with jihadi psychopaths in an alliance to obtain power by violence. What the American left does not understand at all is that the jihadi psychopaths will turn on them once Christians, Jews, and capitalists have all been silenced in the USA. The reason that jihadi psychopaths will turn on the American left is that Muhammad said to slay everyone who was not a member of Islam.

So meanwhile the American left is busy silencing the opponents of socialism/communism and the opponents of homosexuality and the opponents of jihadi psychopaths. It does not matter that you are a refugee from communist brutality or that you teach Christian morality or that you are just teaching what jihadi psychopaths say in Arabic in some Indianapolis mosque.

I believe that the American left and their violent jihadi psychopaths will win power in America. As I said before, I then think that the jihadi psychopaths will take power away from the American left by using the lack of free speech that the American left is now instituting. The jihadi psychopaths will say that the American left is slandering the prophet Muhammad. As President Obama said at the UN on September 25, 2012, The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

Katherine Timpf wrote in National Review yesterday that 41 percent of American university students believe that hate speech such as defined as speaking against the leftist agenda should be punished. Here are a couple of paragraphs from what she said:

What’s always been the most interesting to me is that it seems as though most of the people who want to crack down on people’s First Amendment right to free speech are also people who are very liberal, the same kinds of people who often claim that President Donald Trump is a Nazi. In other words: They want the government to have the power to control speech, they think that the head of the government is a literal Nazi, and yet they don’t see any irony in that. It truly blows my mind.

Everyone isn’t always going to like every person in a position of power in this country, and that’s exactly why we need to keep our speech completely free. If we don’t do that, then our right to speak our minds is subject to the whims of whoever happens to be in power at that time — and that person might have a different view on what kind of speech is or is not acceptable. It could get very scary: If a leader, for example, decided that he or she considered any speech criticizing him or her to be “hate speech,” then we could even lose our right to place a check on government power using our First Amendment right to be critical in that way.

So what are we to do about hateful speech? We speak out against it. That’s right: The way to stop others from saying hateful things is not to use government power to silence them, but rather to use our own freedoms to combat what they say. After all, the only way to ensure that the government doesn’t have the power to police what we say is to make sure that we never give it that power in the first place — because the same laws that could be used to stop speech you don’t like could also at some point be used to silence you.


The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. --Barack Hussein Obama

Incel Wiki #sexist #pratt incels.wiki

Dating is an RPG videogame where you need to pass a minimum looks threshold to pass levels. If the player does not meet the minimum looks treshold, he can still pass levels by compensating via money and status. In recent times, the games' difficulty levels have been increased, primarily in the West.
image
Part 1: At a bar, a man and a woman are smiling at each other. The woman’s eyes are photoshopped to glow red and emit a cone of light scanning the man’s face.
Part 2: A sinister red science-fiction computer display, showing the man’s head frontal and in profile. In the buttom-right corner, a purple female symbol with a fist inside the circle.

PERSONALITY.EXE

ARYAN SKULL SHAPE DETECTED
»INITIATE BREEDING PROTOCOL»

POS. CANTHAL DETECTED

SCANNING ONLINE COMMENT HISTORY FOR MISOGYNY…
HTTPS://WWW.REDDIT.COM/R/BRAINCELS…
|SCANNING INTENSIFIES|
»SCAN COMPLETE»
SCANNING BANK ACCOUNT FOR RESSOURCE EXTRACTION…
»RESOURCES DETECTED»

TARGET ACQUIRED: CHAD

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE:
PREGNANCY
EXTRACT SEMEN A.S.A.P.
SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:
RESOURCE EXTRACTION
KILL SEQUENCE: DIVORCE.EXE

David J. Stewart #fundie #pratt jesusisprecious.org

The popular claim is that the U.S. government is BY the people, FOR the people, and OF the people; but you're a deceived fool if you really believe that false claim. When the government ousted the inspired Holy Bible in 1963 from America's schools, they didn't ask the American people what they wanted. Some demonic Masonic judges (4 of 6) made that fateful decision for all of us! Their lame excuse was that allowing the Word of God tramples upon and violates the rights of atheists and non-religious children. But consider that those same evil judges permit the propaganda of Evolution—an insane clown circus of liars, frauds and deceivers! There is not one legitimate PROOF of Evolution! If men evolved from apes, then why are there still apes? If giraffes grew long necks (as evolutionists claim) by trying to extend their necks over millions of years to reach the leaves (food) in the trees, then what did giraffes eat for those millions of years? And if they ate food closer to the ground, why would they be trying so hard to reach the food in the trees, that they'd actually stretch their neck over millions of years? Folks, are you stupid enough to believe the absurd claims of evolutionists? What saith the Scripture? 2nd Peter 3:5-6, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.” The Holy Bible is very direct, telling us that evolutionists are WILLINGLY IGNORANT of the truth that the world was created by the Word of God!!! My friend, the Bible makes perfect sense to me, but Evolution is obvious blatant fraud.

natsumihanaki20 #homophobia #fundie #pratt deviantart.com

Same-sex marriage should not be a thing. Marriage is a constitution that should be exclusive to healthy non-life threatening heterosexual non-pedophile relationships. To a certain point, marriage is about procreation and child-rearing, but it does not necessarily have to be about procreation and child-rearing. Marriage is about the recognition or consecration of a healthy romantic relationship, or it at least it should be. Therefore, homosexual couples should not have the right to be recognized or consecrated through marriage.

Homosexual couples do not love each other, and are sick unions. Their relationship is a behavior deviant of the laws of nature, and of God. They are sick relationships whose 'love' is very alike a mental-disease, except it is actually an evil choice or result of wicked confusion. Governments should not recognize through marriage sick deviant relationships as if they were normal relationships, or even a form of love. The state must not embrace evil or immorality, but discourage it. By recognizing sick unions though same-sex marriage, the government is encouraging immorality.

Like Confucius said "Societies will achieve social and civil harmony only when individuals achieve moral harmony within themselves." Hence, encouragement of immorality and sickness will do naught but harm society, and threaten the harmony tying everything together. Same-sex marriage is alike allowing psychopaths to become doctors, or allowing a man to marry his own mother. It is not the recognition or consecration of a normal loving union, but the recognition or consecration of sickness as normality, and evil as good.

Homosexuality is a condition which is known to be exceedingly harmful, or at least this is what facts have shown. Studies have proven homosexuality to be a behavior which reduces the lifespan by 20 years precious years. This reduction in the lifespan of gays is not due to stigmatization since the studies were done in countries where opposition to homosexuality was basically none. Religious and ethnic groups which suffer from genuine discrimination ( I'm not talking about the ones who suffer from discrimination so severe so as to be killed due to what their country considers a crime, but about the ones who get beaten or prevented from getting good jobs due to what their country considers a crime) in other countries do not suffer from this appalling state.

Studies has also proven that homosexuality is a condition which increases risk of many deadly cancers, breast cancer among them. Some say this condition is because of gay's tendency towards unhealthy society-disapproved behaviors or states (smoking, drinking alcohol,...). But in all of the studies which revealed this execrable fact, heterosexuals engaged more often in unhealthy society-disapproved behaviors and suffered more of society disapproved conditions than did gays, leaving no other factor to be held accountable for gay's increased risk of cancer other than homosexuality.

