First, nice paraphrasing what you say are gods perfect words. He would be pissed at you fudging them to protect Donny…if he existed. You fucked up big time. These are the commandments dummy….

#1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

#2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

#3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

#4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (That day was Saturday.)

#5. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

#6. Thou shalt not kill.

#7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

#8. Thou shalt not steal.

#9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

#10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Now that he’s president and has murdered thousands, which of these has Trump not broken repeatedly?

1. He has always put himself before any god.
2. He made a gold idol of himself and displayed it for you to worship.
3. He has only ever misused the name of god. He wouldn’t know how to use it in any way besides as a sword or shield.
4. He fucks porn stars on the sabbath, and cheats at golf, and business…he’s never kept anything holy in his life, especially the sabbath.
5. He’s said some terrible things about his immigrant parents and by not fighting the charges but paying millions in fines has admitted they were racist bastards.
6. He killed hundreds as collateral damage from his intended targets for murder.
7. Adultery….he’s never been with any woman he didn’t cheat on, especially all those immigrants he married.
8. Theft…Convicted repeatedly of theft by fraud to the tune of hundreds of millions.
9. Has never given honest testimony or statements in his life, he’s incapable of honesty.
10. He covets everything he sees, especially his friend’s wives that he brags about trying to sleep with and their land he tries to steal.

What was your point? That rapist DJT is really the anti-Christ? 😂

Side note, his home in Florida is seeing a number of biblical plagues…disease like malaria and leprocy are becoming rampant (thanks to anti science health policies), the seas are boiling (over 101 degrees), and a plague of semi-aquatic reptiles are decimating wildlife (pythons), rivers are turning red (https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/florida-creek-red-blood), livestock pestilence (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7140416/mad-cow-disease-florida-us-outbreak-usda/)…just need darkness (wait for the next hurricane). Sounds like any first born children should probably leave the state immediately! 😂

I agree with you here that much has been done in the name of God that was actually immoral, but that is kind of my point; human beings are adrift in a sea of moral relativism. You could literally invent any reason to do what you want to do, and without any objective standard, how could anyone say what you're doing is wrong?

@ChaosEngine

i do not see anyone here defending anything.

now maybe we can view stephen's commentary "dismissive and belittling" as @entr0py pointed out,but i think the deeper issue was prefaced quite succinctly by stephen in his characterization of american,and western societies,as being "infantilized".

where words have become the final bastion of totality in communication and are judged strictly on a word by word basis.so much so that some on the left have been pushing harder and harder to have certain words removed from our lexicon,because they represent negative thoughts/feelings/actions or they may represent a trauma,or horrific violent memory for some people.

but this is the wrong approach.
excising words will not erase those feelings/thoughts/emotions.this will just force people to come up or use different terminology to express those feelings/thoughts.actions that once had words to at least to attempt to express those horrors and/or offenses.

which will just equate to a whole new slew of verbiage being found offensive and in dire need of being castrated from our collective vocabulary.

yet the left (extreme left i grant) appears hell bent on not only attempting to control speech but to also judge those who DO use speech that they find offensive.

this is censorship with prejudice and to claim otherwise is the lie.

just look at your first comment.
you "used" to like stephen fry's opinion,until he became callous and dismissive with what?

words.

but do you REALLY think his attitude and compassion towards those who have suffered emotional trauma is truly dismissive?

well..i do not think so.i have spoken to you enough times to have a modicum of understandings in regards to you,as a person,that you have far more depth of character.

yet it is the WORDS that have hung you up.

look man,words are inert.they are things that are only given life,meaning and context when we add our own subjectivity to them.

words are inadequate.they will ALWAYS be inadequate.
which is why we admire and praise those of us who have a command of words that can reach into our own understandings and extract meaning in a way that blossoms like a spring flower and can create worlds in which we can play,and even share with other people.

i am intimately aware of this deficiency.i do not have an economy of words,and only on rare occasions can i relay,convey and express with ANY form of reductionism.

i struggle to express not only my opinion,but the intent,humanity and compassion of my opinion.

if the extreme left gets their way,the tools we have to express ourselves becomes lesser.

