Comments on: Pastor Schmastor:Leave God Out of Government!

By: teri

teri — Mon, 14 May 2012 15:10:26 +0000

all of you will be damned to hell for the things you have said and for turning your back on God our savior

By: Nephew Wolf

Nephew Wolf — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:01:26 +0000

Aww, come on, annemarie. It’s OK to be wrong (or so I’m told). And I was calling Joseph-whoever-he-is a fucktard.

By: Life Observer

Life Observer — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 02:33:12 +0000

Of course it needs to be a 2 way street too.
Religions stay out of Govtment.
But, also Govment stay out of religions!

Both fall into temptation for each other.

By: annemarie

annemarie — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 01:26:18 +0000

wolf nephew, I know this game. You try to bore the arse of people so that they finally just give in. Well I won’t. I’ll ignore you instead.

By the way, did you just call me a fucktard? You watch yourself mother fucker. I know where you live.

By: Nephew Wolf

Nephew Wolf — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:13:50 +0000

Hooray, HTML tags work here! *No* *more* *asterisks* *for* *emphasis*!

By: Nephew Wolf

Nephew Wolf — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:12:58 +0000

annemarie: "State church" is embraced by "state religion." Banning the latter automatically bans the former, but it could be argued that banning the former does not necessarily ban the latter (and of course people trying to institute a state religion would have made that very argument, pointing out that they're not saying which branch of Zoroastrianism gets the special treatment...). We can all be glad that the framers of the Constitution knew better than to leave that loophole open. An official state church is an established church. That's precisely what "establishment" means in this context, and it's precisely what the framers were referring to. It's what people still mean in England when they talk about establishment; even now they debate whether or not the C of E should be disestablished. So you see, the framers didn't just pull that word out of their asses. It has a specific meaning; it's not a broad prohibition of the expression of religious sentiment by government officials or a mandate for rigid separation of church and state (a phrase which, I'm sure I don't need to tell you, appears nowhere in the Constitution). My point, I guess, is to remind everybody that it is possible to lament the influence that organized religion's uglier elements have on society without being an ahistorical and/or illiterate fucktard.

By: marmalade wombat

marmalade wombat — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:47:23 +0000

athiest groups in australia tried to copy the london uk ads that are featured in your image in this post. christian advertising is prominent on outdoor advertising here (the largest company is APN). APN refused to run the athiest advertisements for no reason. people say this would not have happened if there was a bill of rights or human rights act in australia and i have to agree.
i have not had a good experience with religious people. so i’m biased. but yeh. my 2 cents.

By: HelOnWheels

HelOnWheels — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:40:34 +0000

I have a problem with the whole “God’s mandate” that came through in some of the inaugural address yesterday. Wasn’t that what Dubbaya kept saying? Hearing something like “This is the source of our confidence — the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny” from our new President is very disconcerting to me.

By: fashion herald

fashion herald — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:18:18 +0000

church stopped being interesting when religions stopped supporting the arts. although there are still some churches out there that put on a good musical show. and the best churchmen and women solidly support the separation of church and state.
and although I’m not much for religion, god bless the churchman who injected a little soul into yesterday’s inaugural ceremony.

By: Dexter VanDango

Dexter VanDango — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:49:34 +0000

Sorry… sometimes the Devil temps me to excess..

(..but if God really wanted us to be happy he would have given us an atmosphere consisting of nitrous oxide..)