Baptist Church Excludes Democrats

[perfessor]

http://www.wlos.com/

I don't get it. Didn't Jesus ply his trade among tax collectors, prostitutes, and other "sinners"?

East Waynesville Baptist asked nine members to leave. Now 40 more have left the church in protest. Former members say Pastor Chan Chandler gave them the ultimatum, saying if they didn't support George Bush, they should resign or repent. The minister declined an interview with News 13. But he did say "the actions were not politically motivated." There are questions about whether the bi-laws were followed when the members were thrown out.

So my question for debate: Should the East Waynesville Baptist Church lose its tax-exempt status?

I say they should, since the pastor has turned the church into an arm of the Republican party.

[micatala]

Thanks Chimp. The blogger's description does seem to be a fair bit different thant PBS' own description.

[AlAyeti]

Jose,

Please follow what I say.

Stem Cell research has not been presented to society in any other way than taking humans in the embryonic stage, and making medicines that will cure Steve Reeves and Michael J. Fox. If I missed something I'm not alone. I believe that is why it was called embryonic stem cell research.

Your embryonic stem cells are long gone Jose.

Sadly so is Steve.

But if I have to take a life to save my own, please, even you know that that is anti-Christian.

It has not been sold as using a patients own stem cells.

We who voted for G.W. see the idiocy in the Liberal parasites that plague the Democrat message. Oh, and the pure communists that want taxation so high as to usher in a new coiuntry on this land.

Bush knows what is easily observable. Even Dubya can read all of those UN sanctions. But it seems Democrats can't any longer.

Now, on evolution, you cannot be serious. First, as is easy to prove on this website, the label hung on those that do not cowtow to evolution are condemend as an idiot. I wish "dodo" was the worst.

"Male and female created He them."

"Let us make man after our image, after our likeness."

God is not a blind watchmaker. That comparison is wrong.

We were not created in the image of pool of ooze.

And, 0 x anything is not the created world we see.

We are not blind either. Well, not all of us.

Evolution is used 100% to disprove and denigrate Christianty. You cannot possibly disagree with that.

For example, your statement: "For the DNA bit, yeah--the instructions we get from Mom and Dad determine a great deal about us. But there are other issues as well, about which we know more than you want to admit, concerning embryological development. It should be enough to conclude that homosexuality results from biology, not choice. To the Christian, that biology--the magic of the creation of another human being--is said to be directed by God. Why can't we allow God's creations to live their lives with respect from the rest of us, rather than horror? They are doomed to a life without procreation, and are an "evolutionary dead end." Their plight is not contagious; you can't "catch gay" from anyone. Why do you care what they do?"

///

Aren't pedophiles and sociopaths "born that way?" I will presnt the evidence that pornography spreads both like a virus into others. I saw the Ted Bundy interview with James Dobson.

Now what we do with and by our actions seperates us from the animals and the miscreant. Homosexual sex is a cognitive act. It is a choice behavior. Absolutely empirically proven. No Christian can "respect" sin and certainly not celebrate it.

Yet, as history can testify, you can "catch" homosexuality. I believe Greek and Cretan Pederasty was spread from "man to man." Even Sappho, was "in love" with her childish students. Lesbianism is "taught" and in fact, at UC Santa Cruz, you can earn a Degree in it. Somehow.

Homosexuals are demanding to "have" children, of course violating their own "orientation." Which of course puts e.them biologically into heterosexual classification. Even, by your own perspectivive. They are doomed to a life without procreation, IF, they were homosexual by orientation. But, we see different.

What we see is the final destructive act to the system of the human family in legalizing same-sex marriage. Fatherless children are the majority of "troubled youth" in our society now. Now, children's human developement, will be forced by a new "progressive" cause, to be raised in an unnatural environment.

What took thirty-plus years to be observed in the cause and effect of a sexually promiscuios environment that destroyed the family with divorce and fathers not involved, will not hit society for decades if same-sex "parents" (which is an oxymoron of catastrophic level) raise children among the normal families of America.

God does know what will happen.

Democrats have and are voting against Christians. As well as, putting into place, the Judges that are outlawing us. Denial of the attack on Christianty is not logical.

Christians cannot unequally yoke themselves to unbelievers. "Christians" that celebrate sinners and sin are in the camp of unbelievers. Most Bible-believing Christians (which excludes Liberals) see the destruction of the family, the redefinition of marriage, the unjustifiable murder of tghe unborn for convenience, as major topics.

