Is blasphemy a crime?

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
DANIELINTHELIONDEN
JESUS IS CATHOLIC

IRT:
I am not a Catholic, that is true. You say that God is a Catholic; now I know you are truly living in a delusional world of fantasy; centuries of human history have passed you right by. Everything I said about you is true. You hate President Obama because he is black and not white, and you hate America because it has elected him, a black man as President, and has betrayed you. And you seek his personal destruction by violent means, this you have made clear.
You are a pitiful fool.

ANS:
Jesus instituted the Catholic Church, He is the Vine; Catholics are the Branches. He is the Head of the Catholic Church, and the Pope is the visible head on earth. Therefore, Jesus, who is God, is Catholic in that the Catholic Church is the only Church He has instituted and He is its Head.

Moreover, no one enters into Heaven except through the Catholic Church either explicitly or implicitly, because Jesus never instituted another Church. All other Churches are man made and have originated from man.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p2.htm

"The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life, breath, and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

"The Church is both the means and the goal of God's plan: prefigured in creation, prepared for in the Old Covenant, founded by the words and actions of Jesus Christ, fulfilled by his redeeming cross and his Resurrection, the Church has been manifested as the mystery of salvation by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

"She will be perfected in the glory of heaven as the assembly of all the redeemed of the earth (cf. Rev 14:4).

779 "The Church is both visible and spiritual, a hierarchical society and the Mystical Body of Christ. She is one, yet formed of two components, human and divine. That is her mystery, which only faith can accept.

780 "The Church in this world is the sacrament of salvation, the sign and the instrument of the communion of God and men.

"Abide in me, and I in you. . . . I am the vine, you are the branches."216 And, he proclaimed a mysterious and real communion between his own body and ours: “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.”217

"Believers who respond to God's word and become members of Christ's Body, become intimately united with him: "In that body the life of Christ is communicated to those who believe, and who, through the sacraments, are united in a hidden and real way to Christ in his Passion and glorification."220 This is especially true of Baptism, which unites us to Christ's death and Resurrection, and the Eucharist, by which "really sharing in the body of the Lord, . . . we are taken up into communion with him and with one another."221

"Christ "is the head of the body, the Church."225 He is the principle of creation and redemption. Raised to the Father's glory, "in everything he [is] preeminent,"226 especially in the Church, through whom he extends his reign over all things.

"Let us rejoice then and give thanks that we have become not only Christians, but also Christ himself. Do you understand and grasp, brethren, God's grace toward us? Marvel and rejoice: we have become Christ. For if he is the head, we are the members, he and we together are the whole man. . . . The fullness of Christ then is the head and the members. But what does "head and members" mean? Christ and the Church.230

"The Holy Spirit is "the principle of every vital and truly saving action in each part of the Body."247 All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

"Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

"The word "Catholic" means "Universal," in the sense of "according to the totality" or "in keeping with the whole." The Church is catholic in a double sense:
First, the Church is catholic because Christ is present in her. "Where there is Christ Jesus, there is the Catholic Church."307 In her subsists the fullness of Christ's body united with its head; this implies that she receives from him "the fullness of the means of salvation"308 that he has willed: correct and complete confession of faith, full sacramental life, and ordained ministry in apostolic succession. The Church was, in this fundamental sense, catholic on the day of Pentecost309 and will always be so until the day of the Parousia.

"831 Secondly, the Church is catholic because she has been sent out by Christ on a mission to the whole of the human race:310

Blasphemy or bad taste, I'll say bad taste. but some live to get their panties in a bunch, religion , politics, makes no difference but often they are all up over what ever someone else is doing. they don't see humor or irony of their position. perhaps Blasphemy is just pity for lack of humor, or humility. Blasphemy through history was often telling the truth.

I am not a Catholic, that is true. You say that God is a Catholic; now I know you are truley living in a delusional world of fantasy; centuries of human history have passed you right by.

Everything I said about you is true. You hate President Obama because he is black and not white, and you hate America because it has elected him, a black man as President, and has betrayed you. And you seek his personal destruction by violent means, this you have made clear.

You are a pitiful fool.

And so TTY continues to show how christianity and catholicism blind a person to the Truth of God as It is. S/he can't read real history and thinks the church is going to write an accurate history. S/he has probably never read Mein Kompf, never heard of the inquistion, never heard of ghettos, never heard of Rwandan catholic v protestent genocide, never heard of the holocaust, never heard of conquistadors.. Those were proof of the goodness of his / her church.

But as s/he wants to worship a made up man, born of a woman whose husband was not his father, that's ok by me. I respect everyone's attempt to seek the truth, and like me, their failure to grasp the totality of truth. I do not respect the teachers of a church that would think TTY and the like are their star students; what a sad and horrible theology.

Asato ma sad gamaya
tamaso ma jyotri gamaya
mrityor ma amratam gamaya

shanti shanti shanti

Untruth to truth, guide me
inertia to lightness, guide me
death to eternity, guide me

peace peace peace

I am sure those opposed to this Hindu prayer find it offensive and blasphemous; but that is the untruth/darkness/mortality of their own ideas.

hariaum

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
DANIELINTHELIONSDEN :
“ASPERSIONS AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHY OF THE DELUSIONAL”

IRT:
“So Jesus is a Repbuclican? I bet he looks good in his Repbulican Uniform, a business suit with a sensible striped tie.”

ANS:
Strike one, you are hallucinating again. Jesus was God and a Catholic. The rest is a figment of your imagination.

IRT;
“You have said before that there can be no Christian who is not also a Catholic, and now you say there can be no Catholic that is not a Republican. I know of no recognized Catholic doctrine that makes these claims. Therefore, I now see your previous claim as an official spokesman for the Catholic Church to be a lie.”

ANS:
Strike Two you‘re wrong again. Can you cite the sentence where I said that? You are so predisposed and your rationale is so twisted that you are making things up to suit your delusions.

IRT:
“The Republican Party, which you assoicate with the Catholic Church is anti-minority and pro-rich; it is, in fact, the white people's party of American; it promotes all of the remaining rasicst elements of American life and seeks to obstruct progress in almost every field.”

ANS:
Strike three, the Catholic Church is not aligned with the Republican Party. The Catholic Church is not a political organization or party. If anything, the Republican Party is aligned with the Constitution. The Bill of Rights in the Constitution is aligned with the Catholic Church’s explication of the Natural Moral Law that believes all men are created equal. Democrats believe not all men are created equal, they are the Pro-Abortion Party. The Church believes in the sanctity of human life. Evidently, you do not think life is sacred if you malign the Church.

Can you get anything right? The greatest NGO Charity in the world is Catholic Charities. That is all they do is assist to the poor, the sick and the dying. Try doing some research by visiting their web site instead of talking off the top of your head and making ridiculous statements that have no substance.

IRT:
“You do not like President Obama and his Attorney General because of the color of their skin, it is plain to see now. But how do you square this with the gains that the Cathlic Church is making in Africa? What will someone like you do when there is a black Pope? bust a blood vessel in your neck?”

ANS:
Wrong again. the only thing I object to is what they stand for, and what they are doing to America. The prejudice is yours not mine. You are the one talking about race; you see race in every thing that happens. You have an acute sense of personal inferiority, often resulting in overcompensation and exaggerated aggressiveness toward Christians and the truth.
.
I have never brought up race or even insinuated it, but you have. You have a schizophrenic paranoia of racism. It is apparent that you are a racist against whites, and you obviously harbor an intense prejudice against Christianity. You must lead a miserable life with such antagonistic thoughts that haunt all you thinking and what you do.

IRT:
“And your repeat lies about them to incide violence again them, to have them removed, by violent means from the government. Then you complain, complain, complain about the culture of violence; but who is really promoting a culture of violence? YOU and the Catholic Church.”

Wrong again, violence is murdering babies, sucking out their brains, scalding them to death with salien solution, cutting them to pieces with a curette, sucking them apart with a vacuum, breaking their necks or drowning them in their mother's blood after an abortion fails to me is, maybe not to you, but to me is violence.

You have been given the link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, now find me one lie, instead of you constant repetition of the buffoonery that marks your delusions.

Yes, I complain about murdering little babies, destroying the sanctity of Marriage and the family. The blinders you wear as well as your myopic vision have prevented you from seeing that murder is a crime against humanity, and that gay-sex is a crime against Marriage and the Family. Some 52 million unborn in America have been murdered since “Roe v. Wade,” and 43 million unborn are murdered worldwide each year. Over 26 million have died from AIDS and some 35 million worldwide have HIV, and twice that many are with STDs. That is violence against humanity, and sadly the Obama support them all. That is a fact.

Moreover, like the Hemlock Society has set up Suicide and Euthanasia facilities throughout Florida to murder the old, Planned Parenthood has strategically set up aboratoriums in poor and Black neighborhoods to take advantage of killing off little Black babies and the babies of the poor. Jesse Jackson, before it became politically expedient not to, said that Abortion is Black Genocide.

Bill Cosby recently, on national television, said, “70 percent of Black pregnancies occur out of wedlock and some 55 percent end in abortion.” That is not just his opinion; it is a statistical fact.

Yes, it’s too bad that because of your intentional blindness and people of your ilk, have facetiously chosen to carp about racism but because of their blindness, they like you cannot even see the genocide they blindly defend. What sad and confused people they are.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
DANIELINTHELIONSDEN :
“ASPERSIONS AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHY OF THE DELUSIONAL”

IRT:
“All your views are founded in a Medieval concept of the world, which refutes all modern thinking. It is impossible for a modern-thinking person to have a purposeful and intelligent conversation with someone like you because you are steeped in Medieval ignorance, seeking to promote your racist, sexist, and homophobic views, in the name of Jesus Christ.”

ANS:
Modern thinking is the legalization of murdering unborn children and Gay Marriage. When did the abominable murdering of babies become antediluvian? When did Traditional Marriage become archaic?

Maybe they are medieval and archaic to the Communists and terrorists, to the fools in the Obama Administration who support abortion and gay marriage, but they are proscribed in the Natural Law and the Declaration of Independence as crimes against humanity. Maybe if Obama would take his propaganda and demagogic chain and collar from your neck and the blindfolds of sophistry from your eyes, you might see these things as they are.

IRT:
“All you do in your arguments is drag Jesus down in the mud with you, but I do not think there is much hope that you will gain any converts to your perverted and corrupt way of thinking.”

ANS:
Yeah, to you it is dragging Jesus down by stating what He and His Church teaches--the Commandments of Love your Neighbor as you Love yourself, and as God so Loves you, and for all men to do unto others as you would do unto you.

Yes teaching the Commandments, viz. "Honor your father and Mother," “Thou shalt not steal, lie or commit adultery is dragging Jesus in the mud. In addition, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s good or they neighbor’s wife is also debilitating to Jesus. Finally, there are the Ten Commandments that say honor God.

Now isn’t that quite astute of you to claim that paying tribute to God and giving God His due is dragging Jesus down in the mud. It’s just typical of your bankrupt rationale and senseless fabrications that define your incongruous babble.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1:

'My dear friend, if you are an example of Hinduism, than I think being a Hindu would be an embarrassment."

YOU are an embarassment. You are preaching a Medeival worldview to the people of the twenty-first century. Are you getting any converts here with your racist, sexist, homophobic rants, inciting violence against the President of the United States?

Sophia (wisdom) is the central feminine aspect of the Absolute in Gnosticism - something mainstream Christianity completely lacks in their concept of Godhead (but which is also very evident in the Jewish Kaballah, for example).

Carl Jung wrote of this insufficiency in Christianity, and others have made note of it as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophia_(wisdom)

http://www.essene.com/Gospels/GnosticAndSophia.html

Schaum is correct. Christianity is substantially founded on earlier mythical figures and traditions.

Whether or not there was a particular historical person named Jesus that can somehow be tied to early Christianity (and this is not by any means established to everyone's satisfaction) the inflated characteristics of this 'messianic' figure are clearly inherited from other earlier cultural traditions - Greek, Jewish and Babylonion, to name three.

Comparative religious studies have long established these connections, just as the early Gnostics had a completely different take on the nature and character of the Jesus persona (not to mention the idea of the Demiurge as distinct from the Absolute) - and were thus branded and persecuted as heretics by 'legitimate' Christians that were intent on tailoring and re-shaping mythos as historical fact.

As we can see, the early Church fathers were quite successful in their endeavors - as evidenced by TTWSY and his ilk...... seemingly either a retired priest or clerical wannabee with seriously reactionary republican leanings.

Back in the day, Catholics were uniformly democratic, but like their Protestant democratic brethren south of the Mason-Dixon line, became far more identified with the republican party based on a assortment of 'values' issues that continue to divide the country today - and which are frequently reified here On Faith.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysus

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1:

Sorry. The truth of history is what it is, and regardless of the fact that you don't like it, you don't get to rewrite it. Everything in catholicism was stolen from earlier religions, and your denials merely measure the depth of your ignorance, stupidity, and foolish superstitions.

CCNL:

If you doubt what I have written, you know how to research history. Research is exactly the method I used to prove that you are a blatant plagiarist and incapable of original thinking and writing.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SCHAUM :
“FICTION BEGETS WEIRD ANALYSIS”

IRT:
“The Roman Catholic corporation’s “Eucharist” is, like everything Christianity teaches, stolen from other religions; in fact, it originated long before the existence of the “church”. An ancient Babylonian woman, Semiramis, who is thought to have been a queen, married her son Nimrod and subsequently declared herself to be a goddess. She is known under a variety of names, including Diana, Venus, and the Queen of Heaven.”

