Well it seems UncleBeer’s decided to pick on my OPs today… and demands there should be a reason for my threads. Firstly I thought the BBQ pit was for BBQing and ranting away. So no reason needed right ? I thought both were authentic pieces of American right wing christian lunacy. (Naturally not being representative of the whole nation) I thought they spoke for themselves… but if you want someone to explain to you why they might be scary feel free.
Secondly your “strict” interpretation of the SDMB is plain silly… since I don’t know for a fact that the quotes are false. I sure recognized more than a few as ancient and authentic. None of them seem made up. I’d be happy to learn that most of them weren’t true at all and that there aren’t that many raging armageddon nuts in the most powerful country in the world.
If you can provide enough links with quotes from these christian celebrities where no such quotes exist I will apologize for slandering their good christian names… I certainly don’t think these quotes seem fakes. Even if naturally some might be “out of context”.
Now if all you want is to pick on me for no good reason … please waste your time elsewhere kiddo. No Thanks.
sourced to this anti-Pat Robertson web site which states:
I dreamed I saw Joe Mac last night,
Alive as you and me.
But Joe, I said, you’re decades dead,
I never died, said he.
His ideas live on; it would be nice not to have to go through that again. A lot of those quotes are accurate and relevant; I’m by no means going to say that all of them are. Sourcing would be nice, so I didn’t have to spend half an hour trying to find out if Bailey Smith really said that.
Well, then, perhaps you should take the appropriate steps, if you think you have a case. Frankly, I don’t think that you do, but am perfectly content to let the matter rest with our Mods, who’s clarity and excellence are peerless, and universally admired.
As to friend Askeptics concern about the government entirely in the hands of the theologically impaired, he has ample basis for dread. But while it is true that the Pubbies have a (tenuous) grip on the reins of power, that is not the same thing. The Pubbies exploit the God Goons to their own ends. They would also be entirely happy to have everybody on the lefty spectrum from me to friend Reeder resolve to vote Republican, but that doesn’t mean they will press our agenda.
Imagine, if you will, that the Faith Biased Initiiatives go forward, say, to the tune of a couple hundred million dollars to be dispersed to the Godly. There will be no lack of volunteers to decide precisely how the honey shall be dispensed, you may be sure.
How much for the Unitarians? How much for the Scientologists? The Nation of Islam has a long standing, faith based outreach program in our prisons. On what basis might we deny them funding?
I can name two right wing nutcases who seemed pretty happy about it - until they saw the backlash it caused. - Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.
For what it’s worth, I was already familiar with some of the quotes on the OP’s web site - they have been cross referenced and substantiated by many people.
“God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.”
Is most likely false. To my knoweldge, the only source for this claim was Abbas… and no matter how stupid, venal, or corrupt that chimp is, I just don’t buy that he was quite that stupid. I think it’s propaganda.
So we don’t know. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. But I think it quite the stretch to state that posting a link to a site that includes the post constitutes knowingly posting material known to be false.
Seemed pretty obvious to me that you were jumping on him for no reason. But, just to appease you: I’ll rephrase" “It is just my opinion that askeptic gets off on being a dick.” Better?
While Rashak Mani is hot on the trail of scary “right wing christian lunacy”, he might want to ponder this gem of a quote from a recent GD thread on reasons for hating Jews:
Source of that fine insight - why, Rashak himself. He was asked to explain himself and never did.
Thanks for the citation. It is quite helpful, because it demonstrates the danger of taking quotations out of context. For example, consider one who read only the OP, and saw the following:
(N.B.: the OP inaccurately attributes the quotation to “Chief Justice William Rehnquist” rather than to Justice Rehnquist.)
One reading only that quotation might assume that Justice Rehnquist was arguing for the abolition of the First Amendment. By posting a link to the case from which this quotation is lifted, we are all able to see that Justice Rehnquist’s dissent emphatically does not call for the abolition of the Establishment Clause. Rather, Justice Rehnquist reviewed and critiqued the history of the Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence, and roundly criticized the concept of a “wall of separation between church and state” as a nonsensical test impossible to apply, and one that does not accurately describe the nature of the Establishment Clause.
So thank you for posting a link to the case, so that we all might consider the danger inherent in taking purported quotations out of context. I commend you for the work you have done today in fighting igorance.
What the fuck?
I think the we deserve an explenation for that little turn of phrase. I hope it was simply a very poorly crafted bit of sarcasm, but if not I think that a new Pit thread should be opened.