johnnyrodgers20

And how do you know what Jesus would do? Most thought at the time that he would help the pharisees and was preaching in the temples. Little did they know he would denounce them the most. Most people were shocked when he ate with prostitues and tax collectors. Who knows what Jesus would do in this situation, let alone someone who does not believe in him. You love to bring him into a discussion when it suites you, don't you. I know because I have read the Bible, extensively. I suggest you do the same. Jesus would not go to some third-party meeting and speak in favor of exclusionary laws. Jesus would sit down with LGBT and speak directly to them. He would break bread with them, he would love them, and he would call them his brothers and sisters. I have read the bible and I believe in Jesus as the Son of God can you claim the same. And you should ask your friend Carly how well saying what you think another person would say or do would work in court. I believe he would do that but he would also say go and sin no more like he did with the prostitutes, correct? I would not have a problem with your statement had it been worded I believe but to say you know is incorrect. No one can know what exactly Jesus would do on a subject like this.

He did not as that was not torture. And if BO isn't guilty of A & A then he is guilty of acessory after the fact. That is if there was a crime by Cheney. BO could be guilty of was crimes like A &A on the drone issue He knew bombs were killing innocent civilians The bombs killed innocent civilians He ordered the bombs to be dropped on innocent civilians.

What history witnessed with the crusades was not Christianity. I will not argue theologies or doctrine as to what was the cause, but rest assured it was not Christianity. But the people on the crusade said it was, and many of the crusades were ordered by the pope at the time. So by definition it was Christianity, regardless of what some modern people want to think and rewrite history. And the crusades are hardly the only case in which Christians have been guilty of hate, violence or other sorts of evil in the name of god. We can go through some major points over the last several hundred years if you really like. That depends. If I wear OU shirts, cheer when OU scores a TD and beats Nebraska, yet call myself a Husker fan, would you really believe I'm a Husker fan? In much the same way, a religion whose VAST majority of teachings focus on peace, understanding, love for your neighbor, etc, being used as an excuse for the Crusades doesn't mean that religion is to blame. MAN is to blame. I said much the same thing in this debate when I identified as a Christian. If I walk up to you and punch you in the jaw and say, "I did this in the name of lo country," are you going to be pissed at lo country, or are you going to be pissed at knapplc? I sure as heck hope you'd hold me accountable - lo doesn't advocate punching people for no good reason. Christianity can't be held responsible for the wrongs committed in its name any more than America can be held responsible for the mass murder inflicted in Afghanistan a month ago by one of our servicemen. It's anathema to us - we abhor such crimes, and have laws against them. It is unfair for Afghanis to blame all of us for the wrongs of one of us. But they will, just like Christians will be blamed - wrongly - for the Crusades, or for the Inquisition, or whatever other evil was done in the name of their god. Islam doesn't condone flying planes full of innocent victims into buildings. Christianity doesn't condone rounding up Muslims and gunning them down into ditches. Let's be better than to fall into the trap of believing the worst of our neighbor because someone put a label on behavior THEY should own. And tangentially, Atheists/Agnostics cannot help but blame MANKIND for any wrong, perpetuated by any man, anywhere. All religions are an invention of Man. You cannot blame the pacifist Christian or Muslim for the wrongs of all men. All men are to blame for "wrongs." We are the ones - we, the humans - who come up with this stuff. What does it matter what label we put on it? The difference is what one man does and what a very large group does reflect differently. The crusades were blessed by the popes across about two hundred years. And at the time (around 1100 AD) there were no denominations, so yeah, if the leader of your religion says its how things are... When one person behaves badly, it reflects on the man. When hundreds, thousands or millions of members of a group behave a certain way, you better believe that is a part of that group's belief system. Silent members of a group who do nothing while watching others in the group preform acts against the way they think it should be, are just as guilty. Like the quote "All that is required for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing." The same works for Islam. When you have various clerics calling for killing people, it has the same effect. Weather or not you want to say Christianity preaches hate, many, many priests and preachers do. I've seen it first hand. And this is even without all the thinly veiled threats that are listed in the bible. Hell, there is a bill board off highway 75 sb from I80 that says ""You can run but you can't hide from Me" -God" Sounds like a threat to me. Just about ever religion(Buddhists get a pass here, and I don't know enough about Shinto) over the last two thousand years or so acts exactly the same when they are the dominant power in a region. Non-believers are persecuted, discriminated against, or even killed. Christian ruled lands from the middle ages to the early settlers in North America were tyrannical about enforcing religious dogma. The Middle East still is like this is many to most countries. Its a sad truth of the monotheistic religions. So you are saying all the non violent muslim who say they want peace are responsible for 9/11?