There are plenty of other sicknesses caused by specious homosexuality, but due to their sheer number only this number shall be covered. Thus, the government or any other organization should not consecrate homosexuality through same-sex marriage, for it is a dangerous condition that should be discouraged not encouraged or considered equal to heterosexuality.

Homosexuality is no different from incest, both being sins against God, and medically unhealthy (homosexuality is also similar to zoophilia and other sick romances, but since most people are tremendously ignorant as to why they are similar; they shall not be discussed here for the sake of brevity). The consecration and embracement of one sick romance through the ceremony of marriage means that the other sick romance has an equivalent right to be consecrated and embraced through marriage.

Now, the fact that sick relationships should not be married does not mean that infertile couples should be prevented from marrying. Though infertile couples suffer from the sickness of barrenness, their sickness is not detrimental to the nature of the relationship or should it be an obstacle to marriage. Regardless of their inability to reproduce, their relationship is normal, not a relationship deviant to the laws of nature (opposites attract) or to the laws of God. The sexual acts committed by an infertile heterosexual couple pose no threat to their lives, and in no way are a cause of sickness. They are fully capacitated for child-rearing, and can efficiently bring up kids. Therefore, infertile couples have a complete right to be married, for they fulfill the essential requirements of marriage, and have the capability to satisfy all the optional wants of wedlock. They have the right to be married for their love is love, not sickness.

Marriage equality is a good thing, but this should not include equality among completely unequal relationships. Marriage equality should never include sick harmful relationships; marriage equality should only be for healthy heterosexual relationships. A fish should not have be treated like a cow. Unfortunately, marriage is not anymore what it actually is, the consecration of heterosexual relationships. As people became more detached from reality, and intertwined with immorality; the meaning of marriage and love has been lost. This ignorance has led many to belief in the myth that homosexuals couples can raise kids as efficiently as straight couples even though many recent and non-recent studies has said otherwise. Some in their ignorance has argued that the non-recent studies are wrong for they do not cover the well being of children raised in same-sex married couples. But, this train of thought ignores the results of recent studies which has covered random large samples of children raised in same-sex married relationships. One of these studies being the study done by Mr. Sullins (2015).

In their dark ignorance many have come to compare the performance of same-sex couples in the process of child rearing to that of single parents, even though children in same-sex couples fare worse. Homosexuality is not an inborn condition, and it is harmful. Thus, it is not a cause for special rights.

Adam Ford #fundie #pratt #homophobia adam4d.com

Jesus, Paul and the theological liberal

Jesus: And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the Kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into Hell, where the worm never dies and the fire never quenches. (Matthew 9:47)

Strawman: Whoawhoawhoa Jesus, WHOAAA! Don't you know what that sounds like to people ?

(=Addressing the audience=)

Strawman: Alright guys, so check it out. I know that sounded super bad, but Jesus didn't REALLY mean what it seemed like he obviously meant with all that ugly sin and hell and fire and stuff. There's metaphors, smiles and just WAIT until you here about this one garbage dump...

Next panel.

Paul: Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, - (1 Corinthians 6:9)

Strawman: PAUL! Wait man! Did you really have to include THAT one ?

(=Addressing the audience=)

Strawman: Alright guys, wow, yeah that def sounded waay not OK. I know it sounds like Paul was talking about men who practiced homosexuality when he said "Men who practiced homosexuality" but there are different ways of looking at it, lemme just explain it to you okay ?

Next panel.

Jesus: Just as Jonah spent three days and nights in the belly of a fish, so will the Son of Man spend three days and nights in the heart of- (Matthew 12:40)

Strawman: (bursts out laughing) JESUS! So embarrassing!!! Please just stop now and let me explain this to people.

(=Addressing the audience=)

Strawman: I know Jesus just validated as literal one of the craziest sounding stories of the Old Testament but listen: he didn't mean it LITERALLY, you know ? Jesus would never say something that contradicts science - he's just referring to this story as, like, a Jewish legend or something. Everyone knows there's no way a dude could live inside a huge fish for three days! Even God can't make that happen.

Next panel.

Paul: But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. (1 Galations 8:9)

Strawman: PAUL! BRO! Harsh sounding for reals.

(=Addressing the audience=)

Strawmen: Wow Paul can be an animated fellow huh! I know that sounded pretty bad but listen, it's not as it seems: God's love is big enough to cover ALL people and by what I mean by that is whatever you or o want to be true about God and how he deals with people is true. Okay :)

Next panel.

Jesus: Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. (Luke 9:26)

Strawman: JESUS! Ugh, that sounds so bad!!!

(=Attempts to address the audience=)

Strawman: Alright look, Jesus didn't really mean that he just... (Pauses before glancing to the side) Hey you didn't really mean that, right ?

Amos Moses #homophobia #pratt disqus.com

"the evidence is EMPIRICAL"

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Same goes for the use of ellipses, by the way.

"Take a number of homosexuals, both sexes, put the males on one island,
put the females on another island ........give them anything they want
or desire ..... deprive them of nothing ALLOW THEM TO EXPRESS THIER
DESIRE FOR ONE ANOTHER ..... unrestricted and outside of anyones
judgement ............ but they cannot leave and they cannot have the
opposite sex ...... come back in 60 years ...... nothing will be left
........ society DIES .........."
Heterosexuals of just one sex would not last longer either.
Also, I "love" the assumption here that the ONLY way to contribute to society is reproduction...

"Heterosexuals of just one sex would not last longer either."

Heteros .... DO NOT DESIRE THEIR OWN SEX ....... the object is to GIVE THEM THEIR DESIRES ..... and most homosexuals will tell you that the opposite is ABHORRENT to them .......

"Also, I "love" the assumption here that the ONLY way to contribute to society is reproduction..."

it is not an assumption ...... if you FAIL to make new members to replace the ones that die ..... THERE IS NO SOCIETY ............

1. Homosexuals do not want their own society without the other sex, they want to be an accepted part of society and be allowed to love who they love.

2. Way to miss the point I wrote IN ALL CAPS!
Of course reproduction needs to happen for society to survive. However, it should be self-evident that this is not all there is to society. Furthermore, humanity's population is very, very, very far from the point where a few people not reproducing would risk extinction for the species.
What about a couple who are childless (possible even without a choice on that matter due to infertility), but adopt an orphan and raise the child as if it was their own? Have they not contributed to society?

"they want to be an accepted part of society and be allowed to love who
they love."

it is not love ..... it is NARCISSISM ..... love does no harm to another ..... EVERYTHING the homosexual does harms themselves, their"partners", their families, and society in general ....... what they want is irrelevant ....... what they do is relevant ......... and what they want DESTROYS society .......

Mike King #fundie #pratt tomatobubble.com

The great and the good of the “intelligentsia” assure us that all “educated” people accept Charles Darwin’s Evolution as a indisputable fact of science that is "not open for debate." Oh those superstitious "straw-men" bible-thumpers portrayed in the propaganda film Inherit the Wind may have a hard time accepting it, but even the slightest doubt can never be tolerated within the elite confines of the academic cool-kids club. Woodrow Wilson Warmonger of World War I fame, a former Princeton professor himself, put it this way:

“Of course, like every other man of intelligence and education I do believe in organic evolution. It surprises me that at this late date such questions should be raised.”