ANS:
The only religion that the Catholics used it the Jewish religion because Christianity is the fulfillment of the Jeweish covenant. If you didn't know it, the Jews originated from Adam and Eve the first parents of all humanity. Now pray tell me how you can get earlier than Adam and Eve. Unfortunately, some of the Jews didn't believe God, and they became a minority faith.

Whose history books have you’ve been reading, or if you have bought them, take them back and get your money back. To say such a dumb thing is indicative of your lack of knowledge of what the Eucharist is, and it’s not some dopey woman who married her son and claimed she was the goddess of love.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a3.htm

“The Eucharist in the Catholic Church is the body of Christ. How in God’s name could the Eucharist exist before Christ?

“The Holy Eucharist completes Christian initiation. Those who have been raised to the dignity of the royal priesthood by Baptism and configured more deeply to Christ by Confirmation participate with the whole community in the Lord's own sacrifice by means of the Eucharist.

“1323 "At the Last Supper, on the night he was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic sacrifice of his Body and Blood. This He did in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until he should come again.

And so Jesus entrust to his beloved Spouse, the Church, a memorial of his death and resurrection, a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a Paschal banquet ‘in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.’“135

“THE EUCHARIST - SOURCE AND SUMMIT OF ECCLESIAL LIFE “

“1324 The Eucharist is "the source and summit of the Christian life."136 "The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, our Pasch."137

“1325 "The Eucharist is the efficacious sign and sublime cause of that communion in the divine life and that unity of the People of God by which the Church is kept in being. It is the culmination both of God's action sanctifying the world in Christ and of the worship men offer to Christ and through him to the Father in the Holy Spirit."138

“1326 Finally, by the Eucharistic celebration we already unite ourselves with the heavenly liturgy and anticipate eternal life, when God will be all in all.139”

Try checking on the facts before you make such ridiculous statements.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
NAVIN1
“IT DOESN’T PAY TO BE DELUSIONAL”

IRT:
“Quite the contrary.
It is the christo-islamists that have used war as proof of their superiority. The catholics have to dress up jesus in Hindu clothes and the muslims can't decide if allah is a word or a name. It is these signs of an inferiority complex - the need to force people to agree with you.

ANS:
I see you still are displaying your disrespectful character that marks your derogatory character by trying to insult Christians, or maybe it your ignorance of not knowing Proper Nouns are capitalized, However, since you capitalized Hindu, it appears the spelling is just a result of your persecution complex indicative of your acerbic disposition. You must live a miserable life to so full of acrid priggery.

Aristotle didn't force anyone to belive in God, nor was Albert Einstine forced to believe in a God. Moreover, no one forced the Founding Fathers to believe in a Christian God, they wrote the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence on the foundation of the precepts of a Christian morality, not on a Hindu, Pagan, Buddhist or Muslim gods.

What are you talking about? Who is dressing up Jesus in Hindu clothes but your rampant undisciplined apperceptions? Are your concepts of reality impaired? If by forcing people to agree with me by stating the truth, I am guilty.

However, the jabbering of irrational and delusive prattle that you are babbling is incomprehensible. You need to get back in the real world, and quit living in the Al Gore alternate world, where good is evil and evil is good and up is down and down is up.

IRT:
I simply point out the history of the church. When the crusades happened, it seems that the pope decided that his church needed to prove the need for conversion. When the inquisitions happened (in Spain and in India), it was the pope and bishops that needed to prove the superiority of their religion.

ANS:
The Hierarchy didn't have to prove anything to a reasonable mind; the fruits of Christianity were self-evident. You might compare the societies that reject Christianity to those who embrace it, a.k.a. North Korea to South Korea, East Germany to West Germany. Try visualizing the turmoil and truculence that is embroiling the discord in the Middle East and India. Those kind of social disruptions don't happen in countries that adhere to the moral laws expounded by the Catholic Church. In fact, the harmony and tranquility of a societ is in porportion to its adherence of the Christian exhortations of the Natural Moral Law.

It’s evident that you have no sense of the History of the Crusades, and if anything, you’re evidently speaking from what some birdbrain has told you or reading from some revisionist History book. That’s a bad habit, and a sign, as G.K. Chesterton calls it, of a lazy brain. Namely, you’re too disinclined to look up the facts and you believe anything someone tells you if it’s in accord with your proclivities.

The Crusades were initiated for self-defense from the Saracens and the Turks who were invading the Christian settlements. I figure that giving you a link that proves what the Crusades were for would only be a waste of time for an indolent predisposed brain that is preconditioned to believing what it wants to believe irrespective of the truth.

IRS:
“In fact let us reverse what you have said (as I believe) being christian or muslim or morman, etc prepares an child for a full spiritual life outside of the church in the faith of the supreme transcendant and immanent reality called in Hinduism Brahman, in others the Great father, in others a ghost. When the chirstian is able to look past the idolatry of jesus and the muslim is able to look past the idolatry of the koran, then they will be able to see better the fullness of God's creation and the unconditional love, the lack of condemnation, the reality of truth."

ANS:
My dear friend, if you are an example of Hinduism, than I think being a Hindu would be an embarrassment. You are babbling in delusion and fantasies that are a figment of your imagination. As to facts, you haven’t mentioned one in all of your babble.

IRT:
As the Vedas said long before the christian god decided to fix his mistake - creation of original sin and poorly formed men and women (thus needing a savior), men call IT by many names but it IT is one. it is denial of history that is the ultimate inferiority complex - a desire to ignore truth as it may damage one's ego constructs.

ANS:
God doesn't make mistakes, He is Omniscient and Prescient. Mistakes are a lack of perfection but God is perfect. Only man is subject to making mistakes, and since the Hindu religion is a man made religion, it's understandable that it has many mistakes, and you are making that clear.

You seem to be criticizing yourself. You keep talking about history and you haven’t mentioned on rational historical fact. You need either a new History Book or some one who know history and teach you. Have you been inhabiting with Daniel in his lion's den?

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1

So Jesus is a Repbuclican? I bet he looks good in his Repbulican Uniform, a business suit with a sensible striped tie.

You have said before that there can be no Christian who is not also a Catholic, and now you say there can be no Catholic that is not a Republican. I know of no recognized Catholic doctrine that makes these claims. Therefore, I now see your previous claim as an official spokesman for the Catholic Church to be a lie.

The Republican Party, which you assoicate with the Catholic Church is anti-minority and pro-rich; it is, in fact, the white people's party of American; it promotes all of the remaining rasicst elements of American life and seeks to obstruct progress in almost every field.

You do not like President Obama and his Attorney General because of the color of their skin, it is plain to see now. But how do you square this with the gains that the Cathlic Church is making in Africa? What will someone like you do when there is a black Pope? bust a blood vessel in your neck?

And your repeat lies about them to incide violence again them, to have them removed, by violent means from the government. Then you complain, complain, complain about the culture of violence; but who is really promoting a culture of violence? YOU and the Catholic Church.

All of your views are founded in a Medeival concept of the world, which refutes all modern thinking. It is impossible for a modern-thinking person to have a purposeful and intelligent conversation with someone like you because you are steeped in Medeival ignorance, seeking to promote your racist, sexist, and homophobic views, in the name of Jesus Christ.

All you do in your arguments is drag Jesus down in the mud with you, but I do not think there is much hope that you will gain any converts to your perverted and corrupt way of thinking.

Hmmm, "Schaum" has returned yet again this time spouting more "revelations" about the RCC. He/she speaks like an authority on said subject but gives no references to support his/her commentary.

Also, keep in mind that this is an analogous blog and imposters abound and "Schaum" does seem to make an appearance with timing associated with other blog disturbances. Hmmm????

Did not Moses slay 3000 Jews because they were worshiping the golden calf of Baal? Ref: The Torah (and its myths)

query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

And from the class notes from a graduate theology class at a large Catholic university:

Transubstantiation is still a Catholic doctrine, but it never meant a
literal transforming of bread and wine into the physical body and blood of
Jesus. "Substance" in medieval philosophy referred to the essence of a thing
and was not reducible to material appearance.

Transubstantiation is a way of
expressing belief that Jesus Christ is SOME HOW present in the consecrated
bread and wine in a special way.

Some theologians believe that
"transignification" would be a better term today than transubstantiation.
[Note: both Episcopalians and Lutherans believe in the real presence of
Jesus Christ in the Eucharistized bread and wine.]"

The RCC (and Lutheran and Episcopalian) Eucharist as per most contemporary theologians, NT and historic Jesus is simply a diet wafer with much symbolism and tradition. Nothing more!!!

wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php?title=016_Supper_and_Eucharist

And then there is poor Mary, mother of the simple, preacher man aka Jesus:

For some well researched history, see wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php?title=105_Jesus_True_Family and wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php?title=070_Burial_of_Jesus.

Most contemporary NT and historic Jesus give a thumbs-up to Mary being the mother of Jesus as noted in the references.

These same experts however give no credence to a virgin birth.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
DANIELINTHELIONSDEN :
“ARE THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND”

IRT:
“You argue to incite a violent attack upon our President, as though getting rid of him through violence, would improve our country.

ANS:
Telling the truth apparently upsets the Obama apparatchiks walking around with blindfolds on. Try taking them off and see what you don’t see now. Try checking out Obama’s Attorney General; he’s the terrorist’s greatest advocate and patron.

“Mr. Holder was responsible for these widely-reported miscarriages of justice. He streamlined the Clinton Administration's pardon of fugitive billionaire Marc Rich by steering Rich's representatives to a former White House counsel, then helped lobby the President to pardon Rich ("an unrepentant fugitive wanted on extensive fraud, racketeering, and trading-with-the-enemy charges").

“Holder did so for personal gain, later admitting he hoped this would help him become Attorney General in a Gore administration. Mr. Holder concealed the pardon negotiations from other prosecuting and investigative agencies to prevent their opposition. Mr. Rich's wife was a generous donor to both President Clinton's library as well as his legal-defense fund.

"In 1999, over the objections of the FBI, the Bureau of Prisons, and prosecuting attorneys, Holder supported Clinton's commutation of the sentences of 16 FALN conspirators. These pardons - of terrorists who even Holder has conceded had not expressed any remorse - were issued in the months after al-Qaeda's 1998 U.S. embassy bombings.... The commutations were nakedly political, obviously designed by Clinton to assist his wife's impending Senate campaign by appealing to New York's substantial Puerto Rican vote.

“Holder was also instrumental in the "stealth pardons" of two Weather Underground terrorists, Susan Rosenberg and Linda Evans (both closely associated with President Obama's terrorist friends, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn). Rosenberg and Evans had been serving decades-long sentences for bombings targeting American government facilities. Again, Holder helped circumvent the pardon process and evade objections from prosecutors regarding the terrorists' jail terms.

“Just this summer, now-Attorney General Holder dismissed prosecution of an obvious case (it was filmed) of voter intimidation by members of the New Black Panthers, while also instigating prosecutorial investigations into CIA interrogation techniques of terrorist combatants. Attorney General Holder is a strong advocate for the release of the Islamofascist enemy combatants currently held at Guantanamo Bay.”

Notwithstanding, Holder did away with Military Tribunals and gave the terrorists Constitutional Protections. The cost of moving their prosecution to New York for security alone will cost some $2001 million when Gitmo is the perfect setting to hold the trials. Moreover, the terrorists are given free lawyers and a forum to propagate their propaganda worldwide. So now in a war, the captured enemy will have to be read their Miranda Rights.

Obama and the Dems are tradition havens for terrorists. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pronounced the end of the Patriot Act on national television, and the Dems did everything possible to deny the troops in Iraq funding and to protect the terrorist.

To protect the terrorists, Obama voted not to fund the troops in Iraq. He claimed the war was in Afghanistan, and he would fight that war with immeasurable force.

Obama, appointing Gen. Crystal to marshal the troops in Afghanistan, delayed his request for troops some four months while he went dancing in Paris and was doing numerous TV appearances to bolster his ego. Finally deciding to send more troops, Osama cut the request by 25 percent and it will be over a year before the troops will arrive, another gift to the terrorists, while American troops are dying.

The roman catholic corporation’s “eucharist” is, like everything christianity teaches, stolen from other religions; in fact, it originated long before the existence of the “church”. An ancient Babylonian woman, Semiramis, who is thought to have been a queen, married her son Nimrod and subsequently declared herself to be a goddess. She is known under a variety of names, including Diana, Venus, and the Queen of Heaven.

When her son/husband, Nimrod, died she declared him to have become Baal, the sun-god. She subsequently gave birth to Tammuz and declared that he was the reincarnation of Nimrod, and further claimed that she had borne him without the help of a man. From this evolved the mother/child worship which Christians practice. Many images and statues of Semaris, the queen of heaven, and her “immaculately conceived” baby, Tammuz, were erected: Semaris became known as the mother of Baal, or, simply, the “mother of god”.

Much later, in Egypt, the Egyptian priests developed the ritual known as “transubstantiation”, by which they pulled their sun-god out of the sky and placed him in a wafer. The Egyptians would then eat their god for “spiritual nourishment”. Sound familiar?

The roman catholic corporation today worships Mary as the “Queen of Heaven”, although few if any realize that they are actually praying to Semaris, the Babylonian queen of heaven. And Rome has perverted the Tammuz into jesus. Papal worship is nothing more than the worship of Nimrod and his wife/mother.

The superstitious members of the roman catholic corporation not only believe their priests have the power to turn bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, they also believe that the substance of bread and wine are gone and fully transformed into flesh and blood, notwithstanding the fact that it still looks/feels/tastes like bread and wine.