And that's the rub. If he speaks against the Lincoln ordnance he drags the UNL name through the mud again. Now that this story has gone national he can't show up and claim to be "just Ron Brown, Citizen." I have no problem with Ron Brown thinking what he thinks. But now that he's put himself out there as "Ron Brown of One Memorial Drive" he cannot continue to protest as he sees fit without disassociating himself from UNL first. I hope Coach Brown has a WWJD bracelet. Because Jesus would not speak at this city council meeting against gays. And how do you know what Jesus would do? Most thought at the time that he would help the pharisees and was preaching in the temples. Little did they know he would denounce them the most. Most people were shocked when he ate with prostitues and tax collectors. Who knows what Jesus would do in this situation, let alone someone who does not believe in him. You love to bring him into a discussion when it suites you, don't you.

So atheism is a 'faith system' because some atheists have an agenda? LOL get clue, you are not very funny. I hope you don't make living with comedy. thanks fro the useless post. chuckleshuffle

OK prove all three about Cheney and torture? No problem! 1. Cheney knew about the torturing of captives. 2. The torturing of captives did occur. 3. Cheney encouraged Bush and the CIA to use this type of interrogation. (And they did so.) You don't know #3 happened, he encouraged them? Where is this type of informatiom available?

FIFY Are there unicorn faiths that have their images all over the world? If so I am sure there would be unicorn atheists fighting against the images!! Yes, there are. Unicorn images most likely rival only rainbows and Christian Icons/Ikons as popular images. Unicorn images doesn't mean a following you should know that.

Sure. Aiding and abetting torture. (FYE, here is where we could prosecute for aiding and abetting.) You'd be shocked at how few criminals get orders signed by Congress before committing their crimes or encouraging others to do so. Shocked. you don't get it do you? Cheney is second in command like Biden, what does Biden really do? No. You don't get it. You don't have to be at the top to be prosecuted for aiding and abetting. He encouraged Bush to use torture. Therefore, aiding and abetting torture. It's simple. nO that is not what you said, how does #3 apply to Cheney?

(1) guilty knowledge on the part of the accused; (2) the commission of an offense by someone; and (3) the defendant assisted or participated in the commission of the offense Apply away, Johnny. (I wish someone would do my research for me. Any volunteers?) Well, no1 surely fits, I mean you know he is guilty someone has smart as the annoited one should know that. Johnny, I'm trying to make this easy for you. You have to prove all 3. Not just number 1. I suppose this is what my wife feels like when she tries to explain descending necrotizing mediastinitis to me. OK prove all three about Cheney and torture?

Sure. Aiding and abetting torture. (FYE, here is where we could prosecute for aiding and abetting.) You'd be shocked at how few criminals get orders signed by Congress before committing their crimes or encouraging others to do so. Shocked. you don't get it do you? Cheney is second in command like Biden, what does Biden really do?

Sure. Aiding and abetting torture. (FYE, here is where we could prosecute for aiding and abetting.) You'd be shocked at how few criminals get orders signed by Congress before committing their crimes or encouraging others to do so. Shocked. smoke and morrors, please name his crime, you have been dragging this out long enough. You have been stalling long enough to finally figure out something or do you have nothing as I thought. aiding and abetting torture? Seriously explain that one to me, Cheney is the one who authroized that or Bush. And even if Cheney authroized that could he have done it without Bush's consent?

(1) guilty knowledge on the part of the accused; (2) the commission of an offense by someone; and (3) the defendant assisted or participated in the commission of the offense Apply away, Johnny. (I wish someone would do my research for me. Any volunteers?) Well, no1 surely fits, I mean you know he is guilty someone has smart as the annoited one should know that. You still haven't told me what Cheny is accused of so I can't say if the defendant participated. So you are going to have to do some more work here, very sloppy Carly. What are you accusing Cheney of, if he is a war criminal but what are your charges, you know you have to tell people that one if you want him prosecuted, right?

