These are all groups that are dangerous and should be kept under a watchful eye.
All of these groups have one thing in common; they spread hatred towards people who don't think like they do, in most cases incite violence towards those people. For the most part they are on the border between sanity and being completely brain washed. Although they have different goals, they go about achieving these goals in basically the same way, with lies, exploitation, violence, misinformation, brain washing and so on, in order to further their own personal goals. Please don't ever take what these groups have to say seriously. And just because a group uses the word family in their name doesn't mean they have any intentions on helping people raise children, or have anything to do with actual families. I am part of a family and I consist of me, my girlfriend and my dog, and trust me, these groups don't offer me anything. Typically, when you see one of these lobbyist groups with the word family in it, you can often substitute the word family for one or all of the following:
"Fag haters"
"Abortion clinic Bombing"
"Free speech only for Christians"
"We love white people"
"We hate minorities"
"God"
"Hitler was right"
"Shut up, that's not what the bible says"
"I don't have to listen to you"
"Gun Lovers"
"Save embryos because they're people"
"Kill Convicts"
"Kill Arabs"
"The south was right"
"We love Bush"
"Michael Moore is fat"
"Teach your kids to hate"
"We're such fundamentalists that even the Taliban thinks we are nuts"
"We really don't want to take time to raise our kids ourselves, so we should make the rest of you, who didn't make the same life style choice as we did, suffer and let the government raise our kids for us, thus further restricting everyone else's freedoms."
http://www.godhatesfags.com Westboro Baptist Church
http://www.cc.org Christian Coalition (founded by Pat Robertson)
http://www.aclj.org American Center for Law and Justice (founded by Pat Robertson)
http://www.afa.net American "Family" Association= American "Fag Hater" Association
http://www.frc.org "Family" Research Council= "Shut up thats not what the Bible says" Research Council
http://www.cwfa.org They actually think Subaru is a gay car company
http://www.moralityinmedia.org
http://www.generationlife.org
http://www.family.org/ Focus on the Family AKA Sponge Bob is gay
http://www.patrobertson.com
http://www.falwell.com
http://www.faithandvalues.us
http://www.anncoulter.org
http://www.aqsa.org.uk
http://www.hamasonline.com
http://www.kingidentity.com Christian Identity Movement
http://www.cofcc.org Council of Conservative Citizens
http://www.dixienet.org League of the South
http://www.noi.org The Nation of Islam
Al-Qaeda: No explination needed
KKK: Hardly dangerous at this point, but still retarded
I have begun explaining each of these groups in greater detail, I will post a blog on each of them when I get around to it. And by no means is this list complete.
22 comments:
actually, you should take what those groups say completely seriously. if they are peddling hate, i assume they are serious about it. those of us who disagree need to seriously keep tabs on that shit so we know what we are up against in this country--the Republican national Committee included!
Well I didn’t mean don’t take them serious, I just meant don't take their comments with any credibility because its just propaganda.
And I think it would be hard to lump all republicans in the crazed hate monger group, sure there are some but there are democrats who hate republicans and what they stand for just as much, and will go to great lengths to discredit them and make them look as bad as possible. That causes the republicans to lump those people in the same category as the rioters at World Bank conferences and the ultra left wingers, and therefore they will never take anyone from any of these type of groups serious.
If you ever want debate that will get through to people, you can’t call the people you are trying to reach, or convince, a bunch of crazy nut jobs, because they wont listen and your point falls on deaf ears.
"Fag haters"
-I personally have no problem with 'fags' as some like to call them. I think they're a little messed up in the head, but since they don't reproduce, I don't take issue with them.
"Abortion clinic Bombing"
-Abortion clinics, court houses, schools, its really all the same when it comes to blowing things up. Definately not my style.
"Free speech only for Christians"
-Nah, we can let the minority say what they want too, but since this is a democracy, we only have to listen to the majority.
"We love white people"
-Well I'm glad that you love someone. I love white people too, but I also love some other people as well.
"We hate minorities"
-We don't have to hate minorities, but we don't have to do what they like either.
"God"
-Well, he hasn't struck me down yet, so I must be doing something right.