The roman catholic corporation teaches that eucharistic "adoration," and "processions" are not idolatry because 'jesus' is fully contained in the wafer, and that worshipping the wafer is, in effect, worshipping 'jesus.' Papists are rarely aware that the Egyptians originated ''transubstantiation" to put their sun-god into a wafer to be eaten just like they do. When you bow down to that eucharist cracker, you are not bowing to the creator of the universe, but to a sun-god. Why do you think that your monstrance (device that the wafer is placed when it is being adored) is shaped like a SUNBURST? That is because your wafer-god is a sun-god!!! It is not jesus that you worship in the eucharist, it is Tammuz, it is Osiris, IT IS BAAL!!!

These pagan rituals originated in ancient Babylon; it is therefore no wonder that john refers to the roman catholic corporation as 'Mystery BABYLON" in Revelation Ch 17.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
B2O2

IRT::
“I think it's clear the Catholic Church is in its death throes.”

ANS:
Yes, it has been said that the Church is in its death throes, for over 2000 years and unfortunately, those who have said it have passed on and lay in the dustbins of History. Yes, there are many augurers and necromancers who have conjured up the demise of the Church but what has ever happened to them. Stalin, and Hitler are a couple of contemporaries who attempted to kill the Church in Germany and the USSR. She still exists in the USSR and She is growing but Stalin isn't around any more. However, he left over sixty million dead in his wake.

Poland was targeted by the Nazis and Communist who told the world there was no God. Hitler and Stalin thought they were God, but the Chruch remains, and they are laying in the dustbin of History.

The Church never has died in Germany, but Hitler did; he killed himself, and he didn't rise again. You see he wasn't God either. And what happened to the Church, She's rising and She became stronger after all of Hitler‘s attempts to silence Her.

China is still trying to destroy Her, but She is still there, and the Chinese fear Her presence. Ironically, Soviets have enlisted the Church to aid them in the problems they are having with a negative population growth in Siberia.

Hence, it is written, “the Church will be with us for all time, and the gates of Hell, (a.k.a. people like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao) will not prevail against Her.” Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Church to be disintegrate, it might be for another 2,000 years if the earth last that long.

IRT:
“Rome has been wrong on every major existential question facing humankind for centuries now (e.g. sun-centered solar system, evolution, torture is bad, Jews deserving to live, and homosexuality being natural for a fraction of the species), and most people are starting to realize that an old man in Rome doesn't have any particular hotline to an Almighty Intelligence.”

ANS:
No the man in Rome does not have a hotline to God, but God has a hotline to him. You see God appointed the Pontiff to run His Church, and He sent the Spirit to watchover him and guide him as the ruler of His Church.

And, what are those major questions of which the Church has it been wrong? Is it the Church’s claim that all life is sacred, including yours, or that all men are created equal. Do you consider your life no better than an animal? The Enlightenment movement does. Under the Enlightenment view, you are worth no more than the chemicals that make you up. Sorry, I prefer the Church's view.

Is the Church’s "Ten Commandments" that the Enlightened have dismissed from the Public Square wrong? You know the Commandments that say, “Honor your father and mother. Thou shalt not kill; Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not commit adultery, or covet thy neighbor’s wife or goods, and thou shalt not lie." Our enlightened Supreme Court said the Commandments might corrupt little children's minds and band them from the Public Schools. They also banned the Natural Moral Law and started writting their own in "Lawrence v. Texas."

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
B2O2
“THE CHURCH IS WRONG?”

IRT:
“Rome has been wrong on every major existential question facing humankind for centuries..."

ANS:
Maybe you think the Church is wrong when it teaches the “Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy" in fulfilling those
Two Great Commandments?

THE CORPORAL WORKS OF MERCY”

“To feed the hungry;
“To give drink to the thirsty;
“To clothe the naked;
“To harbour the harbourless;
“To visit the sick;
“To ransom the captive;
“o bury the dead.

The spiritual works of mercy are:

“To instruct the ignorant;
“To counsel the doubtful;
“To admonish sinners;
“To bear wrongs patiently;
“To forgive offences willingly;
“To comfort the afflicted;
“To pray for the living and the dead."

So you don't agree with the "Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy," or the "Ten Commandments," or the two "Great Commandments?"

"The Divine command is set forth in the most stringent terms by Christ, and the failure to comply with it is visited with the supreme penalty of eternal damnation

(Matthew 25:41): "Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, in everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink. I was a stranger, and you took me not in; naked, and you covered me not; sick and in prison, and you did not visit me", etc.

“Here it is true there is mention directly and explicitly of only the corporal works of mercy. As, however, the spiritual works of mercy deal with a distress whose relief is even more imperative as well as more effective for the grand purpose of man's creation,“

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm

IRT:
The church in turn sees people becoming dangerously educated, which of course makes it hard for any cult leader to keep its flock in its control.

ANS:
Yes, we don’t want people teaching the Truth, do we.

IRT:
“They are trying all kinds of ploys to keep control, but the writing's on the wall. Look for the American evangelical cults to follow suit soon Talibanism is a relic of our primitive past, whether you dress them in tunics, robes or western clothing, and whether they speak in Latin, Pashtun, or midwestern American English. Long live human enlightenment.

ANS:
Is that what the Enlightenment has done for you, namely made you a troglodyte and a pessimist? The Enlightenment has given us the Sexual Revolution, the Contraceptive Mentality and the Culture of Death, a.k.a. Abortion, the murder of the unborn, Partial Birth Abortion, the sucking out of the brains of little defenseless babies being born.

Enlightenment has given us Gay Sex and subsequently AIDS, viz. the death of over 26 million AIDS victims. The Enlightenment has given us STDs and over 35 million HIV victims worldwide. The Enlightenment has given us Gay Marriage, the undermining of Traditional Marriage the foundation of the Family. Thus, Gay Marriage, an oxymoron, is the antithesis of the foundation of society, the Family.

To your disappointment, the Church has not been wrong condemning all of these crimes against human nature. Maybe that is what has caused your confusion and dishevelment.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
B2O2

IRT::
“I think it's clear the Catholic Church is in its death throes.”

ANS:
Yes, it has been said that the Church is in its death throes, for over 2000 years and unfortunately, those who have said it have passed on and lay in the dustbins of History. Yes, there are many augurers and necromancers who have conjured up the demise of the Church but what has ever happened to them. Stalin, and Hitler are a couple of contemporaries who attempted to kill the Church in Germany and the USSR. She still exists in the USSR and She is growing but Stalin isn't around any more. However, he left over sixty million dead in his wake.

Poland was targeted by the Nazis and Communist who told the world there was no God. Hitler and Stalin thought they were God, but the Chruch remains, and they are laying in the dustbin of History.

The Church never has died in Germany, but Hitler did; he killed himself, and he didn't rise again. You see he wasn't God either. And what happened to the Church, She's rising and She became stronger after all of Hitler‘s attempts to silence Her.

China is still trying to destroy Her, but She is still there, and the Chinese fear Her presence. Ironically, Soviets have enlisted the Church to aid them in the problems they are having with a negative population growth in Siberia.

Hence, it is written, “the Church will be with us for all time, and the gates of Hell, (a.k.a. people like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao) will not prevail against Her.” Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Church to be disintegrate, it might be for another 2,000 years if the earth last that long.

IRT:
“Rome has been wrong on every major existential question facing humankind for centuries now (e.g. sun-centered solar system, evolution, torture is bad, Jews deserving to live, and homosexuality being natural for a fraction of the species), and most people are starting to realize that an old man in Rome doesn't have any particular hotline to an Almighty Intelligence.”

ANS:
No the man in Rome does not have a hotline to God, but God has a hotline to him. You see God appointed the Pontiff to run His Church, and He sent the Spirit to watchover him and guide him as the ruler of His Church.

And, what are those major questions of which the Church has it been wrong? Is it the Church’s claim that all life is sacred, including yours, or that all men are created equal. Do you consider your life no better than an animal? The Enlightenment movement does. Under the Enlightenment view, you are worth no more than the chemicals that make you up. Sorry, I prefer the Church's view.

Is the Church’s "Ten Commandments" that the Enlightened have dismissed from the Public Square wrong? You know the Commandments that say, “Honor your father and mother. Thou shalt not kill; Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not commit adultery, or covet thy neighbor’s wife or goods, and thou shalt not lie." Our enlightened Supreme Court said the Commandments might corrupt little children's minds and band them from the Public Schools. They also banned the Natural Moral Law and started writting their own in "Lawrence v. Texas."

So who do you think should write the moral laws, the Court or God. The Founding Fathers (FF) chose God. The Court thought the FF were antediluvian, and wrote their own and consequently, gay sex is no different than conjugal love in marriage; it's legal to murder your unborn, and the Court redefined who is human in "Roe v. Wade." They previously defined Blacks as partial humans as they did the unborn, and over 52 million have been murdered.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1

You argue to incite a violent attack upon our President, as though getting rid of him through violence, would improve our country. Yet, ironically, you say that it is a culture of death that all good and forward thinking people believe in.

You see how your Prostestant ally, Spiderman regards you, don't you? He will get rid of the Catholics, along with the gays, flushed down the toilet, all.

You see a culture of death in all that you oppose, yet what you are really seeing is a reflection of yourself, and the culture of death that you, yourself, promote.

I cannot wait to see the contorted and convoluteed tome you will undoubtedly devise to refute the simple truths that I have pointed out.

i dont belleave annything what cxristians say because the bible its selfe has many contradictions

More reality although Eboo Patel will consider it blasphemy:

Once again:

Eboo Patel, CEO and founder of the Interfaith Youth Core and member of BO's Faith Advisory Council, is a Muslim and thereby is obviously "koranicized". Is he therefore to be trusted???

The Interfaith Youth Core’s 2008 financial statement notes that the One Nation Foundation is the Patel’s major contributor i.e. $200,000+ dollars. And what is the One Nation Foundation’s motto?

“Full acceptance of American citizens who are Muslims in the objective of one nation”

and that does not sound good!!!

So who is this One Nation Foundation that basically pays Eboo's salary:

from: http://www.onenationfoundation.org/files/1NationBrochureLATEST.pdf

None other than one of the rich guys in this case one George Russell:

"George F. Russell, Jr., built Frank Russell Company from one part-time secretary in 1958 to become one of the world’s leading investment advisory
firms. Russell served as chairman from 1958 until the firm was sold to Northwestern Mutual Life in 1999. Today, the company guides 1,900 clients
in 44 countries with assets exceeding more than $2.4 trillion, and manages $171 billion in funds. One Nation is the brainchild of Mr. Russell."

And who is on the board of One Nation Foundation?

None other than Professor John Esposito of "sell your soul for $20 million to Islam" Georgetown U. Said Professor continues to "pussyfoot" around the horror and terror promulgated by Islam.

Are there anymore "koranicized" members of the One Nation Foundation?

Yes indeed!!

"Sara Abbasi

After a career in advertising and marketing, Abbasi and her husband, a former Oracle Senior Vice President, endowed the Sohaib and Sara Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies at Stanford University to provide undergraduate and graduate students with both a geopolitical
lens and multidisciplinary lens that includes literature, history, politics, economics, religion, law, sociology and anthropology.

Sara is also President of the Executive Board of Developments in Literacy (DIL), – a U.S. based non-profit dedicated to female literacy and creating schools in the remote areas of Pakistan."

Then there is:

"Hisham Alireza

A descendant of the oldest trading house in Saudi Arabia, Alireza co- founded and managed Xenel Industries Ltd, one of the nation’s leading conglomerates. Now retired, his focus is in the area of philanthropy. He has founded several initiatives supporting education
and cultural understanding between east and west, including Dar Alfikr School, the first American style private School in Saudi Arabia, Dar Alhikma College, the first private college for women in Saudi Arabia, and The Book Foundation, a UK registered charity."

Then there is this guy:

"Hamza YusUf Hanson

A classically educated Westerner who converted to Islam over thirty years ago, he studied for ten years in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, as well as North and West Africa, earning degrees in Religious Studies and Health Care. He founded Zaytuna Institute, which has established an international reputation for presenting a classical picture of Islam in the West and which is
dedicated to the revival of traditional study methods and the sciences of Islam. Graduates of Zaytuna occupy faculty positions atmajor universities in the U.S."

Then there are these two "koranicized" staff members:

"al-Husein N. Madhany

Executive Vice President, One Nation

Madhany is a track two diplomat of the American Muslim community. He is
adept at connecting and coordinating groups of like-minded Muslims, including
both Sunni and Shia communities to their mutual benefits, and America’s, by
actively promoting social entrepreneurship and civic engagement. With graduate
degrees from Harvard, Georgetown and the University of Chicago, Madhany is
a Senior Fellow at the Homeland Security Policy Institute at George Washington
University and serves on the Stanford Islamic Studies Advisory Group for Public
Education. Previously, he taught at Georgetown University and worked as the
Executive Director and Executive Editor of Islamica Magazine.

Nillofur Jasani

A native of India, who has practiced both Islam and Christianity, has lived and
worked in Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates as well as England and Canada. Her
work has raised awareness and built cultural bridges in these faith communities
through dialog and friendship. She served His Highness the Aga Khan as a
member of the National Council of the Ismaili Muslim community in the U.K. and
as communications coordinator in the U.A.E. Her corporate experience includes
having been Executive Assistant to the Vice President of New Product Development
at Weyerhaeuser."

Considering the "koranic-driven" acts of the college-educated 9/11 terrorists, the nine Islamic doctors who tried to burn down a UK airport, the Ft. Hood Islamic psycharist who killed nine US soldiers and the recent attempt to blow up a US flight by an Islamic college student, should we really trust any of these Muslim One Nation Foundation members? Do you really want to get on a plane with any of them?