And yet, neither Darwin, nor Wilson, nor the Communist ACLU Attorney Clarence Darrow (played by Spencer Tracy), nor any other “scientist” (bow your head in solemn reverence when you say that word) has ever adequately addressed the gaping holes of Darwin’s Dogma. The best rebuttal the "smart people" can muster consists of scorn, ridicule, charges of "stupidity" and even government force -- but never any true scientific substance. Many of these holes are blown wide-open in the book: “God vs Darwin: The Logical Supremacy of Intelligent Design Creationism” (by yours truly). But for this particular piece, let us focus on what is perhaps the single biggest flaw of all regarding trans-species “Evolution” – which should not be confused with minor variations / adaptations of existing characteristics already present in a gene pool (Darwin’s finches, peppered moths, stickleback fish, "super rats" etc.) We refer to this gaping hole as the “complex integration” of multiple parts that is found in all living organisms (even “simple” single-cell bacteria).

Darwin and his deluded devotees maintain that tiny “imperceptible” and "innumerable" blind and random mutations, favored by environmental circumstances, added up over very long periods of time to the point that an evolved species (such as us humans) became unrecognizable from our direct lineal “ancestors” (single-cell oceanic bacteria). Apart from the obvious fact that none of these transitions from millions of years ago were observable, how do the Evolutionists explain away the “complex integration” of our body parts? One part of any given creature could not have blindly “evolved” without so many other parts coming into existence at the exact same moment in time. How can hundreds or even thousands of complex parts -- functioning in sync with one another in a scientific symphony in which each component can only function if all the others are in place -- have “blindly” appeared, without intelligent guidance, one piece-of-the-puzzle at a time, over “millions of years?”

To better illustrate this problem, let’s have a closer look at the integration of the digestive system.

To start the digestive process, we need an oral cavity -- that is, a mouth to put the food in. The mouth needs teeth, both upper & lower sets, deeply anchored into our gums, which are attached to a jaw-bone, which is attached to a skull which is etc., etc., etc., Without all of this in place at the same time, the first step of the digestive process comes to a halt. But our gums and 32 perfectly-matching teeth alone, which come if different shapes and sizes for certain functions, won’t ensure survival. We still need saliva to begin the breaking down of the food, as well as the preservation of our teeth and the gums which hold them. And we also need mucous producing cells in the mouth to help form the saliva mix.

Remove any of those elements (oral cavity, teeth (upper & lower), gums, jaw-bone, salivary glands, mucous) and humans (and many other animals) never make it out of the box. Each of the elements is part of an integrated system in which one element cannot function, and serves no purpose, without all of the others already in place. Then of course there is the tongue – a complex multi-faceted organ in its own right, which is vital for chewing and swallowing food. In the back of the mouth, the tongue is anchored into the hyoid bone – which itself is anchored by various muscles and ligaments. Once swallowed, the pre-digested food passes through the pharynx (part of the throat) -- which is lined by more essential membranes and muscles – and moves down to the esophagus (food pipe).

Let’s review the pre-digestion process: oral cavity, teeth (upper & lower), gums, jaw bone, skull, saliva, mucous, tongue, hyoid bone, muscles, ligaments, pharynx, membranes, muscles, and esophagus. That’s 15 systems in all, each of them also highly complex, and each of them integrated with the other systems. Remove just one, and there can be no digestive system and hence, no species. Therefore, the elements of this grand orchestra had to have come into play at the same time – which implies, no, proves deliberate design. But we’re just getting started.

1. Just the individual contents of the mouth alone form a complex integrated system in which each part is useless without all others in place. 2. Complex Integration: Remove just component, and the whole structure becomes non-viable. 3. For that reason alone (although there are many other flaws) Darwin's ridiculous paper gets an "F."

Moving right along, gravity and contraction (more muscles) push the mix into the stomach where digestive enzymes really begin to break down the food. To block these powerful enzymes from literally “eating” the stomach itself, membranes called b]gastric mucosa produce a protective coating of mucous which lines the stomach. How genius is that? On to the duodenum -- the first section of the small intestine which leads to the large intestine. Along the journey there are more enzymes produced by the pancreas. Then it is down to the colon, (there is an ascending colon, a descending colon and a sigmoid colon) rectum, anal canal and out the anus -- where Darwin's stinky work-of-fiction truly belongs. Assisting the expulsion of bodily waste is the diaphragm -- a sheet of internal skeletal muscle made up of no fewer than a dozen different parts. Though it is mainly part of the respiratory system, the diaphragm also generates the pressure needed for waste disposal.

Key contributions to the process are also rendered by the liver, the gall bladder, the spleen, the cecum, and many more muscles and many more glands to numerous to name. And holding those muscles in place are a complex system of more ligaments fastened to more bones which are fastened to other bones etc. etc. etc. As for the liquids that we ingest, that speaks to a whole other complex integrated system of complex integrated systems involving kidneys, renal arteries, renal veins, urinary tracts, collecting ducts, bladder, pelvis etc[/b. Of course, all of this digestion is pointless without blood-flow to carry the food's nutrients throughout the body – which means that even more complex systems had to have been be put in place at the same time: blood, veins, arteries, capillaries. But the nutrient-carrying blood can’t flow through the vascular system without a pump and an oxidation system already in place, right? You need a set of heart & lungs which are the basis of the cardio-pulminary system -- an incredibly complex integrated structure made up of countless essential components such as the -- (well, you get the point -- we can go on forever with this --)

So, let’s take it from the top, boys and girls. All of the following complex elements must come into place at the same time in order for digestion to work:

oral cavity, teeth, gums, jaw-bone, skull, saliva, mucous, tongue, hyoid bone, muscles, ligaments, pharynx, membranes, more muscles, and esophagus, more muscles, stomach, digestive enzymes, gastric mucosa, duodenum, small intestine, large intestine, more enzymes, pancreas, ascending colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon, rectum, anal canal, anus, diaphragm, liver, gall bladder, spleen, cecum, more muscles, more glands, more ligaments, more bones, kidneys, renal arteries, renal veins, urinary tracts, collecting ducts, bladder, pelvis, blood, veins, arteries, capillaries, cardio-pulminary system, a bunch of other intregrated items and systems too numerous to list here and a partridge in a pear tree!

Each necessary component "blindly" evolved and integrated with all the others by itself --- one at a time, without design? Ha ha ha. --- "Intelligent and educated," my foot!

This mind-boggling complexity, -- which cannot be reduced by even a single element lest the species cease to exist -- becomes even more integrated and more complicated when studied on a molecular level --- the complex "4-digit" DNA “computer coding” behind it all. The mere suggestion of these integrated systems blindly “evolving,” one component at a time, independent of one another, in an “imperceptible” manner over millions of years is absurd on its face. As a matter of fact, St. Charles Darwin himself, in a pathetically futile effort to explain away the “problem” that integrated parts posed for his theory, admitted that his idea sounded “absurd in the highest degree.”

From his Origin of the Species:

“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

After objecting to his own theory (so that he can control the debate), Darwin proceeds, in the very next paragraph, to lamely explain away the "absurdity" of attributing the integrated complexity of the eye to random evolution. But his "solution" to the problem amounts to nothing but a diversionary debating trick.

“When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science."