"Hitler was right"
-Hitler was right about alot of things. He said the best way to kill people was to take away their guns to defend themselves, so he did that, then went out and killed 13 million Jews, Christians, Gypsys, Gays, and anyone else he didn't like.
"Shut up, that's not what the bible says"
-Might say it, might not say it, but if they have read the whole thing, they might be right.
"I don't have to listen to you"
-Well I don't have to listen
to you, I take great amusement in the foolishness of others, before I decide how likely they are to procreate. I might have to remove them from the gene pool.
"Gun Lovers"
-Your not gonna catch me humping a gun. I just like shooting them a lot. Anyone who wants to take my guns away might get their throat slashed by a steak knife.
"Save babies"
-Only if their parents have good genes.
"Kill Convicts"
-Why not? I don't want one living near me.
"Kill Arabs"
-Why not? But why stop there?
"The south was right"
-The South got many things right, especially grits, home frys, and catfish.
"We love Bush"
-Bush really pisses me off too. He things its government's job to pay for stuff like school, and fund media outlets who can't make it on their own.
"Michael Moore is fat"
-He's not? Maybe he's just pretending to be fat so he gets more screen space.
"Teach your kids to hate"
-Don't hate inferior people, kids, just pitty them; and make sure they stay out of the gene pool.
"We really don't want to take time to raise our kids ourselves, so we should make the rest of you, who didn't make the same life style choice as we did, suffer and let the government raise our kids for us, thus further restricting everyone else's freedoms."
-Then I seriously hope you're not taking the time to have these kids.
"Free speech only for Christians"
-Nah, we can let the minority say what they want too, but since this is a democracy, we only have to listen to the majority.
i think that if you take a second look at this years election results, you'll see that the Christians arent the minority.
"We love Bush"
-Bush really pisses me off too. He things its government's job to pay for stuff like school, and fund media outlets who can't make it on their own.
you have a right to speak out agianst the President. but i have the right to call you an idiot. he funds schools because they... .umm.... needed funding because clinton screwed it up. and if you're referring to Fox news, i think they are doing alright on their own.
No, I was mainly referring to PBS and NPR, who would be utterly dead without government subsidies.
As for the education, it shouldn't be the government's job to educate people. Government schools are more expensive and less effective than their privately run counterparts. Also, education is probably the most regulated industry in the US at the moment.
"i think that if you take a second look at this years election results, you'll see that the Christians arent the minority."
-I never said they were the minority, because it is obvious that they are a rather powerful voting block. But if this is a true democracy, the minority would be completely irrelevant because a true democracy is basically 3 wolves and a lamb deciding what's for dinner.
Get over this democracy / majority rules thing. America is not a democracy and the majority doesn't rule, the rich minority does, but that's another blog all together.
The United States is a republic, not a democracy.
re-pub-lic: noun
1 a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president; also : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government
2 a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law; also : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government.
And if the majority ruled then Al Gore would have been up for re-election last November and not George Bush.
Technically it's a democratic republic, but yeah, that's a whole other topic in itself. But being part of the Christian majority, and the rich minority, I really don't have all that much to complain about.
Except Bush, I'll still complain about him. I'll stop complaining if he cuts a few hundred billion in pork spending out of the budget. And I want him to militarize our boarders, especially the Mexican boarder.
i dont know much about our president's immigration policies or border control or whatever you color it, but i also understand that he kind of walked in and by the time he got his boxes unpacked he had the crisis of our lifetime on hand. our military IS a little busy at the moment, if you hadn't noticed..... and if someone had aimed a plane at my house, and hit several of my friends houses, i wouldn't subside and get on my knees and beg for mercy, especially if i had the world's strongest military resources on my side. i personally would've soaked up as much oil as possible and then nuked them, but thats just me.
I like that idea too. If we think that Bin Laden is hiding in a random cave in a remote part of nowhere, lets just start carpet nuking the place. He can't hide in the caves if they no longer exist. Proving we vaporized him would be a near impossible task though.