Bottom line- Mr. Russell really needs to re-evaluate his support of Islam, the horror and terror religion of the 21st century. And the Islamic members of the board and staff of One Nation Foundation should seriously consider becoming secularists!!!

TTY

Quite the contrary.

It is the christo-islamists that have used war as proof of their superiority. The catholics have to dress up jesus in Hindu clothes and the muslims can't decide if allah is a word or a name. It is these signs of an inferiority complex - the need to force people to agree with you.

I simply point out the history of the church. When the crusades happened, it seems that the pope decided that his church needed to prove the need for conversion. When the inquisitions happened (in Spain and in India), it was the pope and bishops that needed to prove the superiority of their religion.

In fact let us reverse what you have said (as I believe) being christian or muslim or morman, etc prepares an child for a full spiritual life outside of the church in the faith of the supreme transcendant and immanent reality called in Hinduism Brahman, in others the Great father, in others a ghost. When the chirstian is able to look past the idolatry of jesus and the muslim is able to look past the idolatry of the koran, then they will be able to see better the fullness of God's creation and the unconditional love, the lack of condemnation, the reality of truth.

As the Vedas said long before the christian god decided to fix his mistake - creation of original sin and poorly formed men and women (thus needing a savior), men call IT by many names but it IT is one.

It is denial of history that is the ultimate inferiority complex - a desire to ignore truth as it may damage one's ego constructs.

hariaum

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1

You wrote, "No, it should not be against the law to blaspheme; I believe God will have no problem taking care of the blasphemers; He already has a nice warm little place already waiting for them; it’s called Hell."

Contrary to what you may think, God did not "create" hell.

If one were to "wake up", so to speak, in hell, they will come to the realization that they "built it" themself and have absolutely no one to blame but themself.

It is God's Plan and God's Will that ALL be saved and God's Plan will come to Fruition.

Jesus "won" the "keys" to the netherworld and He will use them in due time.

Jesus said, "Repent and believe in the Gospel", Gospel means GOOD NEWS and if the Good News is not ultimately for all, than it is not Good News at all.

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
Navin1 :

IRT:
Since Hindus are considered ignorant, superstitious devil worshipers by Christians and Muslims alike, and those groups preach about it every week to their flock, It is odd that a Hindu that calls Christianity and Islam religions of evil mono-ideology would be censored, but power is to be worshiped and bowed down to; be careful, you might just blaspheme too far

ANS:
You seem to have an inferiority complex that borders on schizophrenic paranoia. Who has considered Hindus are superstitious devil worshipers? Certainly it is not the Catholic Church, and certainly not any Christian Church unless it is a on the fringe of irrationality.

THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH”
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p3.htm

“The Church's bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race. All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock that God created to people the entire earth, and because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city.331

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."3

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

The Church is catholic: she proclaims the fullness of the faith. She bears in herself and administers the totality of the means of salvation. She is sent out to all peoples. She speaks to all men. She encompasses all times. She is "missionary of her very nature" (AG 2).

It appears that my argument for the demonic nature of jesus was too offensive for the post.

Since Hindus are considered ignorant, superstitious devil worshipers by christians and muslims alike, and those groups preach about it every week to their flock, It is odd that a Hindu that calls christianity and islam religions of evil mono-ideology would be censored.

but power is to be worshiped and bowed down to; be careful, you might just blaspheme too far.

hariaum

I think it's clear the Catholic Church is in its death throes. Rome has been wrong on every major existential question facing humankind for centuries now (e.g. sun-centered solar system, evolution, torture is bad, Jews deserving to live, and homosexuality being natural for a fraction of the species), and most people are starting to realize that an old man in Rome doesn't have any particular hotline to an Almighty Intelligence. The church in turn sees people becoming dangerously educated, which of course makes it hard for any cult leader to keep its flock in its control. They are trying all kinds of ploys to keep control, but the writing's on the wall.

Look for the American evangelical cults to follow suit soon. Talibanism is a relic of our primitive past, whether you dress them in tunics, robes or western clothing, and whether they speak in Latin, Pashtun, or midwestern American English.

Long live human enlightenment.

Nobody knows more about blasphemy than the Roman Catholic Church. Just look at what it did to Copernicus and Galileo when they concluded that the sun was geocentric to the universe, and not the earth as Catholic doctrine endorsed. These two were too famous to burn at the stake like it did to others (check out monk Giacomo Bruno and how it "toasted" him when caught.) The Church realized they were too famous to burn at the stake, but did manage to condemn the two scientists to house arrest for the rest of their lives. This is not to say that Pope John Paul II admitted the Church made a mistake in 1994 in their case. The Pope probably would have invoked "infallibility" except that the Church didn't get around to that until the late 19th century - an act of blasphemy in itself for how it was politically concocted akin to the past election of Popes that employed bribery of Cardinals to achieve clerical power. Aah yes, the Catholic Church is a premier authority of what constitutes examples of blasphemy - it had been practicing it for centuries as part of its holier-than-thou creed fed to its flock. Forewarned is forearmed.

My sons in Christ:

I encourage all men to convert to, and be confirmed in, the Roman Catholic Church of Pedophilia. Even the body of Christ cannot compare to the body of a boy!

Hey TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1, let's try some blasphemy. You can take your god and your bible and cram it up the same place you keep your head.

"What bishops want". I believe all they want is boys age 15. Give me a break.

LAWS AGAINST BLASPHEMY:
Blasphemy is the ridicule and scandalizing of that which is sacred. To make blasphemy a crime would result in a social nightmare. The Political Correct would have a feeding frenzy. Terrorists would have a field day suing the government for blaspheming their religion; the ACLU would be in its glory suing churches religious schools and Universities claiming they had blasphemed the atheists.

All the anti-religious kooks from the White House, the Attorney General’s office, and the Civil Rights divisions, to the perfidious loonies on the treacherous Hollywood Left would be celebrating to no end the crucifixion of free speech. Talk radio would have to set up a residence in a wing of the Supreme Court defending their freedom of opinion.

The Nazi-Feminist and the Left-wing Gays, because, to both, Unigender is sacred, would sue businesses who labeled restrooms Men & Women, insisting they were being blasphemed because God created all the sexes equal without difference. Consequently, the designation of Men and Woman maligns God and His Creation, viz. that God did not create them Male and Female but created them Persons.

No, it should not be against the law to blaspheme; I believe God will have no problem taking care of the blasphemers; He already has a nice warm little place already waiting for them; it’s called Hell.

Hence it is written in Romans 1: 19cf:

“Wherefore, God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness: to dishonor their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, worshipped, and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. For this cause, God delivered them up to shameful affections…”

Since we are in a deadly battle with Islam this law should not apply to so-called blasphemy vs. Islam.

Read about the Church of Pedophiles and the Child Rapists these Jackals protected.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/20/child-abuse-catholic-schools-ireland
http://www.childabusecommission.com/rpt/ExecSummary.php

In my experience, one of the most difficult concepts for many people to accept is the idea of "no beginning". And I won't waste time with an argument for what should be a simple understandable concept. However, it should be pointed out that the dogma of Christian religion, and Western scientific orthodoxy depends wholly on the idea of a "beginning"; not because they necessarily have a counter understanding rooted in an absolute principle, but because a "beginning" serves as a foundation to mediate between those who explain and those who follow explanations! Its antithesis- no beginning!which is well intrenched in many people, would point to a totally different paradigm in our ontology; for then nothing could be explained in any absolute terms. As things stand, "I think, therefore Iam" is the only truth we can really be certain of--"I exist" (the illusional ego) and "Thus, I AM" ("God within me"!)

A word like blasphemey is merely a cultural invention as a result of Man's humanization of God, the Cosmic, or whatever one would call "existence", unless one would presume that God has a personality with all of its human imperfections e.g. jealousy!

All one needs to know is that if "nothing" existed first, there would be NOTHING! And "nothing" needs no explanation.

In my experience, one of the most difficult concepts for many people to accept is the idea of "no beginning". And I won't waste time with an argument for what should be a simple understandable concept. However, it should be pointed out that the dogma of Christian religion, and Western scientific orthodoxy depends wholly on the idea of a "beginning"; not because they necessarily have a counter understanding rooted in an absolute principle, but because a "beginning" serves as a foundation to mediate between those who explain and those who follow explanations! Its antithesis- no beginning!which is well intrenched in many people, would point to a totally different paradigm in our ontology; for then nothing could be explained in any absolute terms. As things stand, "I think, therefore Iam" is the only truth we can really be certain of--"I exist" (the illusional ego) and "Thus, I AM" ("God within me"!)

A word like blasphemey is merely a cultural invention as a result of Man's humanization of God, the Cosmic, or whatever one would call "existence", unless one would presume that God has a personality with all of its human imperfections e.g. jealousy!

All one needs to know is that if "nothing" existed first, there would be NOTHING! And "nothing" needs no explanation.

Hmmm, did the NT story (Mark 14:64) about the high priest accusing the simple, preacher man aka Jesus of blasphemy really occur??

No, it did not according to many NT and historic Jesus experts to include Professor JD Crossan, an On Faith panelist.

e.g. http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php?title=270_Priests_Question

So where did the ghost writers of the NT come up with said blasphemy ideas??

Cross references:
A.1 Kings 21:10 : 1 Sam 2:12; 2 Sam 20:1
B.1 Kings 21:10 : Ex 22:28; Lev 24:15, 16; Acts 6:11
C.1 Kings 21:10 : Lev 24:14

"Leviticus 24:16 (New American Standard Bible)

16'Moreover, the one who (A)blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death. "

And why did the NT ghost writers have the high priest rent/tear his clothes??

http://www.thechristianexpositor.org/page309.html

" (mythical-added) Moses quickly stopped him, commanding: "Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die" (vs. 6). When we go back into Exodus 28:321 to see the significance of this prohibition when we read the description of how the garment should be constructed:

32 "And there shall be an opening at its top in the middle of it; around its opening there shall be a binding of woven work, as it were the opening of a coat of mail, that it may not be torn.

The high priestly garment was not to be torn, even in mourning, and Moses warned Aaron not to tear it "lest ye die." In Matthew 26:64 we read of the encounter between Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, and Christ, at the illegal kangaroo court of the Sanhedrin (Mark 14:53-65). Jesus had just answered the question as to whether He was the Son of God by stating (vs. 64):

Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

In response, verse 65 informs us, "Then the high priest rent his clothes." Orthodox Christian belief widely acknowledges that, when Caiaphas rent the high priestly garment, he ended the Jewish priesthood. A very few hours later, (Matt. 27:51) we read that "the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom." So, within the span of 24-hours, between the time when Caiaphas rent the high priestly garment and the veil of the temple was rent, Jesus Christ paid the ultimate sacrifice on the cross of Calvary and became our High Priest in the New Covenant."

Poor, idiotic Spidermean. How frustrated he is: unable to prove the existence of god, unable to disprove evolution, unable to prove "intelligent design"....and, I would venture to guess, unable to get laid.

believe me, I can even mispell the word "the" into "teh". Only idiots would see that as a discussion point.

I made some valid points concerning the stupidity of evolution and yet here you come, correcting my spelling on the word voracious. Thanks by the way, idiot.

Schaum wrote "He was ridiculing you"

See the minds of idiots. PSOLUS was placing gravity , electromagnetism and thermodynamics on the same level with an idiotic science called evolution.

You guys can't be cured. What a pity.

spidermean2

You wrote, "I like this law to be passed so Catholicism, once and for all, will be tried in courts for blasphemy."

You know that it was the "religious" of Jesus's day that brought the charge of "blasphemy" against Him, don't you?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Spidermean2 wrote:

"Schaum wrote "Why stop there? Let's also ban gravity, electromagnetism, and thermodynamics as well."

Actually, idiotboy, I wrote no such thing. That was written by PSOLUS. He was ridiculing you -- which is a redundant effort, inasmuch as you make yourself sufficiently ridiculous.

spidermean2

You wrote, "WHOSOEVER DOES GOD'S WILL IS MY BROTHER AND SISTER AND MOTHER. It only means that Christ does not put Mary on a very high pedestal as Catholicism does worshipping her even at the level of a demigod or much higher."

Besides being the biological mother of Jesus, Jesus does indeed speak very highly of Mary here, in the fact that Mary said, ""Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word." and she lived it.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Unfortunately the tribal gods of primeval human societies have been replaced by dogmas by religions that are considered more logical now (or claim to be so). Blasphemy is a word coined by the religious heads who want their followers to blindly follow their dictum without using their own brains. Heresy is another word to condemn anyone who tries to come at a par with the priests who feel threatened if their interpretation of their religion is questioned by anyone. In fact even they feel safe hiding behind dogmas.
Hinduism is the only religion that allowed intelligent debates on any religious issue; ever since since its inception some five thousand years ago. For, if there is only one God, which every religion professes but insists that that God is the one imbued with the qualities they assign to Him. Most of them feel that the others' God is fake., Their priests are the ones who do not understand the true nature of God, even as described in their own books. If we all agree that He is Almighty, omnipotent, omnipresent, then all this bru-ha-ha would come to an end. Perhaps it is the Satan who is beguiling mankind (the weak minded ones) into remaining stuck with dogmas that suits Satan's design of keeping the progeny of Adam divided. Recall what he said to God when He asked Satan to bow to His new creation.

Schaum wrote "Why stop there? Let's also ban gravity, electromagnetism, and thermodynamics as well. "

As I've said, you can't expect a crazy man to cure himself. The stupidity of these people has no boundary. The Bible already prophesied their doom but the problem is they can't even understand the Bible.

How pitiful.