Darwin is using an old lawyer's trick here. He states the objection, then casually explains it away by using a bizarre and totally irrelevant analogy to astronomy. He also adds a theatrical touch of Latin mumbo-jumbo to impress the easily-impressed. We're not talking about the sun and the earth and "Vox populi," Chuckie! The subject here is your admittedly "absurd"-sounding claim that the integrated complexity of organisms and body parts came about blindly, randomly, and one element at a time without any intelligence involved. Explain it for us!

Plato warned us to be on guard against the type of empty diversionary rhetoric that Darwin used to explain away the massive holes in his goofy theory of self-creating life coming blindly from non-life, and then putting its own integrated parts together.

Darwin continues:

"Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.”

More slick sophistry and silly semantics -- An "if", followed by another "if," then a "can be," then an "if further," then a "should be," and a "could be," then a "though," and finally a "should not be." If elephants could fly -- If I could live forever -- If dogs could speak. If, maybe, perhaps, and, though, coulda, woulda, shoulda, mighta, but, but but, if, if, if... This then is what the academic cool-kids club refers to as "science?" This non-observable and wild speculation about "numerous gradations" of the eye's integrated components amounts to pure rhetorical manipulation -- not true science. Read it again closely. Darwin totally dodges the question and explains NOTHING to solve the mystery of complex integration -- a mind-boggling phenomena that is observable in all living creatures and even "simple" single-cell organisms.

As it is with the many essential integrated systems of an automobile -- each one absolutely necessary for the car as a whole to function -- (engine, transmission, wheels, axle, spark plugs, gas tank, battery, hoses, belts, ignition, alternator, steering wheel, gear shift, accelerator, carburetor, braking system, drive shaft, oil, coolant / anti-freeze, transmission fluid, containers for fluid, radiator, chassis, pistons, nuts, bolts, welded parts, etc.) -- only the existence of an eternal designing force without origin, permeating and communicating through every living cell of existence, possessed of freakish intelligence and power, and far beyond our lowly human "pay grade" to ever fully comprehend, can adequately explain the complex integration of multiple systems that neither Darwin nor his sci-fi cult of diploma-decorated dick-heads have ever been able to, and never will be.

Can you?

1. The 20th Century discovery of DNA codes which program our physical traits makes Darwin's problem of explaining away integrated complexity a million times even more complex. 2. Imagine car parts blindly "evolving" one at a time and "randomly" integrating themselves during a billion-year tornado. That is essentially what "educated" evolutionists, without a shred of observable precedent, believe to have happened in the living world. 3. You may be a whiz at mathematics and rhetoric, professor. But you're as bloody frickin' stupid as you are crazy!

David J. Stewart #fundie #conspiracy #wingnut #sexist #homophobia #pratt jesusisprecious.org

And so, don't be an idiot and think that Donald Trump as U.S. President is going to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! It won't happen. My friend, America will NEVER be great again until we turn back to a holy God...

America will NEVER be great again until we once again believe the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
America will NEVER be great again until we repent and turn back to the God of the Holy Bible.
America will NEVER be great again until we burn Hollywood's cesspool of iniquity to the ground.
America will NEVER be great again until we dismantle Las Vegas (aka, “SIN CITY”) completely.
America will NEVER be great again until we eliminate the filth and covetousness on the internet.
America will NEVER be great again until we get rid of all the illicit gambling casinos and strip clubs.
America will NEVER be great again until we spend more time with God and family than the television.
America will NEVER be great again until we do away with the Federal Reserve Banks and fiat money.
America will NEVER be great again until we bring the King James Bible back into America's classrooms.
America will NEVER be great again until we bring the King James Bible back into America's churches.
America will NEVER be great again until we stop indoctrinating children with the satanic lies of Evolution.
America will NEVER be great again until we burn all the counterfeit Bible revisions in our churches.
America will NEVER be great again until we stop voting for the lesser of two evils, and not vote for evil at all.
America will NEVER be great again until we prosecute the CIA for trafficking drugs into the United States.
America will NEVER be great again until we stop allowing people to get divorced for any reason at all.
America will NEVER be great again until we bring back the tens-of-millions of lost jobs from foreign slave labor.
America will NEVER be great again until we drain the swamp in Washington DC and elect honest leaders.
America will NEVER be great again until we stop the sexual exploitation of youth through the music industry.
America will NEVER be great again until we stop supporting manmade Illuminati Israel since 1948.
America will NEVER be great again until we America's women forsake feminism and start obeying their husbands.
America will NEVER be great again until men forsake Hooters, Playboy and internet porn and start thinking pure.
America will NEVER be great again until we start moving toward rural living instead of big city urbanization.
America will NEVER be great again until we make same-sex abominations illegal, and stop gays from adopting children.
America will NEVER be great again until we stop letting Globalists exploit the U.S. toward World Government.
America will NEVER be great again until we stop lawyers and judges from raping citizens, bilking them financially.
America will NEVER be great again until we get away from big government and big cities, which promote indifference.
America will NEVER be great again until we enforce border security and ship millions of illegal aliens back home.
America will NEVER be great again until we start rehabilitating prison inmates instead of locking them away.
America will NEVER be great again until we run the ungodly manure-spreading newsmedia out of the country.
America will NEVER be great again until we restore state's rights and limit the power of federal government.
America will NEVER be great again until we get back to little league and recreation, instead of kids parked in front of TV.
America will NEVER be great again until we return to the Christian principles upon which our nation was built.

I could list a thousand more things wrong in the U.S. today. We've lost so much in America! I think our country is doomed, because once sin infests a nation, only one of two things can turn it back to righteousness: 1) Bible-preaching, or 2) God's judgment. Since pastors don't preach anymore, and counterfeit Bible revisions have flooded into the churches, and “the simplicity that is in Christ” (the Gospel, 2nd Corinthians 11:3) has been replaced with false repentance, and churches are supporting manmade Illuminati Israel (thus consequently supporting the New World Order), it appears that all hope is gone, and only God's judgment can save us now!

Boy Scouts allow homosexual scout leaders. That is sickening! If you go fishing, officers and park rangers can confiscate everything you own if you don't know that you are required to pay for a fishing permit. I think that ruins America! Due to liability, many organizations are reluctant to host little league games and other fun activities for children. And now with the pedophile problem—which is a direct consequence of removing the Bible from the schools, Playboy magazine, sensual rock music, feminism, dying churches, homosexuality, the lies of Evolution, the evil influences on television, divorce (no father in the home), Hollywood and the general moral downfall of America—everyone is paranoid about their neighbours these days! How could America ever be great again in such a wicked climate? Everything is deteriorating quickly with a domino effect. We haven't seen anything yet. The daily news already cannot keep up with the abundance of heinous crimes being committed across America. Americans have become extremely covetous and materialistic. Psalms 135:15, “The idols of the heathen are silver and gold, the work of men's hands.”

Ray Comfort #fundie #pratt onthebox.us

“I have no faith. Please do not try and bring me down to that level."

So you have no one you trust. I guess you are insecure. You even sound paranoid. Paranoid people refuse to trust people or things. They live in fear. They have no faith in banks, the police, planes or elevators. Paranoid: "Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others."

