*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Lann.

How is this not in the *religion channel where it belongs?!

Adding video to channels (Religion) - requested by hpqp.

This had better get more upvotes than the original it parodies or I will have lost some faith in my Sift brothers and sisters.

>> ^Hive13:

This had better get more upvotes than the original it parodies or I will have lost some faith in my Sift brothers and sisters.
To be fair, the original is pretty damn funny, too.

3 cheers for godless heathens.

Everyone who voted for this video and (mockingly) for the other one is a hypocrite. Bashing Christians in the name of tolerance? As far as his claims go, this country was founded by Christians, and it has always been Christian. All of the wonderful freedoms that secular humanists enjoy today are only because of Christian principles. If you want to rip out the foundation you're going to sink the boat, and that's exactly what is happening today.

All the freedoms who enjoys? Who is free? You keep saying that everybody is free but we're far from it. The only other countries that we're more free than...are countries that are just slightly more religious than the US. That's right...the more religion, the less freedoms. Inverse relationship between religion and freedom. On the individual, on the community, in a country. Religion is ALWAYS a form of social control, it has never been used to "free" anybody.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Everyone who voted for this video and (mockingly) for the other one is a hypocrite. Bashing Christians in the name of tolerance? As far as his claims go, this country was founded by Christians, and it has always been Christian. All of the wonderful freedoms that secular humanists enjoy today are only because of Christian principles. If you want to rip out the foundation you're going to sink the boat, and that's exactly what is happening today.

Wasn't part of the reason for initial colonization of America (by Europeans) to escape religious prosecution persecution(edit: stupid me)? The thought that America has to be an entirely Christian nation is in direct opposition to the principles of freedom that the country makes its stance upon...

ahh christians. oh so special.

I don't think that's actually Rick Perry.

>> ^residue:

Wasn't part of the reason for initial colonization of America (by Europeans) to escape religious prosecution? The thought that America has to be an entirely Christian nation is in direct opposition to the principles of freedom that the country makes its stance upon...


I think that's not true. The puritans went to America to escape persecution of their particular brand of fundamentalist Christianity. In today's terms, the English got sick of these bible bashing morons, so they shipped off to become the American Christian far right.

They didn't want freedom from religious persecution; they wanted religious persecution - but crucially, their religious. Exactly what the Christian right want to do now.

All the freedoms who enjoys? Who is free? You keep saying that everybody is free but we're far from it. The only other countries that we're more free than...are countries that are just slightly more religious than the US. That's right...the more religion, the less freedoms. Inverse relationship between religion and freedom. On the individual, on the community, in a country. Religion is ALWAYS a form of social control, it has never been used to "free" anybody.

You don't think you're free in America? Let me guess..you take issue with Americas drug laws, right? And you're quite incorrect about the inverse relationship between freedom and religion. The least free countries today are atheistic states and totalitarian regimes. The freest countries in the world all have a rich Christian heritage, though not all of them necessarily honor that heritage. You're also talking about religion as if they're all the same, which they clearly aren't. The Christian religion has brought freedom and liberty where ever it has gone, whereas religions like Islam are oppressive and grind their people into the dirt. The catholic church used Christianity to control people, this is true, but they clearly weren't following anything Jesus taught. There is nothing oppressive about Christianity..it teaches us to regard everyone as equal, to love our neighbors as ourselves, to hate no one, and to minister to the poor and helpless. If everyone followed that we would have an ideal world.

>> ^rottenseed

I really shouldn't feed the troll (and I'm increasingly thinking shinyblurry is a clued up troll because it's getting harder and harder to believe that he thinks that he is making Christianity look good), but here we go. This is what the Christian right make of freedom - it's freedom to do what they want, to say what they want. Not other people.

When you try to apply freedom to something they don't want, no no no, that's not on. You can be free to be a homophobe, or whatever they call it - something about trying to save souls, by subjecting homosexuals to mental bullying (while claiming the physical bullying is completely different). But you're not free to be homosexual, because the Bible makes some vague comments about that being bad. The Bible also says some other stuff is bad and some weird stuff is fine, but it seems you're free to ignore some of that without being a massive, massive hypocrite.