The city of New Orleans and its citizens are not the fault of anyone but those living within the area, AND NOT REALLY even theyare guilty of anything. Much of the city is UNDER sea level. The best help we can give those people is to invite them to live in our communities. Then, we can love them like we love ourselves. I do not want to live under the sea.

If I live under a crumbling overpass, please do not blame George Bush (or Democrats) if I get crushed by the bridge sooner or later.

The stupid Democrats blaming George Bush are not doing themselves any favors. Logic and reason testify against them. As it does on almost everything they hold onto.

Forgiveness and repentance is the name of the Christian game.

Like the Baptist Minister of note, I do not see Liberals that vote for Democrats believing in repentance or forgiveness, because they have redefined right and wrong. Now, to them, morality is bigotry and evil and abomination is a civil right.

"Go, AND sin no more."

But that means nothing to a person that refuses to believe that there is anything to NOT do.

The ONLY pre-emptive strike a Christian is allowed, is to stand for the Truth. Delivered only once to the Church.

Those that do not want to believe in right and wrong as is immutably spelled-out in the Gospels, can go their own way, but not with the votes of those that kjnow the Truth.

For example, YOU,

[Jose]

Jose,

Please follow what I say.

Stem Cell research has not been presented to society in any other way than taking humans in the embryonic stage, and making medicines that will cure Steve Reeves and Michael J. Fox. If I missed something I'm not alone. I believe that is why it was called embryonic stem cell research.

Your embryonic stem cells are long gone Jose.

Sadly so is Steve.

But if I have to take a life to save my own, please, even you know that that is anti-Christian.

It has not been sold as using a patients own stem cells.

Of course it hasn't been sold that way. To do so would undermine the agenda of the Religious Right. They are so dead-set against creating stem cells for any reason that they misrepresent the facts in order to invoke a visceral reaction against the research. It is the same tactic as misrepresenting the facts of evolution, or global warming, or even air pollution, in order to evoke a visceral response against it.

You may note that it is not the scientists who are going around saying that stem cell research will result in women selling their embryos for profit. It is the anti-stem-cell activists. Obviously, if they are the only ones we listen to, theirs is the only message we will hear.

So, look at it this way: I've summarized the science--the facts as we understand them to be. I would suggest that the appropriate response might be to say "ah--the media hasn't described this accurately." It might not be the best response to say "the media, non-scientists all, have described this as some kind of sci-fi horror story, so I have to believe them."

Now, on evolution, you cannot be serious. First, as is easy to prove on this website, the label hung on those that do not cowtow to evolution are condemend as an idiot. I wish "dodo" was the worst.

"Male and female created He them."

"Let us make man after our image, after our likeness."

God is not a blind watchmaker. That comparison is wrong.

You've lost me here. Are you saying that you really believe that Christians are called idiots if they don't understand evolution? I haven't seen that done here. I will suggest that we in the education business have done a lousy job of teaching what evolution really is, given the poor understanding of it in the US. I will suggest that the public, vocal anti-evolutionists are purposely and knowingly misleading their audiences. But, I will not imply that people who didn't learn about evolution adequately in school, and who have been misled by the charlatans, have any "failing" other than a certain lack of knowledge. There is no shame in that, since it applies to all of us in one way or another.

We were not created in the image of pool of ooze.

...and does anyone say we were?

Evolution is used 100% to disprove and denigrate Christianty. You cannot possibly disagree with that.

I can disagree with it because it is flat-out wrong. Evolution is used 100% to explain the data that thousands of researchers over hundreds of years have obtained from studying god's creation.. If there are Christians who think the bible is so weak as to be undermined by a mere scientific finding, then I might suggest that they study it harder, and learn that the bible is far more important than that.

Aren't pedophiles and sociopaths "born that way?" I will presnt the evidence that pornography spreads both like a virus into others. I saw the Ted Bundy interview with James Dobson.

I'm not talking about pedophiles and sociopaths. I'm talking about homosexuals. I have not said that "being born that way" is an excuse for anything. I have repeatedly said that actions that involve consenting adults, and that you don't even know about, except by fantasizing are not ours to condemn. You may note that pedophiles and sociopaths do not ply their trades among consenting adults. Theirs is predatory behavior, and harms others. But, if two guys live together down the street, and harm no one, why should anyone care?

Now what we do with and by our actions seperates us from the animals and the miscreant. Homosexual sex is a cognitive act. It is a choice behavior. Absolutely empirically proven. No Christian can "respect" sin and certainly not celebrate it.

