Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 40
Quote# 111410

You are such an idiot Ray. You reference so many stereotypes that you have heard other people mention.

While I was in Japan, I met the ‘in-crowd’ foreigners, who, like you, labelled so many visitors as ‘Losers Who Couldnt Get Women Back In Their Own Country’. Well, let me set things straight. I travel all over the world and when I am in any particular country, I make friends with both men and women. Some of those women are kind and beautiful and so I become romantically involved with them. I also am romantically involved with various women in my home country, so my behaviour and results dont matter, regardless of where i find myself.

In particular, I have a Chinese girlfriend. When I am in Japan however, I stay with my Japanese girlfriend. And if time permits, I fly over to Indonesia and visit with my Indonesian girlfriend. On the side, when money and time permits, I have sex with prostitutes.

This is year 2014. Many men have multiple women in multiple places. If you look at a guy that you think ‘isn’t all that’ and you falsely label him a ‘loser’, that is a reflection on you, not him.

I am not a troll. A troll is a commentor that provides an argument for argument sake, but no other reason. I, however, corrected your claim regarding foreigners who ‘fuck’, but who supposedly cant get women back home. I have heard this put-down so many times and it gets annoying re-reading the same misinformation.

Do you know why ‘foreign’ men like Oriental women? Because unlike Caucasian women, Oriental women are tinier and more feminine. Moreover, many Oriental women, unlike Caucasians, are focused on ‘traditional’ interests/values.

In terms of feminine qualities, many Caucasian women are larger, weigh more and look older than their counterparts in China, Malyasia, Vietnam, etc. In general, men are less attracted to women who look more like men, and conversely, men are more attracted to women who look more, well, like women.

In North America (and I suspect in Europe), the average Caucasian woman is 5’4? tall, weighs 150-160 pounds, and maybe because of genetics or lifestyle – or both, looks about 3 – 4 years older than they actually are. Conversely, in China, the average woman is about 5’2? tall, weighs about 110 pounds and looks about 5 years younger than they actually are. Look at commenter Lina Chen, pictured above, as an example. Lina is beautiful and would attract many ‘western’ men.

Also, as I mentioned above, many Chinese women (and many other oriental women) think differently than a vast majority of Caucasian women. The average Chinese girl is focused on her career, finding a marriage partner and starting a family. The average Caucasian women is focused on having a good time, but nothing else.

Now, if you are a 25 – 35 year old male that is looking to have a relationship with a woman, who are you going to pick? Would you choose the Caucasian women who looks like a small line-backer, has little interest in having a child and starting a family, and even more bothersome, who spends 25% of her time drinking ethyl alcohol and waking up afterwards in a mental haze; or, the Chinese girl who looks young, slim and pretty and wants to start a family with you as soon as possible?

Mike, Ray Hecht 12 Comments [8/2/2015 2:16:17 PM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111401

The mainstream newsmedia reported this week that Satanists have unveiled a statue of Satan in Detroit, Michigan, but that is not the main thing I see as a Christian. I see a statue displaying two innocent little children admiring Satan. Please don't miss that! This vile display speaks volumes of the intentions of Satan and his sick followers. Satanists want our children! Satan has a bid for your child mom and dad. Look how the Satanic music industry is pushing sexual perversion and blood sacrifices (Satanism) upon tweens and teens today. Even Taylor Swift, who began her career in Cinderella-like modesty and charm, has now sold her soul to do evil, becoming a slutty whore, stripping her clothes off, and behaving like an animal for the Illuminati who've made her filthy rich (as of 2015 Miss Swift's net worth is $200,000,000).

The New York-based Satanic Temple said they picked Detroit because they have a “good community” of 200 followers there. I don't but that story for a second! I think the real reason is because Detroit is so economically depraved and full of crime that no one cares. Detroit is the direction the whole country is headed! Why do you think the Illuminati are relentlessly working to economically destroy America and demoralize our youth? It's so that the whole country will become like Detroit (dead, dirty, decadent and depressed). The residents of Detroit are repressed, depressed and suppressed! About 700 people showed up for the unveiling of the Satanic statue, some critics and others supporters. The Satanists publicly called their event “a night of chaos, noise, and debauchery.” The group was heard chanting the blasphemous words, “Hail Satan! Hail Satan!”

Also, notice the multiethnicity of the children. One is African American, wearing an afro hairstyle, with distinguishing black facial features. And the girl is clearly white Caucasian. The implied message is that Satanism accepts anybody. I am reminded of the children's song, “Jesus Loves The Little Children.” You know... “all the children of the world, red or yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight, Jesus loves the little children of the world!” AND JESUS SURE DOES LOVE THE LITTLE CHILDREN!!! The very image which suggests that Satan loves children is a disgusting bold-faced lie!!! SATAN HATES EVERYONE!!!


There is a darker side to the Satanic image, if you understand the sexually perverted nature of Freemasonry, Judaism, Mormonism, the Talmud, Occultism and Satanism (all related). Don't miss something very telling that the Satanists did immediately after unveiling the statues... two Sodomites began kissing in front of Baphomet! How much clearer could it be that Satan and his followers want to Sodomize children!!! Think about that! Two queers are making-out, sucking each other's faces, in front of children, per se. Satan is a master liar, who deceived people into thinking they are free, able to do anything they so choose, just as long as you don't hurt anyone (and that's their lame excuse). In sharp contrast, God warns all mankind in Ecclesiastes 12:14 that He will hold all men accountable for every deed, whether good or bad. Amen! God will judge us by His holy Commandments and not ours. It's not ok to fornicate as Satan teaches. There are many sinister ideals that are conveyed through the new statue of children admiring Baphomet (Satan). There is truly NOTHING to admire!!! Can you think of a statue where some children are admiring a pastor?