and in the process,WE become lesser.because the tools for dissent,debate,discussion and even..ironically..to expose the more venal and bigoted of our society,will have been reduced to words that offend nobody.

there is danger here,and no good will come from it.no matter if the intent sounds just and the goal compassionate.

freedom of speech is the right to speak freely.
to espouse our opinions,philosophy and yes,our bigotry and prejudice,with legal immunity,but NOT social impunity.

so while we have a right to free speech.
we do not have a right to not be offended,and maybe we need to be offended sometimes.to shake us from our own self-induced apathy and our adoration of digital hallucinations.

so when the westboro baptist church says the most hateful,vitriolic and disgusting admonishments,all in the name of god.
we can be offended by them,and then ridicule them relentlessly.

would stripping words from the english language prevent this group from espousing their own brand of hate?

of course not.they would just find new words.

so what do we do then?
make words illegal?
criminally libel?

so don't judge mr fry too harshly.
he is just pointing to the dangers of controlling speech and the new trend of the perpetually offended.

the extreme right attempts to control morality,and there is serious danger in that practice.
the extreme left attempts to control how we communicate,and hence how we interact,and there is great danger in that as well.

The Radicalized Christian Terrorist illegally occupying a federal wildlife refuge

Fixed that for the Guardian... perhaps they can throw in "allegedly" before the word "illegally" if they wanted to play it overly safe, but let's stop mistreating the word militiamen as this is not what they are. They are using the threat of armed violence to achieve a political goal. That is terrorism. They say they are doing it in the name of God. That makes it Radicalized Christian terrorism.

These guys said they would leave if asked by the local community, they were asked, they've been asked by the tribe, the community, their church, and everyone else. Yet they are still there... They were prepared for the long haul... though apparently they needed to ask for essential supplies, so perhaps they are confused on what being "prepared for the long haul" means.

i'm putting money on "my name is god" is richard james with a windowlicker mask.

I'm extremely sympathetic to anyone who upon rejecting Christianity was rejected by their family or community. My heart goes out to anyone in that situation. It's wrong and it's extremely hurtful and its a violation against everything Jesus taught. I too am sick to my core in regards to the ugliness which has been done in the name of God.

What's wrong however is turning that into an indictment against Jesus, who taught people to do the exact opposite. What I should have said is this..that I am sure there are many atheists here who were raised in dead religion and whose parents never taught them how to have a personal relationship with Christ. That's on their parents because that was their entire job. I don't blame people for walking away from that because it is pointless. If there isn't a real God you can be in relationship with then why bother? Even Paul said that:

1Co 15:16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised.

1Co 15:17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

1Co 15:18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.

1Co 15:19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

He said that if Christ is not raised we are of all people most to be pitied, and he is right. I don't blame people for seeing it that way because I agree with Paul.

However, there is the other side of the coin where a lot of these atheists did know the Lord, and they turned away from Him because of sin. They went out into the world and the world got ahold of them and they turned their back on God. God has given some people some extraordinary evidence, from visitations from angels to out of body experience yet they still deny Him because they prefer to have their personal autonomy. Sin is extremely deceitful and they forget all of the things God has shown them to justify their rejection of Christ.

It's a complex issue in some cases and I am sorry for being obtuse. If you're one of those you described I am sure you have your reasons for believing what you do. What I can tell you is that Jesus never wronged you and He still loves you as much as He did then. He has been knocking at your door your entire life but it's up to you to answer it.

I think part of it must have been cut off. Christians are the most anti-pro-environmental people around, they are the ones most defending the giant corporations fight against the science of climate change. Fox News and the Republican party say it is junk, so they say it is all junk. Which I find odd for the same reason Louis CK notes in the video, if He was real and came back, He'd be upset that they didn't take better care of the Earth. They seemed to have forgotten how good stewardship works... it wouldn't matter if climate change science was BS, taking better care of the environment would be the right thing to do from a Biblical perspective, yet many if not most don't care. I've been told, "It doesn't matter anyhow as Jesus is coming again soon"... as if that is reason enough not to be a good steward of what He apparently gave them to watch over... It just boggles my mind how far disconnected from any sort of logical thought train that the vast majority of them seem to be on... and I don't mean where it contradicts the Bible, but where logic would follow the Bible and yet is still ignored as the vast right wing media machine tells them to...