DavidE #homophobia #wingnut #fundie #pratt conservapedia.com

Homosexual logic is the "logic" used to justify the Homosexual Agenda. Like liberal logic generally, homosexual logic relies on statements that appear to be logical but that are actually rife with logical fallacies. Examples include:
Calling things the opposite of what they are, e.g., justifying their special rights as just another form of equal protection.
Improperly shifting the burden of proof by asserting that homosexuality must be understood as not a choice until it is conclusively shown to be one.
Slippery slope arguments in which they argue that repression of homosexuality will lead to a series of bad results that actually will not follow or that have nothing to do with homosexuality.
Cherry-picking only those parts of the Bible that suit their purposes, while arguing that any parts of Scripture that are inconvenient to them need to be "interpreted" correctly or were "nailed to the Cross," or that just by mentioning them, you are "twisting" them in some unspecified way.
Taking it for granted that any book with a pro-homosexual slant must be true, rather than critically assessing whether that book is credible.
Appealing to majority will, but only when it suits them; switching back and forth between "This is what the people want" and "America is a republic, not a democracy."
Demanding that their own interpretation (or misinterpretation) of the Bible be made binding on everyone, despite the establishment clause.
Demanding limited government, but only when it suits them, while supporting government oppression of anyone they don't like.
Claiming to be persecuted when in reality it is they who are doing the persecuting.

Chick Publications #fundie #homophobia #pratt chick.com

The wave of doubt in the Word of God is rising to a tsunami. Two lies are the primary sources for this doubt: 1) homosexual orientation is God given, and 2) evolution.

“Christian” proponents of the first lie include Matthew Vines, author of “God and the Gay Christian,” recently released by Convergent Books, and Vicky Beeching, popular CCM singer and social commentator.  

Vines discounts the biblical accounts of God’s view of homosexuals by claiming that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed over an attempted gang rape; and that Leviticus 18 is old, outdated law.

Beeching recently “came out” as “gay,” declaring that God’s love would approve her affection for another woman. And she stated her determination to spread the lie: “I feel certain God loves me just the way I am, and I have a huge sense of calling to communicate that to young people.”

Another “Christian” singer has gone public, promoting the other lie, evolution. The false science of evolution presents biblical history as so many myths and legends. Michael Gungor, with his wife, Lisa, form the Christian band, Gungor. Like many who doubt the biblical account of creation, Gungor has bought into “theistic evolution,” the belief that somehow, God used the evolution process to create the world and all of creation. Of course, to do this, the biblical account has to be discarded as just myth and legend.

To Gungor, the Genesis account of creation is simply a poem, one of great intrinsic value, but not to be taken literally. But, as someone asked, “If you don’t believe the first 11 chapters of Genesis, why do you need John 3:16?”

This attempt to shove evolution into God’s narrative of creation demonstrates monumental ignorance of the evidence. Author Vance Ferrell, has compiled nearly 1000 pages of evidence in his book, The Evolution Handbook, confounding the “theory” of evolution.

Part two of the chapter on age of the earth illustrates King David’s declaration: “The heavens declare the glory of God...” “Ferrell describes stars so enormous in diameter that they could not have existed for millions of years, or their initial mass would have been impossibly large.”

Also in those “heavens” there are enormous stars that radiate a million times the energy of our sun. But the evolutionist’s own theory about star energy indicates these stars don’t contain enough hydrogen to maintain fusion longer than 300,000 years.

When it comes to our own sun, its radiation that warms our planet is causing it to slowly shrink. To be its present size, it would have been so large 50,000 years ago as to boil our oceans.

Ferrell’s book is a very thick read and a huge indictment of evolutionary theory. Key topics such as big bang, mutations, age of earth, inaccurate dating methods, effects of Noah’s flood, tectonics, archeological dating, DNA, are included in devastating detail.

A whole chapter is devoted to the intelligent design movement of scientists, Christian and unbelievers, who have concluded, from the overwhelming evidence, that creation must have a designer.

This fact sits deep in the heart of man who always assumes that cars, wrist watches, smart phones and bandwidth are all designed by someone. Yet, evolutionists, with a straight face, teach our children that millions of years of accidents created such wonders as their mother, puppies, whales and sunshine.

With resources such as The Evolution Handbook, you can easily counter the lies that Satan is feeding you and your kids at every turn.

Younger and younger children are encountering the question of homosexuality. As they are able, tracts like, Sin City, Home Alone, Uninvited and Doom Town can be used to guide them to the truth. We also need to salt these truths widely into our communities to strengthen those who really want to stand up for righteousness.

Mike Shoesmith #fundie #pratt ppsimmons.blogspot.co.uk

Should Evolutionists Stay Away From Doctors and Medicine? By Their Logic: YES!

I think I shall never forget a YouTube video I watched about ten years ago in which a young man in his twenties discussed a painful ear infection he was battling. To my amazement he went on to lament the decision he made to take antibiotics; a decision made for him by the pain no doubt.

"I believe in evolution and by taking the medicine I am hindering the evolutionary process," he said to the camera.

Upon further investigation I discovered his channel was dedicated to promoting modern atheism and deep time fish-to-men evolution. "Finally," I thought, "an honest atheist."

Any internal infection can kill you. A dental abscess has toxins that can poison your system. Ear infections are a particularly nasty infliction. Yet the evolutionist will ignore the demands of their theory and implement the aggressive use of force against the attempts of nature to kill us at nearly every turn.

And yet I find it equally disturbing whenever we encounter the evolutionist argument against biblical creationism in the form of their favorite red herring: "If you don't believe in evolution then don't take antibiotics or vaccines because, after all, bacteria and viruses evolve (adapt to our attempts to kill them) and medical science must always stay ahead of those evolutionary mutations in order to produce effective vaccines and antibiotics."

Aha!

Therein lies the single greatest piece of evidence the deep time community has that fish became men, that is, that viruses become viruses and bacteria become bacteria. Therefore we Christians mustn't ever use antibiotics or vaccines because we refuse to believe that fish became men based solely on the fact that bacteria become bacteria and viruses become viruses.

[...]

The Bible offers the greatest reason for the need to use antibiotics and vaccines, etc. Because of the fall of humanity the earth is against us.

Genesis 3:17 ¶And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return
Humanity was thrust into the position of requiring the aggressive use of force to keep sickness away because of this event which happened as the result of man's decision to disobey God. That is the creationist view of the world which lines up perfectly with the evidence and need for such aggressive items as antibiotics (which were accidentally discovered) and vaccines (developed by scientists with God-given intellect).

I am not sure what happened to the atheist in the video I mentioned at first. I hope he recovered from his painful infection and I hope he rejected the Darwinian demand that the bacteria kill him and take over the earth. Above all I hope the evolutionists embrace the knowledge of the truth that just because bacteria change into bacteria and viruses change into viruses that does not mean the evolutionist was once a fish.