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Savior 14 Comments [8/2/2015 11:37:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111415

I am glad Dalrock wrote about this at this time, as the idea has been sprouting up in many places.

Even women who think they ‘need’ to wait until 35+ to have kids do not do the most obvious precautionary step : Freeze their eggs.

This reveals :

1) Women cannot plan long term, and certainly don’t understand cause and effect.
2) They think they are fertile for as long as a man, with no awareness how quickly fertility drops after 30.
3) Extrapolating further, this also explains why women believe their SMV will stay high at age 35, 55, or even 79.
4) Women who have no clue about what their fertility window is often have fancy degrees from fancy schools. In other words, her parents and the taxpayer paid over $500K for ker K-12 + Univ, and yet this person is unaware of the basic factors behind one of her most important life decisions (arguably THE most important one).

Amazing. Yet, we let these people vote, and divert almost all of society’s resources to them. The magnitude of this resource misallocation is stunning.

TFH, Dalrock 7 Comments [8/2/2015 2:35:54 PM]
Fundie Index: 10
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111393

(In response to Sarah Silverman supporting the use of aborted fetal tissue for purposes of science and education)

Killing Jews was legal in Nazi Germany. It would have been insane not to use their skin for lamps.

Ben Shapiro, Twitter 54 Comments [8/2/2015 4:38:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 9
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111288

Question: "Is there an argument for the existence of God?"

Answer: The question of whether there is a conclusive argument for the existence of God has been debated throughout history, with exceedingly intelligent people taking both sides of the dispute. In recent times, arguments against the possibility of God’s existence have taken on a militant spirit that accuses anyone daring to believe in God as being delusional and irrational. Karl Marx asserted that anyone believing in God must have a mental disorder that caused invalid thinking. The psychiatrist Sigmund Freud wrote that a person who believed in a Creator God was delusional and only held those beliefs due to a “wish-fulfillment” factor that produced what Freud considered to be an unjustifiable position. The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche bluntly said that faith equates to not wanting to know what is true. The voices of these three figures from history (along with others) are simply now parroted by a new generation of atheists who claim that a belief in God is intellectually unwarranted.

Is this truly the case? Is belief in God a rationally unacceptable position to hold? Is there a logical and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Outside of referencing the Bible, can a case for the existence of God be made that refutes the positions of both the old and new atheists and gives sufficient warrant for believing in a Creator? The answer is, yes, it can. Moreover, in demonstrating the validity of an argument for the existence of God, the case for atheism is shown to be intellectually weak.

To make an argument for the existence of God, we must start by asking the right questions. We begin with the most basic metaphysical question: “Why do we have something rather than nothing at all?” This is the basic question of existence—why are we here; why is the earth here; why is the universe here rather than nothing? Commenting on this point, one theologian has said, “In one sense man does not ask the question about God, his very existence raises the question about God.”

In considering this question, there are four possible answers to why we have something rather than nothing at all:

1. Reality is an illusion.
2. Reality is/was self-created.
3. Reality is self-existent (eternal).
4. Reality was created by something that is self-existent.

So, which is the most plausible solution? Let’s begin with reality being simply an illusion, which is what a number of Eastern religions believe. This option was ruled out centuries ago by the philosopher Rene Descartes who is famous for the statement, “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes, a mathematician, argued that if he is thinking, then he must “be.” In other words, “I think, therefore I am not an illusion.” Illusions require something experiencing the illusion, and moreover, you cannot doubt the existence of yourself without proving your existence; it is a self-defeating argument. So the possibility of reality being an illusion is eliminated.

Next is the option of reality being self-created. When we study philosophy, we learn of “analytically false” statements, which means they are false by definition. The possibility of reality being self-created is one of those types of statements for the simple reason that something cannot be prior to itself. If you created yourself, then you must have existed prior to you creating yourself, but that simply cannot be. In evolution this is sometimes referred to as “spontaneous generation” —something coming from nothing—a position that few, if any, reasonable people hold to anymore simply because you cannot get something from nothing. Even the atheist David Hume said, “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause.” Since something cannot come from nothing, the alternative of reality being self-created is ruled out.

Now we are left with only two choices—an eternal reality or reality being created by something that is eternal: an eternal universe or an eternal Creator. The 18th-century theologian Jonathan Edwards summed up this crossroads:

• Something exists.
• Nothing cannot create something.
• Therefore, a necessary and eternal “something” exists.

Notice that we must go back to an eternal “something.” The atheist who derides the believer in God for believing in an eternal Creator must turn around and embrace an eternal universe; it is the only other door he can choose. But the question now is, where does the evidence lead? Does the evidence point to matter before mind or mind before matter?

To date, all key scientific and philosophical evidence points away from an eternal universe and toward an eternal Creator. From a scientific standpoint, honest scientists admit the universe had a beginning, and whatever has a beginning is not eternal. In other words, whatever has a beginning has a cause, and if the universe had a beginning, it had a cause. The fact that the universe had a beginning is underscored by evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics, the radiation echo of the big bang discovered in the early 1900s, the fact that the universe is expanding and can be traced back to a singular beginning, and Einstein’s theory of relativity. All prove the universe is not eternal.