FIFY Are there unicorn faiths that have their images all over the world? If so I am sure there would be unicorn atheists fighting against the images!!

Oh goodness. War criminal, sure. Good VP? No. Carly, name me one policy that VP CHENEY made that makes him a war criminal. What did he get signed by congress or one order he authorized that was the definiton of a war criminal?

It's apparent that you don't know what aiding and abetting means. It's equally apparent that you don't know the difference between intentional and unintentional actions. Oh, well. C'est la vie. Live is better than dead I know that, so you can have your unintentional dead family member but I will take an intentional so called torture and see my family member alive. So you are saying if someone holds up a bank and you hide him out and never turn him over to the authroties that is not aiding and abetting?

Do they have proof there isn't a God?

Oh goodness. War criminal, sure. Good VP? No. Yeah right the far left hyperbole is out in force. If he is a war criminal then oBUMa is guilty of aiding and abetting and should be held accountable also for not prosecuting him. oBUMa is a war criminal for all the drone killings and all the innocent women and children he has killed with those drones ( can you say collateral damage). RE: the bold. How so? Lack of prosecution doesn't = aiding and abetting. I'm sure that you knew that. Apparently intentionally torturing prisoners is < or = to collateral damage. Is he not harboring him from the world and not giving him to the UN for prosecution, what do you call that? Last I checked those so called tortured prisoners lived. I guess you would rather have your loved one become collateral damage than tortured and live, smart thinking guy!! It proves either oBUMa doesn't have any evidence or is helping Cheney you only have two options Carly!!

Oh goodness. War criminal, sure. Good VP? No. Yeah right the far left hyperbole is out in force. If he is a war criminal then oBUMa is guilty of aiding and abetting and should be held accountable also for not prosecuting him. oBUMa is a war criminal for all the drone killings and all the innocent women and children he has killed with those drones ( can you say collateral damage).

I have not decided whether or not I will buy a new computer. Does that mean I've made a decision? But, I don't understand what that had to do with what I said earlier anyway. I am not debating your earlier statements just your assertion that atheists do not choose to follow a faith system. Explain how not believing in something is a faith system. They make a conscious effort to get rid of all religious beliefs of other people. They live a life without faith, that takes conviction in the fact there isn't a God and live by that tennat. If someone blindly walks through life and never contemplates the existance of God I would say they have never made a choice and agree with you but many atheists are activists and aggressively push their atheist agenda.

http://andrewsulliva...n-freakout.html oBUMa did the right thing and got UBL that is a feather in his cap for sure. Get over it now, that isn't going to straighten out our economy last time I checked. And whoever wrote that article is the incompetent one, Dick Cheney was a good VP. And VPs don't make policy anyway just ask Biden how much he has done!!

I have not decided whether or not I will buy a new computer. Does that mean I've made a decision? But, I don't understand what that had to do with what I said earlier anyway. I am not debating your earlier statements just your assertion that atheists do not choose to follow a faith system.

I have not decided whether or not I will buy a new computer. Does that mean I've made a decision? But, I don't understand what that had to do with what I said earlier anyway. That depends! If you say I want to but a computer that is on sale but can I afford it you only have a short time to decide when the sale is over obvioulsy you chose not to buy it because if you can't afford it while it was on sale you definitely can't afford it after the sale. Or a better scenario would be should you take a job offer to move to another city. if you never make a decision did you move or go to that city, no, you chose to stay home.

I hope you just mean it's not worth it on this message board. Because I tend to actually believe inalienable rights of human beings in this country...IS worth arguing for. Especially when the predominant reason why a group of people in our society are not allowed to have the same rights as everyone else...is because a single, but majorly influential, religious group in our country says their deity finds those people sinful. If we're going to start making laws based on sins in the Bible...then get out the pad and paper, because this is going to be a long night! And not to side the topic...but atheism is not a faith system Not to decide is to decide!! No......it's not. Ah............yes it is!!

Was a white what?!?

It also takes a level of courage and strength though, does it not? Unfortunately I have gotten a little too close for comfort to that point in my life, and I think the only thing holding me back was a cowardice that made me too fearful to actually commit to it. To a point yes, but for my dollar, it takes more strength and conviction to carry on. If you're committing suicide, you're taking the easy way out and not exhibiting the testicular fortitude you need to survive. +1