Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck.

This is really depressing.

(A) As a citizen, which Republicant would be the least horrible?

(B) As a Democrat, which Republicant makes the opponent in the general election?

A month ago, one might argue Giuliani or McCain for (A). Now I think it's just McCain.

For (B), I go back and forth between Captain Special Underpants and Creation Science Fuckabee.

Should we be good citizens and hope for (A), or partisans and look for (B)?

Hell, I think I would vote for him just to find out how he would gather all the homos and gas us out of existance.

So what is with "God's word"? It is whatever these idiots say it is, just like W does not care about that old worn-out piece of paper called the Constitution.

Bush hasn't had to touch it, he just ignores the parts he doesn't like (1st amendment, 4th, 2nd (his DOJ just sided with D.C. on Heller Friday)).

Hillary will ignore it, Obama, Romney, etc.

Time to stock up on miniballs again.

keep talking crazy, fuckabee.

but now that he is thin, he can go after The "rubenesque" vote which is huge in this country and Huck can shame them for the gluttony thing (Romans 12:9-13) once he gets elected.

im telling u, dan better start being nice to the community of size.

Dominionism describes, in several distinct ways, a tendency among some conservative politically-active Christians to seek influence or control over secular civil government through political action — aiming either at a nation governed by Christians or a nation governed by a conservative Christian understanding of biblical law.

Read more at:

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

I still don't get how the fundies think that they know better than the founding fathers what the Constitution is supposed to be. I'll donate to the minie ball cause if it means that's what they have to dodge in order to get the R nomination.

I wish I could get the actual quote, but since I'm not a reporter, I just grabbed some more deep dish pizza.

I've heard dozens of people make the same case about the shellfish to homos ratio of sin, maybe more than that. But I have never heard of the blanket argument before. Why aren't born againers making this argument more known?

in the bible, there are no seven deadly sins.

All of which these stupid snake-handlers ignore, as they please.

well, 90% of all christians believe in some sort of dispensational view... that the laws of the old testament no longer apply (because of what the new testament says). this is not hypocritical, though people often think it is.

modern christians did not choose which laws to obey and which to ignore. the ones they adhere to are those that are mentioned in the new testament (including one reference to homosexuality). for instance, many christians do not keep the sabbath, and will not execute their children for being disrespectful.

it is freaky to think that huckabee actually wants to change the constitution to mirror biblical laws. what is hypocritical here, is that the whole point of the new testament was to release people from the laws. christians who make people -- especially people who don't believe in jesus -- follow their laws are acting in a way that is counter to the gospel they claim to believe.

NIV, Acts 10:9-16

9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13 Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."

14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

Um, because it really isn't relevant to them? It doesn't matter as long as they can cherry-pick quotes that give them permission to hate gays and women. Why would you invoke logic when you are discussing the superstitious? As if their thinking had anything to do with logic!

At this point, the only response should be, "Show me where it says that in the Bible."

I've had many a bible thumper use this "Christ dies for our sins, so Leviticus doesn't count" crap many times when it deals with their lives; yet nowhere that I know of does it lay that out explicitly. It stands to reason that since the only mention of homosexuality was presented DURING Christ's life, that rule would also be nullified... but in the end it's all just rationalizing a storybook.

1 Cor 6:9-11

9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Looks like teh gheys pass, and people who mix fabric, eat shellfish, trim the corners of their beards, etc. are still damned for all eternity.

I thought that sounded a little anachronistic. I looked up several on-line editions of the King James Bible and that verse says nothing about homosexuals. It says:

(I Cor 6:9) Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

So as long as you're butch, you're alright by god!

seems to me the gays are uncommonly clean now.

instead, just stick with, religious laws should not be imposed on a secular population. clear and simple.

when you start to say that biblical laws contradict themselves, or telling believers how to interpret their bible, you will not gain any traction with them.

Huckabee and Multiple-Choice Mitt would be a dream candidacy for the Dems. They should be easier to beat than Dole was.

And if Muddle America swallows their Xtian Taliban nonsense... well, we're lost...

@ 23 and 25: Yellow lines are also lava proof, you despicable racists.

Repeat to self: Why should anyone (other than a devout Christian) care about interpreting the bible? We shouldn't!

the bible is a collection of fairy tales adapted from earlier polytheistic religions. who gives a flying crap what it says?

i showed a piece at ouch my eye gallery. and here's the breakdown
show - 9.11.06
asking for artwork back - 8.7.07
shit. almost a year. stopping by didn't help get it back either.

then i was sent a nice email with a nice video and some nice words.

then i went to the space and mailed again on 12.17.07

see what i'm getting at.
i am leaving town. To Day. hoooray. south and sun

i asked again for my work or for the check for its purchase.

i know some peoples in the gallery world. maybe this happens all the time...? doubt it. although i did hear that a funny as hell piece about the oval office was stolen from a gallery in town a couple of years back.

anyway, getting back on track here.
name of the show was 'cui bono' or 'who benefits'
ironisch huh?

just a heads up

you have everything you need.

peace
iris