This isn't the whole right wing. I respect Dr. Ron Paul; although I don't agree with his economic policies, he understands that freedom means other people might be free to do things that, gasp, he doesn't like. Also, this isn't a rant against what Christianity is supposed to be, or those Christians who follow that. It's a rant about the Christian right, the fundamentalist, hate filled bigots and the politicians that either fall into this group, or use this group to further their careers.

The Christian Right is neither Christian, nor right.

>> ^Quboid:


The Christian Right is neither Christian, nor right.


Brilliant.

>> ^shinyblurry:
The Christian religion has brought freedom and liberty where ever it has gone...<snip> The catholic church used Christianity to control people, this is true, but they clearly weren't following anything Jesus taught.


What? So there is some secret sect of Christianity that is doing it right were others are wrong.. I see now. Thank goodness we have your interpretation to sort us out.

>> ^Hanover_Phist:

>> ^Quboid:

The Christian Right is neither Christian, nor right.

Brilliant.



Thanks. That's definitely not original, but very apt. I did a search to see who said it but there's many variations and I've no idea who originally said that.

......This isn't the whole right wing. I respect Dr. Ron Paul; although I don't agree with his economic policies, he understands that freedom means other people might be free to do things that, gasp, he doesn't like. Also, this isn't a rant against what Christianity is supposed to be, or those Christians who follow that. It's a rant about the Christian right, the fundamentalist, hate filled bigots and the politicians that either fall into this group, or use this group to further their careers........

I'm not a republican, and I don't really care for the politics of the republican party. I agree with some of their positions, but mostly their Christianity is something that is tacked on to pander to us.. Now. if you're arguing that the Christian right largely run by a bunch of hypocrites, I agree with you. If you want to say anyone who speaks out against homosexuality is a bigot, I disagree with you. We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment. You and your ilk feel free to bash Christians all the time, so you don't really have much to say about tolerance.

>> ^Quboid

>> ^shinyblurry:
If you want to say anyone who speaks out against homosexuality is a bigot, I disagree with you. We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment. You and your ilk feel free to bash Christians all the time, so you don't really have much to say about tolerance.
>> ^Quboid


You're also commanded by God to impregnate your widowed sister in law and allowed by God to sell your daughter into slavery. You're banned by God from touching menstruating women. You're not allowed to work on a Sunday and those who do must be put to death - I presume you kill firemen and doctors? Don't tell me that us politically correct people have stopped following these commands?

No no, I don't bash Christians. My mother is a Christian and I love her. I am intolerant of intolerance. I am intolerant of those who claim to be saving souls, yet who bully young men into committing suicide - and what does your Bible say about that? You're not saving souls, you're damning them.

You can be Christian all you want, but if you have a problem with homosexuality, then you don't engage in homosexual acts.

Oh, and stop bleating about American being founded with Christian ideals. Freedom of religion is in your constitution.

>> ^shinyblurry:
If you want to say anyone who speaks out against homosexuality is a bigot, I disagree with you. We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment. You and your ilk feel free to bash Christians all the time, so you don't really have much to say about tolerance.

We are not bashing your Christianity, we're rightfully bashing your bigotry, intolerance and hatred.

Well that's just the puritans. There were also a whole bunch of other religious factions (quakers, protestants, etc.) really just looking for "space" to practice their own faith in private and America provided the vast amount of space needed (except for some pesky natives...)

>> ^Quboid:

>> ^residue:
Wasn't part of the reason for initial colonization of America (by Europeans) to escape religious prosecution? The thought that America has to be an entirely Christian nation is in direct opposition to the principles of freedom that the country makes its stance upon...

I think that's not true. The puritans went to America to escape persecution of their particular brand of fundamentalist Christianity. In today's terms, the English got sick of these bible bashing morons, so they shipped off to become the American Christian far right.
They didn't want freedom from religious persecution; they wanted religious persecution - but crucially, their religious. Exactly what the Christian right want to do now.