Blasphemy isn't a crime, but religions should be; there an insult to humanity and a Godless disease to boot. You should not be prosecuted for pointing out the truth; and there is little to none in religions. Wake up,there is no God in any religion; just control!

Blasphemy isn't a crime, but religions should be; there an insult to humanity and a Godless disease to boot. You should not be prosecuted for pointing out the truth; and there is little to none in religions. Wake up,there is no God in any religion; just control!

Spidermean2 wrote:

"...madness will consume them like a verocious [sic] wild animal or BEAST."

Is it possible that you meant 'voracious'? Or even 'ferocious'?

Talk about stupidity!

"BANNING EVOLUTION AT ONCE, can actually prevent doomsday..."

Why stop there?

Let's also ban gravity, electromagnetism, and thermodynamics as well.

Spidermean ominously warns:

'Stupidity is self-destructive and doomsday is a result of a world GONE MAD.'

That one bedroom apartment of yours must be a damned scary place...what do the neighbors say??

Terrorism (like this blasphemy law), in different forms , will always be present with us unless the seeds of terrorism like false religions (Catholicism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, liberal Protestantism), gay marriage, fornication, DARWINIAN EVOLUTION, and atheism continue in their stupidity.

It's not gonna get better. The worst is still yet coming when the stupidity that I mentioned above will rear their very ugly heads.

The good news is that when these things self destruct, the days ahead will be a thousand years of peace.

Sadly for many people, which includes the liberal gay-marrying evolutionist (leftist democrat) parts of America, and America's (future) enemies around the world, that thousand year peace will only happen in their absence.

Stupidity is self-destructive and doomsday is a result of a world GONE MAD.

A single plant leaf is a solar cell, a battery, a food maker, an air cleaner, a medicine,etc ALL merged into one single leaf and yet THE IDIOTIC EVOLUTIONISTS CAN PROUDLY CLAIM THAT THERE IS NO INTELLIGENT DESIGN TO THAT.

And yet this kind of stupidity is taught around the world. Expect the worst as the fruit of that madness will consume them like a verocious wild animal or BEAST.

God is not at fault here. Man's destruction is SELF-INFLICTED.

BANNING EVOLUTION AT ONCE, can actually prevent doomsday but you can't let a crazy man cure himself. In other words, it's not going to happen until they self-destruct with their stupid doctrine.

Death is the ultimate blasphemy - find your favorite dead celebrity below. Unfortunately the list probably doesn't go back much further than Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.

Whereas a celebrity dead list worth a damn would have Jesus, Mohammed, Abraham, Moses, Zoroaster, Plato, Socrates, Buddha, and all those assorted famous and near-famous saints, sages, arhats, and avatars that humans inordinately revere.

Elvis, our current On Faith dead celebrity, is single-handedly still making more money via corporate ingenuity than all of them combined. I believe he made more money than (a barely alive) Madonna last year....

There must be a special place in hell for certain dead celebrities, designed to look exactly like the Strip in Las Vegas.......audiences are included.

http://www.stiffs.com/

PSolus wrote :

"TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1 and Thomas Paul Moses Baum versus spidermean2!!!!

A reguar clash of the titans."

Yeah. The Three Stooges of theology -- the OTHER trinity!

I like this law to be passed so Catholicism, once and for all, will be tried in courts for blasphemy.

Mark 3: 31-34 " Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”

33“Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked.

34Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 35Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”

WHOSOEVER DOES GOD'S WILL IS MY BROTHER AND SISTER AND MOTHER. It only means that Christ does not put Mary on a very high pedestal as Catholicism does worshipping her even at the level of a demigod or much higher.

Beneath its skin's surface, Catholicsim is a very cruel religion and the proof is in this law and the largest forgotten catacomb of torture beneath the basilica in Vatican.

If they can raise the penalty to death, they will do it. They have done it for centuries when they still have absolute rule over many people.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1 wrote :

"Thus, can you explain what is meant by the passage below?

Mt 16:18 -
And, I say to thee that thou art Peter; and upon this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

It appears that Peter, the first Pope, would be the Vicar of Christ, if being a Vicar is the visible head of Jesus' Church on earth. "

*****

If you read the book of Peter and his teachings, you would be scratching you head till it becomes bald, but you could never reconcile his teachings with Cstholicism.

Catholicism equates more with the devil's teaching and not with Peter's. Peter's teachings is the same as the teachings of Apostle Paul and the other disciples.

If there's a verse that is attributed to Catholicism,it is this verse : "ye are of your father the devil because the devil is the source of LIES".

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1 and Thomas Paul Moses Baum versus spidermean2!!!!

A reguar clash of the titans.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Mary worship is also blasphemous."

Who worships Mary?

Then, "God has no mother."

Jesus asked, "Who do you say that I AM?"

Personally, I say that Jesus is God, God in the Flesh and Mary is His Mom, His biological Mom, who do you say that Jesus Is?

The question is just as relevant today as it was when Jesus first asked it.

Then, "Christ himself declared in disgust, "who is my mother?""

This is simply not true, Jesus did not 'declare in disgust' but asked, "Who is My Mother, who is My brother and who is My sister?", did He not?

Then He proceded to answer it, did He not?

See you in the Kingdom, don't forget: God's Victory is TOTAL and satan's defeat is total.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SPIDERMEAN2
“VICAR OF CHRIST”

IRT:
“Catholicism has many blasphemous teachings including the belief that the pope is the Vicar of Christ and his infallibility.”

ANS:
“If you are right, can you explain how you can prove the Pope isn’t the Vicar of Christ, and what do you mean by the Vicar of Christ?

Thus, can you explain what is meant by the passage below?
Mt 16:18 -
And, I say to thee that thou art Peter; and upon this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

It appears that Peter, the first Pope, would be the Vicar of Christ, if being a Vicar is the visible head of Jesus' Church on earth.

Second, how do you explain these passages in Scripture?

Matthew18; 15cf.
“Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.”

It also appears that not only did Jesus make Peter the first Vicar of Christ, since it was Christ speaking to Peter in the above passage, it also appears Jesus gave Peter the authority to carry out the office of the Vicar. Was Jesus a blasphemer?

Notwithstanding, there is another passage I am having trouble with, namely, these verses appear to have given the Pope infallibility.

Mt. 28:20. “And teaching to obey everything I have commanded you. And, surely, I am with you always, to the very end of the age Mt.10."; "For it will not be YOU speaking but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you." John 15: 26-27 "When the counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, He will testify about me. And, you must testify about me, who has been with me from the beginning."

Now how do you explain that? The Church is saying these passages are proof of God sending the Holy Spirit to guard the Church against error in Her universal teachings and beliefs and these teaching and beliefs are the ones God has taught them to teach.

So are these passages blasphemy?

Now there is another problem, I hope you can solve for me. If God is Omniscient, and Prescient, why would God institute a Church that a few months or even years after He ascended into Heaven leave the Church subjected to inevitably teach errors
as all the other Christian Churches seem to be doing since there are some 35,000 Christian denominations that contradict in whole or part each other. Consequently, they cannot all be right when they are in contradiction. So we know if God does not guard His Church from error, it will end in error.

It seems if God was very astute, and apparently, He is and if He is Omniscient and Prescient, He would not leave His Church subject to error. It doesn't seem rational that an Omniscient and Prescient God, in a matter of a few years, would leave his Church to teach errors, when it took him 33 years on earth to establish His Church and His Church is to last till the end of time. That doesn't seem to make sense. Please tell me why would Jesus leave a Church to end up in error in just a few years.

IRT;
“Christ himself declared in disgust, "who is my mother?"

ANS:
Are you saying here Jesus didn’t know whom His mother was and He was disgusted because He didn’t know who His mother was? That appears to be a very strange interpretation to say the least when Scripture tells of the Wedding Feast Jesus and His mother attended, and Jesus, upon the request of His mother turned eight huge vases full of water into wine.

IRT:
Catholicism has been a blasphemous doctrine for centuries and it's time that their priests pay 35,000 dollars each.”

ANS:
I don’t’ believe you’ve stated any blasphemies correctly, yet, could you please clarify what are these blasphemies?

IRT:
Mary worship is also blasphemous. God has no mother. “If this turns into a law then all Catholic priests in Ireland would be penalized for being blasphemous.

ANS:
Hmm, I can’t seem to find anywhere in the Catholic Catechism where it is said Catholics worship the Mother of God, Mary. Can you help me out on this, since you appear to know all about Catholicism and appear to be an expert on its blasphemous teachings in the link below.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm

If this turns into a law then all Catholic priests in Ireland would be penalized for being blasphemous.

Catholcism has many blasphemous teachings including the belief that the pope is the vicar of Christ and his infallibility.

Mary worship is also blasphemous. God has no mother. Christ himself declared in disgust, "who is my mother?"

Catholicism has been a blasphemous doctrine for centuries and it's time that their priests pay 35,000 dollars each.

LOL when "Schaum" complains about "impostoring since he/she is one of the kings/queens of the impostors on this blog.

And I do apologize for not referencing my previous comments. I received said list via an e-mail from a friend.

As usual, CCNL, the impostor's impostor, has cut and pasted from the work and thinking of another person, being unable to offer original thought of his own. His "test" about muslim extremists was copied from:

http://theundergroundconservative.wordpress.com/2009/12/28/a-multiple-choice-test/

SAMX....

I knew you were out there, someplace. Thank you, thank you very much'a, for sharing your collection.

CCNL1.

Sometimes you are greatly appreciated. Really good job, this time.

“The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
~Georgia Harkness~

“God has no religion”
~Mahatma Gandhi~

“The church is always trying to get other people to reform; it might not be a bad idea to reform itself a little, by way of example”
~Mark Twain~

“Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is.”
~Mahatma Gandhi~

“The problem with writing about religion is that you run the risk of offending sincerely religious people, and then they come after you with machetes.”
~Dave Barry~

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”
~Seneca~

“Many have quarreled about religion that never practiced it”
~Benjamin Franklin~

“When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said, 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land.”
~Bishop Desmond Tutu~

“Religion is what keeps the poor man from murdering the rich”
~Napoleon Bonaparte~

“Priests are no more necessary to religion than politicians to patriotism”
~John Haynes Holmes~

“A soul you say? Give my pocketwatch to a savage and he'll think it has a soul.”
~Napoleon Bonaparte~

“All Bibles are man-made”
~Thomas Alva Edison~

“We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of love and gentleness; how many bodies were burned alive with the genuinely kind intention of saving souls from the eternal fire of hell”
~Karl Popper~

“I won't take my religion from any man who never works except with his mouth.”
~Carl Sandburg~

“Religion is the masterpiece of the art of animal training, for it trains people as to how they shall think.”
~Arthur Schopenhauer~

“Religions are all alike -- founded upon fables and mythologies”
~Thomas Jefferson~

“My feeling is religious insofar as I am imbued with the consciousness of the insufficiency of the human mind to understand more deeply the harmony of the Universe which we try to formulate as "laws of nature”
~Albert Einstein~

“A religion old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge.”
~Dr. Carl Sagan~

“If the freedom of religion, guaranteed to us by law in theory, can ever rise in practice under the overbearing inquisition of public opinion, then and only then will truth, prevail over fanaticism”
~Thomas Jefferson~

We are living in dangerous times. We can anticipate further polarisation between Islam and the West as the official line becomes more focused on achieving military solutions to what are essentially political and cultural issues.

Fethullah Gülen is unusual in adding a distinctly Islamic voice to the calls for a non-violent approach to conflict resolution. The notion of peace through peace has a rich Western tradition from Tolstoy to Martin Luther King. In the East, all of those active in peace movements today acknowledge a debt to Mahatma Gandhi. These writers continue to influence peace activists such as Gene Sharp, whose work was directly channelled to assist in the recent, relatively peaceful, revolutions in former Soviet states such as the Ukraine.
If you want to read more on this: http://fethullahgulen.org/conference-papers/contributions-of-the-gulen-movement/302-contributions-of-the-gulen-movement/2461-the-work-of-fethullah-gulen-and-the-role-of-non-violence-in-a-time-of-terror.html

More blasphemy???

HERE'S THE TEST:

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by:
a. Superman
b. Jay Leno
c.. Harry Potter
d. A Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by

a. Olga Corbett
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzenegger
d. Muslim male extremists, mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

3. In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over by:
a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d . Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in
Lebanon by:
a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
a. A pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old
American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
a. The Smurfs
b. Davey Jo nes
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
a. Scooby Doo
b. The Tooth Fairy
c. The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jo rdan
d.. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17
and 40

10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed
by:
a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers.Thousands of people were killed by:
a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan
against:
a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40


Who murdered 13 U.S. soldiers at Ft. Hood Texas in November 2009?
a. Michael Jackson.
> b. Mother Teresa
> c. Billy Graham.
> d. A Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40

Most world religions and belief or faith systems either considered a being an image of God or divine; Nature as sacred; beings as oneness; beings and Nature as part of oneness or all things as wholeness. If the world major religions or belief systems either considerer a being as the image of God or oneness (part of a whole). Then with these theology, philosophy or conviction, negative or destructive human being behaviors such are cruelty, violence, malicious, abuses, unkind, harmful, non collaborative, or disrespectful toward each other and Nature must be considered as blasphemous. Even when human being are kind to each other, but perhaps not kind enough (how could human being not being ultra respectful, kind and compassion to the divine), could also be considered as blasphemous. Therefore, perhaps not to be blasphemous is at least to be as fair, just, kind, righteous and compassion to oneself, all beings, living things, and Nature as humanly possible. Furthermore, entities that were not created by any being such as Nature, biodiversity, the universe; that are common to all such as society and civilization; that are the integral part of being such as water, air, soil, atmosphere, earth, and Nature elements; and thoughts that have been developed by humanity throughout the age; belongs to all or are parts of being. In addition, under the separation of church and state, law is defined as based on reason, justice, equality, fairness, civics and kindness (because and for the people and to protect, defend, and serve the people), and not on religion or system of beliefs or ideals. Furthermore, the ability to emancipate one thoughts for transformation is the essence or Nature of being and divine ability or gift to evolve individually and collectively: physically, mentally, and spiritually. In these regards, if a person thoughts or expressions regarding God, the Divine, or Nature, whether humble or unorthodox, is for God, the Devine and Nature to judge and not any person, group or government.