No, what you do is often exactly the same as what animals do. As for "miscreants," their actions break the "rules" that we have established for the smooth running of society--so yes, you are right about that. You are also right that sex acts are cognitive, and actions of choice. But that's not what I'm disputing. I'm disputing your claim that being homosexual is a choice. If it were, it would be chosen only by really, really stupid and masochistic people. Look how mean Christians have traditionally been to homosexuals, and ask yourself if you would choose to have that kind of persecution.

Homosexuals are demanding to "have" children, of course violating their own "orientation." Which of course puts e.them biologically into heterosexual classification. Even, by your own perspectivive. They are doomed to a life without procreation, IF, they were homosexual by orientation. But, we see different.

You think that the gender of a person's brain should erase their natural instinct to want children? You're being either silly or intentionally obtuse. You may have observed that gay "parents" get their children by adopting them, not by procreation. This does not make them heterosexual. Nor does it make their adoptive kids come out homosexual.

What we see is the final destructive act to the system of the human family in legalizing same-sex marriage. Fatherless children are the majority of "troubled youth" in our society now. Now, children's human developement, will be forced by a new "progressive" cause, to be raised in an unnatural environment.

What does same-sex marriage have to do with single-parent households? If single-parent households are your main issue, why don't you work on solving that problem, rather than going off on a tangent about gay sex?

Democrats have and are voting against Christians. As well as, putting into place, the Judges that are outlawing us. Denial of the attack on Christianty is not logical.

Sure it's logical. What's not logical is the paranoia of claiming that Democrats are trying to outlaw Christians. A great many Christians are Democrats (or are they Pretenders in your mind?). Sure, we've voted against dingbats who happen to be Christians, but Christianity doesn't have any special claim to dingbats. There are dingbats everywhere. Voting against a dingbat who happens to be a Christian is a vote against the dingbat, not against his religion.

Christians cannot unequally yoke themselves to unbelievers. "Christians" that celebrate sinners and sin are in the camp of unbelievers. Most Bible-believing Christians (which excludes Liberals) see the destruction of the family, the redefinition of marriage, the unjustifiable murder of tghe unborn for convenience, as major topics.

So, what do you call bible-believing liberals? I'd call them Christians. I think you're going a bit overboard here.

The city of New Orleans and its citizens are not the fault of anyone but those living within the area, AND NOT REALLY even theyare guilty of anything. Much of the city is UNDER sea level. The best help we can give those people is to invite them to live in our communities. Then, we can love them like we love ourselves. I do not want to live under the sea.

If I live under a crumbling overpass, please do not blame George Bush (or Democrats) if I get crushed by the bridge sooner or later.

Ah, the Right-Wing explanation. It's their own damn fault for living where hurricanes happen to hit. It's their own damn fault for being poor or old or sick. It's their own damn fault that our society has institutionalized the marginalization of so many people who's parents aren't rich. So, why does FEMA react so differently when hurricanes hit Florida? Why didn't FEMA or the Bushies do anything in response to the calls for disaster-readiness plans? Why did Bush cut funding for the levee repair project? Why did FEMA take the money given to them to develop an evacuation plan, and use it instead to write a 15-year plan for the causeway over Lake Ponchatrain?

It is true that the city is below sea level. It wasn't at one time, but it is now. What good does it do to invent federal bureaucracies that are supposed to fix problems like this, if they don't do it?

Those that do not want to believe in right and wrong as is immutably spelled-out in the Gospels, can go their own way, but not with the votes of those that kjnow the Truth.

For example, YOU,

You're so charming. Tell me this: how do I know that the Gospels are truth? How do I know they have anything to do with god? The only evidence for this is that the book tells me it's god's word, but people write lots of books that say lots of things, so it seems likely that this is just another of those books that people wrote. Other than that, we just have a bunch of people telling me it's god's word, and therefore truth. Why should anyone believe a bunch of random people? How can you convince anyone that what you say is actually true?

[AlAyeti]

Jose,

Your last paragraph sums up the issue nicely. I on one side of the fence with the Baptist preacher, and you on the other with "Christians" that can slice and dice the Gospel.

JOSE: "You're so charming. Tell me this: how do I know that the Gospels are truth? How do I know they have anything to do with god? The only evidence for this is that the book tells me it's god's word, but people write lots of books that say lots of things, so it seems likely that this is just another of those books that people wrote. Other than that, we just have a bunch of people telling me it's god's word, and therefore truth. Why should anyone believe a bunch of random people? How can you convince anyone that what you say is actually true?

///

I know the Gospels are true. You deny that.

