Is this the private, well-funded, civilian military Obama promised during the campaign? Brannon Howse reveals the largely unknown story of how the Obama's are taking national their radical, socialist, and anti-Christian worldview training that was birthed through their organization "Public Allies". The training will include "social justice" instruction which is code word for Communism, socialism and Marxism. Obama's friend, and self-declared Communist, Bill Ayers is now one of the leading social justice authors of textbooks being used nationally.
Much of this began years ago with the help of socialist John Dewey and William James. James wrote "The Moral Equivalent of War" in which he called for compulsory youth service that used the military model of discipline, drilling and training. While he was anti-military he knew the value of the techniques that teach military members to follow orders, work for the common good of the group, and reject individuality and self-interest for collectivism. James even acknowledges the need for some criminal cruelty to win their war on capitalism and traditional virtues.
The newly passed legislation calls for a committee to study making this youth service mandatory. The Obama/Biden website called for 50 hours of yearly volunteerism for middle school and high school. Sounds harmless enough right? Not until you realize the volunteerism is for liberal leftist, inner-city organizations that are seeking to indoctrinate young minds with the acceptance of the growth of the welfare-state by emotionally manipulating them with the need for redistribution of wealth. The war is the haves against the have nots just as Saul Alinsky called for in his book, Rules for Radicals.
The New York Times reports that this legislation will cost $5.7 billion from 2010 to 2014 and will engage 7 million in this indoctrination. The paper also reports that the majority of Republicans and Democrats voted for this legislation and Rick Warren was an "enthusiastic supporter of this effort". The legislation also forbids students that are going through this government brainwashing from "engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship services, providing instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship."
This bill goes back to the House and then to the Senate after conference. You must demand your two U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative vote against this bill when it comes back to them in the coming days.
This is scary folks. Take a look at HR 1388, and look at...
SEC. 125. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS
Among the list of "prohibited activities" is
‘(7) Engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship services, providing instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship, constructing or operating facilities devoted to religious instruction or worship, maintaining facilities primarily or inherently devoted to religious instruction or worship, or engaging in any form of religious proselytization.
That's right. Obama wants to mandate (read: "Compulsory") every student to complete 50 hours of service a year. Add to this the indoctrination the Obama administration wants to pound into their heads...
What this means is any child from middle school on up will be prohibited from "engaging in religious instruction" and "engaging in ANY form of religious proselytization..." read: "Witnessing," "Sharing One's Faith."
This is perhaps the most dangerous policy this president is pursuing. This is straight out of Hitler's Germany. And I don't care how that makes me sound. There's your private, well-funded, civilian security service.
Obama is the most dangerous man in America today. And I have no doubt the Dan Trabues of this country will applaud and support this effort.
Here is an update: From an article at InfoWars.com posted November 6, 2008....
If Obama’s soon-to-be chief of staff stabs a knife into a table as a form of punctuation while denouncing the enemies of his former boss, Bill Clinton, it does not take a lot of imagination to predict how Obama’s Civilian Security Force will be used.
Is it possible the acorn does not fall far from the tree? Emanuel’s father belonged to a terrorist organization that killed the opposition, including women and children. Is it possible this psychopathic mindset was passed on to his son and will now manifest itself in Obama’s Civilian Security Force?
Did you know Rohm Emmanuel wrote a book back in 2006 entitled, The Plan: Big Ideas for America. This is the same man who, speaking of the growing economic disaster, said:
"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before."
My last word on this? This effort by the Obama's is demonic.
Gateway Pundit also has a perspective on this dangerous bill.
So, this appears to be a piece of legislation encouraging volunteerism (remember Bush I's "1,000 points of light" program?).
ReplyDeleteI don't suppose you're opposed to volunteerism?
Under the auspices of this program, students may not engage in lobbying, organizing unions, trying to influence elections and/or religious proselytizing. Are you suggesting that you'd like to see a gov't program that supports religious proselytizing?
I doubt that you would (I sure hope you wouldn't support such a horrible and unconstitutional idea!).
I don't see anywhere in this legislation anything suggesting that it's a mandatory program. It seems to be an extension of the Bush I era Act that resulted in the creation of AmeriCorps and SeniorCorps - groups that help the poor and elderly.
You think these are bad things?
Seriously, Eric, take a nap. Have a drink. Relax a little.
I'll monitor things for you and let you know if the world is actually going to hell in a handbasket, and in the meantime, you can get some well-deserved rest.
Dan, your comments are getting tiresome. Why don't you just shut the hell up?