I would think that if the Bible says to be a good steward of the Earth and the right wing media machine and Republican party says profits matter more, then I'd question the Republican party and right wing media machine. I would think that if Jesus said the rich won't inherit the kingdom of God, that we were to take care of the sick and the poor and needy, and the Republican party and right wing media machine said, no, we need to let the rich keep more of the money they made by not paying their workers a living wage and punish those working for them by taking away benefits that help them survive, then I would question that message... oh wait, I did. Which is why I changed from a Republican to a Libertarian (defending Fox News and bashing evolution and the whole bit) and eventually to the Liberal I am today. Everything the right wing folks do in the so called name of God is in contradiction to the teachings of the Bible... save perhaps abortion, the solution of which isn't laws restricting it, but affordable health care and education, two things they are against providing...

rough Youtube translation:
"name of God the Merciful .. Just a short film .. filming and directed: (Meso - photo) .. Assistant director: (ar5meds) CAM (Canon - 7D) .. Lenses used [17.50] .. [70-200] .. [10-20] all thanks to the staff .. + (Alastaaaz) watch the fun"

sorry man.the distinction argument is bullshit as well.
that somehow one evil is less evil than the other.

one of the problems i have with the distinction argument is that it attempts to discern...or worse..rationalize.. the intent.
that when the terrorists kill,maim and torture it is for nefarious and evil reasons but when WE do it,the cause is just and noble and that any collateral damage is purely a misjudgement or a mistake.

this is the epitome of hypocrisy.

i am in no way defending the horrors perpetrated upon innocent civilians in the name of god by the taliban.i am,however,pointing out that what we do in the name of (fill in whatever propagandist literature you wish) is just as heinous and evil.

which brings me back to my main point:governments lie.

a little over 30 years ago news used to be not-for profit but rather a badge of honor and integrity.journalists and newsrooms prided themselves on actually reporting and while there were still problems,america had a fourth estate that (for the most part) still reported actual news.

where we find ourselves today is corporate opinion news that (since the late 70's) is FOR-profit).gone are the days of actual news and what is placed in its stead is entertainment dressed up like a dolled-up whore which the zombified american public has been hypnotized to believe is "news" when in actuality it is just entertainment.opinion generated conflict in order to create a dramatic soap opera where americans can enjoy their mac-n-cheese on tv trays and nod their heads in drooling supplication to their corporate (insert name here) god.

how do you control a population of supposed "free society"?
you cant have the midnight knock.
nor can you black bag every dissenting voice.
no no...
you control how they think.
you control their opinion.

let us consider a few points:
1.the media is the NUMBER ONE lobbyist.
not big oil.
not big pharma.
but the media.
2.with almost 3000 media outlets in the USA yet only FIVE owners.(thank you cuntface michael powell!)
that is one mighty powerful megaphone to influence the opinions of a population.
and its works....brilliantly.just look at some of the comments here.

@chingalera has pointed this out in his usual colorful manner and is spot on.

independent news media is the only way to go if you are looking for actual journalism.

@shinyblurry do not get caught in the trap my friend.do not rely on corporate "news" to enlighten you concerning the situation in the middle east nor the origins of the anymosity towards america.truth does not suit their purposes in controlling your opinion.
might i recommend this most excellent documentary:
http://videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-1

and @quantumushroom i will let chomsky address your false equivalency argument:

Soo... science just proved the theory behind the short story, The Nine Billion Names of God by Arthur C Clarke

@spoco2

You THINK you know the truth of there even being a god, and you believe you know who this god is. But these are THOUGHTS and are not backed up by ANYTHING whatsoever. 2+2 = 4 is backed up by being able to SHOW it... you can take 2 beads, take another 2 beads, count them, and have 4 beads.

You cannot point at ANYTHING and say 'See, there's my proof that there is a god, he is the one in the bible, and that is true'.

If you prayed to Jesus Christ and sincerely admitted that you are a sinner, asked for His forgiveness and asked Him to come into your life as Lord and Savior, you would come to know there is a God. It is something which can be empirically verified.