ExaltGod #fundie #pratt #homophobia exaltgod.deviantart.com

Why in the world do you call yourself a Christian if:

* You think the Bible is man-made, and not inspired by God
* You think evolution is true and Genesis is just a fairy tale
* You think something is only sinful if it hurts someone, and not if it's against God's law
* You think God is totally supportive of homosexuality
* You think God is totally supportive of other religions
* You think Hell is a ridiculous myth
* You think miracles are as real as invisible pink unicorns
* You think God just wants us to accept whatever lifestyles exist, even if they are incredibly sinful
* You think God loves pride parades
* You think God wants people to be homosexual
* You think it doesn't matter what anyone believes, because everyone's going to Heaven anyway
* You think God doesn't care how you live, as long as you say "I believe in God"
* You think God hates judging
* You think God loves tolerance for sin
* You think that when God returns to Earth to rule and reign, He's going to set up a democratic government, and that everyone will have a right sin as they please
* You think only a horribly evil God would ever punish people for breaking His law
* You think Jesus supports getting drunk
* You think pornography is totally fine
* You think prostitution should be legalized
* You think getting high is totally fine
* You think the Bible is outdated and bigoted, and should be ignored, except for John 3:16, and the very first part of Matthew 7, of course
* You think God doesn't hate anyone, ever
* You think Jesus died so that you could sin even more
* You think the most important thing is to be true to yourself, and be proud of who you are
* You think self esteem is more important than the fear of the Lord
* You think Jesus hates religion


Seriously...just, stop.
Just admit you're not a Christian already, would you?
Or rather, just admit that you hate God, you hate His word, and you hate Christianity.
Just admit it, and stop lying to everyone.

Anquinette Jones #fundie #pratt rawstory.com

Students in a freshman biology class in Atlanta’s Grady High School were shown a PowerPoint presentation that linked evolution to Satan, abortion, divorce, racism, and homosexuality.

The Grady High student newspaper, the Southerner, reported that Anquinette Jones used the PowerPoint presentation to teach the theory of evolution to her students during a freshman biology class last spring.

One slide in the 52-slide presentation included an illustration that shows creationism and evolution as two sides in a war between good and evil. Creationism is shown to be from Christ, while evolution is from Satan. The illustration suggests evolution is the driving force behind euthanasia, homosexuality, pornography, abortion, divorce, and racism — social ills that are all defeated by creationism and Christianity.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution noted the PowerPoint presentation also includes “grammatical errors and odd illustrations including a photo of Octomom,” along with the creationism picture.

Deborah Hazelip #fundie #pratt #homophobia facebook.com

In response to Robert Punu who posted: Fact of the matter is the atheist/agnostic has wishes and desires of their own. A wish that no Deity exists who will call them to account one day for their actions. Such a desire can be very motivating and could drive a person to hold an atheistic/agnostic position.
Charles Darwin said: "I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother, and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine."

While I cannot prove to you that God exists, and you cannot prove to me that God does not exist.

I can give my own personal testimony that I was murdered at the age of 5 by Atheists, Roman Catholics, Homosexuals, Muslims and many, many other religious groups that were involved in the government experimental program that my twin sister and I were placed into against our own God-given free will and right to choose. I was standing in Heaven before the throne of God the Father and Jesus Christ was and still is seated at His right hand. I could have stayed. When I hear the ridiculous arguments trying to prove that God does not exist and they all of those who were responsible for hurting me and eventually even killing me at the age of 5 when I was helpless to stop them. I thank God that God Himself exists and that the day will come when "all" of the wicked people who live their lives for themselves will have to give account of themselves and their actions, but they will also receive "all" of the good and the "bad" that they have done to other people themselves. NO ONE gets away with anything. "If" you do "not" pay for it down here on the Earth, you will pay for it in Heaven on the Day of Judgment. I asked God the Father to send me back. Since then, I have often regretted my request.

But soon, Jesus Christ will come for His Bride the True Church of God, the True Body of Jesus Christ, the true honest sincere "born again" of God's Holy Spirit Christian believers in Jesus Christ and I will then get to rise to meet Jesus Christ in the air and I will then be with Jesus forever and forever, Amen! I can hardly wait for that day to come.

It vexes my spirit to hear about "all" of the "evil" that is going on down here on the Earth.

[So, Deborah, how long were you dead for when you'd been murdered by homosexuals and atheists? A day? A week? 6 months?]

I was killed by electric shock. Their intention was to try and get me to deny Jesus Christ as my personal Savior and as the only Lord of my life, but I just kept right on refusing and they kept on increasing the voltage until it literally killed me.

My eternal spirit with my eternal soul left my body and I remembered looking back at my body lying dead on the hospital bed, and then I went straight to Heaven where I found myself standing before the throne of God.

Jesus Returning #fundie #homophobia #pratt church-of-illumination.com

I thought all you evil buggers might enjoy this.

Atheists Are Worse Than Satanists
1. Satanists Beleive In God:
To beleive in Satan one must also beleive in God. This means that even though Satanists worship Lucifer they still acknowledge the existence of God while atheists do not. The worst sin ever is not beleiving in God so Atheists are pure evil.
2. Atheists Are Homosexuals While Satanists Are Not:
Even the leader of the church of Satan himself (Anton Levy) still had a wife. Due to Atheists love of Science and Witchcraft they are attracted to members of the same species and become Gays and lesbians. The Bible says that homosexuality is the worst sin ever and that atheists will suffer in hell worse then murderers.
3. Atheists offer more ritual sacrifices than Satanists:
Satanists rarely offer human sacrifices but Atheists do it all the time. They murder millions all in the name of there lord “Science” including: monkeys, animals, mice, humans, and african americans.Satanists are evil but they would never send monkeys into space while Atheists sacrifice thousands of monkeys in they’re science experiments.
4. Atheists Try to Become Gods:
- Satanists listen to heavy metal but they do not build robots and clone sheep.
- Satanists wear black clothing but they do not try to prevent God from giving people Aids.
- Atheists believe in aliens but Satanists know that the only earth contains life.
- Atheists are Feminists but at least Satanists know that women are here to serve Man.

Atheists are more evil then Satanists but
Feminists are more evil then Atheists.
Follow us on Twitter: @Jesus Returning

David J. Stewart #fundie #pratt #forced-birth #homophobia jesusisprecious.org

People who live in gross immorality become so used to it that the awfulness of sin is gone. Think with me, if you will, how evil America has become. We teach our children the blatant lies of evolution, without the slightest shred of proof to back up the ludicrous claims. What was once an unproven theory is now arrogantly (and sinfully) taught by wicked men and women as fact. And please don't mistake the legitimate science of an old earth for the bogus deception of evolution. The Bible teaches that the earth is indeed millions of years old, but mankind was created by God at approximately 4,000 B.C. as taught in the Genesis account of Creation. For an in-depth Biblical exegesis on this important matter, please read, THE TRUTH ABOUT EVOLUTION (or don't let Satan make a monkey out of you) by Dr. Max D. Younce.

How wicked is America? We have slaughtered, brutally murdered over 55,000,000 precious babies since Roe vs. Wade in 1972 and the number is only going higher and higher! Worldwide, a startling 1,700,000,000 children have been murdered by abortion! Sicko John Wayne Gacy murdered 33 young men and was sentenced to death; yet there are abortion doctors who have murdered THOUSANDS of human beings in the womb, cutting their bodies into pieces like Jeffrey Dahmer, putting their body parts into refrigerators, and even selling the BODY PARTS! Yet these evil doctors of death are sinfully honored by a wicked society which craves more and more death and gore on television. TV has completely DESENSITIZED our society to the value of human life and the horrific evils of abortion and war. Americans have become indifferent, complacent and spoiled.