Major religions tenets, principles, and teachings are about love, kindness, honor, honesty, truthfulness, virtues, openness, respect, tolerance, forgiveness, caring, altruism, humility, eliminate of sufferings, righteousness, and compassion and not about accusation, condemnation, and causing sufferings. In addition, blasphemy law are obstacles to diversity; pluralism; emancipation of knowledge, intuitions and insights; transformation of mind, hearts, and senses; development of theology, philosophy, or thoughts; and evolution of consciousness and spirituality. Therefore, based on the defined collective theology and belief, blasphemy law (this is not about blasphemy law in Ireland but rather about blasphemy law anywhere) is in itself blasphemous (how could not a being be considered an image of God, part of God or the divine and not able to humbly express his or her thoughts or opinions about such as life, the sacred, society, or Nature); blasphemy law is delusive and unjust for it is in contradiction to its own belief and faith systems; and can be used as excuses for oppression, dominance, or to harm; to gain advantages or self interests; to discriminate or isolate; for vengeance or aggression; to intimidate or use as fear tactics; for abuse of power; to divide and cause mistrust; to deny or reject the common goods or values; and to deny people their existence, civil rights, universal human rights, dignity, well being, and the essence of being. And throughout humanity history; heresy, blasphemy, and religious and cultural intolerances (the deny of universal human rights, dignity, and well being) have caused much destructions, divisiveness, sufferings and are obstacles for building a better world and humanity.

If there is a need or necessity for blasphemy law, it should be one that protect a person, groups, or communities from false, unjust, and wrongful accusations, condemnations, or persecutions or in other words, law to protect and advance democracy, freedom, civil rights, universal human rights, dignity, well being, and the essence of being. Blasphemy law (even due to self protection, self preservation, caring, good intention, or no bad intention) is counterproductive even to those that want to assert this law for its would invalid and negate their own beliefs and principles and can be obstruction to their own consciousness and spiritual development or evolution in addition to having severe negative affects (can be taken advantage by people to disrupt peace, harmony, and unity and to cause injustice, conflicts and chaos) on society, the global community, and humanity.

Hmmm, Eboo Patel, CEO and founder of the Interfaith Youth Core and member of BO's Faith Advisory Council, is a Muslim and thereby is obviously "koranicized". Is he therefore to be trusted???

The Interfaith Youth Core’s 2008 financial statement notes that the One Nation Foundation is the Patel’s major contributor i.e. $200,000+ dollars. And what is the One Nation Foundation’s motto?

“Full acceptance of American citizens who are Muslims in the objective of one nation”

Hmmm, sounds a lot like a passage from the koran.

From: http://www.bibleone.net/print_tbs74.html

“Mohammed could not have known the size of the world, but several passages in the Koran show that he envisioned Islam dominating all of it, however large it might be: “He it is who sent his messenger . . . that he may cause it [Islam] to prevail over all religions´(Koran 9:33, M.M. Ali; see also 48:28 and 61:9). M.M. Ali designates these three passages as “the prophecy of the ultimate triumph of Islam in the whole world.”

“Mohammed’s successors, the caliphs, quoted passages like these to inspire Muslim armies as they advanced out of Arabia, imposing Islam by the sword upon a peacefully unsuspecting Middle East and North Africa, as I described in the previous chapter.

Islamic armies, imbued with what Mohammed claimed was divine authorization, imposed Islam by force over vast areas, all the while extorting wealth from subjugated Jews and Christians to fund their ongoing conquests. As I noted, major defeats at Tours, France, in A.D. 732, and again at Vienna, Austria, in A.D. 1683, halted Islam’s attempt to take all of Europe by force. Gradually Islamic forces were forced to retreat from Europe, except for part of the Balkans. But Islam has again set its sights on a conquest of Europe and of European civilization, wherever the latter has spread to North and South America and other regions. Muslim strategists ask their followers, Why do we find in these modern times that Allah has entrusted most of the world’s oil wealth primarily to Muslim nations?

Their answer: Allah foresaw Islam’s need for funds to finance a final politico-religious victory over what Islam perceives as its ultimate enemy: Christianized Euro-American civilization. So, Islam follows Nazism, fascism and communism as the world’s latest hostile takeover aspirant.”

And the Interfaith Youth Core, is that possibly a front for an investment company? First Patel’ salary in 2007 was $115,000 up from $85,000 in 2006 which does not include benefits which probably adds another $10,000/yr. (IRS Form 990) available at www.guidestar.com.

Interfaith’s investments:

From IRS Form 990, line 54 A, corporate bonds, $951,319, publicly traded securities, $1,384,641 for a total of
$2,335,960.

With all dividends, interest and capital gains income being tax-free!!!

Now if only all the religions would simply follow the Five Steps for Deprograming and Deflawing the History and Theology of Their Religions, we would not need these religious “non-profits” and in some cases their support of the horror and terror religion of the 21st century i.e. Islam.

NO !

It should, rather, be REWARDED !

UNIVERSALCITIZEN.

Judging your writing, I am surprised you are not a member of the "On Faith" permanent panel.

By the way, how do you like living in Universal City Studios?

That's where Steven Spielberg and Dick Wolf started out, and Clint Eastwood was under contract there, at the beginning of his career. (He did better in Italy, though).

Did you get a dressing room suite, or one of those cheap trailer things, or a cubby hole in the Honey Wagon?

If it is a crime, who is the victim?

Most world religions and belief or faith systems either considered a being an image of god or divine; nature as sacred; beings as oneness; beings and nature as part of oneness or all things as wholeness. If the world major religions or belief systems either considerer a being as the image of god or oneness (part of a whole). Then with these theology, philosophy or conviction, negative or destructive human being behaviors such are cruelty, violence, malicious, abuses, unkind, harmful, non collaborative, or disrespectful toward each other and nature must be considered as blasphemous. Even when human being are kind to each other, but perhaps not kind enough (how could human being not being ultra respectful, kind and compassion to the divine), could also be considered as blasphemous. Therefore, perhaps not to be blasphemous is at least to be as fair, just, kind, righteous and compassion to oneself, all beings, living things, and nature as humanly possible. Furthermore, entities that were not created by any being (such as nature, biodiversity, the universe); that are common to all such as society and civilization; that are the integral part of being such as water, air, soil, atmosphere, earth, and nature elements; and thoughts that have been developed by humanity throughout the age; belongs to all or are parts of being. Also, blasphemy law are obstacles to diversity; pluralism; emancipation of the intuitions and insights; transformation of mind, hearts, and senses; development of theology, philosophy, or thoughts; and evolution of consciousness and spirituality. In addition, under the separation of church and state, law is defined as based on reason, justice, equality, fairness, civics and kindness (because and for the people and to protect, defend, and serve the people), and not on religion or system of beliefs or ideals. Furthermore, the ability to emancipate one thoughts for transformation is the essence or nature of being and divine ability or gift to evolve individually and collectively: physically, mentally, and spiritually. Therefore, based on the defined collective theology and belief, blasphemy law (this is not about blasphemy law in Ireland but rather about blasphemy law anywhere) is in itself blasphemous (how could not a being be considered an image of god, part of god , or the divine and not able to humbly express his or her thoughts or opinions about such as life, the sacred, society, or nature); blasphemy law is delusive and unjust for it is in contradiction to its own belief and faith systems; and can be used as excuses for oppression, dominance, or to harm; to gain advantages or self interests; for vengeance; to intimidate or use as fear tactics; for abuses of power; to divide and cause mistrust; to deny or reject the common goods or values; and to deny people their existence, civil rights, universal human rights, dignity, well being, and the essence of being. And throughout humanity history; heresy, blasphemy, and religious and cultural intolerances (the deny of universal human rights, dignity, and well being) have caused much destructions, divisiveness, sufferings and are obstacles for building a better world and humanity. If there is a need or necessity for blasphemy law, it should be one that protect a person, groups, or community from false, unjust, and wrongful accusations, condemnations, or persecutions or in other words, law to protect and advance democracy, freedom, civil rights, universal human rights, dignity, well being, and the essence of being.

Most world religions either considered a being an image of god or divine; nature as sacred; beings as oneness; beings and nature as part of oneness or all things as wholeness. If the world major religions either considerer a being as the image of god or oneness (part of a whole). Then with these theology, philosophy or conviction, negative or destructive human being behaviors such are cruelty, violence, malicious, abuses, unkind, harmful, non collaborative, or disrespectful toward each other and nature must be considered as blasphemous. Even when human being are kind to each other, but perhaps not kind enough (how could human being not being ultra respectful, kind and compassion to the divine), could also be considered as blasphemous. Therefore, perhaps not to be blasphemous is at least to be as fair, just, kind, righteous and compassion to oneself, all beings, living things, and nature as humanly possible. Furthermore, entities that were not created by any being (such as nature, biodiversity, the universe); that are common to all such as society and civilization; that are the integral part of being such as water, air, soil, atmosphere, earth, and nature elements; and thoughts that have been developed by humanity throughout the age; belongs to all or are parts of being. Also, blasphemy law are obstacles to diversity; pluralism; emancipation of the intuitions and insights; transformation of mind, hearts, and senses; development of theology, philosophy, or thoughts; and evolution of consciousness and spirituality. In addition, under the separation of church and state, law is defined as based on reason, justice, equality, fairness, civics and kindness (because and for the people and to protect, defend, and serve the people), and not on religion or system of beliefs or ideals. Furthermore, the ability to emancipate one thoughts for transformation is the essence or nature of being and divine ability or gift to evolve individually and collectively: physically, mentally, and spiritually. Therefore, based on the defined collective theology and belief, blasphemy law (this is not about blasphemy law in Ireland but rather about blasphemy law anywhere) is in itself blasphemous (how could not a being be considered an image of god, part of god , or the divine and not able to humbly express his or her thoughts or opinions about such as life, the sacred, society, or nature); blasphemy law is delusive and unjust for it is in contradiction to its own belief and faith systems; and can be used as excuses for oppression, dominance, or to harm; to gain advantages or self interests; for vengeance; to intimidate or use as fear tactics; for abuses of power; to divide and cause mistrust; to deny or reject the common goods or values; and to deny people their existence, civil rights, universal human rights, dignity, well being, and the essence of being. And throughout humanity history; heresy, blasphemy, and religious and cultural intolerances (the deny of universal human rights, dignity, and well being) have caused much destructions, divisiveness, sufferings and are obstacles for building a better world and humanity. If there is a need or necessity for blasphemy law, it should be one that protect a person, groups, or community from false, unjust, and wrongful accusations, condemnations, or persecutions or in other words, law to protect and advance democracy, freedom, civil rights, universal human rights, dignity, well being, and the essence of being.

Hmmm, we are sure most Muslims to include Eboo Patel would think the following is blasphemy. Of course it is not and said Five Step Methods For Deprograming and Deflawing the Major Religions are the answer to most of today's religious conflicts.

For Islam:

Using "The 77 Branches of Islamic "faith" a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi as a starting point. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true "faith" (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.

"1. Belief in Allah"

aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added to your cleansing neurons.

"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."
Evolution and the Big Bang or the "Gib Gnab" (when the universe starts to recycle) are more plausible and the "akas" for Allah should be included if you continue to be a "creationist".

"3. To believe in the existence of angels."
A major item for neuron cleansing. Angels/devils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.

"4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."
Another major item to delete. There are no books written in the spirit state of Heaven (if there is one) just as there are no angels/"pwtfft"s to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.

Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the uneducated masses in line. Today we call them fortune tellers.
Prophecies are also invalidated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.

"5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."

Mohammed spent thirty days fasting in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingy thingy". Common sense demands a neuron deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic violence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallucinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.

Accept these five "cleansers" and we guarantee a complete recovery from your Islamic ways!!!!

(Note: It is obvious from recent events that no koran-driven Islamic can be trusted and that includes the likes of Eboo Patel.)

This is a test!

Blasphemy is a most grievous and wicked crime. Insulting the one true god can never be tolerated.
Now, if only we could decide which god it is...

What is "offensive" in many instances depends on who is doing the "offending." Remember when Ted Danson donned "Blackface" and we nearly had a National coronary? Well, at the time, Whoopi Goldberg was not offended, but the politically correct, hysterical classes were beside themselves.
Jews are hypersensitive to any criticism. Indeed, they have a very well-funded watchdog group ready to pounce on anyone they deem to have "stepped over the line." Have you ever seen a "holocaust" movie about the slaughters engaged in by Mao or Stalin? Oh yea, there was one about Cambodia. In the 20th Century, the Communists murdered 20 times the number killed by the Nazis but how many movies, TV specials or mini-series have been done to chronicle the slaughter perpetrated by Communists? Oh yea...ONE!

It all depends on whose ox is being gored!

Again, Julia Sweeney in her one-woman show, "Letting Go of God" is a must see by every member of the human race. It is ironic that said Ms. Sweeney is an ex-Catholic of pure-Irish heritage whose show is filled with humorous, "blasphemic" reality.