ReplyDeleteYou're an idiot.
So, you're coming out opposed to volunteerism and AmeriCorps, Perv?
ReplyDeleteNot surprising.
Google "demonic 2001" and you get 1.4 million hits. Google "demonic 2009" and you get 23.2 million hits.
ReplyDeleteGoogle "nazi 2001" and you get 5.1 million hits. Google "nazi 2009" and you get 14.9 million hits.
Fellas, get a grip. We're not demonic nazis out to destroy the US with our fascistic socialist agenda.
There are no boogeymen, just regular folk. You lost. Get over it. I fear for your mental stability.
What's not surprising is your continual willingness to defend every Godless agenda, and criticize every Godly agenda that comes along.
ReplyDeleteAnd you call yourself a Christian. You should be ashamed.
Idiot.
Yeah, volunteerism IS so godless. Helping people IS so stupidheaded.
ReplyDeleteBetter that we be perverts like you, right?
What's godless is Dan's defense of a program that PROHIBITS participation in religious instruction, and witnessing.
ReplyDeleteHow pathetic is that? To defend a program just because it uses terms like "volunteerism" and "community service," never mind the fact that it looks a lot like the Hitler Youth movement... to defend it because it prohibits participants from lobbying and such... but not bat an eye of protest because its participants are also forbidden their right to exercise their faith... to take instruction in their faith... to express their faith to openly to others.
You are so utterly brainwashed... how utterly fascist you Democrats are! How utterly UN-Christian of you... bowing down to government rather than the commandments of God.
Bravo! I am truly impressed.
Listen to the voice of Rohm Emmanuel in this YouTube Video.... about 1:45 into it to 2:30.... Mandatory 3 months basic training.
ReplyDeleteGood grief, what more do you need? Jackboots kicking in your door and dragging your child out of your house for basic training?
Eric, it is my understanding as I read that legislation, that participants in this GOVT PROGRAM may not use GOVT MONEY to proselytize. I say that this is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteDo you? You don't really think we ought to use gov't dollars to preach your or my or anyone else's version of Christianity, Judaism or Islam, do you?
Children can still worship as they and their parents see fit. This is just talking about participants in THIS particular program, whilst they are part of the program. In other words, these gov't programs with gov't dollars will not be used to evangelize, to organize unions, to advocate for a political party.
Surely you agree that this is good and right?
Are you seeing something different than I am in these words?
And Eric, I have had enough of the truly imbecilic accusations of being nazis, fascists or boogety men. It's simply goofy.
You have become piss-in-your-pants terrified of each little shadow and it's making you nuts and people just don't want to talk with nutty people who smell of fear and piss. You are marginalizing yourselves into nothingness. You are becoming isolated and meaningless and I find that terribly sad.
Be strong. Get some rest. Embrace reason. Reject the fears that are driving you into irrelevancy, brother.
Obama is sending this nation into the annals of irrelevancy. With your help.
ReplyDeleteHey, Idiot.
ReplyDeleteDo you know what the root word of "volunteerism" is? I have to assume you don't, so I'm going to tell you:
It's "volunteer".
That means, anyone who wants to do something nice for anyone else can volunteer to do it.
We who voluntarily volunteer for various projects don't need to be told we have to volunteer, nor do we need to be told how much time we should spend doing it, nor do we need to be told what particular project we are supposed to volunteer for.
The word for Obama's "volunteerism" program isn't "Volunteerism".
It's Communism.
You support this Marxist jerk. So, are we to assume that you also support allowing babies who have survived abortions to die, untended, in the dark?
You wouldn't know if the world was going to hell in a handbasket. Obama has you so blinded you'll be in Hell a year before you finally wake up and realize you're not in Heaven.
Dan, I don't like you, but even I wouldn't want you to go to Hell, but if you continue to blindly follow Obama, that's where you'll end up.
You should seek professional help. Seriously.
"Embrace reason."
ReplyDeleteOh. My. God.
Dan, you idiot. You are truly delusional.
never mind the fact that it looks a lot like the Hitler Youth movement
ReplyDeleteThe Boy Scouts of America looks a lot like the Hitler Youth movement, too.
Dan, I think these guys have embraced the Michele Bachman wing of the Republican Party.
JIm, That's a boneheaded thing to say.
ReplyDeleteThe boy scouts voluntarily join up, and it's a Christian organization, and they are free to practice their religion as much as they want without fear of severe punishment, which Commissar Obama no doubt has in mind for every child that doesn't behave the way he wants them to. They aren't forced to join against their will as this bill would have America's youth doing.