(You also - untypically - did a lot of spinning.)

Evolution is brought to us by a bunch of people too and there are lots of them saying lots of different things. For example, some say that something from nothing can agree with the Bible. -Evolution is something from nothing. - God did not use smart apes to build the "Tabernacle" to dwell in. That is not Biblical, but it is closer to Satanic. Christians that hold onto choas to Jesus are deluded.

Homosexualism promoted as noramal is brought to us by a bunch of people too. And, they are opposed by other people.

And so are other non-Christian and Anti-Christian Democrats that do things that are anti-Christian and think they can call themselves Christians. Abortion for convenience being the top of the Abomination list. Destruction of the family number two. Demanding that honest people be forced to pay for miscreants, deviants and the resulting inevitable bad outcomes of living a godless life.

And those "poor people," Democrats and Liberals, do not teach them worth. Only excuses for the conditions. Last time I was in New Orleans, I noticed that all of the people there were human beings. All with the "choice" to live the way they want. Awful Leftist of you to blame right-wingers for the fourth or fifth generation welfare recipients. It is precisely the relativism and denial of the truth that causes people to be brain-washed into living off others' "welfare." There is no moral reason to GET pregnant with a second iliegitmate child.

The famous corruption of New Orleans is not the fault of right-wingers. Find the blame where it belongs. On the left. I wish that the African Americans that throw there support behind the Liberals would see what has happened to them.

This is a right versus wrong issue. Democrat/Liberals legislate what is wrong and the do it knowing full well what they are doing.

That IS the issue of this thread.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

I know the Gospels are true. You deny that.

I don't suppose you would be willing to show us this objective evidence in support of your claim?

For example, some say that something from nothing can agree with the Bible. -Evolution is something from nothing. - God did not use smart apes to build the "Tabernacle" to dwell in. That is not Biblical, but it is closer to Satanic. Christians that hold onto choas to Jesus are deluded.

I would just like to point out that Evolution is NOT "something from nothing", as you assert. You confuse Evolution with "The Big Bang". Evolution is a gradual change over time. I have come across nothing in the Bible that contradicts this.

[Jose]

Tell me this: how do I know that the Gospels are truth? How do I know they have anything to do with god? The only evidence for this is that the book tells me it's god's word, but people write lots of books that say lots of things, so it seems likely that this is just another of those books that people wrote. Other than that, we just have a bunch of people telling me it\'s god\'s word, and therefore truth. Why should anyone believe a bunch of random people? How can you convince anyone that what you say is actually true?

I know the Gospels are true. You deny that.

No, no, no....I'm not asking for you to tell me you Know. I'm asking how you know. What is the evidence?

(You also - untypically - did a lot of spinning.)

Wheeeee!

Evolution is brought to us by a bunch of people too and there are lots of them saying lots of different things.

But they don't claim to be speaking for god. They simply report what they've found while studying the earth and what lives here.

For example, some say that something from nothing can agree with the Bible. -Evolution is something from nothing.

This is absolutely wrong, and based on the misrepresentation of the anti-evolution crowd. Evolution is exactly, and only, the change of life over the years. The origin of life is a different field, and has different theories. Perhaps, if you'd separate them the way science does, you wouldn't get so upset about evolution. Sure, go ahead and question the origin-of-life folks. That's a tough question, and we don't have the answer. But with respect to evolution, the game is different. We have too much evidence to shrug it off.

- Homosexualism promoted as noramal is brought to us by a bunch of people too. And, they are opposed by other people.

The difference, again, is data. There is no evidence other than the bible that the bible is what it says it is. For biology, there are published procedures that you can follow yourself, and prove whether the information is valid. The evidence says homosexuality is normal, whether we like it or not. The evidence says we might be able to decrease the frequency of it, by being much more careful with chemical pollution. By refusing to accept the evidence, we end up with the Bush Doctrine: "what I say goes." In this case, what he says is "increase pollution" and "belittle gays." His approach will only increase the frequency of homosexuality, along with cancer and birth defects.

And so are other non-Christian and Anti-Christian Democrats that do things that are anti-Christian and think they can call themselves Christians. Abortion for convenience being the top of the Abomination list. Destruction of the family number two. Demanding that honest people be forced to pay for miscreants, deviants and the resulting inevitable bad outcomes of living a godless life.

I'm a bit confused here. How can Christians be anti-Christian? This kind of statement seems to put you solidly in the camp of the Better-Than-Thou, narrow-minded zealots who would seek to destroy most of the world in the name of "morality."