I have just touched the tip of the iceberg concerning America's utter wickedness in the sight of God, and the irony of a Noah's ark theme park amidst such a wicked people! As I type, at least 13 states have now legalized homosexual unions (errantly called “marriages”). The only “gay marriage” is between one man and one woman. Homosexuality is a disgusting sin which brings the judgment of God. It's just a matter of time, likely if Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton is appointed Commander-In-Thief of our nation, that the U.S. Supreme Court (supreme arrogance against God) will legalize same-sex unions at a federal level, just like Roe vs. Wade (of which 37 states had already legalized abortion at the time it was federalized). Same-sex marriage is the death of America in so many ways! Even in Noah's time we don't read about homosexuals getting legally married, which is sanctioning the wickedness, claiming it is good and acceptable to God. Biblically, God hates all sin (Psalms 97:10; Hebrews 1:9). God destroyed the entire world by flood because of their constant wickedness. We need 40 days of rain today!

Vashta Nerada #homophobia #pratt forum.nationstates.net

No, I highly doubt you know how I think because we've never met or spoken on a personal level. I use common sense to understand the fact that homosexuality is wrong no matter how you look at it. Even if you look at it from a religious or atheist point of view, homosexuality is unnatural regardless of your stance. At least with heterosexuality, there is an outcome that results from opposite sex relationships that benefit society. There is no such benefit with homosexuality. So I don't an excuse to speak about homosexuality. No excuse is needed. If I see something is wrong, I'm going to speak up about it. The only defense you have is that there is a large, vocal minority people with a lot of money and thus a lot of political power, pushing the issue in society, and push people to accept something that most of the world believes is wrong.

Rafael Cruz #fundie #wingnut #homophobia #pratt rightwingwatch.org

You know communism or socialism, whatever you want to call it, what is happening in this country is not different than what happened in Cuba; the procedure might be different, they may be a little slower, but it’s the same thing. It is about government control of your lives. You got to realize how Marxist, how socialism works. We need to understand the issues. When you hear all these things about homosexual marriage, this has nothing to do with homosexual rights. Did you know that? The whole objective is the destruction of the traditional family, it has nothing to do with homosexuals, they could care less about homosexuals, they want to destroy the family.

You need to understand, it’s just like evolution. You know most Americans have their head in the sand about evolution. I’ve met so many Christians that tell me ‘evolution is a scientific fact.’ Baloney! I am a scientist, there is nothing scientific about evolution. But you know something, Karl Marx said it, ‘I can use the teachings of Darwin to promote communism.’ Why? Because communism, or call it socialism if you think communism is too hard a word, necessitates for government to be your god and for government to be your god they need to destroy the concept of God. That’s why communism and evolution go hand and hand. Evolution is one of the strongest tools of Marxism because if they can convince you that you came from a monkey, it’s much easier to convince you that God does not exist.

William Lane Craig #pratt #homophobia reasonablefaith.org

The lesson to be learned from the legality of interracial marriage is that just as the law must be blind with respect to the race of persons desiring to marry, so it must also be blind to the sexual orientation of persons desiring to marry. Just as persons desiring to marry cannot be discriminated against on the basis of their race, neither can they be discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation. When two persons ask the state for the right to marry, the state must ask no questions about their race or sexual orientation. Just as laws which would discriminate against persons’ marrying on the basis of their race are unconstitutional, so laws which would discriminate against persons’ marrying on the basis of their sexual orientation are unconstitutional.

That’s why the term “gay marriage” (which, I noticed, you were careful to avoid) is misconceived. Laws permitting gay marriage would be clearly unconstitutional, since they would not be blind to the sexual orientation of the persons involved. Such laws would sanction marriage for same-sex couples only if they were homosexuals, thereby taking cognizance of their sexual orientation and discriminating against heterosexuals who wanted to enter into marriage with someone of the same sex. To repeat: just as the law must be blind to the race of persons entering into marriage, so it must be blind to their sexual orientation. Laws sanctioning gay marriage would thus be unconstitutional (not to speak of unenforceable!). [Emphasis added]

So the laws governing marriage must have no reference to the sexual orientation of the persons involved. But that is precisely the situation of the status quo! Under the laws of the status quo no one is denied the right to enter into marriage because of his/her sexual orientation. Two heterosexuals, two homosexuals, or a heterosexual and a homosexual are free to marry, no questions asked, just as persons of different races are free to marry, no questions asked. What they are not free to do under federal law, whatever their race or orientation, is to enter into same sex marriage, simply because there is no such thing. Marriage is by its essence a relation between a man and a woman. But the sexual orientation of the persons involved, like their race, is a matter of complete indifference to the law.

So the legality of interracial marriage actually goes to support the current laws, which are indifferent to both the race and the sexual orientation of the persons involved. Those who want to re-define marriage in such a way that it need no longer be between a man and a woman need to come up with some other argument in support of that redefinition than the appeal to interracial marriage.

Conservative #pratt #wingnut #homophobia conservapedia.com

[Could you please explain to me how arresting/executing homosexuals is any different than what the Nazi's did (arresting/executing Jews for what they perceived was the Jew's harm to society)?]

That's very easy. The leftist National Socialist German Workers Party genocide was largely motivated by evolutionary racism.[23] Anti-sodomy laws are based on righteous indignation and meant to protect society from sexual perverts and the disease, pederasty and other moral degeneracy they spread/promote. See: Homosexuality and health and Homosexuality and murders and Homosexuality and pederasty and Homosexuality and Illegal Drug Use and Homosexual circuit parties and disease and Homosexuality and bestiality and Causes of homosexuality. I hope that clears things up for you.

Linda Harvey #fundie #homophobia #pratt rightwingwatch.org

People of this state already have the right to marry, adults in Ohio have the freedom to marry someone of the opposite sex because that’s what marriage is. Marriage law is simply a legal confirmation of what we see in nature, that a male and a female fit together anatomically, that this is how children and families are creation, that children and new humans are valuable, not a problem, so this is really a pro-life issue at its heart.

The fact that a few people have deviant desires and want to overturn marriage law for everyone is not an issue of equality, it’s an issue of morality. It’s rebellion against nature, against civil order and against the beautiful design of God. We need to tell the people and this effort a resounding ‘No.’

The question is sometimes asked, how would same-sex marriage harm your marriage? There are several simple answers. One, it changes what is considered normal and legal throughout our culture and therefore what is taught and modeled to our children and grandchildren. Do we want little Morgan in second grade to learn that when she grows up she might marry a boy or might marry a girl and either one is perfectly fine and she won’t know until she’s older which she prefers, but that’s OK. Do you think Morgan will develop with a secure and stable idea about her identity as a girl and woman with this shaky and morally irrational guidance? No wonder our kids are anxious, stressed out and feel they have nothing to believe in sometimes, they are being told what they can see themselves is foolishness and being told to swallow these lies and stay quiet if you don’t agree.

This nonsense is already being taught in some schools and in those states where same-sex marriage is legal it has exploded. Many schools now routinely shut off all debate about homosexuality, there is only one viewpoint and it is pro-homosexual. The deception that results is a dark cloud hanging over our educational environment and our culture and it harms these precious, developing minds and hearts the most. I urge you friends to stand against same-sex marriage.