It's refreshing to see someone else around here that can recognize that it isn't specifically religion to blame but rather the people that hide behind religion as an excuse to be assholes. There isn't anything inherently wrong with being a christian or the christian religion, the problem arises when people use religion of any kind as a pedestal and twist it how they see fit to push their agendas.


>> ^Quboid:

I really shouldn't feed the troll (and I'm increasingly thinking shinyblurry is a clued up troll because it's getting harder and harder to believe that he thinks that he is making Christianity look good), but here we go. This is what the Christian right make of freedom - it's freedom to do what they want, to say what they want. Not other people.
When you try to apply freedom to something they don't want, no no no, that's not on. You can be free to be a homophobe, or whatever they call it - something about trying to save souls, by subjecting homosexuals to mental bullying (while claiming the physical bullying is completely different). But you're not free to be homosexual, because the Bible makes some vague comments about that being bad. The Bible also says some other stuff is bad and some weird stuff is fine, but it seems you're free to ignore some of that without being a massive, massive hypocrite.
This isn't the whole right wing. I respect Dr. Ron Paul; although I don't agree with his economic policies, he understands that freedom means other people might be free to do things that, gasp, he doesn't like. Also, this isn't a rant against what Christianity is supposed to be, or those Christians who follow that. It's a rant about the Christian right, the fundamentalist, hate filled bigots and the politicians that either fall into this group, or use this group to further their careers.
The Christian Right is neither Christian, nor right.

You're also commanded by God to impregnate your widowed sister in law and allowed by God to sell your daughter into slavery. You're banned by God from touching menstruating women. You're not allowed to work on a Sunday and those who do must be put to death - I presume you kill firemen and doctors? Don't tell me that us politically correct people have stopped following these commands?

Have you read the bible? I am commanded to do no such thing. What you're referring to is the jewish cermonial and civil law which was only for Israel in that time and place. Please read up on the differences between the old and new covenants.

No no, I don't bash Christians. My mother is a Christian and I love her. I am intolerant of intolerance. I am intolerant of those who claim to be saving souls, yet who bully young men into committing suicide - and what does your Bible say about that? You're not saving souls, you're damning them.

I haven't bullied anyone, and it isn't loving to tolerate sin. It is actually hateful to tolerate it because sin is what sends people to hell. No one should be bullied or singled out, and those who act that way are not following what Jesus taught.

So I presume if your mother is Christian, you grew up in the faith? If so, why did you turn your back on it?

You can be Christian all you want, but if you have a problem with homosexuality, then you don't engage in homosexual acts.

I have a problem with sin, and I will continue to speak out against it as God commanded me.

Oh, and stop bleating about American being founded with Christian ideals. Freedom of religion is in your constitution.

I will stop talking about it when people stop trying to rewrite history.

>> ^Quboid

"We are not bashing your Christianity, we're rightfully bashing your bigotry, intolerance and hatred"

This video is clearly bashing Christianity, and you have put your stamp of approval on it. And I don't hate anyone; I view all people as being in the image of God, having an essential dignity and being worthy of respect. Neither am I a bigot; what I am intolerant of is sin.

>> ^Hanover_Phist:
>> ^shinyblurry:
If you want to say anyone who speaks out against homosexuality is a bigot, I disagree with you. We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment. You and your ilk feel free to bash Christians all the time, so you don't really have much to say about tolerance.
We are not bashing your Christianity, we're rightfully bashing your bigotry, intolerance and hatred.

Freedom of religion is an amendment, not a rewrite. "Neither am I a bigot; what I am intolerant of is sin." - sin according to your interpretation of the Christian Bible. Therefore, intolerant on religious grounds. Therefore, a bigot.

I went to church when I was young and I believed in God, but at that age anything my mother told me, I believed. We stopped going to church and years later when I asked why, I was told that my older brothers started asking questions that my mother couldn't answer and when she realised she had a family of rational atheists, she knew better than to try.