Just because I am warning people about all the bullshit that is out there doesn’t mean that I am spreading hatred towards these groups. What it means is that just because someone disguises their agenda with the term family doesn't mean that they are a family oriented group, nor does it mean that they care about your family or my family. I am just warning people of this fact. Basically what I am saying is read between the lines/lies. I can start a group called Faith and Values and it would be an entirely different group that one that Falwell is in, I have values, just not his values, and I have faith that evolution is how we explain our existence and faith that there isn't really a God, and just because my values don't include rewriting the constitution and gay bashing, doesn’t mean they aren’t values. I think tolerance and equality, and allowing people the freedom to do what they want are better values than Falwells who preaches against tolerance, equality and most of what our constitution is all about. Its just a different interpretation of "values".
Isn’t being a Christian, and hating homos and adulterers just as contradictory? Jesus specifically says to love your neighbor and your enemy; I never made such claims or promised to live under those pretenses. I don't love my neighbors or my enemies, so at least I am consistent. And no that doesn’t mean I hate them either.
What's funny is the inconsistency of the phrase "Let people do what they want. . ." You're not letting myself and other conservatives do what we want. Additionally, if my values were to track you down and kill you for your beliefs you wouldn't tolerate my values, would you? Or, what if someone's values consist of molesting every child in their sight? Or, what if someone's values consist of killing people of other races? Or, what if someone's values consist of oppressing women? Don't you see the need for absolutes!? Your system doesn't work in the real world. That is why it is necessary to live by the standards, morals, and rules dictated by an unseen, but very real God. If we get to choose our own values it leads to chaos. Falwell's application of those terms given to us by God may be very distorted, but that does not distort the image or character of God. I don't hate homosexuals. But I am very much a conservative Christian. In fact, my love for homosexuals leads me to disciple them to a better way of life - the life God called them to live. However, my approach to homosexuals is the same if I were dealing with a drunkard, adulterer, liar, or thief. The Bible is clear about each of these actions being a sin and for me to correct them is not an act of hate, but love. It is the same principle if my child persists on sticking things into an electrical outlet. I know his actions are dangerous and potentially harmful. So, I swat his butt to make my correction meaningful and understood. Is that hate? Or is that love? Liberals need to understand that discipline is not an act of hate. You see, those who run from an organized moral code (ie. religion) are often a product of selfishness and a lack of self-control. My guess is that you are disguising sin in your life as liberalism. It's easier to justify your sin, which leads to presupposition. You fear a life without the sin you love. So you have created a philosophy that fits your lifestyle and tell yourself that your lifestyle is dictated by your values. That's why you hate Christians so much. Accountability is what you hate. A Christian's lifestyle is dictated by God's commands. You will never find a Christian who was a wonderful person before accepting Christ. The change ALWAYS occurs after they relinquish control of their lives. You are a common story. I was once like you.
Maybe I should have prefaced that phrase by saying "let people do what they want up until the point it interferes with others". There you happy? Two guys kissing in San Francisco, whats on a TV channel that you aren't watching, what I am allowed to read, what music I wan't to listen to, has no impact on what a farmer in Kansas does or how he raises his kids.
Yes it does! Because raising a child does not occur on a neutral plane. Raising a child requires an variable environment. A person can only control his child's environment until it becomes detrimental to the child's development. Thus, sharing an environment with others becomes necessary. When people blatantly publicize their "personal" choices it becomes a personal problem for that said "Kansas farmer" (which by the way is a very bigoted statement - not to insinuate you are intolerant or hateful though). If liberals have the "right" to portray their personal decisions on every form of media then conservatives should be given equal right to those forms of media as well. This is, in fact, what you are professing to fight for. Thus, we conservatives will continue to publicize our "personal" decisions, following the clear lead of liberals.
I assume this means that if I want to raise my child as a gay atheist then Pat Robertson is no longer allowed to broadcast his show since his show is hateful towards and contrary to how a gay atheist would want to live his life.
Or how about this, you watch Pat Robertson and I'll watch lesbians make out on Cinemax and you just don't get Cinemax or let your child watch it. No one said you have to own a TV.
Are you saying there are no farmers in Kansas??
In the same way, you don't have to watch the 700 Club or listen to Focus on the Family. Follow your own advice!