Check your cable TV (Showtime) schedules for the next showing!!! And do tape it for added viewing pleasure by your relatives and friends.

Well, if you make any statements the ADL thinks are offensive to Jews you'll have hell to pay for it as they will use every legal angle they can to bankrupt you. If you say anything anti-Christian, well, you're exercising your free speech rights.

It all depends on whose ox is being gored...doesn't it?

Hmmm, "Schaum" and "Carstonio" are they related??? Keep in mind that this is an anonymous blog and imposters abound.

NAVIN1.

As I said "...as self-righteous as anybody else." All truth seekers, every one, I guess.

In "The Jerk," Martin's character name was "Navin?" Huh.

All the road runnin

I prefer the term jerk specially since Steve Martin made the name Navin so famous.

I am self righteous. I seek the truth with zeal and rigor. But I particularly enjoy turning the arguments of the self righteous against them (a figurative chiasmus).

On the other hand, I would say I am balanced by an open mind to Truth (the entity I worship as Krishna). I am self righteous to the ideology that we each are on a search for our own connection to Truth. And thus while I aggressively condemn monoideological constructs (and what I see as poor thinking), I reinforce the idea that the human being is good.

(I don't believe anyone's idea should be that we are going to convince those with long held views to agree with us. I do believe that a public dialogue allows readers (including you and I) to challenge their own constructs; some destructive, some constructive.)(I also am not satisfied in accepting the idea that all religions are the same and other propaganda that monoideologists use to undermine reasonable debate; ie killing in the name of allah is a moral good because, well, everybody does it.) I suppose that makes me self righteous in my demand that we have freedom of conscience.

or just another blasphemous jerk.

hariaum

Daniel ITLD,

If indeed you have figured out how to manipulate CCNL, then please make the bastard disappear!

DanielInTheLion's Den:

"(aside to the audience: I can't wait to see how this guy will answer)."

No fear! Although he ran out of original thoughts years and years ago, as long as CCNL can cut and paste the writing and thinking of other people, he will always have something to "say".

"When was George Carlin a Catholic prelate?"

In the Kevin Smith movie "Dogma". A delightfully blasphemous film in itself. Including God being missing because She was playing Skee-ball in Coney Island. Another standout is Alan Rickman as the Angel Metatron.

Then, there is the news item supra.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/04/AR2010010400976.html

Some, in other religions, seek to control even the use of certain words. It is much safer to criticize Ireland though.

Under the principle of free speech, all ideas and institutions are subject to criticism. It would be as ridiculous to criminalize criticism of a religion and its tenets as it would be to criminalize criticism of Impressionism or Coca-Cola or the infield fly rule or Daniel Snyder.

More blasphemy to make Danny ILD's day:

"Danny Boy" was written by an Englishman.

To wit:

"To begin with, Danny Boy is one of over 100 songs composed to the same tune. The author was an English lawyer, Frederic Edward Weatherly (1848-1929), who was also a songwriter and radio entertainer.

In 1910 he wrote the words and music for an unsuccessful song he called Danny Boy. In 1912 his sister-in-law in America sent him a tune called the Londonderry Air (or possibly something else, as discussed in Section 3), which he had never heard before. He immediately noticed that the melody was perfectly fitted to his Danny Boy lyrics, and published a revised version of the song in 1913.

As far as is known, Weatherly never set foot in Ireland."

Whose arse are the anti-blasphemers kissing now?? This practice apparently isn't reserved exclusively for Satanists...

Ireland has been there before - a short piece pays homage to playwriters of the past that dealt with the whole issue of blasphemy.....an oily concept construed to mean something other than a means to convey endless human arrogance.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0505/1224245943373.html

CCNL

You have been referring to the current crisis for a number of years. But isn't a crisis, by definition, some series of events of short duration? During a crisis, don't all sit, breathlessly to see how it will resolve? When it goes on so long that it is boring, and people don't even notice the crisis anymore, then can you really keep calling it a crisis?

(aside to the audience: I can't wait to see how this guy will answer).

NAVIN1.

As I have commented before, I enjoy most of what you write, and especially enjoy your writing ability -- whether I agree with you, or not. But, at the end of the day, you come off, at least to me, as self-righteous as anybody else.

DANIEL12.

One can stop taking Roman Catholicism quite so seriously, when one recognizes that all the popular religions of today come out of the post Neolithic Orient. Also, the Orient is where and when (post Neolithic) "civilization" began.

Skipping quickly past 1,000 years, we come to Abraham, or the idea of Abraham. He has brought with him all the ideas of Oriental gods. Another few thousand years go by, and these ideas have been conflated into Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Go further into the Orient, east of the Indus River, and one gets a different idea of the interpretation of gods, until, finally, in China and Japan, gods become less mythological, and more "something else."

But back to Roman Catholicism. "Roman" is the key word. Yes, as the Ambrahamic idea of G-D spread westward, it was found by the people to be more fun to include the post neolithic god ideas of the North people -- the people of Odin and Thor. The Roman Catholics also preferred greatly some of the stuff of the Greek gods.

When one has studied the religions and gods of all mankind, especially if one is raised Roman Catholic, one rather quickly observes that Roman Catholicism is more Pagan, than Abrahamic. Not a bad thing, merely another thing.

I find fascinating that the pursuit of morals, ethics and values are of the same nature, of both Confucius and Jesus, as well as many other like-kind thinkers. And, it's kind of a good thing, that the Odin and Thor people finally embraced a bit of the Abrahamic G-D idea.

And the oriental Marduk was simply too harsh, as was Yaveh, until His prophets taught Him justice and mercy.

Gosh! I just realized, the story of religions is the story of gods being taught about what humans need, not the other way around.

Ah, the whole thing is a great story. From my perspective, blasphemy is not a human need. So evidently, God's got more to learn.

http://www.atheist.ie/

See for yourself what the atheists in Ireland are doing.

Daniel 12

Don't worry about it. The whole idea of blasphemy is silly. It shows either a weak and stupid mind, or a sneaking and conniving mind, neither very much to brag about.

The whole blasphemy law in Ireland is going to implode upon itself, or else just go dormant, as unenforceable in modern Europe.

Blasphemy only means something to people who are seeking to push a religeous idea on the unwilling. Those kind of people are responsible for alot of what is wrong in the world today, and those people might get a little unwanted wisdom if we could give them a good swift kick in the pants.

Moslems are currently the ones who throw the biggest baby tantrums if they detect even the remotest hint of blasphemy, but if we give in to them, they will never learn. Blasphemy is good for them, and they should hear more of it.

Blasphemy a crime?

Let me be honest about this: Ever since I was a boy I have never understood the word "blasphemy". I have never been able to understand if it means being skeptical about say, Roman Catholicism, or if it means uttering in anger and with hatred a statement such as "your religion is absolute sh*t and you and your kind can go f*ck yourselves in every orifice with your crosses!"

This bothers me because it seems the most natural thing to be skeptical about religion what with our increasing capacities for logic and scientific reasoning. If just thinking skeptically about religion means blasphemy then blasphemy will only increase. And what worries me is that precisely because thinking in general is more dangerous to religion than any utterance out of anger blasphemy will ironically be directed toward the thinkers in the world and people uttering the most vile things will not be punished as severely.

But let me give an example of my reasoning about the Roman Catholicism of my youth and why I have decided to become an atheist. First of all it seems Roman Catholics really have no faith at all, which is to say that ironically they seem to require logical proofs and evidence for their beliefs much in the way of a logician or scientist. They do not merely believe, have faith in God, they want proof of God. Thus we have supposed eye witness accounts of Christ's resurrection, proofs such as Aristotle's that God exists and so on.

And this is not necessarily a bad thing this demand for logic and proof of Catholics--it can be argued that Roman Catholicism was conducive to the increase of logic and the birth of science. The problem is all this logic and proof of Roman Catholics is glaringly deficient. Following their own methods we first can easily observe that no reliable evidence exists for Christ being anything more special than just another holy man at the time let alone that he rose from the dead. And as for logical proofs of God and logical consistency in general in Roman Catholicism we have serious problems as well.

Take for example Aristotle's celebrated proof for God. What it essentially declares is that all effect must be traceable to a cause and this regression to a cause results in the concept of a "prime mover" or origin or God. Now the proof of Aristotle is quite rigorous, I must admit, but the grave deficiency of this proof is that it traces ALL EFFECT, ALL CHANGE, back to this cause. In other words it does not at all demonstrate with clarity that God exists and that he is all good. On the contrary, it leaves us with the feeling that perhaps God has been demonstrated logically to exist but that this God is ambiguous, not clearly good over evil.

In other words, Aristotle has not managed to say only positive change is traceable to God and that negative change (evil) is divorced from God. He tries to state such in a sense when he argues that although all change (potentiality) is traceable back to the prime mover (pure actuality) the prime mover is separate from the very change which is supposed to demonstrate its existence in the first place--but of course the argument does not work. So we are left with God perhaps existing but not at all convincingly good in our minds.

Roman Catholics however twist logic left and right trying to see Aristotle demonstrated both the existence of God and that he is good. But they get into the same trap as Aristotle: All change traceable to a prime mover and then in the attempt to make the prime mover good as well effect a separation between himself and at least negative change (evil). But this just results in God causing only a part of change and not total change thus resulting in him not being omnipotent, omniscient and in control of all!

In other words we have the classic dilemma of God either having created evil as well as good or not being God for precisely having a certain aspect of existence out of his control. We remove evil from God at the price of diminishing his power. He is either responsible for all, in which case he is indeed God (but also evil), or he is not responsible for all in which case his power is only partial and not total. This was expressed wittily by Stendhal who observed that God's only excuse (for the evil that exists in the world) is that he does not exist. In other words God either created evil as well as good, in which case he is indeed God, or he created only good in which case he is not God for being responsible for only a part of existence, the good and not the evil--which is to say a part of existence, again, is out of his control and that makes him less than omnipotent and omniscient, not God.

Another tack Roman Catholics try to take when faced with this fundamental problem is to say that man is responsible for the evil which befalls him and that he does. In other words the story of Adam having been in the garden of Eden and having sinned (original sin) is stressed. But this argument is full of errors of logic as well. We are told that God created Adam and that Adam was given free will and abused it. It was all Adam's fault that he sinned and God is correct to have persecuted him, considered him not fit for the garden of Eden. But a simple question throws this theory into question: Was Adam created by God to be as powerful, knowing and wise as God or did God create Adam as a lesser being than himself?

If the former Adam could not have sinned being as God. If the latter Adam had to have sinned not being God and not all good. And as we all know, Adam was not created by God to have the power and knowledge of God. God created a lesser being than himself. So Adam could not have been responsible for original sin. God is the responsible party. God, first, created a fallible being, thus immediately demonstrating he is not all good and does not act perfectly. Then when his creation sinned he persecuted his creation as if his creation could have behaved as wisely as himself. But of course if his creation was not created as infallible as himself his creation did indeed act as himself because he himself was not all bright in creating a fallible being in the first place. God got the creation he deserved.

Then supposedly Christ came out of the love of God (who persecuted Adam for not loving him as he wished--apparently good God is just as jealous as any man when it comes to love) to redeem man for his sins, which is to say man is supposed to walk in the footsteps of Christ which of course is an impossibility because Christ is God and man is man, just as fallible as poor dumb Adam...Is it too much to observe here that first God did not get it that Adam being fallible had to have sinned and then continued to not get it by sending his son (Christ) to show man the way when of course man being man cannot walk in the footsteps of God? Does God learn at all? Does it not appear he is as stupid as man?

And then we have it drummed into our heads what a great and painful sacrifice it was for Christ to die for our sins although of course Christ knowing he was the son of God (and God as well, the mystery of the trinity...) knew full well his suffering would end in himself ruling in full glory in heaven, a knowledge--not to mention power--no man ever had which means of course that routinely men suffer far more than Christ ever did...Must be nice to know one is the son of God and that most certainly a heaven exists and that one will rule in full power in it. Sure makes suffering bearable, especially suffering which cuts a life short and does not drag out year after year into old age. Must of been nice for Christ not to have experienced old age and dying alone in a lonely house as so many people routinely do today.

Now is all this blasphemy? If yes, then I stand convicted. By man. God however will have to present his case to me. He will have to convince me of the error of my ways after I die. Or I suppose he can be just as he is as told by the good priests in which case being tried by him is no better than being tried by man. In which case I will never have any faith again in him (I had faith when younger). In which case I will go at life and death alone. With maybe a few like-minded humans. Blasphemers all of us and never really understanding the meaning of that word.

CCNL

You didn't make my day. But I see now that I can push your buttons and get you to do whatever I want.

hmmmm ... what should I make you do next?

Hmmm, should we make DIL's day? Why not!!! (maybe the Irish will shut down On Faith after all the blasphemy so far spilled forth and that yet to come :))

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a
mythical character as was mythical Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

Many of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and many of their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.

Current crisis:

Realization that the Jews are not god's chosen people.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

Current crises:

Pedophiliac priests, atonement theology and original sin!!!!

3. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs” et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

Current crises:

Adulterous preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology, all male hierarchies and strange banking and funding.

4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the massacre at Ft. Hood and in Mumbai, the assassinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

Current crises:

The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system, reincarnation and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

Current crises:

The caste system and cow worship/reverence.

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."

"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb. Then there all those reincarnations to whatever and whomever!!!

And thehen there are these Words of Blasphemy-

Bottom line: Mormonism is a business cult using religion as a front and charitable donations and volunteer work to advertise said business.