Further, the laws that surround causation speak against the universe being the ultimate cause of all we know for this simple fact: an effect must resemble its cause. This being true, no atheist can explain how an impersonal, purposeless, meaningless, and amoral universe accidentally created beings (us) who are full of personality and obsessed with purpose, meaning, and morals. Such a thing, from a causation standpoint, completely refutes the idea of a natural universe birthing everything that exists. So in the end, the concept of an eternal universe is eliminated.

Philosopher J. S. Mill (not a Christian) summed up where we have now come to: “It is self-evident that only Mind can create mind.” The only rational and reasonable conclusion is that an eternal Creator is the one who is responsible for reality as we know it. Or to put it in a logical set of statements:

• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe and an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.

Former atheist Lee Strobel, who arrived at this end result many years ago, has commented, “Essentially, I realized that to stay an atheist, I would have to believe that nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; and non-reason produces reason. Those leaps of faith were simply too big for me to take, especially in light of the affirmative case for God's existence … In other words, in my assessment the Christian worldview accounted for the totality of the evidence much better than the atheistic worldview.”

But the next question we must tackle is this: if an eternal Creator exists (and we have shown that He does), what kind of Creator is He? Can we infer things about Him from what He created? In other words, can we understand the cause by its effects? The answer to this is yes, we can, with the following characteristics being surmised:

• He must be supernatural in nature (as He created time and space).
• He must be powerful (exceedingly).
• He must be eternal (self-existent).
• He must be omnipresent (He created space and is not limited by it).
• He must be timeless and changeless (He created time).
• He must be immaterial because He transcends space/physical.
• He must be personal (the impersonal cannot create personality).
• He must be infinite and singular as you cannot have two infinites.
• He must be diverse yet have unity as unity and diversity exist in nature.
• He must be intelligent (supremely). Only cognitive being can produce cognitive being.
• He must be purposeful as He deliberately created everything.
• He must be moral (no moral law can be had without a giver).
• He must be caring (or no moral laws would have been given).

These things being true, we now ask if any religion in the world describes such a Creator. The answer to this is yes: the God of the Bible fits this profile perfectly. He is supernatural (Genesis 1:1), powerful (Jeremiah 32:17), eternal (Psalm 90:2), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7), timeless/changeless (Malachi 3:6), immaterial (John 5:24), personal (Genesis 3:9), necessary (Colossians 1:17), infinite/singular (Jeremiah 23:24, Deuteronomy 6:4), diverse yet with unity (Matthew 28:19), intelligent (Psalm 147:4-5), purposeful (Jeremiah 29:11), moral (Daniel 9:14), and caring (1 Peter 5:6-7).

One last subject to address on the matter of God’s existence is the matter of how justifiable the atheist’s position actually is. Since the atheist asserts the believer’s position is unsound, it is only reasonable to turn the question around and aim it squarely back at him. The first thing to understand is that the claim the atheist makes—“no god,” which is what “atheist” means—is an untenable position to hold from a philosophical standpoint. As legal scholar and philosopher Mortimer Adler says, “An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition—one that denies the existence of something—cannot be proved.” For example, someone may claim that a red eagle exists and someone else may assert that red eagles do not exist. The former only needs to find a single red eagle to prove his assertion. But the latter must comb the entire universe and literally be in every place at once to ensure he has not missed a red eagle somewhere and at some time, which is impossible to do. This is why intellectually honest atheists will admit they cannot prove God does not exist.

Next, it is important to understand the issue that surrounds the seriousness of truth claims that are made and the amount of evidence required to warrant certain conclusions. For example, if someone puts two containers of lemonade in front of you and says that one may be more tart than the other, since the consequences of getting the more tart drink would not be serious, you would not require a large amount of evidence in order to make your choice. However, if to one cup the host added sweetener but to the other he introduced rat poison, then you would want to have quite a bit of evidence before you made your choice.

This is where a person sits when deciding between atheism and belief in God. Since belief in atheism could possibly result in irreparable and eternal consequences, it would seem that the atheist should be mandated to produce weighty and overriding evidence to support his position, but he cannot. Atheism simply cannot meet the test for evidence for the seriousness of the charge it makes. Instead, the atheist and those whom he convinces of his position slide into eternity with their fingers crossed and hope they do not find the unpleasant truth that eternity does indeed exist. As Mortimer Adler says, “More consequences for life and action follow from the affirmation or denial of God than from any other basic question.”

So does belief in God have intellectual warrant? Is there a rational, logical, and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Absolutely. While atheists such as Freud claim that those believing in God have a wish-fulfillment desire, perhaps it is Freud and his followers who actually suffer from wish-fulfillment: the hope and wish that there is no God, no accountability, and therefore no judgment. But refuting Freud is the God of the Bible who affirms His existence and the fact that a judgment is indeed coming for those who know within themselves the truth that He exists but suppress that truth (Romans 1:20). But for those who respond to the evidence that a Creator does indeed exist, He offers the way of salvation that has been accomplished through His Son, Jesus Christ: "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13).