Now you are reaching for straws. You've been clearly outdueled here. You are not getting the message. The things you and other liberals are asking for - tolerance, acceptance, and opposition submission - are the very things conservatives hope and dream for as well. However, they are striving for a certain amount of purity in the public realm. You, on the other hand, are asking for freedom to do whatever (no matter how crude, vulgar, impure, distasteful, or disrespectful it may be) you want wherever and whenever you choose. But the very thing you condemn us for, shoving our principles down your throat, is what you do to us on a daily basis through your behaviors and actions. Private, personal decisions should be expressed in private, personal ways. When is the last time you saw a heterosexual Christian couple obscenely making out in public to prove a point? When is the last time you saw Pat Robertson produce a television show on primetime television that promoted heterosexuality by displaying it in full detail in the bedroom? The liberal lifestyle is bold, blatant, and obscene. And I still can't figure out why. Maybe it comes down to the need for attention. I don't know. But you can continue to indulge in your destructive practices (ie. lesbians on Cinemax). And you can continue to "brainwash" your children toward your philosophies and lifestyle (ironic isn't it?). Because it truly comes down to the product we want to produce with our lives. You can continue to serve yourself and your own indulgences. Or you can choose to serve others and their true needs. That is the bottom line difference between a liberal and a conservative. How much do you love yourself and others? The facts point to the answer - not very much.
Define obscene.
If Pat Robertson is allowed to offend me then Larry Flynt has the right to offend you. I call what Pat talkes about obsense and offensive not to mention wrong. Its all a matter of perspective. What you call immoral I call artistic, what you call moral I call evil.
I have no way of knowing weather or not the people I see making out on the streets are Christian or not. Since 85% of this country is Christian I assume most of them are. However, I know that 100% of the fat ugly people I see making out are indeed fat and ugly and since that grosses me out that should be illegal and they shouldn't be allowed to marry under your definition of who should be allowed to marry.
How is watching lesbians of Cinemax any worse than listening to a drug addict, I mean Rush Limbaugh on the radio. How is it destructive. I never destroyed anything after seeing lesbians. PLenty of people have destroyed things while doing drugs.
When you say tolerance and acceptance to the opposition you are saying that I should be tolerant of hate speech on the 700 club but you shouldn't be tolerant of Cinemax, Howard Stern or Harry Potter. The real comprimise here is for liberals to agree that Robertson has the right to air his show and voice his opinion no matter how wrong and hateful it is (which we have done) and conservatives must do the same and take responsibility for their own parenting instead of relying on a huge central government to do ir for us; which is what I thought Republicans were supposed to be about.
Your last post was so full of contradictions I don't know where to begin.
#1. You are against drugs. Am I hearing you correctly? Since a well-known conservative struggles with drugs you are against them? I hardly believe this is a consistent stance throughout your philosophies.
#2. Sexual immorality hardly ever has a tangible effect on the participant. However, sexual deviants often victimize the innocent. I would suggest watching lesbians, or any porn for that matter, will lead to a difficulty in marriage, self-control, health, and overall purity. It corrupts the mind, which leads to corrupt actions.
#3. There is nothing biblically incorrect about "fat and ugly" people marrying. Once again, you are grasping for straws.
#4. Victimization of others is not art.
#5. And to steal a phrase from an ultra-liberal. "It takes a village to raise a child." If indeed that is true, then government and community both have a shared responsibility for the cultural climate we allow in the United States. If we are truly satisfied with today's current climate, it saddens me.
I didn't say anything about drug use. If you must know, I think the amount of people in jail for drugs is ridiculous and yes maybe we should save the room for violent offenders, especially for those who only smoke weed from time to time. I am merely pointing out one of many hypocrisies of your conservative poster child. So are you saying you are for drugs since Rush does them?
As far as the lesbian scene corrupting society Ill say this: A. I’m not married (which means I actually get to have sex) so there is no marriage to destroy. B. Many married couples watch and make their own porn and those couples are probably the ones who have a greater likelihood of staying together as opposed to people who are sexually repressed. Good sex makes for a good relationship; if the sex is bad usually it’s because the relationship is bad. Who are you to define what is pure?? I never have impure sex. Which lesbian is a victim? How is watching high paid actors having sex a victimization? Very few people like watching gang rapes and trying to say one is the same as the other is simply ignorant.