And those "poor people," Democrats and Liberals, do not teach them worth. Only excuses for the conditions. Last time I was in New Orleans, I noticed that all of the people there were human beings. All with the "choice" to live the way they want.

That's disgusting (of course, I say this in the kindest way). NO--not the part about everyone being human beings, but the part about how they have the choice to live any way they want. Ha! Most of them were African-Americans. They've been oppressed by us Honkies for generations. They are still being oppressed--despite being human beings who are equal to everyone else.

Awful Leftist of you to blame right-wingers for the fourth or fifth generation welfare recipients. It is precisely the relativism and denial of the truth that causes people to be brain-washed into living off others' "welfare." There is no moral reason to GET pregnant with a second iliegitmate child.

Ah. Denial of the truth. Just what is the truth here? You're going to say that they've been brainwashed into sucking off of society. But you'll conveniently ignore the systematic demoralization forced upon them. We pretend that all schools are equal, but we give less resources and worse teachers to the poor. Why? Because "they're poor." Presumably, they wouldn't be poor if they'd just be Republicans. So we give them a lousy education, so they can't get decent jobs or buy adequate housing. And then we wonder why they live in squalor. Damn. In the face of such odds, I'm impressed that so many of them do as well as they do--this probably proves that they are inherently smarter than mere Honkies.

But set my rant aside, and let's get back to what you said. Tell me: just what is the Truth here?

The famous corruption of New Orleans is not the fault of right-wingers. Find the blame where it belongs. On the left. I wish that the African Americans that throw there support behind the Liberals would see what has happened to them.

I agree with you that the bizarre continuous-party nature of New Orleans is not the fault of right-wingers. Nor is it the fault of left-wingers. It is a result of the quirks of historical interactions among people of different nationalities who have come together in that particular gumbo bowl. But that's not the issue. My complaint is that the Bushies have systematically ignored the scientific advice, in favor of their weird, selfish ideology. From this, we ended up with a physical and humanitarian disaster beyond anything imaginable for the US.

It's not the Bushies' Christianity that's the problem--please get this clear. It's that they've hornswoggled Christians into thinking they are worthy by pretending to be in favor of hot-button True Christian issues. That's a farce. They don't give a hoot for these issues. They only give a hoot for themselves and the amount of money they can make before people wake up and see what happened.

This is a right versus wrong issue. Democrat/Liberals legislate what is wrong and the do it knowing full well what they are doing.

That IS the issue of this thread.

No, Democrats and liberals know full well that what they are doing is the best course of action for the greatest number of people. It's hard to see this when you're preoccupied by a small number of issues, the way a pit bull can't see the food dish when its jaws are clamped on your arm. I guess it's too much to ask to step back, take a few deep breaths, and actually look at the data.

[AlAyeti]

P-P,

The Gospels are accurate historically. Caiaphas, Pilate, everything really happened.

God dwelt among us.

There are two major themes of the Bible, taking care of the poor, widows and orphans, and knitting together the family members of Jesus. Ruth, Tamar, Judah, etc., etc., many people fitting together in the OT come to light in Jesus the Messiah.

God's Succah.

Ever thought about how similar Jesus is to Joseph (Egyptian Joseph)?

[McCulloch]

Reading the posts, one can find a pattern. AlAyeti makes a bold unsupported assertion. The Persnickety Platypus asks AlAyeti to provide objective evidence to support his strong assertion. AlAyeti, in stead of providing evidence, repeats his assertion in more detail. This is not evidence.

I know the Gospels are true. You deny that.

I don't suppose you would be willing to show us this objective evidence in support of your claim?

P-P,
The Gospels are accurate historically. Caiaphas, Pilate, everything really happened.
God dwelt among us.
There are two major themes of the Bible, taking care of the poor, widows and orphans, and knitting together the family members of Jesus. Ruth, Tamar, Judah, etc., etc., many people fitting together in the OT come to light in Jesus the Messiah.
God's Succah.
Ever thought about how similar Jesus is to Joseph (Egyptian Joseph)?

[AlAyeti]

Jose,

I've been around the block for many moons. Evolution is something from nothing that somehow bumbled its way to "us."

The Origin of Species is a book about "Evolution" Jose. The bible of evolution really.

Evolution-Jesus is a mutation.

Not mine though.

I'm puzzled about the "speaking for god" point of view. Historic Christians let God do His own speaking. It is Liberal Christians that change the meanings of simple things. Like marriage and life for example.