Got Questions Ministries, Got Questions 28 Comments [7/30/2015 3:06:17 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111285

Some say only the Old Testament speaks against sodomy but that the New Testament is silent about it. This is not true. The New Testament clearly condemns this sin. Romans 1:21-27 speaks about the sodomites. Paul says they are vain in their imaginations, they steal God's glory, they are foolish, unclean, vile, and against nature. In II Peter 2:6, the word "ungodly" is used in connection with sodomy. Paul said in I Corinthians 6:9 that these people would not inherit the kingdom of God.

Friend, sodomy is wicked in the eyes of God!

Don't most professionals agree that a person's sexual orientation is of biological or genetic origin?

Yes, but they're dead wrong. The majority of professional people once believed the earth to be flat. Were they right? The majority of astronomers once believed the stars could be numbered. Were they right? The majority of scientists today believe that men have evolved from monkeys. Are they right? In Genesis, the majority of the world thought Noah was crazy. Were they right? The majority thought Jesus Christ should be crucified. Were they right? Listen friend, if you're running with "the majority," then you are on a collision coarse with the Devil! IGNORE THE MAJORITY! Just trust God's word. God says that sodomy is WRONG, so it's wrong. Period.

Besides, there are many professional people in the medical field who believe that sodomy is an acquired behavior. The book, Shadow In The Land, by Congressman William Dannemeyer, cites several authors who disagree with the biological and genetic theories. The following are among them:

"Homosexuality, the choice of a partner of the same sex for orgastic satisfaction, is not innate. There is no connection between sexual instinct and choice of sexual object. Such an object choice is acquired behavior; there is no inevitable genetically inborn propensity toward the choice of a partner of either the same or opposite sex." (Charles Socarides, Homosexuality: Basic Concepts and Psychodynamics, International Journal of Psychiatry 10, 1972: 118-25)

"Whatever may be the possible unlearned assistance from constitutional sources, the child's psychosexual identity is not written, unlearned, in the genetic code, the hormonal system or the nervous system at birth." (John Monday, Sexual Dimorphism and Homosexual Gender Identity, Perspectives in Human Sexuality, 1974, p. 67)

James L. Melton, Biblebelievers.com 24 Comments [7/30/2015 3:02:15 AM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: Chris
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111287

If your moral claims are not objective, then they are nothing more than opinions and should be treated the same. If you say "I think that gassing Jews was wrong," all you are REALLY saying is that you don't like gassing Jews in the same way you don't like vanilla ice cream. It really is nothing more than your opinion, because you have stated that you don't believe objective morals exist.

"I see you have very poor morals." ANOTHER objective moral claim! You really are addicted to stealing from God, aren't you?!? On the plus side, I note that you have admitted the existence of God by asserting these objective moral claims - thank you once more for making my point! :-)

If your moral claims are not objective, then they are nothing more than your claims that you like vanilla ice cream and not chocolate. They are just opinions, and nobody cares about your ice cream desires. When you write "Pretending your opinion is a command from god(s) only makes it worse -- people kill people because they think that's what their god wants." you are merely saying that you think it's "worse" in the same sense that you think chocolate ice cream is "worse." And, "killing people because that's what their god wants" is "bad" in the same sense that chocolate ice cream is "bad."

But, the truth is that those are objective moral claims whether you want to call them so or not. You are stuck: if you want to keep stealing from the Christian God, at least have the courage to become a Christian and stand on your principles! Otherwise, you are just talking about ice cream flavors, and no one wants to hear such nonsense.

Please, please, please, take a course in A-theism for Dummies! Or, when you graduate from high school, please take a course in basic logic - should you go on to university. You really are failing today, and your fellow a-theists are quite ashamed of your performance (or lack thereof).

WorldGoneCrazy, Christian News Network 29 Comments [7/30/2015 3:04:37 AM]
Fundie Index: 10
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111298

Our first encounter with demons coming out of computer and TV screens, happened several years ago, when one of my kids had clicked on a video that promised the viewer a glimpse of a real alien. We were all sitting there at the kitchen table, with the kids doing their school work, and this one kid had finished early, so as a reward, I told him he could use the computer while he waited for the rest of the kids to finish.

Well, most of the youtube video that he had decided to view, was silent and dark, which caused one to lean in closer to the computer screen, to see if you could see anything. Suddenly, a drawing of an alien’s face flashed upon the screen, and a loud roar came from the speakers, and as everyone there at the table turned to look at the computer screen, a large black ghost-like hook, (reminiscent of Peter Pan’s Captain Hook, but very very black and wraith-like,) reached out through the computer screen and tried to stab itself into my child’s forehead. It glanced off the surface of his skin, and then gave an even louder roar of frustration, once it realized it had failed in its attack. The claw then evaporated back into the computer screen. Laughter was then heard coming from the video, as the perps laughed out loud at their supposed joke.

dunamis, dream of dunamis 31 Comments [7/30/2015 3:43:01 PM]
Fundie Index: 17
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111377

Prophecy: Donald Trump Shall Become the Trumpet

In His great wisdom throughout the course of human history, God has chosen not only to fulfill His plans and purposes through men and women who have yielded to the sound of His voice, but He has also chosen to accomplish His will through men and women who have ignored and rebelled against Him. One such man was King Cyrus mentioned in Isaiah 45.

Isaiah prophesied of Cyrus and speaks as a mouthpiece of the Lord when he declared, "I have even called you by your name [Cyrus]; I have named you, though you have not known Me. I am the Lord and there is no other; there is no God besides Me.
I strengthen you, though you have not known Me, so that they may know from the rising of the sun and from the west that there is no one besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is no other" (Is. 45:4-6).

What a powerful and profound prophetic declaration to a man who did not know or serve the Lord! Could God not use the wicked and ungodly to bring about His plans and purposes thousands of years ago and can He not still do the same thing again, especially in the midst of the crisis that we find America in today?

I was in a time of prayer several weeks ago when God began to speak to me concerning the destiny of Donald Trump in America. The Holy Spirit spoke to me and said, "Trump shall become My trumpet to the American people, for he possesses qualities that are even hard to find in My people these days. Trump does not fear man nor will he allow deception and lies to go unnoticed. I am going to use him to expose darkness and perversion in America like never before, but you must understand that he is like a bull in a china closet. Many will want to throw him away because he will disturb their sense of peace and tranquility, but you must listen through the bantering to discover the truth that I will speak through him. I will use the wealth that I have given him to expose and launch investigations searching for the truth. Just as I raised up Cyrus to fulfill My purposes and plans, so have I raised up Trump to fulfill my purposes and plans prior to the 2016 election. You must listen to the trumpet very closely for he will sound the alarm and many will be blessed because of his compassion and mercy. Though many see the outward pride and arrogance, I have given him the tender heart of a father that wants to lend a helping hand to the poor and the needy, to the foreigner and the stranger."

As the body of Christ, we must keep our ears and eyes open as we continue to move toward the 2016 elections in the United States. I believe that God is not only going to use the prayers of the saints to bring about His plans and purposes, but He is even going to use those who do not know Him. What a great comfort and source of encouragement we have in the wisdom of God in this hour.

Just as Job declared to God in Job 42:2, "I know that You can do everything, and that no thought can be withheld from You." Let's begin to pray in faith, knowing that God can do all things and that no purpose of His in the 2016 elections can be thwarted!

Jeremiah Johnson, Charisma Magazine 27 Comments [8/2/2015 2:39:09 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111339

If the USA were still a civilized nation, it would declare war on Planned Parenthood and eradicate the ghouls. #PPSellsBabyParts

Vox Day, Twitter 25 Comments [8/1/2015 3:00:09 AM]
Fundie Index: 12
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111290

The most disturbing news event related to the media bias is the reaction to the undercover investigative video of Planned Parenthood. A pro-life group filmed a Planned Parenthood executive talking casually about the body parts of aborted babies, using the partial-birth abortion procedure to ensure the baby parts stay intact. The press took a couple days to figure out how to create the right spin to convolute the truth about the sickening video. The AP was the first to say it was only about the “disposition of fetal remains.”

The Washington Post followed with columnist Petula Dvorak proudly declaring, “Planned Parenthood deserves to be supported, not attacked.” In it, she called the video “nothing more than another one of those graphic abortion protest posters,” or “totally out of context and totally horrible.”

Cosmopolitan magazine used the use the same boldfaced denial tactic with the headline, “That Planned Parenthood Video Isn’t the Scandal Abortion Opponents Are Making it Out to Be.” Now, frankly, I’m just going to yawn,” wrote writer Robin Marty. While she “shuddered” at watching the video, she reasoned that “medicine overall is often gory and gruesome.”

Samantha Allen from The Daily Beast attacked the financial claim in an article titled: “Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Sell Fetuses: The Real Story Behind That Shady Video.” She unconscionably comes to this conclusion because “payments are for processing and transportation costs.”

The minds of these reporters are so sick and twisted, if they had worked for the Nazi state media they would easily have explained away Hitler’s death camps by saying, “Oh, these people died from a mass suicide” or “maybe the Red Army committed these atrocities.”

Todd Strandberg, rapture ready 13 Comments [7/30/2015 3:06:56 AM]
Fundie Index: 9
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111291

But #DefundPlannedParenthood is about more than tax dollars. It’s about, as Krauthammer notes, turning on the lights inside the abortion industry. I’ve argued before that pro-abortion sentiment in this country thrives off ignorance. Is there a more coherent explanation as to why Planned Parenthood and its allies lobby against ultrasound and parental notification laws? By keeping the visceral reality of abortion obscure–and by drenching the debate in muddy jargon–the architects of legal abortion can fold into “pro-choice” ranks many who might otherwise stand for life.

But what about those people like the medical officials in the videos? What about people with a lifetime’s worth of experience in dismembering unborn bodies (and then haggling over a fair price)? They are not clueless. Krauthammer’s ominous words about “what abortion does to us” sound like the Old Testament prophet’s warning that those who worship idols eventually become like them. There’s a hardening of the moral sensibility that must come to those who learn to excel in the business of death.

That’s the testimony of the late Bernard Nathanson, the famous abortionist-turned-pro-life activist. Dr. Nathanson’s documentary The Silent Scream has been credited with converting many to the cause of life, merely through its grisly depiction of an actual abortion. Like many other pro-life activists, Nathanson was militant for the cause of abortion rights for a long time as a medical professional. The story of his conversion to the cause of life is in this terrific profile by Robert P. George, and I encourage you to read the entire piece.

One chilling paragraph, with a quote from Nathanson, stands out:

By his own estimate, he presided over more than 60,000 abortions as Director of the Center for Reproductive and Sexual Health, personally instructed medical students and practitioners in the performance of about 15,000 more, and performed 5,000 abortions himself. In one of those abortions, he took the life of his own son or daughter—a child conceived with a girlfriend after he had established his medical practice. Writing with deep regret in his moving autobiography The Hand of God (1996), Nathanson confessed his own heartlessness in performing that abortion: “I swear to you, I had no feelings aside from the sense of accomplishment, the pride of expertise.”

“I had no feelings.” That’s it. That’s what Krauthammer means when he says “what abortion does to us.” The numbness, the deafness, the coldness. The corrosion of the moral imagination.

The videos of Planned Parenthood depict a culture–and likely a business–defined by its emotional distance from reality. The unborn children whose parts are bargained for over a red wine are not the only victims here. Can a society with such a calcified conscience ever regain its humanity? Yes it can. Like Dr. Bernard Nathanson, abortionists can discover the beauty of birth, through the miracle of rebirth. The blood of Jesus Christ runs deeper and redder than the bloodiest surgical tool. A dead moral imagination can be raised to life again, as sure as the dead body of the Son of God was raised.

Samuel James, Inklingations 27 Comments [7/30/2015 3:07:45 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: AJ Williams
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111292

Being that there is scientific fact concerning Adam and Eve, this should be reason enough for it to be taught in schools, it is shows proof that our origin comes from God creating male and female and that we did not evolve from a monkey,fish or whatever they claim. This is a basic biblical foundation. Knowledge and faith go hand in hand. God gives us knowledge and we can choose to believe Him or not which requires faith. But we only know at this time in part as Paul says in, 1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known

Josey, Christian News Network 25 Comments [7/30/2015 3:09:55 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111294

[Re: Say good things about other beliefs]

Buddhism- I think they are nice people. I used to day a buddhist who I almost converted but she ended up not because of my horrible actions. This was before i turned into the awesomness I am now. I think they will get the least punishment in hell cuz of their nice deeds.

Sikhs, asian religions- ditto, just like buddhims

Islam- There are a lot of nice muslims. But I think they will burn in hell pretty bad. Sorry thats negative. Im just saying. There own book attacks jews and christians! What do u expect!

Atheists- Atheist try to act smarter than thou and so evolved and intelligent, but end up sounding stupid and wicked. They are fools just like the bible says- only a fool says there is no god. Atheists will be burned more than crispy critters in the pit of hell. This is negative i know. But its the truth!

Catholics- Truly the craziest sect of christianity. Apart from the smaller cult like versions- like jehovahs witnesses and mormons. Im not entirely sure of their salvation. But I think there are alot of nice catholics.

Jehovahs witnesses, mormons, various wannabe christian cults- BURN, BURN, BURN, i hope these guys bring plenty of sunblock and water in the pit of hell cuz their false beliefs will get the screaming in torture. That sounds horrible. But im being blunt honest, im tired give me a break.

Oh well,... yawn... goodnight eveyrone! AND DONT BURN IN HELL!

Polish_Crusader, GameFAQs 39 Comments [7/30/2015 3:12:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 23
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111295

1. Do you accept that sexual orientation is not a choice?

This is irrelevant. God commands against sin and if he defines certain sexualities as sinful, then we must obey. We have no choice in the fact that we are all born sinners under the wrath of God according to Adam’s fall, but the fact that we have no choice in the matter does not make us any less accountable to God. As a species created in God’s image, in light of Adam’s fall, all of us are sin oriented. Our own corruption and condemnation was never our personal choice. However, God in his mercy gives us Jesus Christ as a ransom for sin, so that through faith in Jesus we can become justified and no longer condemned. None of us chose our corrupt nature, and none of us choose which sins trip us up the most, but that does not validate our actions or give us license to continue in our disobedience to God.

Blakodeel, deal of theology 37 Comments [7/30/2015 3:27:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 11
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111388

(after being referred to a talkorigins.org list of 29 proofs of evolution)

"Common Sense is Not Science" - it's assumption
"Science Provides Evidence for the Unobservable via INFERENCE" - Speculation
Why don't you stop hiding behind website links and post one of your own topics? Probably because all you have is blind faith.

Oboehner, Christian News Network 15 Comments [8/2/2015 2:40:18 AM]
Fundie Index: 13
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111296

[The other fundies have been reacting to the news that a fossil of a four-legged snake ancestor has been found.]

Humans supposedly evolved into an upright walking position because we had to have our eyes above tall grasses on plains. Lately, it seems that we evolved up in the trees, then ventured into the water but, unlike dolphins, porpoises, and whales, thought better of it and went back to the land.

One of these days, they'll get it right.

son of dust, Rapture Ready 29 Comments [7/30/2015 3:27:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111297

It's refreshing to hear honest researchers simply report on the data and candidly admit where the evidence appears to lead. But this honesty comes at a terrible price. You would think that the scientific arena would promote objectivity and serious consideration of all ideas. But that's not what we find. In fact, it's just the opposite. It is the goal of every researcher to get published. But in academia, peer review is used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication. And under this flawed system, the acceptance of a new find trumps its actual validity: "We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong." (Richard Horton, editor of the British medical journal The Lancet).

"The interposition of editors and reviewers between authors and readers may enable the intermediators to act as gatekeepers. Some sociologists of science argue that peer review makes the ability to publish susceptible to control by elites and to personal jealousy.The peer review process may suppress dissent against "mainstream" theories. Reviewers tend to be especially critical of conclusions that contradict their own views, and lenient towards those that match them. At the same time, established scientists are more likely than others to be sought out as referees, particularly by high-prestige journals/publishers. As a result, ideas that harmonize with the established experts' are more likely to see print and to appear in premier journals than are iconoclastic or revolutionary ones." (Wikipedia, "Peer Review," various sources, references 41-48.)

Under such restrictions, as you would expect, researchers are forced to go along if they want to get along. Otherwise their careers are over before they've even begun. And it is within this environment that for some bizarre reason intelligent design has been absolutely barred from all discussion.

Guillermo Gonzalez is one of the astrobiologists who co-wrote the book, "The Privileged Planet". He was an assistant professor in the department of physics and astronomy at Iowa State University. When I checked into his background a little deeper I was disappointed to learn (but certainly not surprised) that after publishing his views in the book that he co-authored, his tenure was subsequently denied by the university when it came due. "Academic tenure is primarily intended to guarantee the right to academic freedom: it protects teachers and researchers when they dissent from prevailing opinion, openly disagree with authorities of any sort, or spend time on unfashionable topics. Thus academic tenure is similar to the lifetime tenure that protects some judges from external pressure. Without job security, the scholarly community as a whole may experience pressure to favor noncontroversial lines of academic inquiry. The intent of tenure is to allow original ideas to be more likely to arise, by giving scholars the intellectual autonomy to investigate the problems and solutions as they see fit, and to report their honest conclusions." (Wikipedia). After many appeals he has since moved on and currently resides at Ball State University in Indiana as an assistant professor in the department of physics and astronomy.

Two years prior to his consideration for tenure, approximately 130 members of the faculty of Iowa State University signed a statement opposing "all attempts to represent Intelligent Design as a scientific endeavor." Similar statements were issued by faculty at the University of Northern Iowa and at the University of Iowa. A total of approximately 400 professors signed the three petitions. Here are a few of the statements made:

"Intelligent Design has become a significant issue in science education, and it has now established a presence, even if minimal, at Iowa State University. Accordingly, if you are concerned about the negative impact of Intelligent Design on the integrity of science and on our university, please consider signing the "Statement on Intelligent Design by Iowa State University Faculty" below. We, therefore, urge all faculty members to uphold the integrity of our university of "science and technology," convey to students and the general public the importance of methodological naturalism in science, and reject efforts to portray Intelligent Design as science."

Wow. Does that sound like objective scientists to anybody? Banding together to pre-emptively strike down any and all theory of intelligent design, regardless of evidence. A Creator is just too unthinkable for these "scientists" regardless of where the evidence leads. Even the TV show, Ancient Aliens, is more objective than this bunch and regularly exposes the ridiculously flawed version of history we are required to believe. They, too, however, have an unthinkable attitude toward God, and so attribute our creation and assistance to aliens. The responsibility for the overwhelming evidence for our design has to belong to someone, right?

How very strange that any honest research that leads to logical conclusions pointing to intelligent design should be such an affront to the establishment, and so, be discredited straightaway. Once upon a time we formed theories based on evidence. Today we force the "evidence" to fit the theory and discard what doesn't fit. This inexcusable bias and intolerance to truth is, alas, the reality of the "science" of today. Shameful. We really have to do our own homework and fully utilize the Internet. Mainstream channels are unreliable and you simply won't find the truth on T.V. Hats off to the folks who are risking everything by resisting these academic bullies, sacrificing promotions and careers to reach us with the facts.
We can make up our own minds from there.

The Last Trump, Christian News Network 21 Comments [7/30/2015 2:16:39 PM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111300

Last week, the mainstream conservative press went apoplectic with rage at the epithet “cuckservative,” a popular insult in alternative right and neoreactionary circles. For the uninitiated, cuckservatives are right-wing politicians and pundits who make a big show of defending traditional values, yet when push comes to shove, they roll over for the left on every issue out of fear of being called “racist,” “sexist” or “homophobic.”

Conservatives like Red State’s Erick Erickson who throw tantrums over the term “cuckservative” are doing so because the term describes them perfectly. If you’re wondering whether you might be a cuckservative, Return of Kings has put together this handy guide to show you. Read on and discover if you’re the kind of conservative who enjoys watching your nation get brutally gang-raped by cultural Marxists…


4. You think the reason Detroit and other major U.S. cities are falling apart is because of unions

Cuckservatives are so desperate to avoid being called “racist” that they completely deny the role of race in American society. For example, National Review’s Kevin Williamson absurdly blames the dysfunction of Detroit on unions run amok and not the fact that the city is more than 80 percent black. While socialist policies will eventually ruin a nation, white liberal areas such as Vermont and Oregon have considerably higher standards of living than black areas with the same politics.


6. You support corporations, despite their advocacy for leftist causes

Cuckservatives are vociferously opposed to any government action that limits the power of corporations, from higher taxes to environmental regulations to minimum wage increases. These corporations have rewarded cuckservatives by eagerly shoving left-wing degeneracy down Americans’ throats. Not only does Hollywood and other popular media glorify homosexuality, transsexuality and other perversions, most corporations enforce leftist orthodoxy, contrary to the left’s claim that big business is pro-Republican.

For example, following the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing gay marriage, a whole host of corporations, from Google to Facebook, suddenly put up rainbow flag logos in solidarity with the LGBT movement. Here in Chicago, Allstate currently has posters plastered all over the L featuring two men holding hands. Just a few days ago, the WWE acceded to left-wing hysteria about “racism” by firing Hulk Hogan solely because he used a racial slur in a private conversation nearly a decade ago.

Even supposedly right-wing corporate figures are further to the left than the average American. For instance, the Koch brothers, favorite boogeymen of the left, are in favor of open borders. Yet despite being turkey-slapped repeatedly by their corporate masters, cuckservatives are all too happy to spread their cheeks for these multinational purveyors of leftist degeneracy.


Unfortunately for cuckservatives, their reign of squeezing their clammy mitts around conservatism’s balls is coming to an end. The sudden popularity of the “cuckservative” epithet shows that grassroots right-wingers are tired of the movement’s spinelessness and groveling to the left. With Donald Trump on the rise and cuckservatives on the run, reversing America’s decline has never looked more possible.

Matt Forney, Return of Kings 22 Comments [7/30/2015 4:43:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 13
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111306

Of course! Only an idiot would say that Jesus Christ was wrong about our origins (Matthew 19:4).

paulie, Christian News Networka 23 Comments [7/30/2015 5:15:50 PM]
Fundie Index: 11
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111307

yep, even these same naysayers today would never believe that "social cleansing" of places did not involve the obliteration of all evidence of these past "rulers" and their symbols/names ... as they cheer the Confederate flag, the Decalogue, & any reference of "God The Creator" removed from "Public" for fear of the FFRF...

I wager that we(The USA) will be the laughing stock of judgment day when the group of frail cowards(the least offensive description of reality) over at the FFRF calling themselves lawyers is put on display..... Why do these cowards not take on the giant graven religious goddess ISIS renamed Liberty on public land in NY’s harbor?… Or the National Cathedral home to homosexual & Islamic religions in DC? … Or the mandating of Darwinism in public schools?

Where is the Fools Following Religious Fiction(FFRF) & their cowards where actual “congress” might be found to be violating the 1st amendment in the bill of rights … instead of cash strapped school districts & communities? Missing in action!O_o! They are COWARDS, that is why.

GodsElasticAcre, Christian News Network 24 Comments [7/30/2015 5:15:58 PM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111309

Our religion is what built this great country and gave even you the right to be as depraved and deceitful as you wish. If your religion of intolerance and hatred were to rule, you'd be nothing more than a slave to a master who'll make sure you feel every whip lash under his tyrannical evil grin calling you by the name of 'Useful Idiot'.

Stupidity is curable, willful ignorance is not. 2Peter 3:5 Also see Romans 1:18-21 You're without excuse, God's wrath is coming some day, whether or not you believe it is irrelevant.

notsunkyet, Christian News Network 22 Comments [7/31/2015 2:50:09 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111352

My kids were in one of their classes at college, where each student had to get up in front of the class, and share with everyone, something that had happened to them in the past, that had completely changed their life.

Well, one of their classmates got up and began to share how her life had changed, when she had first met her imaginary friend in a dream.

This was a girl that both of my kids had seen before, and had felt decidedly uncomfortable around. When one of my kids had first met this girl, he had smiled at her and said “hi,” but the girl had looked right through him and then coldly ignored him. My kid thought she was just being shy, but now began to realize differently. This girl’s imaginary friend, was a demon, and this demon was jealously protecting its host from interacting with any believer.

The girl showed paintings that she had done of her imaginary friend to the classroom, and explained the imaginary world that her imaginary friend lived in. It was all quite detailed and colorful. She was a good artist.

As the girl began to describe her imaginary friend, the demon stood right there next to her.

The girl began to describe in great detail, what her imaginary friend looked like. “He has light blue skin, a pert pigs nose, and has one of its eyes missing. He is…”

At this, the girl paused, searching for words. One of my kids spoke up under his breath, and said “he’s tall!”

And even though there was no way that the girl could have heard him say this, (he was at the back of the room and she at the front,) she said “oh yes! And he’s very tall, standing about ten feet high.”

My son gave a slight nod of agreement.

The girl then said that this imaginary friend changed her life, when she accepted him as a friend, despite his disabilities. She claimed that this imaginary friend taught her not to judge others harshly, but to be accepting of everyone, no matter what their disability.

Dreams of Dunamis, Dreams of Dunamis 13 Comments [8/1/2015 5:05:56 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111310

That is exactly what Rev. Wright was saying. When you don't take his words out of context he's saying God is not blessing America anymore he is damning it. Just pick up a newspaper.....look at our morals today. The devil dances for joy as mother's kill their babies, father's kill whole families, rapes and murders and child molesting. Even Christians yell, "kill" to illegal immigrants and other poor and helpless. Women sleep with so many men they cannot say who the father is and it's politically incorrect to even 'shame' her. Our television set is full of murder, torture, and crimes against women and children. We are already ruled by Satanists as far as I'm concerned.

Sharktooth Martin, Christian News Network 21 Comments [7/31/2015 2:50:28 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 111364

Here is an interesting video advertising an antidepressant medication. I found it ironic that they actually had the gall to show that it is indeed, a demon!

dunamis, dream of dunamis 12 Comments [8/1/2015 5:08:10 PM]
Fundie Index: 7
WTF?! || meh
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 40