For me personally, I was talking to my brother about Noah's Ark for some reason and I remember he said something like "you don't actually believe that, do you?". I was stunned - it had never before occurred to me that something in the Bible might not be true. That made me start questioning things and the more I thought about it, the less I believed. It took me a while to get my head around things but the more I thought about it, the more unbelievable it was. A few years later and I'd come to accept that the whole book is essentially fiction.

Wait, what??

shinyblurry: "No one should be bullied or singled out"

What?

Are you serious?!?

Are you actually trying to say that you don't single out homosexuals?

I, I ... oh, I give up.

>> ^Quboid:


I, I ... oh, I give up.


Reality calling @Quboid.
He's a troll--pure and simple.

Please don't feed the troll, people.
If he don't get his attention fix he'll go away.

Orly? How come I never see your righteous rants under videos about eating seafood? (Lev. 11:10-12) >> ^shinyblurry:

We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment.

Freedom of religion is an amendment, not a rewrite. "Neither am I a bigot; what I am intolerant of is sin." - sin according to your interpretation of the Christian Bible. Therefore, intolerant on religious grounds. Therefore, a bigot.

The bible is extremely clear on what sin is. There isn't much to interpret, although many people try to make it that way.

I went to church when I was young and I believed in God, but at that age anything my mother told me, I believed. We stopped going to church and years later when I asked why, I was told that my older brothers started asking questions that my mother couldn't answer and when she realised she had a family of rational atheists, she knew better than to try.

For me personally, I was talking to my brother about Noah's Ark for some reason and I remember he said something like "you don't actually believe that, do you?". I was stunned - it had never before occurred to me that something in the Bible might not be true. That made me start questioning things and the more I thought about it, the less I believed. It took me a while to get my head around things but the more I thought about it, the more unbelievable it was. A few years later and I'd come to accept that the whole book is essentially fiction.

What you failed to do is trust God and let Him provide you the answer.

Trust in the LORD with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding

When you stopped doing that you made yourself Gods judge, and trusted in mans reason instead of Gods. You rejected God because you didn't have any faith. It doesn't sound like you even understood why you believed, let alone realized that you had a personal relationship with God. I'm sure you still know in your heart there is a God, but you're rejecting Him now.

"Wait, what??

shinyblurry: "No one should be bullied or singled out"

What?

Are you serious?!?

Are you actually trying to say that you don't single out homosexuals?

I, I ... oh, I give up."

I don't single out anyone..we've all sinned and fallen short. Neither would I go up to a homosexual and say they've done anything worse than what I've done, or what you've done. It doesn't matter who it is, or what their background is..I just witness to whomever or whatever is in front of me.

>> ^Quboid

Because Christians do not follow jewish civil or cermonial law.

>> ^hpqp:
Orly? How come I never see your righteous rants under videos about eating seafood? (Lev. 11:10-12) >> ^shinyblurry:
We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Because Christians do not follow jewish civil or cermonial law.
>> ^hpqp:
Orly? How come I never see your righteous rants under videos about eating seafood? (Lev. 11:10-12) >> ^shinyblurry:
We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment.



So where do you get that homosexuality is a sin? St Paul? The guy who thinks guys should not have long hair, and women should shut up and learn from their husbands at home?

Anyone else reminded of the Old Fashioned man from The State?

The only mention that can be construed as Jesus speaking against gays is Mathew 19:4-6:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’[b]? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

However, if you read the "context" (since you dummies love to pull the context card out), the question he is answering is:

Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

So pretty much the ONLY mention of a man and a woman is an exclusive mention of not getting a divorce

All of this is for naught, however, since the first amendment to the constitution, states:

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.

Pretty amazing, huh? How not only does the constitution (apparently written and signed by "Christians") doesn't mention any "god" whatsoever, but they make sure in an amendment, that the government does not support any single religion. This means that, sin or not, the government has no business enforcing any law on the basis of religion.

game. set. match.
>> ^shinyblurry:

Because Christians do not follow jewish civil or cermonial law.
>> ^hpqp:
Orly? How come I never see your righteous rants under videos about eating seafood? (Lev. 11:10-12) >> ^shinyblurry:
We're commanded by God to speak out against sin and we aren't going to stop obeying God to listen to the politically correct establishment.

