(for better or for worse.)

A comic quite possibly seen previously in the Daily Funnies thread.

It will probably fail.

Failure is as failure does.

---

me@rescam.org

(for better or for worse.)

A comic quite possibly seen previously in the Daily Funnies thread.

It will probably fail.

Failure is as failure does.

OK.

Religion is not about 'making people feel good', religion is about 'saving peoples souls'... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Religion is not about 'making people feel good', religion is about 'saving peoples souls'... ;)

And making sure your happy meal comes supersized.

---

me@rescam.org

Religion is not about 'making people feel good', religion is about 'saving peoples souls'... ;)

I think I'd rather use mine now thank you.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Catholics, communion and politics

E.J. DIONNE JR.
THE WASHINGTON POST

June 3, 2008

Word spread like wildfire in Catholic circles: Douglas Kmiec, a staunch Republican, firm foe of abortion and veteran of the Reagan Justice Department, had been denied communion.

His sin? Kmiec, a Catholic who can cite papal pronouncements with the facility of a theological scholar, shocked old friends and adversaries alike earlier this year by endorsing Barack Obama for president. For at least one priest, Kmiec's support for a pro-choice politician made him a willing participant in a grave moral evil.

Kmiec was denied communion in April at a Mass for a group of Catholic business people he later addressed at dinner. The episode has not received wide attention outside the Catholic world, yet it is the opening shot in an argument that could have a large impact on this year's presidential campaign: Is it legitimate for bishops and priests to deny communion to those supporting candidates who favor abortion rights?

A version of this argument roiled the 2004 presidential campaign when some, though not most, Catholic bishops suggested that John Kerry and other pro-choice Catholic politicians should be denied communion because of their views on abortion.

The Kmiec incident poses the question in an extreme form: He is not a public official but a voter expressing a preference. Moreover, Kmiec – a law professor at Pepperdine University and once dean of Catholic University's law school – is a long-standing critic of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision.

The former head of the Office of Legal Counsel in the late 1980s, Kmiec is supporting Obama despite the candidate's position on abortion, not because of it, partly in the hope that Obama's emphasis on personal responsibility in sexual matters might change the nature of the nation's argument on life issues.

Kmiec has drawn attention because he is one of the nation's leading “Obamacons,” conservatives who find Obama's call for a new approach to politics appealing. Kmiec started life as a Democrat. His father was a soldier in the late Mayor Richard J. Daley's Chicago political machine and Kmiec's earliest political energies were devoted to Robert F. Kennedy's 1968 campaign.

But like many Catholic Democrats, Kmiec said he was profoundly attracted to Ronald Reagan. For Kmiec, five words in Reagan's 1980 acceptance speech summarized the essence of a Catholic view of politics: “family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom.”

In an interview over the weekend, Kmiec argued that 35 years after Roe, opponents of abortion need to contemplate whether “a legal prohibition” of abortion “is the only way to promote a culture of life.”

“To think you have done a generous thing for your neighbor or that you have built up a culture of life just because you voted for a candidate who says in his brochure that he wants to overturn Roe v. Wade is far too thin an understanding of the Catholic faith,” he said. Kmiec, a critic of the Bush administration's Iraq policy, added that Catholics should heed “the broad social teaching of the church,” including its views on war.

Kmiec shared with me the name of the priest who denied him communion and a letter of apology from the organizers of the event, but requested that I not name the priest to protect the cleric from public attack.

The priest's actions are almost certainly out of line with the policy of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. In their statement “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” issued last November, the bishops said: “A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter's intent is to support that position.”

The “if” phrase in that carefully negotiated sentence suggests that Catholics can support pro-choice candidates, provided the purpose of their vote is not to promote abortion.

Already, Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City has played an indirect role in the 2008 campaign by calling on Kathleen Sebelius, the popular Democratic governor of Kansas who has been mentioned as a possible Obama running mate, to stop taking communion because of her “actions in support of legalized abortion.”

But because Kmiec is a private citizen and has such a long history of embracing Catholic teaching on abortion, denying him communion for political reasons may spark an even greater outcry inside the church.

Kmiec says he is grateful because the episode reminded him of the importance of the Eucharist in his spiritual life, and because he hopes it will alert others to the dangers of “using communion as a weapon.”

---

me@rescam.org

I'm still waiting on an answer as to where the Bible the Qur'an or even the Book of Mormon instructs 'believers' to enforce religious laws upon 'nonbelievers'...

And no, I don't want to hear a verse from the sunnah or from doctrines and covenants or from any other 'supplemental' book, I want to hear it from one of Gods books... ;)

(BTW - look up the definition of communion. If you are not in communion, then you do not take communion. It's really quite simple.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Look up the definition of communism?

---

me@rescam.org

Look up the definition of communism?

Communism:
A scheme of equalizing the social conditions of life;
specifically, a scheme which contemplates the abolition of
inequalities in the possession of property, as by
distributing all wealth equally to all, or by holding all
wealth in common for the equal use and advantage of all.

Call me crazy, but I don't think 90% of the population would have a problem with this... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Look up the definition of communism?

Communism:
A scheme of equalizing the social conditions of life;
specifically, a scheme which contemplates the abolition of
inequalities in the possession of property, as by
distributing all wealth equally to all, or by holding all
wealth in common for the equal use and advantage of all.

Call me crazy, but I don't think 90% of the population would have a problem with this... ;)

Tear down that wall, Mr. Jeffrey!

---

me@rescam.org

I'm still waiting on an answer as to where the Bible the Qur'an or even the Book of Mormon instructs 'believers' to enforce religious laws upon 'nonbelievers'...

In answer to this, there is no verse in any Christian or Muslim text concerning the enforcing of religion on nonbelievers. In fact, the Mohammad makes it clear that no children of the book be treated any different than a Muslim would treat a Muslim. FYI, the children of the book are christians, muslims, and jews.

All that is in any of these texts is the directive to carry the message. Whether or not someone convert after hearing it is up to them.

Strangely enough, out of the Christian, Jewish or Muslim faith only one has explicit rules on warfare, and that is the Muslim faith.
1) you do not kill non-combatants
2) you do not kill old men, women or children
3) you do not target innocents and non-warriors. (which, by the way, every Muslim extremist group does, and by disobeying the words of the prophet, they gonna end up in a rather warm place...)

As far as the Jews and Christians are concerned, it is a basic kill em all and god will sort his from non believers

All that is in any of these texts is the directive to carry the message.

And with that said, someone has just been promoted to 'head of the class'... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

The Brick Testament - the Bible illustrated in Lego. Some of the earlier stuff is a bit racy so be warned.

- CONTENT NOTICE -
The Bible contains material some may consider morally objectionable and/or inappropriate for children.

---

Reality Internet Personality

II Corinthians 11:12-15
And what I do I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.

Do not be deceived! Learn the material... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

II Corinthians 11:12-15
And what I do I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.

Do not be deceived! Learn the material... ;)

Well I wouldn't want my kids reading the stuff about rape and incest.

---

Reality Internet Personality

You might want to consider trading in that mystical bible for a slightly more traditional version... ;)

(I'd also recommend dropping your cable tv and internet service.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

II Thessalonians 2:9-12
The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Do you love the truth, or do you believe what is false... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Matthew 24:3 (The Question)
As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?”

Matthew 24:4-5 (The Answer)
And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.

Do you have Jesus? ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Do you have Jesus? ;)

What Would Jesus Buy?

---

me@rescam.org

Revelation 13:16-17
He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

Are we there yet? ;)

(Or were you expecting a dot on your forehead like they do in the movies.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .