Lynn v. Sekulow

Lynn v. Sekulow


Prayer Decision Flawed

posted by Jay Sekulow

Barry,

This decision hardly represents a ‘victory’ for religious liberty, as you suggest.  It’s more like a small setback in the ongoing battle to keep groups like Freedom From Religion Foundation from purging all religious references and observances from American public life. 

This decision is by a single federal district court in Wisconsin.  It does not follow well established precedent on First Amendment jurisprudence.  And, at the end of the day, it is our belief that this twisted interpretation of the Establishment Clause will be overturned – if not by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit – than by the Supreme Court.

I’ve read the decision and disagree completely with Judge Crabb’s analysis.  I believe her conclusions are flawed.  The only good news out of this is that she put her injunction on hold – clearing the way for the National Day of Prayer to continue – while appeals move forward.  And, after the decision, the White House made it clear that the President intends to recognize a National Day of Prayer again in May. 

This National Day of Prayer is voluntary and no one is compelled to pray or not to pray. 

In an amicus brief we filed with the court representing 31 members of Congress in this case we cite a long history of recognizing a national day of prayer dating back to the late 1700′s with the Continental Congress recommending that the states set apart a day for prayer and thanksgiving.  Such requests were made by our nation’s Founding Fathers – including Benjamin Franklin and George Washington.  Even, the drafter of the First Amendment, James Madison, issued four proclamations in the early 1800′s calling the nation to a day of prayer.  The fact is that since the country’s inception, nearly every president has issued proclamations calling the nation to pray for a variety of purposes.

Barry, as you know, this case could very well end up at the Supreme Court.  And, as we prepare our amicus brief – once again representing members of Congress this time before a federal appeals court – it’s important to note that this case could very well end up in front of Justice Stevens’ replacement.

That’s why it’s so important for the nominee to answer direct questions about their judicial philosophy, how they view the role of judges, and their view of the rule of law.

To subscribe to “Lynn v. Sekulow” click here  

 



Advertisement
Comments read comments(165)
post a comment
HG

posted April 16, 2010 at 4:48 pm


Jay S.: “… purging all religious references and observances from American public life.”
Admitting that prayer is not government business is hardly purging all religious references and observances from American public life. Go ahead and pray if you want to waste your time, there’s no ban, but the government shouldn’t be in the business of sponsoring religious beliefs. This decision is in perfect accord with the Constitutional separation of religion and civil government.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 16, 2010 at 4:57 pm


Okay Mr. Sekulow,
I wonder how you would address the words of the judge who pointed out that our government has no more right to urge the citizens to engage in Judeo-Christian prayer than it has to “encourage citizens to fast during the month of Ramadan, attend a synagogue, purify themselves in a sweat lodge or practice rune magic.”
I am wondering if you support a National Sweat Lodge Day? A Hare Krishna Chant Day? Or are you only interested in seeing Judeo-Christian Day?



report abuse
 

Ellen Brown

posted April 16, 2010 at 5:00 pm


“This National Day of Prayer is voluntary and no one is compelled to pray or not to pray.”
There’s that specious old argument again…no one is FORCING you to pray. NO government sponsored prayer time is more Constitutional, thank you. But don’t worry Jay, you can still pray if you want to–as you can 24/7 anywhere in this country. However our government shouldn’t be telling us where and when.



report abuse
 

GFine

posted April 16, 2010 at 7:17 pm


I agree with Ellen, but I’ll add this. If this ‘special day’ was not knocked down what next? Onward Christian soldiers day, and more and more until the calendar is littered with ‘special’ religious days.
We are not a nation of Christians. We are a nation whose major religions are Christian, but it is inclusive of Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and so on with the freedom to practice their religion as the individual see fit.
We don’t need a special dispensation as we are free to do as we please regarding religion, but in the privacy of our own homes, and places of worship.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 12:44 am


Ellen Brown says:
…our government shouldn’t be telling us where and when.
But then…
GFine says:
…we are free to do as we please regarding religion, but in the privacy of our own homes, and places of worship.
Mr. Incredible says:
It appears that GFine disagrees with Ellen Brown, and vice versa.
She says we shouldn’t be told where and when. Then, GFine says we SHOULD be told where and when.
Which is it?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 12:51 am


GFine says:
…we are free to do as we please regarding religion, but in the privacy of our own homes, and places of worship.
Mr. Incredible asks:
May I pray aloud in a city park? If the city lets me, is it promotion/establishment?
May I, through a city park, carry a sign with John 3:16 on it? If the city lets me, is it promotion/establishment?
May I, in the city park, have a conversation with somebody else, or a group of others, about the Word of God? If the city lets me, is it promotion/establishment?
May I have a sign in the window of my house, seen from the public street, proclaiming “Jesus is Lord!” If the city lets me, is it promotion/establishment?



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 17, 2010 at 5:32 am


May I, through a city park, carry a sign with this on it? “For God so hated humanity that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever does not believe in him will not perish but have everlasting life being tortured for all eternity in Hell without hope of forgiveness.”
Mr. Incredible asks:
May I pray aloud in a city park?
Boris says: Only if you want people to know what a superstitious retard you are.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 6:22 am


Boris Bonehead, misquoting me, says:

“May I, through a city park, carry a sign with this on it?”

Mr. Incredible says:
Of course, I didn’t write that, and I didn’t write what the idiot, Boris, adopting the ways of the Devil, says John 3:16 says.
Mr. Incredible asks:
May I pray aloud in a city park?
Butt-sniffer Boris says:
Only if you want people to know what a superstitious retard you are.
Mr. Incredible says:
They are ignorant. Like you. But so what?



report abuse
 

Mary-Lee

posted April 17, 2010 at 10:00 am


Mr. Incredible asks:
May I pray aloud in a city park? If the city lets me, is it promotion/establishment?
You certainly may, and you may do all the other things you cited. Don’t be too surprised, though, if people give you a wide margin as they pass by.



report abuse
 

Mary-Lee

posted April 17, 2010 at 10:11 am


It’s more like a small setback in the ongoing battle to keep groups like Freedom From Religion Foundation from purging all religious references and observances from American public life.
I really don’t know how you can make such a statement, Mr. Sekulow.
You know as well as I do that religious references permeate the art, music, and other cultural expressions that exist in this nation.
But why should I be forced to support a government-sponsored National Day of Christian Prayer? I am not a Christian.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 17, 2010 at 10:14 am


I see Mr. Incredible (the guy with the special Jesus powers) is worried about the devil. He seems to think that Boris has adopted the ways of the, now don’t be scared, THE DEVIL.
Geez dude, you have degenerated into a cheap imitation of the Church Lady!



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 5:27 pm


Rich says:
I see Mr. Incredible (the guy with the special Jesus powers)…
Mr. Incredible says:
Thank you, Jesus!
Rich says:
…is worried about the devil.
Mr. Incredible says:
I’m not worried about the Devil cuz He already defeated the works of the Devil. So, the works of the Devil bounce off me like Superman.
Rich says:
He seems to think that Boris has adopted the ways of the, now don’t be scared, THE DEVIL.
Mr. Incredible says:
Well…?
Rich says:
Geez dude, you have degenerated into a cheap imitation of the Church Lady.
Mr. Incredible says:
We know you’re trying to be clever.
The word, “geez,” is a mangled version of the name of Jesus. Why do you appeal to Someone YOU say doesn’t exist???



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 5:36 pm


Mary-Lee says:
Mr. Sekulow…You know as well as I do that religious references permeate the art, music, and other cultural expressions that exist in this nation.
But why should I be forced to support a government-sponsored National Day of Christian Prayer?
Mr. Incredible says:
“National Day of ‘Christian’ Prayer”??? Where is THAT? There is no requirement that the prayer on that day must be Christian. An atheist, like Rich, in the post above, can pray to “Geez,” or Jesus, or to his car.
You’re not forced to support The National Day of Prayer. If you give money to an organization that uses THAT particular money for a particular purpose, that’s one thing. However, if you pour money into the State’s coffers, that money goes into a general fund and, from there, is distributed to different departments. When it gets to the government, it is no longer YOUR money; you can’t tell the government to spend those particular dollars only the way YOU want them to be spent. When you give money to an organization whose mission it is to spend the money one, particular way, you have a say-so — you can examine their mission statement and determine whether you wanna get to that organization, or not.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 5:43 pm


Mr. Incredible asks:
May I pray aloud in a city park? If the city lets me, is it promotion/establishment?
Mary-Lee says:
You certainly may, and you may do all the other things you cited. Don’t be too surprised, though, if people give you a wide margin as they pass by.
Mr. Incredible says:
Why should I be surprised, if some do??? Some of them will join in. So what??
Y’see, Christianity is not like a club seeking members and adjusting rules and requirements in order to attract people. Christianity does not surrender to surveys and polls. That’s why God says, although He loves all, He will save only a remnant, and Christ says only few will find the gate.
My point is, does mere expression on public property signify promotion/establishment? It does not. The First Amendment says,

“Congress shall make no law…”

CONGRESS shall make no law.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 17, 2010 at 5:59 pm


“The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment
means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government
can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion,
aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither
can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”
U.S. Supreme Court, Everson
Seems pretty straightforward to me. The government does not exert religious influence or support religious activities.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 6:20 pm


HG says:
“The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment
means least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government
can set up a church.
Mr. Incredible says:
The enactment of The National Day of Prayer does not set up a church.
HG says:
Neither can pass laws which aid one religion,
aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.
Mr. Incredible says:
Which “religion” does The National Day of Prayer aid?
HG says:
Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.
Mr. Incredible says:
The enactment of The National Day of Prayer does none of that.
HG says:
No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”
U.S. Supreme Court, Everson
Mr. Incredible says:
The enactment of The National Day of Prayer does none of that.
HG says:
Seems pretty straightforward to me.
Mr. Incredible says:
Seems pretty straightforward to us, too.
HG says:
The government does not exert religious influence or support religious activities.
Mr. Incredible says:
The National Day of Prayer exerts no “religious” influence since prayer can be directed to anyone, or any thing, not necessarily just to “religious” figures.
The National Day of Prayer does not support “religious” activities above any other activities. It is concerned only with prayer, and, as I say, anyone can pray to anyone, or any thing. Prayer is not necessarily only a “religious” activity.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 17, 2010 at 6:21 pm


ya hg,
that is why there is freedom of religion…..the government can not mandate people to believe in God….
nor can they mandate people not to believe in God.
too bad they haven’t figured out how to protect the people of our Posterity?
What??
they are still killing people in the womb and in the science lab….
cc



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 6:24 pm


HG says:
No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”
U.S. Supreme Court, Everson
Mr. Incredible says:
No such tax has been levied.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 17, 2010 at 6:49 pm


Mr. Incredible says: “Which “religion” does The National Day of Prayer aid?”
All religion. Praying to an imaginary being is a religious exercise, and prayer in general is widely recognized as inherently religious. Your failure to recognize this seems disingenuous.
Incred: “HG says: No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”
U.S. Supreme Court, Everson
Mr. Incredible says: The enactment of The National Day of Prayer does none of that.”
Oh, yes it does. Any expenditure of time by paid government employee, and any purchases of any kind for the ‘promotion’ is an expense of taxpayer money.
“Your Name
April 17, 2010 6:21 PM
ya hg, that is why there is freedom of religion…..the government can not mandate people to believe in God….
nor can they mandate people not to believe in God.
Read much? Nor can they encourage or discourage, or provide any degree of financial support for ANY religious exercise (which the National Day of Prayer certainly WAS).
cc: “too bad they haven’t figured out how to protect the people of our Posterity?”
Is that a question? ‘They’ have. It’s called the U.S. Constitution.
“they are still killing people in the womb and in the science lab….
cc”
Not people as covered by the fourteenth amendment, but in the minds of fixated individuals, like yourself, who would repeal the very individual liberties the constitution was established to enshrine.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 7:14 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
Which “religion” does The National Day of Prayer aid?
HG says:
All religion.
Mr. Incredible says:
Including atheism.
HG says:
Praying to an imaginary being is a religious exercise…
Mr. Incredible says:
No one is forcing anyone to engage in “religious” exercise.
HG says:
… and prayer in general is widely recognized as inherently religious.
Mr. Incredible says:
The government isn’t engaging in any “religious” exercise. The government isn’t forcing anyone to engage in a “religious” exercise. Where’s the imposition?
HG says:
Your failure to recognize this seems disingenuous.
Mr. Incredible says:
I recognize what you say. I thought about it. Then, I rejected it. I still do.
HG says:
No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”
U.S. Supreme Court, Everson
Mr. Incredible says:
The enactment of The National Day of Prayer does none of that.
HG says:
Oh, yes it does.
Mr. Incredible says:
Oh, no, it doesn’t.
HG says:
Any expenditure of time by paid government employee, and any purchases of any kind for the ‘promotion’ is an expense of taxpayer money.
Mr. Incredible says:
No government employee, on government time, will be praying in violation of the First Amendment. No government employee, on government time, will be going around requiring others to pray. The enactment of The National Day of Prayer does not promote “religion.” Prayer is not necessarily only a “religious” activity.
HG says:
Nor can they encourage or discourage, or provide any degree of financial support for ANY religious exercise (which the National Day of Prayer certainly WAS).
Mr. Incredible says:
It encourages prayer which is not necessarily a “religious” activity.
Cara says:
they are still killing people in the womb and in the science lab….
HG says:
Not people as covered by the fourteenth amendment [sic]…
Mr. Incredible says:
The Fourteenth Amendment defines what it means to be a citizen, not what it means to be a person.
HG says:
…but in the minds of fixated individuals, like yourself, who would repeal the very individual liberties the constitution was established to enshrine.
Mr. Incredible says:
That comment belongs here — – > http://thumbsnap.com/OeJTeNPL



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 7:42 pm


HG says:
No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”
U.S. Supreme Court, Everson
Mr. Incredible says:
The enactment of The National Day of Prayer does none of that.
HG says:
Oh, yes it does.
Mr. Incredible says:
Show us — show EVERYBODY — precisely what law levies a tax for the express purpose of and particular disbursement to particular “religious” activities of which you people cannot be part.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 8:17 pm


HG sasy:
Nor can they encourage or discourage, or provide any degree of financial support for ANY religious exercise (which the National Day of Prayer certainly WAS).
Mr. Incredible says:
The government may encourage an atmosphere of “religious” activity by saying that it is okay, according to the Constitution, to perform “religious” exercises and that the government cannot stop “religious” expression. Government may recognize “religious” activity without promoting it, nor establishing it. In any case, prayer is not necessarily “religious.”
The National Day of Prayer — which is goin’-ta happen anyway — doesn’t set aside ANY money for that day. No one in government has to do anything before, during, nor after, that day to facilitate prayer by anybody. There is no requirement to pray. You, for instance, may pray to your car 8-track stereo to work; you may hit it, hoping that it will work, and that hoping is, in fact, a prayer, and you don’t need that day to pray.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 8:21 pm


The government can do nothing to stop me from exercising a public, “religious” display of worship. That it does nothing is not the same as promoting, nor establishing. Recognizing is not the same as promotion/establishment.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 8:25 pm


HG says:
No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance.
Mr. Incredible says:
Show us ALL where in the enactment of The National Day of Prayer there is punishment of anybody for those things.
You’re a fear-mongerer.



report abuse
 

interpreter

posted April 17, 2010 at 10:41 pm


The Wisconsin judge is just another example of the war on Christians being waged by activist judges appointed by Democrats. That’s why I always vote Republican.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 17, 2010 at 10:54 pm


interpreter,
I am the mirror image of your comment. I always vote for Democrats because they afford the best chance to thwart Christian Theocrats. They aren’t all that great but at least they are better. The is a war but it is actually activist conservative judges creating special rights for all the poor down trodden Christians and then giving our tax money to parochial schools that provide religious instruction.
Yeah, I want my tax money to go to teach a kid about talking snakes!



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:00 pm


Mr. Incredible (the guy who has special superpowers directly from Jesus) says to Mary-Lee:
“you can’t tell the government to spend those particular dollars only the way YOU want them to be spent.”
Hmm, well I guess there goes the abortion using government funds prohibition.
You know, you really are monumentally dense, a liar, or insane. It would be a miracle to be all three at once. Normally, I don’t believe in miracles…



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:25 pm


Good comments Rich.
I ask readers to please note that where Incred writes “HG says”, what he quotes is often from the Supreme Court quote I posted. I did not “say” these things. I posted a quote wherein not every point was relevant to this case, nor did I make the claim they were. If government expenditure of time, effort, and treasure is 0.0%, then I have no problems, because then the prayer day is not governmentally sponsored. I believe the Court is correct in ruling that no law may be made promoting prayer.
“It goes beyond mere ‘acknowledgment’ of religion because its sole purpose is to encourage all citizens to engage in prayer, an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function in this context,” wrote Judge Barbara Crabb, who said the Day of Prayer violates the First Amendment’s establishment clause. Cha-ching!



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:30 pm


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible (the guy who has special superpowers directly from Jesus)…
Mr. Incredible says:
Thank you God through Christ!



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:31 pm


Rich says:
You know, you really are monumentally dense, a liar, or insane.
Mr. Incredible says:
Gee, I think I’ll go and fling myself in front of a train cuz YOU say you think I’m really monumentally dense, a liar, or insane.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:31 pm


Rich says:
I always vote for Democrats…
Mr. Incredible says:
Only this coming November, it will do you no good.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:34 pm


interpreter says:
The Wisconsin judge is just another example of the war on Christians being waged by activist judges appointed by Democrats. That’s why I always vote Republican.
Mr. Incredible says:
He will be on the winning side this coming November and in ’12.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:35 pm


Rich says:
They aren’t all that great but at least they are better.
Mr. Incredible says:
ALL the polls show that the American People disagree with you.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:36 pm


CORRECTION
interpreter says:
The Wisconsin judge is just another example of the war on Christians being waged by activist judges appointed by Democrats. That’s why I always vote Republican.
Mr. Incredible says:
You will be on the winning side this coming November and in ’12.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:44 pm


Atheism is not an act of intellect; it’s an act of the Will. It’s a manufactured belief. Fabricated to sound intelligent while precluding themselves from admitting that they don’t know 98% of all that’s out there.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:48 pm


Rich says:
… actually activist conservative judges creating special rights for all the poor down trodden Christians…
Mr. Incredible says:
What “special Rights”??



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:49 pm


Rich says:
… giving our tax money to parochial schools that provide religious instruction.
Mr. Incredible says:
After it gets to the government, it’s not YOUR money.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 17, 2010 at 11:55 pm


Mr. Incredible says to Mary-Lee:
You can’t tell the government to spend those particular dollars only the way YOU want them to be spent.
Rich says:
Hmm, well I guess there goes the abortion using government funds prohibition.
Mr. Incredible says:
Except that I vote for the people who are in charge of spending that money. They and I are on the correct side — that is, the Godly side. If they are in the majority, and they and I are on the correct side, the money does not go to the pro-kill the unborn-by-choice fanatics. Abortion is a matter of life and death. “Religious” expression is not; you can do what you tell us to do — that is, if we are confronted with pornography, just ignore it, or change the channel. When you are confronted with “religious” expression, just ignore it, or change the channel.



report abuse
 

Gwyddion9

posted April 18, 2010 at 12:05 am


Personally, I am pleased with the decision. The National Day of Prayer, has, for all intents and purposes, has been hijacked by conservative Christians in the attempt to make it “their” day and what’s more, to define what is acceptable as well as who should pray.
I know of one Wiccan student who was told that she wasn’t allowed to pray as it wasn’t to the “Judeo-Christian god” but she could remain as long as she was quiet.
A day of prayer was to be for all citizens to offer prayers to whom they prayed not be dictated to whom one should pray.
Plus with the information that Barry provided, it is very clear that Dobson and his group were defining it solely as a “Christian” event with prayers to the “Christian god”.
Again, I am glad with the judges’ decision and I am also glad that other Christians are finally speaking up and saying that you, conservative Christians, DO NOT represent Christianity or all of Christianity for that matter.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 18, 2010 at 12:53 am


Mr. Incredible, the guy who is really cool and incredible because he says so he is,
You wrote: “Gee, I think I’ll go and fling myself in front of a train cuz YOU say you think I’m really monumentally dense, a liar, or insane.”
Wow, don’t let me stop you. However, do surprise me. Keep in mind that Sarah Palin has been traveling around in a bus for her teabagger tour. If you were to step in front of her bus you would really get a whole lot more media coverage, something a really neat and incredible guy you likely craves.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 18, 2010 at 1:08 am


Mr. Incredible, my good friend with all those special powers from your ‘special’ friend,
re: your paragraph -
“Except that I vote for the people who are in charge of spending that money. They and I are on the correct side — that is, the Godly side. If they are in the majority, and they and I are on the correct side, the money does not go to the pro-kill the unborn-by-choice fanatics. Abortion is a matter of life and death. “Religious” expression is not; you can do what you tell us to do — that is, if we are confronted with pornography, just ignore it, or change the channel. When you are confronted with “religious” expression, just ignore it, or change the channel.”
This would be great if it was coherent. You do know that saying you are on the “correct” side offers no persuasive logic or any credible reasoning that might defend your claim, it is just moronic cheerleading. In this case, you are cheerleading for yourself, kind of tacky dude! Best change your moniker to “Mr. I Am Really Trying and Want to Be Incredible”
As for the “godly” side, you got any proof of that? I am thinking you are hallucinating and until you can provide substantive and verifiable proof of such, well, we can all just treat that as a product of your ongoing delusions of grandeur.
And finally, you complete and utter dolt, comparing pornography (an endeavor of private enterprise) to religious expression (by our government) is really pretty lame, even for you. You do understand that no one has to pay for what private business sells other than willing customers. I would like to think that even you can see that we all have to pay for what our government does.



report abuse
 

GFine

posted April 18, 2010 at 1:28 am


My Mistake Mr I. Thanks for pointing that out. I didn’t read into what Ellen wrote as it was a little ambiguous.
But what is not ambiguous is the 1st Amendment.
Why do people find the need to legislate religion? Is it some arrogance that says we are the majority and therefore what we say goes?
Legislating something opens it up for abuse. The problem is the abuse is in the arrogance of those who claim to be religious, and pious.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 18, 2010 at 1:41 am


Gwyddion9: “I am glad with the judges’ decision and I am also glad that other Christians are finally speaking up and saying that you, conservative Christians, DO NOT represent Christianity or all of Christianity for that matter.”
Yes, this individual GFine seems particularly reasonable. I mustn’t lose sight of the fact that most people are content with freedom for all.
Rich: “I would like to think that even you can see that we all have to pay for what our government does.”
That’s a valid point, and supplemental to the court’s reasoning which stated “it goes beyond mere ‘acknowledgment’ of religion because its sole purpose is to encourage all citizens to engage in prayer, an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function…”



report abuse
 

daniel rotter

posted April 18, 2010 at 1:50 am


“The Wisconsin judge is just another example of the war on Christians…”
So Judge Crabb’s very EXISTENCE is an “example of the war on Christians!?” Insanity, pure insanity.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 1:55 am


GFine says:
Why do people find the need to legislate religion?
Mr. Incredible says:
I dunno. I want not to legislate the First Amendment.
GFine says:
Is it some arrogance that says we are the majority and therefore what we say goes?
Mr. Incredible says:
In some cases, yes.
GFine says:
Legislating something opens it up for abuse.
Mr. Incredible says:
Give me an example.
GFine says:
The problem is the abuse is in the arrogance of those who claim to be religious, and pious.
Mr. Incredible says:
The Pharisees were religious and pious. They taught that the Law saves. Jesus came to show that the Law kills and that His Grace gives life through His Truth.
There are Christians who preach the religiosity of Christianity, that Salvation comes through the Law, not through Grace. They are pious in that they try to show off their supervisory watchfulness rather than conveying the Word of Grace.
However, it is also true that, unless you see your condition before God, you cannot access Grace. That doesn’t take beating somebody down, rather helping them to see their condition before God, then telling them how God, through Christ, gives them a way out.
The problem in these pages is that those who are blind, deaf and ignorant don’t see their condition before God and want nobody to bring their condition to their attention. We are here to say, “That’s tuff.”



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:11 am


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible, my good friend with all those special powers from your ‘special’ friend…
Mr. Incredible says:
What “‘special’ friend”?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:11 am


Mr. Incredible says:
Except that I vote for the people who are in charge of spending that money. They and I are on the correct side — that is, the Godly side. If they are in the majority, and they and I are on the correct side, the money does not go to the pro-kill the unborn-by-choice fanatics. Abortion is a matter of life and death. “Religious” expression is not; you can do what you tell us to do — that is, if we are confronted with pornography, just ignore it, or change the channel. When you are confronted with “religious” expression, just ignore it, or change the channel.
Rich says:
This would be great if it was coherent.
Mr. Incredible says:
It IS coherent. It’s just that you have trouble with comprehension.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:12 am


Rich says:
You do know that saying you are on the “correct” side offers no persuasive logic or any credible reasoning that might defend your claim…
Mr. Incredible translates:

” I don’t agree with what you say, and, so, YOU’RE illogical and not credible.”

Rich says:
… it is just moronic cheerleading.
Mr. Incredible translates:

” I must belittle what doesn’t agree with me.”

Rich says:
In this case, you are cheerleading for yourself…
Mr. Incredible says:
God, through Christ, cheerleading for me, and I cheerlead for Them.
I testify of Them, not myself.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:13 am


Rich says:
As for the “godly” side, you got any proof of that?
Mr. Incredible says:
“godly”? No. Godly? Yes.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:14 am


Rich says:
I am thinking you are hallucinating…
Mr. Incredible translates:

” Since you don’t agree with me, you must be hallucinating.”

Rich says:
…and until you can provide substantive and verifiable proof of such…
Mr. Incredible says:
Already done. You have precluded yourself from accepting any proof we provide.
Rich says:
…well, we can all just treat that as a product of your ongoing delusions of grandeur.
Mr. Incredible says:
Be my guest.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:14 am


Rich says:
And finally, you complete and utter dolt…
Mr. Incredible translates:

” You are getting under my skin.”

Gee, that’s really tough.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:15 am


Rich says:
… comparing pornography (an endeavor of private enterprise) to religious expression (by our government) is really pretty lame…
Mr. Incredible translates:

” I agree with you, and you provided a really good comparison, but I can’t be seen as agreeing with you. So, I am forced by my own prejudices to try to belittle you.”

Rich says:
You do understand that no one has to pay for what private business sells other than willing customers. I would like to think that even you can see that we all have to pay for what our government does.
Mr. Incredible says:
However, when you pay your taxes, you don’t get to earmark that money, especially for pro-kill-the-unborn-by-choice.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:42 am


Just like the boneheads, don’t want to use public funds for something helpful and legal (women’s healthcare), but have no problem using it to promote an act of religious masturbation. Incredible!



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 2:58 am


HG says:
Just like the boneheads, don’t want to use public funds for something helpful and legal (women’s healthcare), but have no problem using it to promote an act of religious masturbation. Incredible!
Mr. Incredible says:
Just like the boneheads don’t wanna use public money for what they consider to be “religious” activities which are constitutional, have no problem using them for their pro-kill-the-unborn-by-choice activities which are unconstitutional cuz, while it is convenient for the woman and her social life, it’s inconvenient for the unborn person.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 3:20 am


By the way, elective abortion to save the mother’s social life is not health care.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 3:20 am


Rich says:
You do understand that no one has to pay for what private business sells other than willing customers…we all have to pay for what our government does.
Mr. Incredible says:
If you don’t like what the government does, vote for somebody else this coming November.
However, given what we know about your political agenda, your vote won’t count for much, given the political climate in this country. The people YOU want in government don’t stand much of a chance, thank God. Can YOU say, “LANDSLIDE!”



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 3:31 am


Gwyddion9 says:
Personally, I am pleased with the decision.
Mr. Incredible says:
Surprise, surprise.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 3:46 am


Gwyddion9 says:
The National Day of Prayer, has, for all intents and purposes…
Mr. Incredible says:
But not in reality.
Gwyddion9 says:
… has been hijacked by conservative Christians…
Mr. Incredible asks:
By what mechanism?
Gwyddion9 says:
… in the attempt to make it “their” day…
Mr. Incredible asks:
How did we do that?
Gwyddion9 says:
… and what’s more, to define what is acceptable…
Mr. Incredible asks:
Do we not have the Right to express?? Who says you must agree with us?? NOBODY!
Gwyddion9 says:
… as well as who should pray.
Mr. Incredible says:
Nobody — neither we nor the government — does anybody who should pray. You may pray, or not pray, or pray to your car.
I can understand that, as a Kristian, you’d be against this.
Gwyddion9 says:
I know of one Wiccan student who was told that she wasn’t allowed to pray…
Mr. Incredible says:
Where, in the enactment of The National Day of Prayer, the prohibition against prayer of any sort?
Gwyddion9 says:
… as it wasn’t to the “Judeo-Christian god” …
Mr. Incredible says:
There is no such thing as “Judeo-Christian god.” There IS, however, “Judeo-Christian God.”
Gwyddion9 says:
… but she could remain as long as she was quiet.
Mr. Incredible says:
She should’ve gone to another group who was praying to their car stereos, or to their burritos. Was there a ball and chain on her?
Gwyddion9 says:
A day of prayer was to be for all citizens…
Mr. Incredible says:
And it is.
Gwyddion9 says:
…to offer prayers to whom they prayed not be dictated to whom one should pray.
Mr. Incredible says:
No one with any authority told her not to pray. In any case, however, as I say, she could’ve moved to another group that was praying more to her liking.
Gwyddion9 says:
Plus with the information that Barry provided, it is very clear that Dobson and his group were defining it solely as a “Christian” event with prayers to the “Christian god”.
Mr. Incredible says:
There is no such thing as “Christian god.”
Whether it is very clear, or not, Dobson and his group, and anybody else, can define it any way they want. Are YOU required to accept that definition? No. As long as the government isn’t defining it, it’s okay.
Gwyddion9 says:
Again, I am glad with the judges’ decision…
Mr. Incredible says:
Again, surprise, surprise.
Gwyddion9 says:
… and I am also glad that other Christians…
Mr. Incredible says:
Liberal Christians, of course.
Gwyddion9 says:
…are finally speaking up and saying that you, conservative Christians, DO NOT represent Christianity…
Mr. Incredible says:
Christ is conservative. We are conservative. You do the math.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 3:48 am


CORRECTION
Nobody — neither we nor the government — does anybody who should pray. ——-> Nobody — neither we, nor the government — tells anybody who should pray.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 18, 2010 at 4:31 am


Mr. Incredible says:
There is no such thing as “Christian god.”
Boris says: The first true thing this lying idiot has ever said on this blog.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 18, 2010 at 4:59 am


“Mr. Incredible says: Just like the boneheads don’t wanna use public money for what they consider to be “religious” activities which are constitutional,…”
Well, now, the problem here is that the latest Court ruling says otherwise, citing the First Amendment.
Incred: “…have no problem using them for their pro-kill-the-unborn-by-choice activities which are unconstitutional…”
Well, now, the problem here is that the Supreme Court has ruled otherwise.
Incred: “cuz, while it is convenient for the woman and her social life, it’s inconvenient for the unborn person.”
But not a ‘person’ who qualifies as a ‘person’ under the Fourteenth Amendment (again, according to the Supreme Court). And, of course, you would trivialize the reasons women have for aborting an unwanted pregnancy. I am amazed you can be so callous about something which you can know so very little. But then, you don’t need to know much, only the word of God as YOU understand it, whether it makes any sense to anyone else or not. Oh yeah!
Incred: “The problem in these pages is that those who are blind, deaf and ignorant don’t see their condition before God and want nobody to bring their condition to their attention. We are here to say, “That’s tuff.”"
“We”? Are you more than one person? For whom do you claim to speak? Who will force me to see my condition before a non-existent god? You are the one in denial, there is no god, and you are an obstrusive pest in trying to force such belief upon others.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:07 am


Mr. Incredible says:
There is no such thing as “Christian god.”
Cum-drunk Boris says:
The first true thing this lying idiot has ever said on this blog.
Mr. Incredible says:
Yes, there is no such thing as “Christian god.” There is however a Christian God. Butt-sniffin’ scoffers like you don’t know the difference.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:32 am


Mr. Incredible says:
Just like the boneheads don’t wanna use public money for what they consider to be “religious” activities which are constitutional,…
HG says:
Well, now, the problem here is that the latest Court ruling says otherwise, citing the First Amendment.
Mr. Incredible says:
I was just pointing out your inconsistency.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:33 am


Mr. Incredible says:
… have no problem using them for their pro-kill-the-unborn-by-choice activities which are unconstitutional…”
HG says:
Well, now, the problem here is that the Supreme Court has ruled otherwise.
Mr. Incredible says:
It has not ruled that it’s okay to kill persons.
Mr. Incredible says:
cuz, while it is convenient for the woman and her social life, it’s inconvenient for the unborn person.
HG says:
But not a ‘person’ who qualifies as a ‘person’ under the Fourteenth Amendment (again, according to the Supreme Court).
HG says:
The Fourteenth Amendment defines what it means to be a citizen. It does not define what it means to be a person.
In order to be a citizen, according to the Amendment, a person — a person exists — must be born. However, an unborn person cannot be a citizen. So, according to SCOTUS, the unborn cannot be a person for the purpose of being a citizen. SCOTUS did not say the unborn are not persons. In fact, Justice Blackmun, in Roe, itself, says that, had legal personhood been presented to the Court, the Court would’ve had to rule the other way. This leaves the door open for us to present to the Court a legal definition of “personhood” that meets the requirements outlined by Justice Blackmun, in Roe.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:33 am


HG says:
And, of course, you would trivialize the reasons women have for aborting an unwanted pregnancy.
Mr. Incredible says:
Most abortions are elective. An elective abortion is not for health care. It is to save the social life of the woman.
HG says:
I am amazed you can be so callous…
Mr. Incredible translates:

” I’m amazed that you haven’t come around to my way of thinking.”

HG says:
… about something which you can know so very little.
Mr. Incredible translates:

” That you don’t agree with me must be cuz you know so little. “

HG says:
But then, you don’t need to know much, only the word of God as YOU understand it…
Mr. Incredible says:
As I KNOW Him.
HG says:
… whether it makes any sense to anyone else or not.
Mr. Incredible says:
We know He doesn’t make any sense to you. Scoffers cannot make any sense of Him.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:34 am


Mr. Incredible says:
The problem in these pages is that those who are blind, deaf and ignorant don’t see their condition before God and want nobody to bring their condition to their attention. We are here to say, “That’s tuff.”
HG says:
“We”?
Mr. Incredible says:
Yeah, that’s right.
HG says:
Who will force me to see my condition before a non-existent god?
Mr. Incredible asks:
Which god?
HG says:
You are the one in denial…
Mr. Incredible says:
Denial of what? I don’t deny God. Don’t deny Christ. I deny scoffers. Like YOU.
HG says:
…there is no god,
Mr. Incredible says:
We know there is no “god.” We believe in God. Scoffers don’t know the difference.
Of all the things you do not know — and that’s plenty — how do you know that God doesn’t exist in all that you don’t know?
HG says:
… and you are an obstrusive pest…
Mr. Incredible translates:

” I can’t get you to agree with me and you keep posting, and, so, you must be a pest.”

HG says:
…in trying to force…
Mr. Incredible asks:
What “force”?
HG says:
…such belief upon others.
Mr. Incredible points out:
Much like you people are trying to force your beliefs on us.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 7:01 am


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible, the guy who is really cool and incredible because he says so he is…
Mr. Incredible says:
Not cuz I say so, rather cuz God, through Christ, says so.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 7:01 am


Mr. Incredible says:
Gee, I think I’ll go and fling myself in front of a train cuz YOU say you think I’m really monumentally dense, a liar, or insane.
I wrote that after you wrote,

“You know, you really are monumentally dense, a liar, or insane.”

I am demonstrating that I don’t care what you think you think of me.
Don’t you have a barnyard animal to “play with”?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 7:06 am


Mr. Incredible asks:
May I pray aloud in a city park?
Boris says:
Only if you want people to know what a superstitious retard you are.
Mr. Incredible asks:
Have you figured out yet which one of your mother’s twenty-five boyfriends is your real daddy?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 7:11 am


HG says:
… and you are an obstrusive pest…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“Lookit me, everybody! I gotta thesaurus!”



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 18, 2010 at 7:31 am


HG says:
… and you are an obstrusive pest…
Mr. Incredible says:
You have fingers, or claws, or hooves. In the off time that you’re not scratchin’ the crack of your butt and sniffin’ them, all you have-ta do is scroll past my posts and VOILÀ! you don’t have-ta lookit my posts and be pestered. Real easy. You’re happy, and I’m happy.



report abuse
 

Trylon

posted April 18, 2010 at 10:16 am


IMO the donnybrook in Flint, Michigan connects to this matter. Believe it or not, in this case it is the Teamsters Union who is suggesting prayer, on a billboard. Ya gotta laugh.
The billboard lasted three days and was obliged to be removed. Here I’d been, praying my heart our for these wage negotiating nurses, but stopped as soon as some clerk found the regulation. It’s what Steven Wright would do.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/when-did-pray-become-4-letter-word



report abuse
 

DSJulian

posted April 18, 2010 at 1:31 pm


Mr. Incredible and his minions don’t realize the untenable position they have backed themselves into: in order to comply with the Constitution the cross can no longer be regarded as an exclusively Christian religious symbol, an unborn fetus has to have the same rights as a living citizen, and now, apparently prayer can no longer be regarded as an exclusively religious exercise. It is only by redefining the words that they can fit these round pegs into square holes…



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 18, 2010 at 1:41 pm


Atheism is not an act of intellect; it’s an act of the Will.
Boris says: There’s always an undercurrent of defensiveness, dishonesty and desperation when Christian liars make this absurd claim, because Incredible realizes his own blind faith in what his cult leaders have told him is invalidated by the existence of a genuinely different approach to life and the universe. Atheism cannot be a religion unless that term carries essentially no meaning. Everyone is born an atheist. No one is born believing in any God. Unbelief is the natural position to take on any subject until something has been proved. The existence of God has not been proved and so atheism is simply the natural position to take on the existence of God. No one can will them self to believe something that is evidently false to them. So atheism is not an act of will. Thus Mr. Hutaree’s argument fails miserably. He’s still batting .000. ROFL!
It’s a manufactured belief. Fabricated to sound intelligent while precluding themselves from admitting that they don’t know 98% of all that’s out there.
“Uncle John” McCarthy says: “An atheist doesn’t have to be someone who thinks he has a proof that there can’t be a God. He only has to be someone who believes the evidence on the God question is at a similar level to the evidence on the werewolf question.”
Boris says: The religionists like Mr. Incredibly Delusional who constantly seek to frame atheism as a religion do so in order to couch their arguments legally as an issue of freedom of religion. By calling atheism a religion, they think can now argue that the government’s approach to separation favors one religion (atheism) over another, thus giving them a leg to stand on in court when trying to do things like placing the 10 Commandments in public buildings. Someone should tell them that this argument failed the day the Constitution was ratified. ROFL!
“The American brand of Christianity is unraveling while its hypocrisy is being weighed by the minds of our younger folks and discovering that questioning religious doctrine is a trait of human nature, not the voice of Satan.” – Jesse Ventura. Mr. Hutaree is has no defense against valid criticisms of his religion so he has to blame Satan for natural human curiosity, skepticism and intelligence. Mr. Hutaree proudly wears his ignorance and stupidity as a badge of honor.



report abuse
 

Gwyddion9

posted April 18, 2010 at 4:36 pm


Mr. I,
As the last article that was presented by Rev. Lynn showed the comments of Focus on the Family about the ‘day of prayer’ from their own website.
It is very apparent that they were making it a day of prayer to their god.
You are correct in the fact that I did not capitalize god when referring to Judeo-Christian god as he is not my God and I have no respect for him. If people like you are his representatives, your words alone are simply another reason as to why he shouldn’t be respected or given worship. Your constant attack of people and belittling of them on this discussion do not say much about you or your understanding of religion or your god.
We’ve been through this before and you can continue to spit into the wind for all I care.
If you have something to say, please do but knock of the disrespectful attitude. All you’re succeeding in doing is proving everyone’s thought about conservative Christianity. Perhaps you think you’re defending your religion and god but the approach you use does not create any respect for either.
I am particularly tired of all the “attack on Christianity” comments. Considering that most of those in this country are self-professed Christians I do not see Christians attacking Christians. This whole thing of being persecuted is simply a martyr complex that so many seem to have when the people don’t agree with them. This is much like the whole concept Activist Judges. When the Judges support their beliefs…they’re great and god fearing but if they disagree, they suddenly become activist judges. It’s nothing more than pissing in the wind and I’m glad to see many other Christians finally getting tired of all the lies and telling others to get off their self-righteous horses.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 18, 2010 at 5:20 pm


Boris: “Unbelief is the natural position to take on any subject until something has been proved.”
Should be, but it doesn’t work that way when people are in a state of ignorance and fear. I was very sure, as a child, with no real evidence of course, that monsters lurked in the dark places. Religion gives people a super-hero, a ‘good monster’ to take care of all the lurking bad ones. Accepting that, the most fearful thing imaginable becomes the loss of the ‘good monster’. Those people seem obtuse (and sometimes obstreperously obtrusive) to those of us who’ve come to believe there are no monsters.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:21 pm


Re: HG
Well, you state that people are somehow enforcing the take away plan of an individual because they are fighting to protect the individual in the womb….
That is the point, that they have somehow biased the laws in place towards the carrier, instead of equal rights for, both individual and the Posterity in the making….
So, the very fact that you keep poiting out the
Constitution as the point of view as giving equal rights towards one, and unequal rights towards another, is in fact unconstitutional…
That is the point!
So you are giving freedom to kill the Posterity in the womb, while excluding the freedom of protection in the womb, for our Posterity. Which is in fact a biased view and not ethical…
So here we go again….We the People of the United States in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
highlight this:
, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,
highlight again:
Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,
highlight again:
to ourselves and our Posterity
highlight again:
and our Posterity
highlight again:
our Posterity
highlight again:
Posterity
————-
So if the nation kills the Posterity before they are born, this does not so indicate giving them liberty….
For killing our future generations of people, however they do it, is in fact a violation of freedom for our Posterity…
So the notion that giving others the freedom to kill, is in fact, insane!!!!!!!
So we the poeple will protect the future generations of people by making the procedure of abortion, an illegal activity.
cc



report abuse
 

interpreter

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:23 pm


Gwyddion9,
Most Republicans are Christians, but I don’t think you can say the same about democrats. They are the ones appointing activist judges who attack Christianity.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 18, 2010 at 6:36 pm


true



report abuse
 

daniel rotter

posted April 18, 2010 at 7:01 pm


Which “activist judges” have attacked Christianity?



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 18, 2010 at 7:38 pm


daniel rotter: “Which “activist judges” have attacked Christianity?”
daniel, as you and Gwyddion9 (and others) have noted, Christian extremists have a persecution complex. When their attempt to foist religious beliefs upon the general population through illegal government proxy is foiled, they feign persecution.
cc: “Re: HG… So, the very fact that you keep poiting out the
Constitution as the point of view as giving equal rights towards one, and unequal rights towards another, is in fact unconstitutional…
That is the point!”
The fact that I keep pointing out the Constitution is unconstitutional? You just keep getting funnier and funnier! I’m not the one who pointed to the Constitution and found individual liberties secured there which protect abortion rights–that was the Supreme Court. You know, the one empowered by the Constitution to perform that duty. While your misrepresentation of fact is not unconstitutional, it is willful, and therefore disgraceful. Fortunately, our blessings of Liberty remain secured in the Constitution.



report abuse
 

Lowell

posted April 18, 2010 at 8:11 pm


Jay, it doesn’t take a law degree to read the crystal clear words of the Establishment Clause: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. But that is EXACTLY what Congress did. The law, written by CONGRESS, *requiring* the President to issue a prayer proclamation, IS a law respecting an establishment of religion.
Now, please explain exactly how that isn’t the case, without resorting to your usual weaseling lies.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 18, 2010 at 9:19 pm


Mr. Incredible who hears voices in his head saying Mr. Incredible is incredible,
re:
Rich says:
Mr. Incredible, the guy who is really cool and incredible because he says so he is…
Mr. Incredible says:
Not cuz I say so, rather cuz God, through Christ, says so.
Wow, dude. That is pretty cool! God himself is saying you are cool although through an intermediary in the form of Jesus Christ. You are really lucky to have such special voices in your head. I mean I always sort of thought you naming yourself Mr. Incredible was really just a bit of self-agrandizement, but instead, I find out that you are so special that there really are voices in your head.
So, tell me, I really want to know. Does Jesus have an accent? Does he sound like Yasir Arafat? Also, while you are talking to Jesus have you asked him how God is lately? Mary? Moses? Noah? I bet Jesus knows all those folks. You should really try and get the latest gossip in heaven, that would be so cool! It would be incredible!!!!



report abuse
 

daniel rotter

posted April 18, 2010 at 11:18 pm


Jesus Christ believes that “Mr. Incredible” is “really cool and incredible?!” That’s reason enough not to worship Him!



report abuse
 

GFine

posted April 18, 2010 at 11:54 pm


I respect those who are religious, but I dislike those who want to push their beliefs onto me or my family. I agree those who claim to be pious are the pharisees who have to claim some exemption from the laws of man claiming the laws of their deity are superior.
It is the old argument. Those Christians who say they are restricted are, in reality, the ones who want to restrict others.
Jay is the paid legal whiz for Robertson. So even if he didn’t believe as Robertson does, if he balks, all the 700 club-man would do is kick him to the curb. I wonder what Jay would say and do if that leash were released from around his neck.



report abuse
 

nowanatheist

posted April 19, 2010 at 12:19 pm


All I can add is that if Mr. Incredible is for it then I am totally against it & visa versa. For once it would be nice if I could read through the comments w/o having to skip over 100 by Mr. I.



report abuse
 

Valerie

posted April 19, 2010 at 1:15 pm


I wonder how Christians would feel if they were forced to pray to Pagan gods. They don’t seem to care about those who don’t share their beliefs. Prayer doesn’t belong in the Government.. Want the government to sponsor pray? Move to the middle east.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 19, 2010 at 4:52 pm


Re: HG
No we don’t have a persecution complex. People persecute Christians.
That is biblical and you seem to be heading one of the ships.
cc



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 19, 2010 at 5:29 pm


Valerie, nobody is forcing you to pray….
You can worship the mirror on the wall if you want….
Freedom of religion.
cc



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 19, 2010 at 5:31 pm


Cara,
Wow, Christians are persecuted in America! Good grief!
Hmmm, I drive down the road and see Christian churches everywhere. I see churches conducting services any given day of the week. I see references to the Judeo-Christian god on our coins and bills. I turn on the TV and can find any number of televangelists yammering on. I see Christian churches given the complete freedom to protest with signs that read “God hates Fags” as the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq. I go into bookstores and libraries and find rows of books related to Christianity.
What I haven’t seen are any cases of Christian being rounded up and tossed in jail for being Christians. Nor have I seen the military coming around and knocking down churches with tanks. I haven’t seen the government censor any Christian publications. I guess America isn’t real skilled at persecution,
It is really time for you to put up or shut up. Your charge is pretty insane and you really ought to provide on clear example of people being persecuted in the US for merely being Christians. If you can’t do that, you really ought to check yourself into a mental facility.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 19, 2010 at 5:34 pm


Error: Rich
Thinking that his comments are not persecution.
cc



report abuse
 

7Mike7

posted April 19, 2010 at 7:00 pm


Today I heard your program concerning an organization that is gloating over the fact that the National Day of Prayer has been ruled unconstitutional.
These groups have always put the Christians on the defensive where the Christains are always tryng to raise money to defend themselves in court.
The ‘enemy’ knows that if they only win 1 out of 10 cases in court, they have won through intimidation.
My position is that WE should be the ones on the Offensive and WE need to take action against them in court for using ‘Bigoted’ material to bring harm against US.
Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 (King James Version)
18: “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”.
These words from the Creator Himself, have given US the marching orders to become much more Offensive and put them on the run where they need to raise money for Defense.
Remember, the Gates in the above verse, are Defensive in nature but the Gospel is Offensive. The gates will NOT prevail, according to Jesus Christ but we need to attack them…not run from them.
When they print ‘Bumper Stickers’ that bring reproach to the Church, we need to bring SUIT against them for enciting hatred and bigotry. Sue them for millions and watch them become a thing of the past.
An old sports axiom sums it up:… “The best defense is a good offense.”
Let’s start to attack rather than defend and run.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 19, 2010 at 7:11 pm


7Mike7: “…the Gospel is Offensive.”
You got that right.



report abuse
 

7Mike7

posted April 19, 2010 at 7:37 pm


HG … The Bible, God’s Word, agrees with you…it states that “the Gospel is Offensive to those who perish.” Look it up.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 19, 2010 at 7:57 pm


7Mike7,
You comments seem a bit detached from reality to me due to the following:
“the Christains are always tryng to raise money to defend themselves in court.” – that is because the Christians are always trying to subvert the Constitution.
“to take action against them in court for using ‘Bigoted’ material to bring harm against US.” – Wow, dude. Even if the Christian watchdog groups were being bigoted rather than protecting the integrity of the Constitution being bigoted is not illegal. Geez, that was about as a moronic comment as I have ever heard.
“Jesus said in Matthew 16:18…” Yawn. You got to remember that the Bible is a book of fantasy solely believed in by superstitious dolts, it carries no weight legally and it hardly can be used for argue a point. You may have well as quoted me a couple of lines from the Lord of the Rings, another book of fantasy except way better written.
“they need to raise money for Defense.” – Since we are the ones obeying the Constitution that you would toss in the garbage and replace with the Wholly Babble, please try your tactic. You will squander all your money making lawyers across the US wealthy as you lose your frivolous lawsuits one by one. I mean, come on seriously guy, what are you going to sue people for, adhering to the 1st Amendment?
7Mike7, a moniker I haven’t seen around here before, is really typical of the right-wing loons who give all Christians a bad name. Really, take a look at what he writes, it is nothing but some pathetic paranoia that the poor Christians are being persecuted simply because they can’t get the government to advertise for them. As well, I am always struck at just how narrow minded a guy like 7MikeY really is, just because he likes Christianity he assumes that we should all like it too, if we don’t too bad, he likes it. He just can’t see beyond the nose on his face while he has some childish tantrum that everyone has to follow his religion.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 19, 2010 at 7:58 pm


I don’t believe that the Bible is God’s word. I believe it is a work of fiction. All men perish, and it’s only this fiction that convinces you that some are saved in an afterlife by a supernatural being while all who failed to accept this belief or that receive punishment (up to and including prolonged existence in a lake of fire or some such nonsense). Fiction. The fact that you believe it is one thing, but using government to endorse religious behavior is improper.



report abuse
 

HG

posted April 19, 2010 at 8:31 pm


Rich: “the Christains are always tryng to raise money to defend themselves in court.” – that is because the Christians are always trying to subvert the Constitution.”
That caught my attention too. Madison warned of these encroachments and promptly used his veto on a couple of the early attempts. So many more have followed, they continually try to leverage any success. What is it that makes Christians believe they have a right to demand that the rest of us support their religion?
Lowell was succinct in pointing out the wording of the First Amendment. Just don’t make a law. That’s all. Don’t do it. We do not create any legislation respecting an establishment of religion, it just isn’t the way we roll in this country.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 20, 2010 at 4:52 pm


HG,
Well, exactly what do you recall as the Christians trying to subvert the Constitution?
cc



report abuse
 

Your Ad Here

posted April 20, 2010 at 10:30 pm


Seklow and his bogus legal group (remember:they ARE laywers) love to cry persecution, yet support laws denying basic civil rights allowed to all other Americans to gay couples. Sekolw also has this nasty habit of lying quite often, for instance. claiming that the process the Democrats used to help pass health care was unconstituional, when in fact, it is not and was used by Republicans previously when they saw fit to try to ram home their agenda. He is either intentionally dim or simply lying if he doesn’t understand that government endorsement of prayer of any type is unconstitutional.



report abuse
 

The Genuine Anti-Christ (never accept a substitute)

posted April 20, 2010 at 10:50 pm


Your Ad Here,
Absolutely true about Sekulow et al crying persecution and then turning around and doing that very thing. It amazes me the gall of these folks. They cry foul that their religious rights are being impinged upon when laws are enacted that require landlords, even Christian landlords, to rent to gay couples. They whine that when the state prohibits them from discriminating it is discriminatory. Poor pitiful creatures! It just breaks my heart to know that when Christian entrepreneurs enter the public marketplace they are being forced to follow the same rules as the rest of society. They should be treated special, after all, they are Christians, the most special of all people, just ask them. The government is clearly being a big bad bully.



report abuse
 

rob r

posted April 21, 2010 at 2:06 am


Jay S, please stop equivocating the word “public”. Would Jesus approve?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 5:32 am


HG says:
I don’t believe that the Bible is God’s word.
Mr. Incredible asks:
Which Bible?
HG says:
I believe it is a work of fiction.
Mr. Incredible asks:
“It” is which Bible?
HG says:
All men perish, and it’s only this fiction that convinces you that some are saved in an afterlife by a supernatural being while all who failed to accept this belief or that receive punishment (up to and including prolonged existence in a lake of fire or some such nonsense).
Mr. Incredible says:

“Faustus: ‘I think Hell’s a fable.’
Mephostophilis: ‘Ay, think so still — till experience change thy mind!’”

HG says:
The fact that you believe it is one thing, but using government to endorse religious behavior is improper.
Mr. Incredible says:
Prayer is not necessarily a “religious” behavior.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 5:35 am


CORRECTION
Mr. Incredible says:

“Faustus: ‘I think Hell’s a fable.’
Mephostophilis: ‘Ay, think so still — till experience change thy mind!’”

HG says:
The fact that you believe it is one thing, but using government to endorse religious behavior is improper.
Mr. Incredible says:
Prayer is not necessarily a “religious” behavior.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 5:47 am


nowanatheist says:
All I can add is that if Mr. Incredible is for it then I am totally against it…
Mr. Incredible says:
Is THAT what this “intelligence” we been hearin’ so much about is all about??? YIKES!
nowanatheist says:
…& visa versa.
Mr. Incredible says:
Uhhhh, it’s “vice versa.”
nowanatheist says:
For once it would be nice if I could read through the comments w/o having to skip over 100 by Mr. I.
Mr. Incredible says:
Just press CTRL F and type in “Mr. Incredible,” click “next” until you get to the last post by me; or click on the “Recent Comments” section and click on the comments above “Mr. Incredible.”
Valerie says:
I wonder how Christians would feel if they were forced to pray to Pagan gods.
Mr. Incredible asks:
Who’s forcing anybody to pray? Tell them I told you to tell them to stop forcing you!
Please show us where, in the enactment, it says that everybody “must pray, or else.”



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:06 am


“Prayers may bring solace to the sap. the bigot, the ignorant, the aboriginal, and the lazy – but it is the same as asking Santa Claus to bring you something for Christmas.” – W.C. Fields. No intelligent person has ever prayed or would ever pray. Prayer is for stupid and ignorant people like Mr. Hutaree and Cara Floyd.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:09 am


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible who hears voices in his head saying Mr. Incredible is incredible…
Mr. Incredible says:
The Voice I hear I hear in my heart from God, through Christ can the Holy Spirit. Scoffers don’t understand is. But so what?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:12 am


CORRECTION
through Christ can the Holy Spirit — – >through Christ and the Holy Spirit.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:13 am


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible, the guy who is really cool and incredible because he says so he is…
Mr. Incredible says:
Not cuz I say so, rather cuz God, through Christ, says so.
Rich says:
God himself is saying you are cool although through an intermediary in the form of Jesus Christ.
Mr. Incredible says:
We get it. You’re jealous.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:14 am


Rich says:
You are really lucky…
Mr. Incredible says:
It has nothing to do with luck.
Rich says:
…to have such special voices in your head.
Mr. Incredible says:
The Voice I hear I hear in my heart from God, through Christ can the Holy Spirit. Scoffers don’t understand this. But so what?
Rich says:
I mean I always sort of thought you naming yourself Mr. Incredible was really just a bit of self-agrandizement…
Mr. Incredible says:
So what? Did I need YOUR approval?
Rich says:
… but instead, I find out that you are so special that there really are voices in your head.
Mr. Incredible says:
The Voice I hear I hear in my heart from God, through Christ can the Holy Spirit. Scoffers don’t understand is. But so what?
Rich says:
So, tell me, I really want to know.
Mr. Incredible says:
No, you don’t.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:16 am


DSJulian says:
Mr. Incredible and his minions…
Mr. Incredible says:
I don’t have “minions.”
DSJulian says:
…don’t realize the untenable position they have backed themselves into:…
Mr. Incredible says:
Gee, I just can’t wait.
DSJulian says:
…in order to comply with the Constitution the cross can no longer be regarded as an exclusively Christian religious symbol…
Mr. Incredible says:
“Can no longer be regarded” by whom?
DSJulian says:
… an unborn fetus has to have the same rights as a living citizen…
Mr. Incredible says:
Yes, we are anti-pro-kill-the-unborn-by-choice.
DSJulian says:
… and now, apparently prayer can no longer be regarded as an exclusively religious exercise.
Mr. Incredible says:
“Can no longer be regarded” by whom?
DSJulian says:
It is only by redefining the words that they can fit these round pegs into square holes…
Mr. Incredible says:
The renaming is done by pro-kill-the-unborn-by-choice fanatics and atheists who wanna impose their Will on the rest of us.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:17 am


daniel rotter says:
Jesus Christ believes that “Mr. Incredible” is “really cool and incredible?!” That’s reason enough not to worship Him!
Mr. Incredible says:
So, THAT’S what you needed not to worship Him???
Anywho…
God, through Christ, says that those who are born again are more than conquerors. He doesn’t need your permission, nor approval. Neither do I.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:20 am


Atheism is not an act of intellect; it is an act of the Will.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:27 am


Unbelief is the natural position to take on anything until something has been proved. The existence of God has not been proved. Therefore atheism is the natural position to take on the existence of God. Everyone is born an atheist and they would stay that way without religious indoctrination. Atheism is man’s natural state. A person cannot will themselves to believe what is evidently false to them.
Once again I have proved that Mr. Hutaree, Mr. Bigot, Mr. Racist. Mr 325lb pig, doesn’t know what she is talking about. Tell us all again how homosexuals cannot really have sex again. That was freaking hilarious. Homophobic homosexuals always pretend they don’t know how homosexuals have sex in order to hide their own homosexuality. You’re not foooling anyone limp wrist.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 21, 2010 at 6:30 am


Mr. Incredible says:
The renaming is done by pro-kill-the-unborn-by-choice fanatics and atheists who wanna impose their Will on the rest of us. We want to impose our will on innocent females and turn them into government owned breeding animals.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:02 am


Boris, a retired space monkey trianed to type messages on a computer, is still groovin’ on the aroma coming off his fingers after he scratches his butt-crack, or somebody else’s.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:58 am


Boris says:
Unbelief is the natural position to take on anything until something has been proved.
Mr. Incredible says:
And, so, atheists believe that there is no God. That is their belief.
Boris says:
The existence of God has not been proved.
Mr. Incredible says:
The existence of God HAS been proved, but not to your liking.
Boris says:
Therefore atheism is the natural position to take on the existence of God.
Mr. Incredible says:
It is what you allege to be the natural position thanks to Adam and Eve.
Boris says:
Everyone is born an atheist…
Mr. Incredible says:
No, they aren’t. It just seems that way cuz they are conceived in iniquity and born in sin. That’s why they must be born again. Otherwise, they remain in the condition set by Adam and Eve.
However, the Word of God says that everyone is given to know God, given THE measure of faith. Atheists ignore that, having talked themselves into ignorance.
Boris says:
… and they would stay that way without religious indoctrination.
Mr. Incredible asks:
What “religious indoctrination”?
Boris says:
Atheism is man’s natural state.
Mr. Incredible says:
No, it isn’t, as explained above.
Boris says:
A person cannot will themselves to believe what is evidently false to them.
Mr. Incredible translates:

” I’m stubborn.”

Boris says:
Tell us all again how homosexuals cannot really have sex again.
Mr. Incredible says:
I never said that those who claim to be homosexual cannot have sex. A man who claims to be homosexual can’t have sex with a woman who claims to be homosexual.
Boris says:
Homophobic homosexuals always pretend they don’t know how homosexuals have sex in order to hide their own homosexuality.
Mr. Incredible says:
So, you’re an authority on what you allege to be “homosexual sex.” We thought so.
Anywho…
If I were homosexual, I wouldn’t speak against homosexuality as being detested by God. That would be a house divided.
There is no such thing as “homophobic homosexuals.” One who claims to be homosexual is either glad to have made the choice, or is glad to find the choices can be changed.
Boris says:
You’re not foooling anyone limp wrist.
Mr. Incredible says:
Your trailer sits on a landfill, doesn’t it?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:31 am


CORRECTION
they remain in the condition set by Adam and Eve —> they remain in the condition set by Adam and Eve’s disobedience



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 21, 2010 at 12:44 pm


Mr. Incredible,
You crack me up, flailing away with endless words and erratic fury all purporting to demonstrate your great religious faith and heterosexuality. C’mon, thirteen posts in a couple of hours, something must have you worried. The whole thing reminds me of that paraphrase of Shakespeare:
‘Methinks thou dost protest too much’



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 21, 2010 at 1:27 pm


Yeah Rich, ever since Incredible’s homosexuality was exposed on this blog he’s gotten even more frantic hasn’t he?



report abuse
 

Tamara Reed

posted April 21, 2010 at 2:28 pm


It could just be me, but it appears that Boris and Rich have gotten SLIGHTLY off topic. Those who can’t articulate a point well in a debate almost always jump right to childish name calling. Good on ya.
A religion is defined as a belief system about the origins of mankind that can’t be empirically/tangibly proven. Atheism is a religion in every way for this reason. You may think the theories of evolution and the big bang support your belief, and that therefore absolves you of the whole ‘religion’ thing. On the contrary, that only serves to prove that atheism is a religion. Using theories (macro evolution is not a fact, a.k.a. ‘monkey into man’, it’s an unproven THEORY despite what you’ve been force fed in school) that can’t be proven as the foundation to support your world-view about the origin of life is EXACTLY the same as Christians, for example, using the bible to support their belief in God.
Yet neither the theory of macro-evolution or the big bang provide ANY data about the biggest two questions both pose: WHY and HOW? Why and how did everything explode from nothingness, and why and how did the dead universe, without logic or reasoning, see fit to plop all of this life here? On the two most important questions of all, you got nothin’.
Everyone has a belief in origins, yet atheists more often than not take the position that theirs is the correct/default one, closing their mind off to listening to the evidence there is for God, then claiming there isn’t any. They’ve taken over the market of free thought and have shut down ways to find out the evidence we have by muzzling us at every turn. You can’t claim there’s no proof while simultaneously rebuking any attempt for people to provide it to you.
Boris, you said we are born atheists. I know I was, I was an atheist until I was 20 when I used logic and reasoning to listen to the argument for God’s existence(I’m 35 now) and became a believer. But it’s because from birth, I was force fed the atheist position in school and in the media, and I was not provided any of the amazing facts that I now know that strongly support evidence for a creator.
I don’t believe in God to ‘comfort myself’. I believe in God because I investigated the claims of the bible for myself, and as a logical thinking person, was compelled to believe them as the Truth.
Case for a Creator – Lee Strobel. Get this book and read it, if you have an open mind to the facts you lack, as you claim. Otherwise, stop claiming you have no proof of God. It’s everywhere. It’s like a man floating in a boat claiming there’s no ocean beneath him. If you just keep floating there claiming there’s no water, you’re going to start to look pretty foolish.



report abuse
 

RIch

posted April 21, 2010 at 3:13 pm


Wow, another imbecilic statement that atheism is a religion. If I only had a dollar for every time…
Before I get started, it makes sense to address your self-righteous and faux-indignant comment berating Boris and I about straying off topic. Did you take the time to peruse the title of this thread? I didn’t see anything about Evolution vs. Creationism, but then again, I live in reality. Your comments assure me that you reside elsewhere. So, anyway, who cares where the conversation leads, obviously you don’t feel constrained and therefore I will not either.
First off, Evolution is a proven theory. It is supported by the fossil evidence, embryological research and genetic research. It has proven time and time again that its framework is predictive. Perhaps you might want to review how the transitional fossil Tiktaalik was discovered. In short, it was based upon looking for a fossil in predicted strata between two distinct eras that would show a transition from fins to legs. Oh, and gosh darn, they found one showing the exact transition.
I won’t even get started on your mindless assertion that the universe could only get started by a direct act from a supreme being. Gosh, do you think that is maybe a bit anthropomorphic?
So you got hooked into Christianity at age 20. Was that one of those lost and lonely girl scenarios, a young woman on her own for the first time at college looking for acceptance into a new family because she didn’t have the mental fortitude to brave the cold cruel world? Easy prey for the happy smiling people offering comfort and acceptance into their cult.
You wrote a lot of garbage about your certainty that God exists. I didn’t see any offered proof. And, any offered assertion without proof can certainly be dismissed out of hand. Nice try. Well, not so much.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:05 pm


It could just be me, but it appears that Boris and Rich have gotten SLIGHTLY off topic. Those who can’t articulate a point well in a debate almost always jump right to childish name calling. Good on ya.
Boris says: First of all the resident creationist loonies on this blog try to turn every thread into a discussion on abortion rights. Don’t just say we didn’t articulate any points well. That’s just babble. You need to explain exactly why what we said wasn’t articulated well. Otherwise you’ve said nothing. What you call childish name-calling is really calling people acting like children what they are.
A religion is defined as a belief system about the origins of mankind that can’t be empirically/tangibly proven. Atheism is a religion in every way for this reason. You may think the theories of evolution and the big bang support your belief, and that therefore absolves you of the whole ‘religion’ thing. On the contrary, that only serves to prove that atheism is a religion.
Boris says: What a crock. Atheists are not required to believe anything about evolution, Big Bang cosmology or anything else. Many atheists admit they don’t know much about the origins of the universe or life. Calling atheism a religion is like calling baldness a hair color.
Using theories (macro evolution is not a fact, a.k.a. ‘monkey into man’, it’s an unproven THEORY despite what you’ve been force fed in school) that can’t be proven as the foundation to support your world-view about the origin of life is EXACTLY the same as Christians, for example, using the bible to support their belief in God.
Boris says: Your ignorance is typical of a creationist Bible thumper. You obviously learned nothing about evolution when you were in school. The theory of evolution does not state that humans are descended from monkeys and you would know that if you knew anything at all about evolution. How come every CHRISTIAN college and university that teaches science teaches evolution, common descent, Big Bang cosmology and all the rest of the science you Bible thumpers deny, fight against and lie about? Who are we to believe about science, Christian scientists who teach and work at these universities or Christian science-denying Bible thumpers who have been wrong about every scientific discovery and theory ever made since the Bible has existed?
Yet neither the theory of macro-evolution or the big bang provide ANY data about the biggest two questions both pose: WHY and HOW?
Boris says: Science does explain how things occur in the universe. Claiming God did it explains exactly nothing.
Why and how did everything explode from nothingness, and why and how did the dead universe, without logic or reasoning, see fit to plop all of this life here? On the two most important questions of all, you got nothin’.
Boris says: The answer is thermodynamics. Life evolved to move heat. That is our purpose as biological organisms. Yikes! Again you would know this had you actually been “force-fed” anything at all about science in school. I suggest a trip to the science section at the nearest public library or bookstore. The thing is though, if you really wanted accurate scientific explanations for things you could easily find them right here on the Internet. The fact that you don’t know the answers to these really stupid questions of yours is proof that you haven’t even bothered to find out what the scientific explanations for them are. Instead you get your science information from your religious cult leaders. No one but a creationist would tell you that the theory of evolution posits a monkey to man transition and no one but an idiot would believe that it does.
Everyone has a belief in origins, yet atheists more often than not take the position that theirs is the correct/default one, closing their mind off to listening to the evidence there is for God then, claiming there isn’t any.
Boris says: Present your best evidence for God right here. We’re more than happy to see what you think is evidence for your God. Trust me, you won’t present anything all of us atheists haven’t seen hundreds of times before. All arguments for God’s existence assume from the start the point they are trying to prove and therefore prove nothing at all.
They’ve taken over the market of free thought and have shut down ways to find out the evidence we have by muzzling us at every turn.
Boris says: Your evil and false religion shut down the market of free thought and all scientific progress for over 1000 years during its glory years, a period we call the Dark Ages for good reason.
You can’t claim there’s no proof while simultaneously rebuking any attempt for people to provide it to you.
Boris says: Back it up. Let’s see your proof right here. You’ve made a lot of claims so far but said nothing.
Boris, you said we are born atheists. I know I was, I was an atheist until I was 20 when I used logic and reasoning to listen to the argument for God’s existence (I’m 35 now) and became a believer. But it’s because from birth, I was force fed the atheist position in school and in the media, and I was not provided any of the amazing facts that I now know that strongly support evidence for a creator.
Boris says: Oh please. How many of your teachers or people in the media are atheists? Again, let’s see your amazing facts right here on this blog.
I don’t believe in God to ‘comfort myself’. I believe in God because I investigated the claims of the bible for myself, and as a logical thinking person, was compelled to believe them as the Truth.
Boris says: Really? You have proved that the earth was created in just six days only a few thousand years ago? You have been convinced that the earth is flat, motionless and sits on a foundation supported by pillars and is orbited by the sun every day? You can prove the earth was created before light and stars, birds and whales before reptiles and insects, and flowering plants before any animals? Because from science, we know that the true order of events was just the opposite and uh, the earth is round and actually moves too.
Case for a Creator – Lee Strobel. Get this book and read it, if you have an open mind to the facts you lack, as you claim. Otherwise, stop claiming you have no proof of God. It’s everywhere. It’s like a man floating in a boat claiming there’s no ocean beneath him. If you just keep floating there claiming there’s no water, you’re going to start to look pretty foolish.
Boris says: I’ve read several of Strobel’s books including that one. You Bible thumpers act like we skeptics haven’t seen your best arguments hundreds of times already and don’t know to refute them. You put what you think are the best arguments for God right here on this blog. I bet you’re not up to the challenge Big Mouth. Because it is you who really knows you’ve got nothing. Step up to the plate or disappear.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:31 pm


Rich says:
Wow, another imbecilic statement that atheism is a religion.
Mr. Incredible says:
We know that you think the statement is imbecilic. We know that you reject the Truth.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:31 pm


Rich says:
Evolution is a proven theory.
Mr. Incredible translates:

” The theory of evolution is proved to be a theory.”

Gee, what a revelation!
Rich says:
It is supported by the fossil evidence…
Mr. Incredible says:
The speculation of evolution is supported by selective, fossil evidence.
Rich says:
… embryological research and genetic research.
Mr. Incredible says:
The speculation of evolution is supported by selective, embryological research and genetic research.
Rich says:
It has proven time and time again that its framework is predictive.
Mr. Incredible says:
Selective “evidence” tends to work that way.
Rich says:
Perhaps you might want to review how the transitional fossil Tiktaalik was discovered. In short, it was based upon looking for a fossil in predicted strata between two distinct eras that would show a transition from fins to legs. Oh, and gosh darn, they found one showing the exact transition.
Mr. Incredible says:
It is all speculation. There is no conclusive, uncorrupted, unbiased, scientific evidence of the transitional creature.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:32 pm


Rich says:
I won’t even get started on your mindless assertion…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“Since I know everything and you don’t agree with me, you’re assertions must be mindless.”

Rich says:
Gosh, do you think that is maybe a bit anthropomorphic?
Mr. Incredible translates:

“Lookit me, everybody! I gotta thesaurus!”

Rich says:
You wrote a lot of garbage about your certainty that God exists.
Mr. Incredible says:
That’s the way you reinforce your rebelliousness.
Rich says:
I didn’t see any offered proof.
Mr. incredible says:
Yes, you didn’t see what was there. You don’t have the ears to hear, nor the eyes to see.
Rich says:
And, any offered assertion without proof can certainly be dismissed out of hand.
Mr. Incredible says:
It doesn’t bother us that you dismiss what you choose not to see.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:38 pm


Boris says:
Present your best evidence for God right here.
Mr. Incredible says:
Already done. You must’ve missed it.
Boris says:
We’re more than happy to see what you think is evidence for your God.
Mr. Incredible says:
No you’re not. You want us to waste our time. You already have precluded yourself from accepting any of the evidence.
Boris says:
Trust me…
Mr. Incredible says:
Can’t. You’re untrustworthy.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 21, 2010 at 7:56 pm


Mr. Incredible translates:
” The theory of evolution is proved to be a theory.”
Gee, what a revelation!
Boris says: A theory is an explanation of the facts. The Theory of Evolution explains the facts of evolution. One fact of evolution is common descent. Any theory hoping to replace evolution would have to also explain common descent. This is what every Christian college and university in the world teaches, other than Jerry Falwell U., which is a Tier Four school like Regent University. The lowest rating a school can get.
Mr. Incredible says:
The speculation of evolution is supported by selective, fossil evidence.
Boris says: Nope, the FACTS of evolution are supported by all of the fossil evidence – every last itsy bitsy teensy weensy fossil supports evolution. Your extremely low intelligence is proof that human intelligence is not of divine origin. You are made in the image of a God? Hahahaha. Only if God’s a lying idiot! Of course according to the KJV Bible he is, and worse a genocidal maniac and control freak.
Mr. Incredible says:
The speculation of evolution is supported by selective, embryological research and genetic research.
Boris says: Uh, speculation doesn’t produce results. This is why your creation “scientists” and Intelligent Design magic hoaxers can’t produce anything with their version of “science.” Nothing but propaganda only an idiot would believe. And so you do.
Mr. Incredible says:
Selective “evidence” tends to work that way.
Boris says: No one is more selective about evidence than a Bible thumper. This is because they have no evidence at all so they have to carefully distort certain evidence and try to make it say what it clearly does not.
Mr. Incredible says:
It is all speculation. There is no conclusive, uncorrupted, unbiased, scientific evidence of the transitional creature.
Boris says: What a retard! All species are transitional even humans. Even creationists, which are descended from a very primitive creature known as Creationopithecus Alabamus Stupideedist. Hahahahahahahaha.
How is your denial of evolution any different than Christian denials of the discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo and every other scientists who has lived since the Bible was voted on to be he Bible by gay pedophiles wearing dresses? It isn’t. You Bible thumpers have fought against, denied and lid about every scientific discovery and theory ever made sine the Bible has existed. When have scientists ever had to revise one of their theories in the face of the never-ending complaints from Bible believers? You people never learn from your mistakes, which is why you keep expecting someone the rest of the world knows never even existed to return. Thanks again for the big fat target lard butt. ROFL!



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:00 pm


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible,
You crack me up…
Mr. Incredible says:
There you go, too, thinking about dude’s cracks.
Rich says:
… flailing away with endless words and erratic fury all purporting to demonstrate your great religious faith and heterosexuality.
Mr. Incredible says:
I don’t need to demonstrate them. They just are.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:00 pm


Mr. Incredible,
Not surprisingly you don’t know what a theory is.
Tell you what cowboy, why don’t you look up Bernoulli’s Equation and the Theory of Flight and come on back and tell it us that well, according to you, it can’t be true because it is just a theory.
Good grief, you aren’t really qualified for this little game we are playing are you?



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:00 pm


Rich says:
C’mon, thirteen posts in a couple of hours…
Mr. Incredible says:
I keep telling you people how easy it is for me to write and post. That’s what this blog is about — writing and posting.
Rich says:
…something must have you worried.
Mr. Incredible says:
I’m doing the same thing you people are going on this blog — writing and posting. If something worries me, something worries you people.
Rich says:
The whole thing reminds me of that paraphrase of Shakespeare:

“‘Methinks thou dost protest too much’”

Mr. Incredible says:
Aren’t you protesting, too?
Boris says:
Yeah Rich, ever since Incredible’s homosexuality was exposed on this blog he’s gotten even more frantic hasn’t he?
Mr. Incredible says:
“Frantic”? Hardly.
For the record, it doesn’t matter to me whether you dummies think I’m homosexual. I’m not, but that won’t stop you from saying that I am. It’s an attempt at intimidation. I’m not intimidated. After all, you people are used to lying. Why stop now.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:01 pm


Tamara Reed says:
It could just be me, but it appears that Boris and Rich have gotten SLIGHTLY off topic.
Mr. Incredible says:
It’s not you. It’s what they do. Boris, especially.
That idiot comes here, in these blogs, and, no matter what the subject is, he turns it into something against Christianity and Christians. He is full of hate. He is full of anger. Mark my words, there will be a time when we will be reading stories of that character up, in a tower, naked and firing a high-powered rifle into the crowds below.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:05 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
Already done. You must’ve missed it.
Boris says: The predictive power of the theory that Mr. Incredible is a coward and has no evidence whatsoever to support his belief in God has proved that theory to be correct. I’ve seen no evidence for any God posted on this blog anywhere else and neither has Mr. Incredible. He has proved he believes in God because he is afraid he’ll go to hell if he doesn’t, Plain and simple proven by his own cowardly actions and words right here on this blog. Post up or shut up lard butt.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:42 pm


Mr. Incredible translates:

“The theory of evolution is proved to be a theory.”"

Gee, what a revelation!
Boris says:
A theory is an explanation of the facts.
Mr. Incredible says:
The theory of evolution is a speculation of evolution. There may be some facts in the speculation that are arranged to sound as though the conclusion makes sense. Of course, it doesn’t.
Boris says:
The Theory of Evolution explains the facts of evolution.
Mr. Incredible says:
The theory of evolution explains the speculations that go into making the theory what it is — a theory.
Boris says:
One fact of evolution is common descent.
Mr. Incredible says:
Except for YOUR link to the ape, the rest of us are not linked to the ape.
Boris says:
Any theory hoping to replace evolution would have to also explain common descent.
Mr. Incredible says:
No need. The ape is not part of the human family.
Boris says:
This is what every Christian college and university in the world teaches…
Mr. Incredible says:
Not as fact, rather as information about what THEORIES are out there.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:43 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
The speculation of evolution is supported by selective, fossil evidence.
Boris says:
Nope…
Mr. Incredible says:
Yup.
Boris says:
…the FACTS of evolution…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“… the SPECULATIONS of evolution…”

Boris says:
… are supported by all of the fossil evidence…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“… are supported by all the fossil evidence that we can assemble according to our speculations…”

Boris says:
- every last itsy bitsy teensy weensy fossil supports evolution.
Mr. Incredible translates:

“Selective fossil records ‘support’ our speculations.”

Boris says:
Your extremely low intelligence…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“If you don’t agree with me, you must be of low intelligence.”

Boris says:
… is proof that human intelligence is not of divine origin.
Mr. Incredible says:
Human intelligence is not of Divine origin. God gives Man the capability of intelligence. Some, like YOU, don’t take advantage of that capability.
Boris says:
You are made in the image of a God?
Mr. Incredible says:
No.
Man was made in the Image of God. Then, Man — that is, Adam and Eve — made himself in his own image. Then, got offered Man a chance to have relationship with Him; being born again is to restore that relationship, His making the one born again in the Image of God again. Those who are not born again remain in the image created by Adam and Eve.
Boris says:
Only if God’s a lying idiot!
Mr. Incredible says:
Of course, it doesn’t matter to Him what YOU think. It doesn’t matter to me, either.
Boris says:
Of course according to the KJV Bible he is…
Mr. Incredible says:
Okay, you take the Devil’s side. We already got that.
Boris says:
…and worse a genocidal maniac…
Mr. Incredible says:
Except that He doesn’t perform acts of genocide. He allows them on those who disobey cause, after all, those who disobey tender back on Him. He can’t protect those who reject Him. That’s the deal. It ain’t, “Let’s Make a Deal.”
Boris says:
…and control freak.
Mr. Incredible says:
He controls only those who give Him the authority to control them. The Devil controls those who give him the authority to control them.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:44 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
The speculation of evolution is supported by selective, embryological research and genetic research.
Boris says:
Uh, speculation doesn’t produce results.
Mr. Incredible says:
The result of such speculation is your posts.
Boris says:
This is why your creation “scientists” and Intelligent Design magic hoaxers can’t produce anything with their version of “science.”
Mr. Incredible says:
Only God can produce.
Boris says:
Nothing but propaganda only an idiot would believe. And so you do.
Mr. Incredible says:
You believe your own propaganda. I don’t believe your propaganda.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:44 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
Selective “evidence” tends to work that way.
Boris says:
No one is more selective about evidence than a Bible thumper.
Mr. Incredible asks:
Which Bible?
Boris says:
This is because they have no evidence at all…
Mr. Incredible says:
None that you’ll believe, anyway.
Boris says:
so they have to carefully distort certain evidence
Mr. Incredible translates:

” You don’t agree with me, and, so, anything you say must be a distortion.”

Boris says:
and try to make it say what it clearly does not.
Mr. Incredible translates:

“I try to make the Word of God say what He clearly does not say, and, so, and I try to trick everybody into believing that the THEORY of evolution is the FACT of evolution.”



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:45 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
It is all speculation. There is no conclusive, uncorrupted, unbiased, scientific evidence of the transitional creature.
Boris says:
What a retard!
Mr. Incredible translates:

“I can’t think of anything created to say, and, so, I’ll just keep using the same old insults that I know have been so overused that they really mean nothing. “

Boris says:
All species are transitional even humans.
Mr. Incredible asks:
God created Man a Special Creation. Apart from the animals.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:47 pm


CORRECTION
created to say — – > creative to say



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:48 pm


Boris says:
How is your denial of evolution any different than Christian denials of the discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo and every other scientists [sic]…
Mr. Incredible says:
Nobody was at the alleged, triggering, evolutionary event.
Since Copernicus, Galileo and others, we have been able to witness the actual, physical events.
We know you don’t understand that.
Boris says:
You Bible…
Mr. Incredible asks:
Which one?
Boris says:
…thumpers have fought against, denied and lid [sic] about every scientific discovery and theory ever made sine the Bible has existed.
Mr. Incredible says:
No, we haven’t. That won’t stop you from saying that we have. That’s where the Devil comes in.
Boris says:
When have scientists ever had to revise one of their theories in the face of the never-ending complaints from Bible…
Mr. Incredible asks:
Which one?
Boris says:
…believers?
Mr. Incredible says:
When discoveries have been made to show that they — the scientists — have been wrong.
Boris says:
You people never learn from your mistakes…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“You people don’t agree with us, and, so, you make mistakes.

Boris says:
… which is why you keep expecting someone the rest of the world knows never even existed to return.
Mr. Incredible says:
That’s why God will save only a remnant. He says only few will find the gate. He would like to save everybody. However, He won’t cuz He won’t say those who reject Him.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 8:48 pm


Boris says:
Thanks again for the big fat target lard butt.
Mr. Incredible says:
That’s just another one-a your desperate ploys to be liked.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 9:00 pm


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible,
Not surprisingly you don’t know what a theory is.
Mr. Incredible says:
Not surprisingly, you don’t know what speculation is.
Rich says:
… why don’t you look up Bernoulli’s Equation and the Theory of Flight and come on back and tell it us that well, according to you, it can’t be true because it is just a theory.
Mr. Incredible says:
Bernoulli’s Equation and the theory of flight can be demonstrated. The THEORY of evolution cannot in the macro sense.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 9:01 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
Already done. You must’ve missed it.
Boris says:
I’ve seen no evidence for any God posted on this blog anywhere else…
Mr. Incredible says:
We know that you have seen no evidence for any God posted on this blog [or] anywhere else. That’s cuz you have precluded yourself from seeing any of the evidence.
Boris says:
…and neither has Mr. Incredible.
Mr. Incredible says:
Others have posted the evidence. You haven’t seen the evidence cuz you want not to see the evidence. You have precluded yourself from seeing the evidence.
Boris says:
He has proved he believes in God because he is afraid he’ll go to hell if he doesn’t…
Mr. Incredible says:
God did not give me a spirit of fear. Therefore, I’m not afraid.
I am on the Lord’s side cuz I love the Lord. It has nothing to do with what happens if I am not.
We know that you people don’t understand that. But so what?
Boris says:
… proven by his own cowardly actions…
Mr. Incredible says:
Whatever THEY are.
Boris says:
…and words…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“I just can’t think of anything to say anymore that can impose my thoughts on everybody else, and, so, I will just resort to calling those who do not think the way I do — if you can call it “thinking” — names.”

Boris says:
Post up…
Mr. Incredible says:
Already have. You must’ve missed it. It must’ve gone over your two heads.
Boris says:
… or shut up lard butt.
Mr. Incredible says:
I don’t think they gave you enough time to detox.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 21, 2010 at 10:10 pm


Don’t worry I am fine with my education. I know where I received it from. I find when people are threatened by a point, they attack the one thing they think they can hurt one with. I don’t study like you, or want to become like you. I find that you protect yourself and your interest, and look to use me as some sort of escape route for your own behavior. You have not honored who I am, or what I stand for. I do not stand for money or childish rumors. So, the fact that you would celebrate others in their childish behavior is in fact dishonorable. So, I have been writing as long as I have to protect children. I am not here to debate that. I know when people love me, and they don’t dishonor me to further their own career or their bank account. They genuinely want to be a part of my life, they are simply not showing up to protect themselves and what they stand for. So, you don’t use me to humiliate me for your own interest.
You don’t know exactly what happened to me, or my thoughts about it. You came to me under high pressure situations, not to be part of my life, for if you did, you would have just came up and said hi, are you ok? You were worried what I would say, so don’t represent me in my understanding. I wrote to protect the children.
CC



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 21, 2010 at 10:15 pm


What’s the matter, you can’t handle the truth? The little slanderous comments, here or there, are what they are. Empty souls who put down to not love.
cc



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 10:47 pm


Cara,
As you know, they are here to hurt, not to heal, destroy, not to build. Remember John 10:10 as you consider what THEY do.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 10:51 pm


Rich says:
… why don’t you look up Bernoulli’s Equation and the Theory of Flight and come on back and tell it us that well, according to you, it can’t be true because it is just a theory.
Mr. Incredible says:
Bernoulli’s Equation can be demonstrated with a garden hose.
Flight is not a theory.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 21, 2010 at 11:49 pm


Here — http://www.allfunnypictures.com/pages3/prettywoman.html — Boris, in skinnier days, sees a dude he likes in the crowd.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 22, 2010 at 2:09 am


Mr. Incredible, the boy with the special powers from Jesus,
re: “Flight is not a theory”
Indeed, flight itself is not a theory but there is a Theory of Flight. Of course, you chose not to address the concept of theories, we all know why.
It amuses me to ponder what goes on in your head. You can’t obviously think you are fooling anyone do you? You are doing a pretty bad job of covering up for the fact that you don’t know what a theory is. You have to know you are being abjectly dishonest, not a great advertisement for Christianity. Which is okay with me, the more you repel away from your religion, the better the world will be.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted April 22, 2010 at 4:03 am


Rich have you heard the latest “theory” the Bible thumpers have come up with?
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New ‘Intelligent Falling’ Theory
KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held “theory of gravity” is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.
“Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, ‘God’ if you will, is pushing them down,” said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.
Burdett added: “Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, ‘I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.’ Of course, he is alluding to a higher power.”
Founded in 1987, the ECFR is the world’s leading institution of evangelical physics, a branch of physics based on literal interpretation of the Bible.
According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God’s Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.
The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue “so they can make an informed decision.”
“We just want the best possible education for Kansas’ kids,” Burdett said.
Proponents of Intelligent Falling assert that the different theories used by secular physicists to explain gravity are not internally consistent. Even critics of Intelligent Falling admit that Einstein’s ideas about gravity are mathematically irreconcilable with quantum mechanics. This fact, Intelligent Falling proponents say, proves that gravity is a theory in crisis.
“Let’s take a look at the evidence,” said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden.”In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, ‘And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.’ He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, ‘But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.’ If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling.”
Critics of Intelligent Falling point out that gravity is a provable law based on empirical observations of natural phenomena. Evangelical physicists, however, insist that there is no conflict between Newton’s mathematics and Holy Scripture.
“Closed-minded gravitists cannot find a way to make Einstein’s general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world,” said Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry. “They’ve been trying to do it for the better part of a century now, and despite all their empirical observation and carefully compiled data, they still don’t know how.”
“Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work,” Carson said. “What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that ‘gravity waves’ and ‘gravitons’ are just secular words for ‘God can do whatever He wants.’”
Some evangelical physicists propose that Intelligent Falling provides an elegant solution to the central problem of modern physics.
“Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the ‘electromagnetic force,’ the ‘weak nuclear force,’ the ‘strong nuclear force,’ and so-called ‘force of gravity,’” Burdett said. “And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus.” – The Onion



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 5:17 am


Rich says:
Mr. Incredible, the boy with the special powers from Jesus…
Mr. Incredible says:
That’s right.
Mr. Incredible says:
Flight is not a theory.
Rich says:
Indeed, flight itself is not a theory but there is a Theory of Flight.
Mr. Incredible says:
There is also a theory of coffee-making. There is also a theory of brooms. So what? Everybody has a theory about everything. So what? A theory is not proof. It is speculation.
Rich says:
Of course, you chose not to address the concept of theories, we all know why.
Mr. Incredible says:
It’s not difficult to understand.
Rich says:
It amuses me to ponder what goes on in your head.
Mr. Incredible translates:

“I have-ta amuse myself by making up things about you so that I can feel justified.”

Rich says:
You can’t obviously think you are fooling anyone do you?
Mr. Incredible says:
I need not try to fool anyone. I need not fool anyone.
Rich says:
You are doing a pretty bad job of covering up for the fact don’t know what a theory is.
Mr. Incredible translates:

“I know everything, and, to cover up my arrogance, I must blame you.”

Rich says:
You have to know you are being abjectly dishonest…
Mr. Incredible translates:

“You don’t think like me, and, so, it must mean that you are dishonest.”

Rich says:
… not a great advertisement for Christianity.
Mr. Incredible says:
A scoffer is in no position to know.
Rich says:
Which is okay with me, the more you repel away from your religion, the better the world will be.
Mr. Incredible says:
I repel no one from Christianity who wasn’t disposed to repel himself.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 6:09 am


SPECIAL NOTE

April 22, 2010 3:25 AM
["Welcomed Decisions by 9th Circuit on Pledge and National Motto" blog]
Boris says:
I was sent by the devil…

Now, didn’t we all really know all along? Is there really any surprise here?



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 22, 2010 at 11:20 am


Boris,
Normally I would say that if it was good enough for The Onion, it was good enough for me. Sadly, in this case they need to be a bit more rigorous in their research. Had they done their job, they would have surely be led to the majestic and celestial truth of how the Flying Spaghetti Monster holds us all down to the ground with infinite noodly appendages.
I live in a community where the majority of the residents are adherents of the FSM faith. As Americans we have an historical right to free religious expression and we insist that Noodly Appendage Theory be taught alongside the “scientific” Theory of Gravity. The liberal courts are filled with secular humanist activist judges that keep telling us that Noodly Appendage Theory is not science but religion. Our nation cannot tolerate an abandonment of Noodly values, we will continue our fight to insure that our children receive and education that includes acknowledgment of His Noodliness.
For any pagan idolaters reading this and live in communities where the truth of the FSM is supressed, here is a link to revealed word:
http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 22, 2010 at 11:57 am


OY!
Can not a single Beliefnet blog be safe from hijacking by the not-credible?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 22, 2010 at 5:23 pm


What?
Is that not what Mr. Incredible is supposed to do on this sight, debate?
To be or not to be? That is the question?
cc



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 5:29 pm


Your Name says:
OY!
Can not a single Beliefnet blog be safe from hijacking by the not-credible?
Mr. Incredible says:
“Hijacked”? Not quite. That would indicate that I keep everybody from posting; but that’s not the case. I urge everybody to post. I eagerly await responses.
Everybody has the same chance to post, and there are enough electrons for everybody.
Your unwritten complaint is actually that I have so much to say in response to what has already been posted by others, that I overwhelm and that they don’t/cannot respond. You and they don’t expect it, and theonly gripe you can voice is that I post too much. However, that’s not MY problem.
I have the knowledge, skill and resources to respond a lot and very quickly, and I intend to use them, especially the resources which require of me very little effort to post. If you only knew.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 5:38 pm


Thanks, Cara,
I’m not anything special. It’s just that I got the knowledge, skill and, especially, the resources [plus the knowledge and skill to use those resources efficiently] to post WWWAAAAYYYY more and more WWWWWAAAAYYY more quickly than they can, and that has them worried cuz THEY wanna control this. That’s why they’re here, and here I am doin’ the controllin’. So, all they’re left with is tryin’ to intimidate me, and that ain’t workin’. It’s fun to see.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 22, 2010 at 7:30 pm


Mr. Incredible,
re: “here I am doin’ the controllin’”
Only if they changed the sense of the word controlling to mean “embarrassing oneself”.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 7:39 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
… here I am doin’ the controllin’
Rich says:
Only if they changed the sense of the word controlling to mean “embarrassing oneself”.
Mr. Incredible says:
If scoffers say that I must be embarrassed, then I need not be embarrassed.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 7:54 pm


Cara,
They, who came here askin’ for it, are threatened by us. Else, why spend so much time and energy on us? Especially me, and that shows that I, as well as you, am on the right track. The Devil is really mad at me. But so what? Jesus defeated the works of the Devil. So, the Devil’s works through them bounce off me like Superman.



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 7:59 pm


Anywho…
This prayer decision will be overturned cuz the enactment of the resolution of the National Day of Prayer is not directed at anybody in particular. It doesn’t require speech. It doesn’t require thought. It doesn’t establish so-called “religion.”
In any case, while appeals are being formulated, the National Day of Prayer will go on, as scheduled. Even if it is not overturned, the National Day of Prayer will be so obvious, henceforth, that, everywhere they go, they will see it and hear it. Lettem getta judge to stop that.



report abuse
 

Rich

posted April 22, 2010 at 8:32 pm


Mr. Incredible,
re: “The Devil is really mad at me.”
Well, you certainly are a special guy. Not only does Jesus give you magic powers making you incredible, you also have Satan after you.
How do you do it? I mean you must live the tortures of the damned what with being hounded night and day by the Horned Creature and all. I think it is a testament to your mental fortitude that even with all those voices echoing in your head you are still able to punch out your pearls of wisdom on the keyboard. That one where you wrote that “Jesus is Lord” was just really informative. The fact that you even set it all up in bold lettering was what really brought most people around to your side. A true masterstroke!



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 22, 2010 at 10:19 pm


Mr. Incredible says:
The Devil is really mad at me.
Rich says:
Well, you certainly are a special guy.
Mr. Incredible says:
A special guy in Christ.
Rich says:
Not only does Jesus give you magic powers…
Mr. Incredible says:
They appear magical to the world. They aren’t.
Rich says:
… making you incredible…
Mr. Incredible says:
So says God, through Christ.
Rich says:
… you also have Satan after you.
Mr. Incredible says:
We are not ignorant of your devices.
Rich asks:
How do you do it?
Mr. Incredible says:
God, through Christ, does it.
Rich says:
I mean you must live the tortures of the damned what with being hounded night and day by the Horned Creature and all.
Mr. Incredible says:
Romans 8:1 [KJV]
Rich says:
I think it is a testament to your mental fortitude…
Mr. Incredible says:
You mean my faith fortitude.
Rich says:
…that even with all those voices echoing in your head you are still able to punch out your pearls of wisdom on the keyboard.
Mr. Incredible says:
God is wonderful!
Rich says:
That one where you wrote that “Jesus is Lord” was just really informative.
Mr. Incredible says:
Good.
Rich says:
The fact that you even set it all up in bold lettering was what really brought most people around to your side.
Mr. Incredible says:
They make a choice. If they turned toward God, God brings them to Him. It has nothing to do with MY power. It has to do with His power.
Rich says:
A true masterstroke!
Mr. Incredible says:
Yes, God is wonderful, through Christ!



report abuse
 

Criag

posted April 25, 2010 at 9:21 pm


Mr. Incredible said:
“…My point is, does mere expression on public property signify promotion/establishment? It does not. The First Amendment says,
“Congress shall make no law…”
CONGRESS shall make no law. ”
You are correct, which is exactly the reason for the opposition to the National Day of Prayer. It was established by the passage of a law by Congress. Therefore the law passed is in direct violation of the establishment clause of the Constitution.
A national day of prayer sponsored by churches or private individuals and promoted by them is certainly constitutional, even if I may disagree with its value. And if someone wants to carry a sign promoting religion, or even with a specific religious phrase on it in a public park it does NOT constitute government endorsement of religion even though the park may be government maintained because the statement is clearly that of the person with the sign, not of the park sponsor. If however that sign were to be hammered into the ground in that park it could and should be removed by the government because it may create the appearance of government endorsement of religion.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 26, 2010 at 3:52 pm


I don’t know, you keep getting up despite the damnable and the circumstances of life. I never thought prayer would be such a topic, especially if they have a choice in doing so, to who and why.
cc



report abuse
 

Mr. Incredible

posted April 30, 2010 at 6:21 am


Mr. Incredible said:
…does mere expression on public property signify promotion/establishment? It does not. The First Amendment says,

“Congress shall make no law…”

CONGRESS shall make no law.
Criag says:
… which is exactly the reason for the opposition to the National Day of Prayer. It was established by the passage of a law by Congress.
Mr. Incredible says:
Except that the First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law respecting an “establishment of religion.” The enactment of the National Day of Prayer establishes no religion.
Criag says:
Therefore the law passed is in direct violation of the establishment clause of the Constitution.
Mr. Incredible says:
Except that it doesn’t, as explained above.
Criag says:
If however that sign were to be hammered into the ground in that park it could and should be removed by the government because it may create the appearance of government endorsement of religion.
Mr. Incredible says:
The hammering of it into the ground of a public park does not match “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” In that scenario, it is clear that Congress is not establishing a religion.



report abuse
 



Previous Posts

Another Blog To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting LynnvSekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow: Faith and Justice  Happy Reading!

posted 11:26:38am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Another blog to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Lynn V. Sekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow's Faith and Justice Happy Reading!!!

posted 10:36:04am Jul. 06, 2012 | read full post »

More to Come
Barry,   It's hard to believe that we've been debating these constitutional issues for more than two years now in this space.  I have tremendous respect for you and wish you all the best in your new endeavors.   My friend, I'm sure we will continue to square off in other forums - on n

posted 4:52:22pm Dec. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Thanks for the Memories
Well Jay, the time has come for me to say goodbye. Note to people who are really happy about this: I'm not leaving the planet, just this blog.As I noted in a personal email, after much thought, I have decided to end my participation and contribution to Lynn v. Sekulow and will be doing some blogging

posted 12:24:43pm Nov. 21, 2010 | read full post »

President Obama: Does He Get It?
Barry,   I would not use that label to identify the President.  I will say, however, that President Obama continues to embrace and promote pro-abortion policies that many Americans strongly disagree with.   Take the outcome of the election - an unmistakable repudiation of the Preside

posted 11:46:49am Nov. 05, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.