Yes indeed, just like Jesus said, there are liars within Christianity. Not atheists, no, no, a liar would have to come from the ranks. That's not narrow-mindedness, it is logical, and to be expected. We Christians believe that evil really exists. Why would Satan waste his time among the losing team?

Evolutionists do claim to be speaking against God. You have heard of Richard Dawkins . . . no? The Bible refutes evolution the same way complexity does. Michael Behe has every right to be considered in the issue of origins, but secularists screech in horror when even thinking about giving voice to any dissent. Remind you of "darker days?" Now who are the intolerant ones?

Take your (and evolution's) "change of life over the years" and go backward. You are left with 0 x 1. The math is inescapable. Probably why the hysteria about ID is so ubiquitous on the secular-humanist-atheist side. The insane are known for outbursts.

The anti-evolution crowd, only wants an equal platform. ID doesn't have to mean Jesus of Nazareth. But the Christians always bare the brunt of the hatred of the humanist. Remember John's Jesus is Greek iPhilosphers deology. John's so open-minded.

Good sound "logic" that it is.

You're right. The difference is the data. Complexity is also not only in the Bible but also empiricism in the lab.

And another thing about the poor African Americans, I absolutely am saying that they are brain-washed into sucking off society. If they would stop listening to Leftist propaganda, they would rise above. Their content of charachter reflecting a better inner-city situation. How can you not see that?

In the face of the odds of Liberal whining and blaming others, it is a wonder that anyone escapes the poor condition.

BUT we have reached total agreement!!!!

Christians should stop being led by the GOP!

Christians should get out of politics and lead by example.

Big business is just as repulsive as letting same-sex couples and Liberals destroy marriage and family.

I found it interesting that your views on homosexuality paint it as far worse than mine. I just judge their actions. You describe it as pathological deviation and sexual orientation of homosexuality as a true birth defect. You're right of course that it is the science of biology that proves the natural and unnatural on the issue of normal sexuality. No matter what the cause, the math is always the same. No bigotry need apply.

But Liberals do know full well what they are doing and who their doing it for. Abortion is pure evil. With all of the scientific evidence about the condition inside the womb and the science of DNA, they still peddle their pederasty and licentiousness in the wrapper of a woman's choice?

Show the truth and let a woman not be given the right to kill an independent human being for the convenience of making her licentiousness go away and her right to keep on partying into the night be unabated.

Funny thing about abortion. Men are winning the battle of the sexes and women still don't see it. I know many women who have had abortions, and their lives are not better for the "choice" they made. But, unfortunately, pregnancy is a two way street and the women are driven down only on one side whether they like it or not, by men.

I'm not talking about incest, sexual assault or the life of the mother being in jeopardy. But the minute amount of abortions that are necessary for extremem reasons, doesn't license the murder of unborn humans to make the life of immoral men and women easy. But what Liberals have done with the slaughter of the unborn is pure evil.

The Bushies are not my heroes. But, the GOP is certainly less hostile to Christians than the average Democrat.

"The best course of action for the most people?" Democrats?

C'Mon Jose that's unbecoming of you. The Liberals know they cannot get anything close to a majority of people to side with them, so the means are gained through activist Judges. When a young eprson finally wakes up to teh goofiness they embraced in college from the hornswaggling of those sick socialist professors ( we both know them), they wake up to a more "conservative" view of things. Especially when they finally have children. Then the disgusting nature of Liberalism comes into sharp relief.

And, Bush wins by three-million votes. More, if Democrats didn't throw away the other millions or we could see the military votes. Or, as in the case (back in the day) of Nixon-Kennedy, if Democrats don't let the dead vote. I'll leave Clinton alone.

"There's nothing new under the sun," as the Bible says.

[AlAyeti]

McCulloch,

For you.

ob·jec·tive (b-jktv)
adj.
1. Of or having to do with a material object.
2. Having actual existence or reality.
3.
a. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair1.
b. Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.
4. Medicine Indicating a symptom or condition perceived as a sign of disease by someone other than the person affected.
5. Grammar
a. Of, relating to, or being the case of a noun or pronoun that serves as the object of a verb.
b. Of or relating to a noun or pronoun used in this case.
n.
1. Something that actually exists.

///

The Gospels mention real people and real places in real time.

I used "objective" properly when asked to do so.

I believe that what I read in the Gospels is accurately presented.

So do many non-Christians. History books -not in a church - can be used to prove the places and names.

It is fair and a persons free will to deny Jesus as the Messiah of Israel or as God Incarnate. It just puts the person holding that opinion in the position of being wrong.