Or....do you just not understand the word, "mandatory"?
Just go ahead and take your place in the padded cell along with Dan. You are both delusional.
Let us not forget history. The state youth organizations in both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were ordered to inform the state about any suspected subversive activity or speech they learned about, even if that activity or speech came from their own parents.
ReplyDeleteIt could well be, Dan, in the next 4 years or so, that your own children may lead you to your execution. In the name of the state.
Beyond delusional. Damn near certifiably effing crazy.
ReplyDelete"Much of this began years ago with the help of socialist John Dewey and William James."
Started earlier than that, with Jesus the Christ his own self.
it's a Christian organization
ReplyDeleteUh, no it's not. Last time I looked there was no mention of our Lord and Savior in the Oath, Law, or Motto.
Let's see, you're talking about the Hitler Youth bill that the Nazi Orrin Hatch of Utah is one of the main authors of?
Interesting. Care to cite the section of the bill that says anything about mandatory?
Do you people ever read anything about this stuff beyond what Rush, Hannity, Beck and Bachman spew?
What a fantasy world you all live in!
Perhaps Jim should actually read the bill.
ReplyDeleteUnder section 6104 of the bill, entitled “Duties,” in subsection B6, the legislation states that a commission will be set up to investigate, “Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”
Section 120 of the bill also discusses the “Youth Engagement Zone Program” and states that “service learning” will be “a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency”.
By the way, could the phrase "overcome civic challenges" be referring to challenges to the constitutionality of the bill?
There you have it, Jim. Now, do we need to define the word "mandatory" to you?
Jim, you and Dan need medication before you hurt yourselves. Even ER agrees you two are delusional.
Jim, apparently you've never read the scout oath either:
ReplyDeleteMission Statement
The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.
Scout Oath Scout Law
On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.
A Scout is:
Trustworthy
Loyal
Helpful
Friendly
Courteous
Kind Obedient
Cheerful
Thrifty
Brave
Clean
Reverent
Vision Statement:
The Boy Scouts of America will prepare every eligible youth in America to become a responsible, participating citizen and leader who is guided by the Scout Oath and Law.
Pay special attention to those words, "ethical" and "moral". These are qualities Jesus taught us to have. Plus, boy scouts are sponsored by Christian churches nationwide.
Really, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.it's too easy.
Not as easy as you think. You'rer the nutjob in this thread, Markus, among many others.
ReplyDeleteYou've said it yourself many times: Being in a church makes one a Christian no more than being in a garage makes one a car. The word "God" and encouragements to ethics and kindness, which are universal, in the Boy Scouts oath is the same: One, it's pablum; two, no Jesus, no Christianty.
You etter duck. The fish are shooting back.
Jim, rock on. Dan, these guys are NOT worth your trouble. EL, your seething hatred and contempt for all those unlike yourself are going to kill you before your time.
Mark, I'm an Eagle Scout, bronze palm and Vigil Honor member of the Order of the Arrow. You don't need to recite the Oath to me nor presume to "school" me about the Boy Scouts of America.
ReplyDeleteI guess no other religion on earth has morals or ethics or believes in God, huh?
We used to have a "mandatory service requirement" in this country, in fact it had "service" in its name: The Selective Service Administration, better known as the draft. It's still around today. My son just registered.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, could the phrase "overcome civic challenges" be referring to challenges to the constitutionality of the bill?
I suppose, in the same way it could mean local police fighting off alien space invaders with tasers and donuts.
Setting up a commission to investigate is a long way from enacting such legislation. And anyway, I have no problem with the concept of requiring community service of young people. My kids have to perform community service to graduate from high school. After receiving 13 years of free education, it seems like a reasonable thing to expect of them.
The Bachman wing of the party must have people reading every proposed legislation (assumes they can read) to figure out what scary lies they can make up out of it.
What a waste of time!
Mark often presumes to school others on matters about which he knows little.
ReplyDeleteAnd I am ALL FOR selective for mandatory service for, maybe, 2 years. Those inclined to the military can have it, the rest of us could bag sand, teach people to read, help nation-build here *and* abroad, whatever.
Great job Mark, but in addition to all that, the Boy Scouts of America are neither government led nor sponsored. Hitler Youth was, and judging by the fact that HR 1388 even exists, so too will the Obama Youth program be government led, sponsored, and worst of all, MANDATED.
ReplyDeleteIf this bill actually makes it to law, you will see widespread civil disobedience, the likes of which you have not seen before.
How can you folks not see how this looks? It truly looks like some Communist/Khmer Rouge organization with forced participation, reeducation camps, uniforms... How far will the government and Cultural Marxism (read: "political correctness") take this? When will we see jackboots, brownshirts, catchy salutes?
That's not what it will be initially, but think about how things evolve over time. Obama said he wanted this force to be just as powerful and equipped as the US military... a civilian defense force. Well, the question to ask is, 'defense from what'? I know the scenarios the bill lays out, but once established how difficult would it be for THIS congress (or any congress) to decide that spying on one's parents is part and parcel with their defense of this nation... their service to this nation? Who's to say these children wouldn't be brainwashed into believing it is their duty to protect the morals and "best practices" of the state?
Why is it, Dan, that it is impossible for you to think critically about the leaders YOU support? Especially this one? You speak of constitutionality in your first comment, hoping I would not support something that was UNconstitutional. What about Geithner? Do you support him? as an arm of the Obama Administration? knowing, of course, that he does nothing that the president does NOT approve of, policy wise? You do understand that he's proposing regulations that would allow the government to seize private companies? that his proposals amount to the government declaring how much a private company can pay its employees? (How many times did we have to listen to you howl about the Patriot Act?) Look at it from this perspective: the government gave us, some time ago, a MINIMUM wage. Now they desire to impose a MAXIMUM wage? Where is America in that? Where is the "Land of the Free" in that? Where is "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" in that? It's dead on the side of some lonely American highway, victim of a hit and run... Obama and democrats at the wheel, looking back in the rear-view mirror, chuckling.
The real horror is not that Freedom lies bleeding and dying on the side of the road, but that the public would applaud and praise the driver, much like the folk praising that cop-killer out in California. It's disgusting.
Do you believe a president has an obligation to tell the truth? Of course you do-- you constantly talk about all the republican liars. Why then can you not call president Obama's declaration that he will reduce the debt by half, by the end of his first term? ESPECIALLY since he's ADDING TRILLIONS TO that debt... TEN trillion in the next ten years, the lie that it is? You do realize that Cap and Trade amounts to a tax increase for every American, rich and poor alike, on electricity, heating oil, you name it. And yet you still defend this man's policies like he's Jesus Christ himself.
Don't tell me to 'take a nap, have a drink, relax a little.' Freedom is secured and defended by vigilance, sweat, and blood. You are a fool if you can't see how our wise and benevolent Leader is trying to radically change the face of this country.
Look at all his associations; all the radical and anti-American people with whom he surrounded himself throughout the years. The man is dangerous, but right now I can't decide who is more dangerous to the outcome of this presidency, and this nation... President Barack Obama and all the radicalism that framed his world view? or people like you, Dan, who blindly and ignorantly support him.
You claim to be a Christian, but you don't take scripture seriously, or honestly-- you pick and choose the ideals you wish to follow. What about Revelation? Daniel? Ezekiel? Joel? I reckon I should be giddy about being so utterly blessed to be among the generation that will see HIS return, but God forgive me, I love this country. And I'm afraid for what is coming.
YOU on the other hand appear as oblivious to your surroundings as a slug to the very large salt shaker looming overhead.
No time to relax, or have a drink, Dan. This is no time to take a nap. It's time to WAKE UP!
Eric, you need to realize that you know two white guys, raised as Southern Baptists, who live as Christians, who knowingly and deliberately, with eyes wide open, support this president and most of his policies, and see you and those like you as the greatest threat to this country. We are wide awake.
ReplyDeleteAnd therein lies our impasse
ReplyDeleteER, regarding Eric's claim that compulsory youth service began with Dewey and William James, you wrote the following:
ReplyDeleteStarted earlier than that, with Jesus the Christ his own self.
I actually agree that state conscription of the youth is an ancient idea, but it can be traced back to Plato's Republic, not to anything that was taught by Christ or His Apostles.
Leaving aside the question of the Gospels' reliability -- since you put seemingly blind trust in (some) scholars' unjustifiable position that the NT writers were guilty of sheer fabrication -- just WHAT did Christ teach that leads to the idea that the state should compel youth service?
(Lemme guess, I'm a jackass for not accepting your quite controversial claim as gospel, right?)
If this claim cannot be substantiated, then it's not the gospel writers who put words in Christ's mouth: it's the articulate hillbilly who hypocritically slanders inerrantists as idolatrous while he makes a false Christ out of his own politically progressive image.
No, Bubba, you're just a jackass, without qualification.
ReplyDeleteBut maybe I implied something I didn't mean to, so I'll give you something you refuse to give me, the benefit of the doubt.
Re, "Much of this began years ago with the help of socialist John Dewey and William James."
I read "this" as the broader issue here that drives you and Eric nuts: the very idea of community, mutual service, democracy and democratic socialism. And all that traces to ChristJesus.
On trust: I trust no thing and no human, past or present, wholly or blindly.
Your other remarks I take as spit and foam not requiring my response.
I guess the request to stow the name calling will go unheeded. Is it worse from the traditionalist right or the tolerant left? I can never tell.
ReplyDeleteGoing just on memory, for which I make no lofty claims, I believe the Boy Scouts were founded by a Brit looking to instill Christian morality in young boys. Not feeling particularly ambitious after some tasty jambalaya and a bottle of wine, I'll leave it to others to research.
I don't think Jesus made anything mandatory. He simply described how we ought to live, but the choice to do so is up to us. Sounds a bit different than what Barry has in mind. Of course, I haven't yet equated Barry with deity.
I have to say that with at least one of my older daughters there was mandatory volunteerism. Sounds about as oxymoronic as "same-sex marriage", but it's true. Members of her class were forced to volunteer or their grades would be affected negatively. A cursory look at this bill (and I mean "cursory". Bottle of wine, ya know) suggests the same type of "voluteerism". And that is what we excitable right-wingers might find troublesome. The left often likes to use words, like "Fairness Doctrine" to suggest something opposite fairness, or in general, to evoke perceptions that aren't really reflective of what's being put forth. So, with that in mind, to hear a word like "volunteer" in a bill produced by the Dems, detailed study of said bill is "mandatory".
"Seriously, Eric, take a nap. Have a drink. Relax a little."
At first blush, and I don't refer to my face after a bottle of wine, my first thought is, this is the stereotypical "good men doing nothing" that always results in trouble. But then I remembered it was from Dan, who's goodness is in doubt with each incident of calling Mark a pervert.
But then, Dan, as well as Bent and ER, have taken similar attitudes in responding to concerns raised by Eric. (Kinda blows that whole "good men doing nothing" thing right outa the water) All the Barry-lovers have assumed this attitude, as if Barry is the second coming and all is well. For me it always comes back to this: which is worse---Barry or the people who supported him? It has to be the supporters for Barry can do nothing on his own. Supporters will NOT give detailed looks at Barry's proposals and will assume the best. That's how the dude got elected in the first place. So much misery that will befall us is directly on the shoulders of Barry's buddies.
Eric, you sound like your peeing in your pants right now. Your fear of these imaginary creepy-crawlies must be overwhelming.
ReplyDeletea civilian defense force Aren't you conflating two different Obama initiatives here? I believe that Obama's call for a civilian defense force is about strengthening and coordinating civilian agencies such as police, fire fighters and other "first responders", local and county law enforcement, TSA and anything else needed to inspect and defend ports, chemical plants, power grids, cyberspace, etc.
This is completely different from the Volunteer Service initiative which is to work to support communities, schools, the elderly, the poor. Again this is a bill written in large part by Orrin Hatch, Republican Senator from Utah, for crying out loud!
How can you folks not see how this looks? Apparently it looks to you like the Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
Why is it, Dan, that it is impossible for you to think critically about the leaders YOU support? Why is it impossible for you to think critically about any of this at all?
You do understand that he's proposing regulations that would allow the government to seize private companies? Uh, Eric, the government has been seizing private companies for years. It's called the FDIC and it's been "seizing" banks and other financial institutions since it came into being! They do this when banks become insolvent. Then they restructure them and sell them back to private investors. It's what Lindsay Graham and other top Republicans have been calling for.
his proposals amount to the government declaring how much a private company can pay its employees. Only those companies that are receiving substantial taxpayer assistance and even then there is no limit for payment of restricted stock.
all the radical and anti-American people with whom he surrounded himself throughout the years. Other than Rev. Wright (whose "anti-americanism" is debatable) and William Ayers (who nobody has been able to show more than a passing association with Obama), can you name all these radical and anti-American people you're referring to?
Peeing in your pants, Eric. You and Michele Bachman.
Why wasn't anyone peeing in their pants when the town of New London decided to seize private property to give to developers? Oh, that's right, they were! And they were freaking out all the way to the supreme court. And what did those fine justices do? They made "constitutional" the ability for any town across America to seize property from one private citizen to give to another for the purpose of increasing their tax base.