With the "pwfft" i.e. Gabriel and the "warmongering, womanizing, "holey not holy hallucinator" aka Mohammed what does one conclude about Islam?

A cult based on the oil profits, terror, fear of the sword, stoning, hand chopping and suicide bombers.

With the "pwfft" i.e. Gabriel and the illiterate peasant, possible mamzer, hallucinating and embellished Jesus what does one conclude about Catholicism/Christianity?

A cult based on the fear of hell, guilt trips, the sin of myths, limbo, and the false promises of sin atonement, "miracles", water purification, indulgences and the only key to the spirit state of Heaven.

With "avenging pwtfft"s, and the mostly mythical OT and its "fortune tellers" what does one conclude about Judaism?

A cult based on the support of its rich members, the fear of Hell, the promise of a messiah and the return to the mythical promised land conquered previously by mythical OT characters.

And then there is our favorite poll of how to accurately describe Mohammed:

Recommended descriptions so far are:
1. Mohammed the Great Hallucinator Of Mythical Wingie Thingies?
2. Mohammed the Great Prophet?
3. Mohammed the Great Profiteer?
4. Mohammed the Lover of Many Women Young and Not So Young?
5. Mohammed the Man of Many Myths?
6. Too much Time in the Sun, Mohammed?
7. Mohammed, Man Made by Many Militant Scribes

The poll will remain open for another week. Enter today to win a chance for a free trip to Eboo Patel's Islamic Fairy Land.

Once again:

Are commentators who are imposters committing blasphemy against the sacred WaPo blog rules?

"Schaum", we see has returned yet again. Remember, this is an anonymous blog and imposters abound. BTW, "Schaum" typically has reign over Jacoby's comments but when she i.e. Jacoby is late, "Schaum" an imposing imposter, "blesses" us with his/her thinking akin to that of whomever the origin of said imposter is.

When was George Carlin a Catholic prelate?

The Irish Blasphemy Law which passed in July of last year has officially gone into effect. A group called Atheist Ireland has wasted little time before challenging this law on behave of all the Irish people. It doesn’t take a theologian to recognize that all religious are blasphemous to all other religions.

You can read the rest of my response to this topic here:
http://digg.com/d31EjlP?t

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe. Feel free to leave comments.
-Staks

Benedict XVI, the Death Pope who pronounced that the use of condoms causes the spread of AIDS, has now become an environmentalist. He has evidently figured out who is causing all our ecological difficulties: its the atheists. The Pope and the truth have always had an antagonistic relationship. His job requires it. He said: “Is it not true that inconsiderate use of creation begins where God is marginalized or also where his existence is denied? If the human creature's relationship with the Creator weakens, matter is reduced to egoistic possession, man becomes the 'final authority,' and the objective of existence is reduced to a feverish race to possess the most possible.”

Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, says: “This is rich coming from the leader of an organization that has plundered the world to enrich itself. As he sits in his golden palaces, surrounded by unimaginable luxury and material wealth, he lectures the rest of us about restraint and greed. We have nothing to learn about environmentalism from this hypocrite”.

I have a few questions for this pope. Like, "What about over-population? What's the devout roman catholic corporation’s plan for dealing with that serious environmental issue?" and "Have you noticed all those hell-holes of destruction in Africa? How does the roman catholic corporation help people achieve economic and individual autonomy?"

Oops....have I been blasphemous? Jesus on a bicycle, I certainly hope so!

DanielInTheLion'sDen:

Actually, I had the dance rhythm of the Charleston in mind...there may be similarities to both.

OnlyJesusSavesDOTcom, you are blathering. There is NO "commandment" forbidding blasphemy against the name of Jesus.

Further, Jesus DID commit blasphemy, according to the Jews, and that is why they demanded his execution.

And, in fact, 'taking the name of the lord in vain' is not forbidden by the first commandment. The first commandment is: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; you shall have no other gods."

The commandment "You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the LORD your God" is the second or third commandment, depending upon whether you are catholic or protestant.

Schaum

I was reading your poem.

It has the meter of that old song from the 1960's, "They're Coming to Take Me Away, Ha-ha"

Remember that song?

If man was made in the image of god, what does god excrete? Why does god have genitals? Where are those balls? How does one recognize a divine bugger? Does god blaspheme against himself when he creates another (particularly if he creates a lesser other and then condemns his own creation to eternal hell for the mistake of having been made by a blasphemous god)? Does god recycle his own poop or just hold it in? Are not atheists blaspheming the construct of no absolute truth when they make an absolute truth statement about the non-being of god?

Holy f-- s--- hammer me to a cross, burn me at the kabaa, drown me in the Ganga, marry me a hundred mormon girls, what a bunch of biblical baloney the blarney baked!

Ok that's my share of having too much fun today.

hariaum

From what I've heard about this from some Pagans who live in Ireland, the main reason that this law is being enacted is to keep people from discussing the abuses done by the Catholic Church. The Church doesn't like all of this stuff coming out into the open, so they pushed the government into enacting a blasphemy law that would make it illegal to condemn the Church.

I suppose god's creation is not good, isn't that blasphemy? After all if God called his creation good, then we are a part of his creation and thus good. But some blaspheme and say only god is good and the rest of us need a savior. Dam, Mary screwing, bastard son of god, nailed on the boards, forsaken man, what the hell.

hariaum

A Buddhist novice asked a monk, what shall I do if I find the Buddha on the road. The monk answered, kill him. Is this blasphemy?

A christian celebrates the bible as the literal word of god. A christian scholar points out that the book has been edited by men for centuries. Is this blasphemy?

A muslim hates idolators. A muslim asks, is the kabaa an idol? Is this blasphemy?

A man worships truth. another says there is no truth. Is this blasphemy?

Krishna says to Arjuna, go beyond the vedas. Is this blasphemy?

A woman worship the mother earth. Her son takes a hoe and scars the woman's goddess' skin to grow food. Is this blasphemy?

I declare I hate ignorance. I find ignorance in myself and you. Am I blaspheming?

The civil control of speech is a power statement of hegemony. Even in the setting of libel and slander laws. The justification of this civic exercise of power is based on intended harm. It is only when corporations, religions, and institutions acquire equal to greater merit than an individual and when their power is challenged that restrictions on human freedoms are made. These soul-less entities (that live as long as a government recognized their being - near eternally) then decide how to apportion that power.

We, the people, form governments to protect our rights from those that would oppress us. We, the people, do so in the collective voice that can only be legitimized by open and free voices; specially including those of dissent.

Indeed, as the novice learned, it is our duty to blaspheme against those idealogues whether they are in our own minds or in the social context. The mono-ideologies fear our independent pluri-potential mind for then they will be properly placed in the sewage of history (they will be dis- empowered). Those who seek to develop independent pluri-potential minds MUST blaspheme.

As to those who are offended by differing perspectives, grow up.

hariaum

@alltheroadrunnin - Yeah, It might SEEM right but that statement is Scripture twisting, at best, to get that out of the Commandment to not blaspheme Jesus.
What IS right about the understanding of the 1st Commandment is to use it to show why man deserves Hell. There is NO one who has not blasphemed, but Jesus. And only Jesus did not, because only God is good.
What the Commandments do is to show us why we need a Savior, why God''s Grace is Amazing and how we can NEVER earn Heaven.
Only Jesus Saves.
See http://www.NeedGod.com for details...
Patrick Burwell,
Response@OnlyJesusSaves.com

"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain," means God does not want humans to make their own laws in His name -- according to Hebrew biblical scholars.

That makes sense.

Let Ireland follow the USA example:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

After all, it is a reportable offense to make a comment someone is offended by HERE as well! "Report Offensive Comment, Mailto:onfaith@washingtonpost.com"

Is this yet another attempt at making a state religion? Or is this a means by which Christianity will be made illegal?
I think this is just another attempt to stifle FREE SPEECH. Since when is it a crime to offend someone?
Well, if this law passes it will be, just like offending with speech is a crime in Canada.
Slippery slope...

CCNL

Why don't give give us your little spiel about Mohammed, or Jesus, and show us again how blasphemous you can be.

You know the ones where you say that Jesus was an illiterate ... yada-yada-yada ... whatever ... I forgeet the exact text;

... and the one where you say that Mohammed was a womanizing pediphile ... yada-yada-yada ... I forget the exact wording on that one too, but you know the ones I mean; do those again for us please ...

Blasephemy only has meaning for people who doubt their purported beliefs. That is one reason why I believe that Islam is much weaker and more brittle than Moslems let on, for if they were truly assured in their beliefs, then they would not be bothered by any criticism.

BUT THEY ARE, BLANCHE! THEY ARE BOTHERED!

Blasphemny is when God is insulted. First of all, can God be insulted?

I do not think so.

Can people be insulted on God's behalf? Yes.

Does God need protection from indignant people, seeking to spare his feelings?

I don't think so.

God can take care of himself, at least one would think so.

This law is going to cause alot of problems until it is nullified or repealed.

If I lived in Ireland, I would not violate the law, but I would provoked its violation in others; it is easy to do when talking to intolerant people; they cannot help themselves.

Are commentators who are imposters committing blasphemy against the sacred WaPo blog rules?

"Schaum", we see has returned yet again. Remember, this is an anonymous blog and imposters abound.

"Is blasphemy a crime?"

Right now, in Ireland, as well as in several other countries, it is.

However, it is a superstitious concept, and will be difficult to enforce intelligently.

So, a gay female American Episcopal Bishop could probably be fined for wearing her clerical collar on a visit to kiss the Blarney Stone?

I'm feeling blasphemous!

Some priests take vows: stability,
Obedience, and chastity,
Some take a vow of poverty,
And then, there is The Pope.
Some give up almost every thing
That modern life can surely bring
But look upon that Papal Ring
With lust, or greed, or hope.

They gladly take authority,
Relieving folks like you or me
From any need to think, you see,
Then listen to our sins.
To hear some girl or boy confess
How lust has made their life a mess
Brings fullness to a priestly dress
The minute it begins

"I've coveted my neighbor's ass,
When, such a lovely little lass,
She dressed right by the window glass--
It's quite a frequent bother!"
If it were not for fear of God
And Satan's massive cattle prod
I swear a priest would shoot his wad
With every "Bless me, Father..."

And now the Pope, on throne of gold,
Decides to blame, so we are told,
His enemy from days of old--
The folks who don't believe--
For lust for power, ego, greed,
For taking more that what they need
Rejecting his ascetic creed
And giving earth the heave.

He has the gall to preach restraint
And act the part of slighted saint;
I have to tell myself, "how quaint!
He acts as if we care!"
Surrounded by his gold and jewels,
Pontificating papal rules
To sycophants and silly fools...
Humanity, beware!

Perhaps restraint is what you want if
You are going to say this, Pontiff--
Seems a bit too nonchalant, ef-
fusing thoughts like these,
Ensconced in your luxurious palace,
Sipping from your golden chalice
It frankly, Ratzi, feels like malice:
Authority? Oh, please.

from the previous question:

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1 said the following things about President Barak Obama, with a little thrown in for his wife, too:

"... we have elected an amoral Socialist materialist who has surrounded himself with Communist Socialists dedicated to the distribution of the wealth of America to the Third World through the subterfuges of Global Warming, and the implementation of the surrender of our sovereignty to a World Government."

" ... the President is on a sociopathic odyssey of destruction of our capitalistic economic structure and the extirpation of our basic moral foundations."

"... our President has endorsed the malignancy of the Court, and has promised to continue its legacy."

In response, I say, these are all lies, designed to prove that a black man is not qualified to be President because of his sub-human negroid qualities. This phoney guy, TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1, is a racist who hates people who are not white. Even more, this guy, TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1, is a Republican and seeks to entwine his Republicanism with his Medeival Catholic thought, suggesting that God and Jesus Christ, themsevles, are Registered Republicans, and that Democrats are therefore, by definition, Godless agents of Satan. (That is the Medieval imagery that this guy, TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1, likes to use, isn't it?

And he goes on to say:

"... both the President and his wife have supported Partial Birth Abortion that sucks out the brains of a defenseless child being born. In addition, Obama has vowed to advance the lust and sodomy of Gay Marriage..."

He mischaracterizes the practice of medicine to save a mother's life, and expresses his deep-seated and brutal hatred for gay people, and his wish for their utter and complete extermination, his way of fixing God's obvious mistakes.

And if this guy, TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1, is a woman and not a man, then this GUY, TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ1, can say so, and stop implying that people are retarded for not being able to read HIS mind.

This an interesting law. I am not sure what its intended purpose is, but I am sure that it will have unintended consequences.

It will draw out all of the religious animosities among religious people.

If, for instance, there are 2 feuding neighbors and one of them utters an expletive, such as "Jesus Christ Hanging on the Cross," the other will simply register a complaint with the authorities that the neighbor has committed blasphemy.

I have no doubt that this is how the new law will be invoked, in almost every case, by self-righteous Christians against each other.

And I am sure there will be anti-Anglican blasphemy, and also blasephemy against Evangelical proselytisers, and counter anti-Catholic blasphmy among Evangelicals.

And this does not even take into account the hyper-sensitivty of Islamic people, in their ever-vigilant watch for anti-Islamic blasphemy.

This law will either be invoked harshly against many people for going about their daily habits of expressing religious intolerance towards each other, or it will languish in unenforced obscurity.

Blasphemy? Art!

http://americansfortruth.com/news/sodom-gomorrah-would-blush-homosexual-sadists-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off-in-poster-for-folsom-street-fair.html

Blasphemy is a sin or, in Buddhist lingo, a bad cause but it is only a crime if a government makes it so.

Atheism is the ultimate blasphemy.

Is blasphemy a crime?

No.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.