The Beast of Revelation #fundie #pratt #homophobia amazon.com

In reality, the proof of God's existence is so abundant and obvious as to be undeniable by any rational person. The world in which we live clearly would not exist except for an omnipotent God.

The only reason why atheists believe that God does not exist is that they want to believe that. Their belief is not based on evidence that God does not exist, nor is it based on a lack of evidence that He does exist; their belief has no basis. It has only motivation. The atheist has psychological motivations for believing that God does not exist.

All of the reasons that atheists claim to have for their atheism are really just rationalizations. They had a desire to believe that God does not exist; when they finally found arguments that could allow them to deceive themselves into believing that he does not exist, they did so. The people became atheists after engaging in self-deception.

All of their arguments are really self-delusion.

Atheism is very common among homosexual men; this single fact proves that psychology, not evidence, is the cause of atheism. One can not rationally argue that homosexual men have more evidence that God does not exist. Thus, atheism must be the result of psychological motivation.

Of course, in addition to homosexuality, paranoia and fear of authority result in atheism.

God's existence is manifest and evident. The proof of God's existence is far too plentiful to be denied by any normal person. Therefore, only an individual who has an abnormal psychology can possibly be an atheist.

These are all established facts about psychology. No rational person ever disputes them.

Don Boys #fundie #pratt americandaily.com

It is time New Atheists like Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, Harris and Co. are called upon to “put up or shut up.” Will the New Atheists take the challenge from a simple Christian? I challenge atheists to leave their ivory towers, lecture halls, etc., to put up or shut up.

Tell us that you do or do not believe the unsupportable, even outrageous teaching that nothing created everything. I promise not to laugh out loud–maybe only a snicker or two. And don’t try to flimflam us common people with scientific jargon, but make your points in clear English.

Tell us how all the scientific laws evolved such as gravity, inertia, the First and Second Laws, laws of planetary motion, etc. How does a scientific law evolve? If they did not evolve, where did they come from?

Did the evolution of those laws precede or follow the Big Bang?

Can you provide any example of an explosion resulting in order?

Tell us how life first formed on this planet made up entirely of rock? All atheists want to sit down beside

Darwin’s warm little pond and watch the first forms of life, but I demand to know much more than that if I’m expected to consider the idea has any possibility.

Do you, or do you not, believe in spontaneous generation? No honest scientist will agree to that fable.

Where are the ancestors of insects?

Why are meteorites not found in ancient rocks? Could it be that the rocks are not ancient?

Tell us how men and women evolved at the same time in history at the same location? What if “early man” had been all male!

Which evolved first, the mouth, the stomach, the digestive system or the elimination system? What good is a mouth if there is no stomach or a digestive system and what good are the three without an elimination system?

Tell us why we are here and where we go when death finally comes for us? Why have people all over the Earth since the beginning of time been concerned with that concept?

Eivind Berge #psycho #sexist #wingnut #pratt #dunning-kruger eivindberge.blogspot.com

My rape advocacy is twofold. Two aspects of feminism currently independently justify rape, in my view: 1. equality and 2. feminist corruption of justice. Feminist rape law reform has more than blurred the distinction between rape and consensual sex. In many circumstances it no longer matters in the eyes of the law whether we actually rape a woman or not -- she can regret sex in any case and have us convicted of "rape." The law quite explicitly states that mere negligence is enough to be a rapist even if you had no evil intentions. So why should men care if we rape or not? Women don't respect us anymore, so why should we respect women? Hate breeds hate. I have followed the deterioration of justice closely throughout my life, and my heart has been filled with deeper hatred at every step of feminist legal reform. False rape is now institutionalized. At this point, I don't believe Norwegian women are morally entitled to protection from rape.

Giles Muhame #homophobia #pratt queerty.com

(in response to a circuit court's decision to bar him from printing the names of homosexuals on the front page of his magazine)

I am confused, I do not understand why people are outraged by us putting those pictures on our magazine page. We did the right thing to show those pictures. The tabloid will win the appeal. We must expose criminals. The homos argued that their right of privacy- had been breached when we published their pictures – but we must reveal these criminals to protect our children, homosexuality is spreading like wildfire and we must stop it. The parliament is trying to strengthen the weak law. — I will have no problem to follow the law. The law is the law. I will give my child to the authorities and will let it be what must be – if he must go to Jail or hang that will be fine if he is homo. If the law is there the homo should be hanged -he will pay the price. They will have to go to prison. — [P]eople call us the Nazis of Africa and the gays are the Jews of Africa. They call themselves that to get sympathy.

ScubieNuc #fundie #homophobia #pratt freerepublic.com

I have used a similar argument when discussing how homosexuals are actually safer under strict Christian rules then if they were left to the rules or beliefs of Darwinistic athiests.

While Christians will declare that homosexuality is a sin and will work to keep it from becoming mainstream or acceptable as marriage, the opposite of that has a very ugly past. Christians are not called on to eliminate or kill people because they are homosexuals. However, while atheists will not view or see homosexuality as a sin or evil, they will and do eventually see homosexuals as a weaker “species” and that does lead to the “elimination” option.

Whether or not Darwin himself proclaimed specifically “survival of the fittest”, his dogma/doctrine/teachings lead to that way of thinking. If something is not making your species stronger or better then it can and should be eliminated. While most atheists are probably not for forced elimination, their dogma of life without a final judgement with God makes that option quite open.

It only takes a few powerful atheists in the right spots to force their “elimination” effort (if all Christians are neutralized or removed from the scene).

baileysmom #homophobia #pratt rr-bb.com

Homosexuality should STILL be illegal. All they are doing is acting out because they are either traumatized by a bad experience with the opposite sex (in which case they need psychological help) or becaues they are being willfully rebellious. NO ONE is naturally attracted to the same sex. NO ONE naturally wants a relationship with the same sex. We ALL crave love and affection from the opposite sex, as it was intended to be. People who are homosexual are deceived. They have psychological issues and they desperately need mental and spiritual help. If our society were to make this behavior illegal, I think it it would stop alot of people from being homosexuals. Maybe not all, but alot.

Pink_Fuzzy_Bunny #fundie #pratt #homophobia kongregate.com

[(Previous post:) I hate Christianity it is the worst plague that has ever takes over large parts of the world. Christianity is unnatural and should should be prevented from having a part in society. But PFB don’t feel offended I mean no wrong to Christians just Christianity its ok I still like you.

^^ Feel offended? Exactly.]

Homosexuals are not defined by their homosexuality. I, however, am defined and find my identity in the love of Christ.

Gary DeMar #fundie #pratt 74.255.56.30

Charles Darwin could never have conceived of the Joker character as he is depicted and played in The Dark Knight. Darwinism flowered in the midst of a world impacted imperfectly by a tide of Christian influence. No one was talking about being an “intellectually fulfilled atheist.” No one was claiming that morals are social constructs. The Joker as portrayed by Ledger is the consistent Darwinist. To use his own words, “I’m just ahead of the curve.” There is nothing menacing about the Joker if evolution is true. If you go to see the film, ask yourself this question: “If the assumptions of the four horsemen of atheism are true, what did the Joker do that was wrong?” To be ahead of the curve simply means that he figured out and is willing to live out what he is by nature. Darwin drew the blueprints for the Joker thinking he was making Pygmalion.

Next page