*promote this back just because I like the sentiment so much

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Thursday, December 8th, 2011 1:08pm PST - promote requested by JiggaJonson.

@rottenseed

However, if you read the "context" (since you dummies love to pull the
context card out), the question he is answering is:
Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful
for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

So pretty much the ONLY mention of a man and a woman is an exclusive
mention of not getting a divorce

Obviously it isn't the only mention, since Jesus is quoting the Old Testament. There are other verses which refer to marriage, but even if it were the only one, it doesn't change the fact that God has defined marriage to be between a man and woman and has condemned homosexual relations and fornication. One mention or 100, the truth of it is absolute.

All of this is for naught, however, since the first amendment to the
constitution, states:
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.

Pretty amazing, huh? How not only does the constitution (apparently
written and signed by "Christians") doesn't mention any "god"
whatsoever, but they make sure in an amendment, that the government
does not support any single religion. This means that, sin or not, the
government has no business enforcing any law on the basis of religion.

game. set. match.

Your declaration of victory is premature. What the founders meant by "religion" is any particular Christian denomination. They did not want any to be preferred or adopted as the national religion. Fisher Ames, who wrote the language of the first ammendment, said this:

“...we have a dangerous trend beginning to take place in our education....We've become accustomed of late to putting little books in the hands of children containing fables with moral lessons. We are spending less time in the classroom on the Bible, which should be the principle text in our schools. The Bible states these great moral lessons better than any other man made book.”

The man who wrote the first amendment obviously thought it was constitutional to teach the bible as our principle text in public schools, yet today they say that even having one in the classroom violates the 1st amendment. I wonder who actually knows more about the 1st amendment or what its purpose was. Obviously it wasnt meant to prevent government support of Christianity or the bible as our principle means of education. "Imagine that"

Two years after Jefferson wrote the letter that people use to justify a separation of church and state, he ordered as a presidential act the extention of using federal lands "“for the sole use of Christian Indians and the Moravian Brethren Missionaries for the civilizing of the Indians and promoting Christianity”. He ordered that act extended two more times before he left office. Yet today they say that we can't have a nativity scene on government property. Are you starting to see how painfully out of context your imagined secularist interpretation is? There wasn't any such thing as secularism then, because everyone was Christian and believed in God. Why do you think the US capitol building was converted to a church every sunday? Why was the first supreme court opened with a 4 hour prayer and communion service?

What you are also unaware of is that the state constitutions at the time not only mentioned God and Christianity, many of them forbid anybody but Christians taking office:

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776), stated:

There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State in preference to any other.

Article XXXII That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State. (until 1876)

In 1835 the word “Protestant” was changed to “Christian.” [p.482]

Constitution of the State of Maryland (August 14, 1776), stated:

Article XXXV That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention, or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion.”

That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God is such a manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty;
wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested… on account of his religious practice; unless, under the color [pretense] of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality… yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax, for the support of the Christian religion. (until 1851) [pp.420-421]

Constitution of the State of South Carolina (1778), stated:

Article XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated… That all denominations of Christian[s]… in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges. [p.568]

The Constitution of the State of Massachusetts (1780) stated:

The Governor shall be chosen annually; and no person shall be eligible to this office, unless, at the time of his election… he shall declare himself to be of the Christian religion.

Chapter VI, Article I [All persons elected to State office or to the Legislature must] make and
subscribe the following declaration, viz. “I, _______, do declare, that I believe the Christian religion, and have firm persuasion of its truth.”

Part I, Article III And every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law: and no subordination of any sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law.” [p.429]

Starting to get the picture? How about this treaty?

Continental Congress (1783), ratified a peace treaty with Great Britain at the close of the Revolutionary War. The treaty began:

In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. It having pleased the Divine Providence
to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith… and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings and differences… [p.149]


Why did George Washington announce this when they finished the constitution?:

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor-- and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/GW/gw004.html

The evidence is insurrmountable and overwhelming that this country was founded on Christian principles. To deny it is to ignore everything that is true about our history.