ReplyDeleteWhat a fine bunch of criminals you all are. You democrats, you.
Switching gears, the bible does not state that communal living is a requirement of living in Grace. That service to the community is compulsory-- we're talking free will here. I have argued in the past for "compulsory" military service in the form of two-year mandatory service immediately after high school, before college; not unlike the system Israel has, but I have been shot out of the sky by the likes of both ER and Dan. And yet, hypocritically, they suggest there is nothing wrong with the government demanding compulsory service to the state in the form of what? Community service? Service to one's community but NOT service to one's country... it's defense.
Jim-- great ripostes, too bad their only opinions.
Eric, I've been thinking. Obama can go ahead and get this legislation passed.
ReplyDeleteIt will be absolutely hilarious to watch him try to force America's teenagers to do anything at all that they don't want to do, and believe me, they aren't going to want to do anything that doesn't give them immediate personal gratification, mostly in the form of money or drugs.
Maybe before school teachers started teaching them that they don't have to listen to their parents, or any authority for that matter, they might have volunteered. But, today's public school systems have taught today's teenagers to be completely selfish. There is no sense of personal responsibility in today's young people.
C'mon, think about it. Look at your typical teenager that works at the local McDonalds or Walmart. They applied for that job. They intentionally convinced the interviewer that they wanted to do that job. They wanted that job because that job pays a salary.
Now look at them. They hate to work! They hate their bosses! They hate the customers! All they do is put in their time until they get off so they can go out and spend their money. They don't enjoy doing something they wanted to do. Something they get paid to do!
When is the last time anyone ever got decent customer service from these youths?
What makes Obama think they will volunteer to do any job they don't get paid for? And, if he tries to force them to do it, that will be a real laugher!
It will be as fruitless as trying to herd cats, and equally as funny.
Snort. The city of New London, driven by business interests, seized private property. Business interests. Strike 1.
ReplyDeleteThe case went to a SCOTUS with more GOP appointees than Dem appointees, and the case hinged on economic growth being seen as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. ECONOMIC GROWTH. Business interests. Strike 2.
What a fine bunch of criminals you all are. You republicans, you.
Re, "Switching gears, the bible does not state that communal living is a requirement of living in Grace."
You got me. The Bib;e actually goes way beyond that. See the rich young ruler. Strike 3.
Dude. If you'e not gonna actually play, why show up?
They made "constitutional" the ability for any town across America to seize property from one private citizen to give to another for the purpose of increasing their tax base.
ReplyDelete"They" are the US Supreme Court with a very conservative, Republican majority.
too bad their [sic] only opinions. Huh? Actually they are not opinions.
Mark, did you get a cold burger tonight?
FINALLY, after 144 years, the democrats will be getting their slaves back. Imagine the drama queenery that would ensue if Obama had said he'd bring back the military draft.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLR:
ReplyDelete1. You're better than that. But not much.
2. Give him time.
President O is leading the fixing of this screwed-up country. All of it.
EL frequently promotes the Israeli mandatory public service of it's youth, but hey that has no relation to this program.
ReplyDeleteHas Ben not bothered to read any of my comments? Of course not. If he had he would have read, in this very thread, my admission that I DO support compulsory service in our military. And he's right, compulsory military service has absolutely nothing to do with what the Obama administration desires to do with its brownshirt program. Service to one's country is not the same as service to one's government. The military teaches one how to love America, and requires an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; bearing true faith and allegiance to the same.
ReplyDeleteWhat will Obama's brownshirts be taught?
It saddens me that one commenter deleted his/her comment, rather than let it stands. But this is what was posted:
"I believe that Dan will have Satan's back [on] Judgement Day.
Why not? He's certainly one of the Author of Confusion's greatest apologists presently."
The following is a prayer offered at my church this morning:
[paraphrased]
Heavenly Father, thank you for this day and the opportunity to come to your house to worship you and hear your word taught. Bless us with the anointing of your spirit.
And Lord, I pray for our president this morning. He calls himself Christian, but I see no evidence of it, but you know what's in his heart. I see hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked imaginations. I see a proud look, a lying tongue, a false witness that speaks lies. And I see a man who sows discord among the brethren. Save him, Lord. Save his soul, and give him a new spirit. Cleanse him of all his unrighteousness. Save him, and please, Lord, save our country.
We praise you and thank you for all your blessings. We know that everything is in your hands. Thank you again for this day, and give our congregation a sweet spirit.
In Jesus name, Amen.
sigh. I don't know why I bothered coming back here. I'll try to avoid making that mistake again.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, this brother, saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus the Christ, loves and supports freedom of choice, is actively opposed to oppression of any sort, seeks to follow in the footsteps of Jesus and supports the best ideals of our great nation - justice, charity, doing unto and with the least of these, the marginalized, the poor, the foreigner.
If you would like to criticize that and call it unchristian and unamerican, by all means, have at it. Despite your fears, it's a free country.
While you're at it, you can tell me what part it is exactly that you object to. Is it that I trust in God's grace? Is it that I believe Jesus to be the son of God? Is it that I am opposed to slander and demonization of one's enemies? That I am opposed to those who'd speak falsehoods? Is it that I am supportive of volunteerism? Is it that I am willing to point out hypocrisy when I see it (and, whatever else you might call it, supporting MANDATORY military service but opposing MANDATORY charitable service is hypocrisy)?
What exactly do you find objectionable that you must try to make these sorts of discussions personal? Is it that you object to my using the same tactics you use? I must tell you that I find that perhaps the most amusing and yet sad thing that I see here - when I start name-calling and ranting about the perversion and hypocrisy of some, you find that objectionable, but when others who agree with you do it, well, it's all good.
So, have a fun time demonizing this brother in Christ, and others like me. If you'd like, you can make up crap about my mother and grandmother, too. I'm not especially worried about it, as you have identified yourselves as the fringe lunatic edge and no one really cares much what lunatics think.
I'm just a little sorry for y'all, that you're all so mentally unstable and living in such fear and paranoia. It's rather sad.
Peace.
And Lord, I pray for our president this morning. He calls himself Christian, but I see no evidence of it, but you know what's in his heart. I see hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked imaginations. I see a proud look, a lying tongue, a false witness that speaks lies. And I see a man who sows discord among the brethren. Save him, Lord. Save his soul, and give him a new spirit. Cleanse him of all his unrighteousness. Save him, and please, Lord, save our country.
ReplyDeleteThis prayer was offered at your church? And you would criticize Jeremiah Wright?
This is one of the most disgusting "prayers" I've ever seen.
There is no basis for any of this fantasizing. You could just as easily given the same prayer for George W. Bush. But if anyone had, you would have had a coronary.
To call this "sad" does not do it justice.
You know, there's some real sick stuff in this thread, from the hand of the host.
ReplyDeleteIchabod! If God were ever here!
I may actually throw up.
ER:
ReplyDeleteRe, "Much of this began years ago with the help of socialist John Dewey and William James."
I read "this" as the broader issue here that drives you and Eric nuts: the very idea of community, mutual service, democracy and democratic socialism. And all that traces to ChristJesus.
I don't believe anyone here rejects the ideas of community and mutual service.
It's not the case that those ideas lead inevitably to socialism of any kind, democratic or not.
And it's simply not true that socialism has its roots in the teachings of Jesus Christ.
You can't point to any teachings that lead to socialism, because none exist. By claiming that His teachings lead to socialism, you're putting words in your supposed Lord's mouth.
Dan, I will remind you that you defended Jeremiah Wright by invoking the imagery of lynching against us, his critics.
While you're at it, you can tell me what part it is exactly that you object to... Is it that I am opposed to slander and demonization of one's enemies? That I am opposed to those who'd speak falsehoods? ...Is it that I am willing to point out hypocrisy when I see it[?]
It's quite clear that none of these things are true. You don't object, on principle, to slander, demonization, falsehood and hypocrisy.
You only do so when it suits your purposes.
And, on the subject of hypocrisy, this rather takes the cake.
For the record, this brother, saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus the Christ, loves and supports freedom of choice, is actively opposed to oppression of any sort, seeks to follow in the footsteps of Jesus and supports the best ideals of our great nation - justice, charity, doing unto and with the least of these, the marginalized, the poor, the foreigner.
You say you are actively opposed to oppression of any sort, but you support the legal sanction of abortion.
You say you support justice and charity, but the killing of the unborn is by no means just or merciful.
You say you defend the least of these, but your defense of abortion as "freedom of choice" belies that claim.
The flagrance with which you wrap yourself in these virtues while defending the murder of literally millions of unborn, is far more repulsive and frankly evil than any hypocrisy of which Eric is guilty.
Ah, of course! It's all about abortion. Abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion.
ReplyDeleteIt's not the Hitler youth organization. It's not the FEMA concentration camps. It's not the Chinese world currency.
It's that Obama, who can't change any state abortion laws, agrees with the majority of Americans that abortion should be legal, safe and rare.
Nothing else really matters, does it?
Pointing out the rank hypocrisy of someone who "loves and supports freedom of choice" while paying lip-service to the ideals of justice, charity, and the protection of our most vulnerable, doesn't mean that it's the only issue that matters.
ReplyDeleteYou're knocking down strawmen, just as you did earlier when you compared compulsary service with the private organization of the Boy Scouts.
To be clear, that was MY prayer, in closing our congregational prayer. How absolutely horrid of me to pray for the immortal soul of our president.
ReplyDeleteThere is no evidence that Barack Obama is Christian. None. Jim asked earlier...
"I guess no other religion on earth has morals or ethics or believes in God, huh?"
And I answer now... NO other religion on the face of the earth beside Christianity and Judaism that believes in God. They may have morals and ethics but they are not the morals and ethics of God. If they were, these other religions would not be on the fast track toward hell. They would not need any evangelizing. They would not need to hear the Gospel of Christ.
All we have from Barack Obama is his word. His hands and his other words say he is not what he claims to be. Dan and ER aren't going to pray for his soul, so men like me have to.
And no, it's not just about abortion. It's about his lies. It's about his deceptions and deceit and false witness. It's about his corruption and that of his ministers. It's about so much more than abortion. But to that particular point, what kind of Christian can vote AGAINST the Born Alive Infants Protection Act not once, but twice? What man of God can righteously deny life-saving treatment to those victims of abortion who miraculously survive the procedure?
Show me such a man, and I'll show you a child of Satan... NOT God. NOT a man bought by the blood of Christ. When God enters in HE changes everything; your heart, your mind, your sense of purpose... "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
ER wants to shout "Ichabod"? He needs to look in the mirror.
I don't care how many of you are angry and disgusted with what I've written here. The truth has to be told, whether YOU like it or not.
"It's that Obama, who can't change any state abortion laws, agrees with the majority of Americans that abortion should be legal, safe and rare."
ReplyDeleteIf all of America supported abortion at any time, for any reason, for anyone (as Obama does now), a true leader of conscience and character would speak out against the heinous practice.
But really Jim, it's not about abortion in this thread. You just keyed on a response to Dan's boo-hoo lament of being put-upon. The topic is still very much Obama's "Hitler Youth" proposal.
But there is no such thing as an "Obama Hitler Youth proposal." It's a figment of your imagination. There is nothing in the bill that in any way is comparable to the Hitler Youth Group. The bill was substantially written by Orrin Hatch, for crying out loud.
ReplyDeleteYou guys are peeing in your pants over something that Rush Limbaugh dreamed up.
Viva Michele Bachman!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteOne other quick thing, ER:
ReplyDeleteOn trust: I trust no thing and no human, past or present, wholly or blindly.
You believe that the NT writers "obviously put words in Jesus's mouth." I asked you to justify that belief with an argument for why you believe any particular passage is inauthentic.
You didn't provide an argument, and you even implied that it wasn't necessary.
"I'm making no argument; I'm not gonna give you what you want. It's not about arguing; it's about trusting researchers who will follow the research wherever it leads more than trusting religious people, leaders or followers, who are to defend their own position no matter what."
When it comes to undermining the authority of Scripture, you say that it's all a matter of "trusting" (some) scholars, and that it's not a matter of actually studying their arguments.
That certainly seems like blind trust. If your trust isn't blind because you actually studied the arguments, you sure didn't seem eager to repeat those arguments, and you didn't even seem to think those arguments were all that important.
Dan,
ReplyDeleteNo one's trying to tell you what you think. We're just reponding to what you've typed. If you can't articulate your thoughts properly, perhaps running away is the best move. You seem to want things all ways, such as calling for civility as if it really matters to you, and then "lowering yourself" to name calling because others have so engaged themselves, and then pretending that gives you clearance to do so. Well, why would you avail yourself of such presumed clearance if you truly cared about civility? It certainly doesn't further your case.
Personally, I have no problem with your commenting aside from the fact that you are so often wrong. Constantly positioning yourself as pious is tiresome, that is, as if we don't get the point, put on or otherwise. But there are serious issues of consistency in your positions and calling you out on those inconsistencies is not mind-reading or "telling you what you think". It's a demand for clarity or concession. You can't seem to give the former and you refuse to give the latter. It seems typical of most of our opponents, now that I think of it, and a few of them have left for good as well. I suppose that would then be the typical next step. You've always shown more resolve than those folks up to now.