And I said that it was fine for you to believe that there was one true god. Go right ahead and believe that you have found that 'truth'. It's your forcing of YOUR belief in this on others, this belief that cannot be shown to be true in any way. This belief of yours that a man who sleeps with another man is damned to hell forever and so should be feared and scorned is horrible.

If it's fine to believe that Jesus is God incarnate, then it is also fine for me to obey His commands, one of which is to preach the gospel. This is a fundamental right that every american has according to the first ammendment. Why should I be censored? You feel free to say what I believe is not correct. Why shouldn't you be censored?

A man who tells a lie, steals something, blasphemes the name of God, or looks at a woman with lust is on his way to hell. One sin isn't necessarily worse than any other sin; the wages of sin is death, and all have sinned. So the man who lies is just as guilty as the man who sleeps with another man. God cares so much about the well being of His Universe that He punishes all sin with eternity in hell. He cares so much about us that He gave His only Son to take our place in punishment, so we could be forgiven and have eternal life. Those who reject His mercy will have to face His justice.

My beliefs, those of science and observable phenomenon, do not say anything about how people choose to live their lives. My morals state that anyone is free to be with whoever they want to. They can live however they want, including believing in an invisible man in the sky with a long, flowing beard, as long as that way of living doesn't try to do harm to others.

You are doing harm to others. Mumford and Sons are not.

Many of your views may hide behind apron of true science, but I can guaranatee you that the presuppositions of your worldview are not based on empirical testing. As far as who is doing harm, if you saw someone in a burning building, would you not stop to try and rescue them? At least one atheist understands this:

http://videosift.com/video/Penn-Jillette-gets-a-Bible

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Then, in that same vein - could you make the case that religion is not necessarily the cause of atrocities either. Correlation is not causation. Or in other words - Nutty sociopaths may be religious - but it's not why they commit atrocities - just a side effect.

>> ^Fletch:

^ Not completely true, and I would argue that the cult of personality surrounding Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Mussolini, et al, is at the very root of religion. They may or may not have been atheists, but they were definitely using religion of a sort to gain and keep power. Dogma is dogma, and blind faith in dogma or a leader IS religion, whether that faith is whipped up through nationalist rhetoric or pious devotion to a deity. "Christian" is just a different flavor on the same banana split.
Hirohito was viewed as a living god. Hitler killed Jews because he felt it was god's will. This whole "atheism was responsible for the Holocaust" bullshit is just that... tired bullshit. It's the reactionary mantra and selective parsing of history by blissfully-ignorant religious zealots who can't compute, or, just refuse to accept the utter devastation religion has wreaked on the human species IN THE NAME OF GOD.
Lack of belief is not a belief, and connecting atheism to 20th century atrocities is several logical fallacies all rolled into one dumb assertion. Believing it and saying it over and over doesn't make it true, and just because some murderous bastard was an atheist doesn't mean some nutter's concept of atheism was the cause.
>> ^dag:
^Shiny makes a good point - Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot - the biggest baddies of the 20th, we're all atheists. Might it be that extremist ideologies of any kind are the problem?

^ Not completely true, and I would argue that the cult of personality surrounding Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Mussolini, et al, is at the very root of religion. They may or may not have been atheists, but they were definitely using religion of a sort to gain and keep power. Dogma is dogma, and blind faith in dogma or a leader IS religion, whether that faith is whipped up through nationalist rhetoric or pious devotion to a deity. "Christian" is just a different flavor on the same banana split.

Hirohito was viewed as a living god. Hitler killed Jews because he felt it was god's will. This whole "atheism was responsible for the Holocaust" bullshit is just that... tired bullshit. It's the reactionary mantra and selective parsing of history by blissfully-ignorant religious zealots who can't compute, or, just refuse to accept the utter devastation religion has wreaked on the human species IN THE NAME OF GOD.

Lack of belief is not a belief, and connecting atheism to 20th century atrocities is several logical fallacies all rolled into one dumb assertion. Believing it and saying it over and over doesn't make it true, and just because some murderous bastard was an atheist doesn't mean some nutter's concept of atheism was the cause.

>> ^dag:

^Shiny makes a good point - Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot - the biggest baddies of the 20th, we're all atheists. Might it be that extremist ideologies of any kind are the problem?