Yes, there is Biblical condemnation of fat people. Ever hear of the deadly sin gluttony? Ever hear the phrase your body is a temple? Jesus is actually pretty clear about this even though, just like most issues, Christians tend to ignore the ones that would complicate their lifestyles and instead focus on other issues that would complicate other lifestyles such as Homosexuality which Jesus never spoke out against like he did obesity or any other thing that could harm your body. That being said, thankfully we live in the United States of America, not the United States of Jesus therefore what the Bible says is not our law. You don't see everyone going to mandatory Church services on Saturday do you? Well that was a law of the Bible which clearly the US does not have on its law books which is proof that we don't live in the United States of Christianity.
And on your fifth point I would just like to get the Republicans stance on big government; are they for it or against it?? Do you want the government telling you that you can only have sex on Wednesdays and only with black women and only in the bedroom under the covers? Then now you know how we feel when someone tries to legislate who, when, how and where we liberals decide to have sex. And lets just forget the part about parents being responsible for raising their own children and it not being my or the governments jobs to raise your children and monitor what they are watching. That is your job. Don't make the rest of us suffer for your lifestyle choices and for being a lazy parent.
You are so incompetent I don't know where to begin. We were discussing marriage, not about obesity being a sin or not. You are so blind with the need to appear radical that your emotion carry the bulk of your communication and the logic (or lack there of) is simply thrown out the window. I refuse to banter with people who don't know what they believe only what they don't believe.
Oh wow, the incompetent line; thats almost as good as "off your meds again". Its funny that when someone has no response they resort to ad hominem attacks ignoring the issue at hand. Its a very primitive debating technique.
So you are saying the Bible is pro gluttony? Pro fat unhealthy people??
We weren't discussing marriage. We were discussing the fact that we live in a fee country and it’s neither my job nor Cinemax's job to raise your child as you see fit; it’s your job. If you allow the airwaves to be filled with Radio show hosts who call people with Parkinson’s disease liars and the TV to be filled with some old kook who talks about how Hurricanes are going to destroy towns who don't jail homosexuals then you have to leave room for the other side which is lesbians making out on Cinemax or a rapper bitching about crooked cops or a gay guy telling us why he should be allowed to marry is partner. The constitution doesn't say free speech for Christians only. Your argument that Cinemax and Jay-Z interfere with your parenting abilities just points out that you are a poor parent. There are plenty of people who would rather their children listen to JayZ than to Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell or any other hateful, ethnocentric bigot. If they are allowed to pollute my child’s ears then JayZ must be allowed to pollute your child’s ears. I can warn my children not to fall prey to their banter and I can choose not to give them access to those shows by putting a lock on the TV, not allowing them to have cable in their room, or not having cable TV at all. It’s pretty simple.
Now if you can find me a passage in the New Testament, the book where Jesus teaches Christians how to live, that says two women cannot marry each other I will at least admit that as far as Christianity goes, it is a sin. Even though you won't find that it still wouldn't bolster your argument that gay marriage should be illegal because in the US, unlike Iran, there is no state religion and therefore laws cannot be made based on religious grounds. That’s not to say that it doesn't happen; it’s just unconstitutional. And before you say something remedial such as murder being in the Bible Ill point out that Hammurabis code of laws predates Moses by several hundred years and that is where most of the 10 commandments were derived from; not god.
Proverbs 23
1 When you sit to dine with a ruler, note well what [a] is before you,
2 and put a knife to your throat if you are given to gluttony.
3 Do not crave his delicacies, for that food is deceptive.
4 Do not wear yourself out to get rich;have the wisdom to show restraint.
5 Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle.
6 Do not eat the food of a stingy man, do not crave his delicacies;
7 for he is the kind of man who is always thinking about the cost. [b] "Eat and drink," he says to you, but his heart is not with you.
8 You will vomit up the little you have eaten and will have wasted your compliments.
Matthew 11:
19The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and "sinners." ' But wisdom is proved right by her actions."
Post a Comment