REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

"‘God Help Us’: Fox News Columnist Calls Pope Francis the ‘Catholic Church’s Obama’

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Saturday, December 14, 2013 13:43
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4477
PAGE 1 of 2

Sunday, December 8, 2013 1:19 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Conservatives’ uneasy relationship with Pope Francis I got even more complicated after he issued his recent apostolic exhortation that criticized the “idolatry of money.” Judge Andrew Napolitano blasted the pope for “attacking free-market capitalism” ( http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/4/napolitano-liberty-the-
wellspring-of-capitalism-an
/) Rush Limbaugh accused him of preaching “pure Marxism” ( http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/02/rush-limbaugh-vs-the-pope/) And now, in an op-ed for FoxNews.com, editor Adam Shaw takes things one step further by calling Pope Francis the “Catholic Church’s Obama,” and not in a positive way.

The rest of Shaw’s headline — “God help us” — belies the tone of the article, which warns that the current pope will “prove a disaster for the Catholic Church” just as President Barack Obama “has been a disappointment for America.” He tells his fellow Catholics that “should be suspicious when bastions of anti-Catholicism in the left-wing media are in love with him.” He doesn’t mention him by name, but it seems possible Shaw is referring in part to Bill Maher, who has repeatedly said he believes the new pope is an “atheist.”

Throughout the column, Shaw offers at least five more direct, unfavorable comparisons between Pope Francis and President Obama:
Quote:

“Just like President Obama loved apologizing for America, Pope Francis likes to apologize for the Catholic Church.”

“Just like Obama thought he’d won over Putin by promising a reset, Francis thinks by talking vacuously about the poor, he will be respected.”

“Just as Obama snubs Britain and Israel, Pope Francis swipes at practicing Catholics.”

“Like Obama, Francis is unable to see the problems that are really endangering his people.”

“Like Obama he mistakes the faithful for the enemy, the enemy for his friend, condescension for respect, socialism for justice and capitalism for tyranny.”

Read the full column at http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/04/pope-francis-is-catholic-chu
rchs-obama-god-help-us/
]


Shaw ends his piece by upping the stakes of the new pope’s reign and suggesting that he’s “hell-bent on a path to undo the great work of Benedict XVI and John Paul II, and to repeat critical mistakes of the past.” http://www.mediaite.com/online/god-help-us-fox-news-columnist-calls-po
pe-francis-the-catholic-churchs-obama/


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 1:52 PM

JONGSSTRAW


Just sounds like more studitiy from very stupid people. Why these people and others are attacking the Pope is beyond my ability to defend or even understand. I mean ... WHAT THE FUCK? ... he's the Pope, he's not Putin. I can only shudder to imagine what they'd say about Gandhi or Mother Teresa if they were alive today. I say to the Pope critics ... get a job, get a life, get a clue.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 1:55 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



I think their points are valid. *shrug*

Funny how the libs are all praising the Pope on some issues, but will turn on a dime when he still speaks out against abortion.

He's still against it, right ?

No dog in this fight.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 2:04 PM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

I think their points are valid. *shrug*

Funny how the libs are all praising the Pope on some issues, but will turn on a time when he still speaks out against abortion.

He's still against it, right ?


That's the point. There's things believers and non-believers can agree with or not agree with him on. So why attack him for the things you don't like? It's just stupid. He's the Pope, the cute old guy in the funny hat. He's a spritual leader without any real political power to do anything. Why are some people so angry and/or afraid of him?

You don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with the Pope.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 2:36 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw: He's the Pope, the cute old guy in the funny hat. He's a spritual leader without any real political power to do anything. Why are some people so angry and/or afraid of him?

You don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with the Pope.



Tell that to Sinead O'Conner. Oh, how the Left LOVED it when she 'stood up' to the Pope then, but now, even after he's waded into the political arena, if anyone dares to question or challenge him, they're CRAZY !!



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 2:49 PM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw: He's the Pope, the cute old guy in the funny hat. He's a spritual leader without any real political power to do anything. Why are some people so angry and/or afraid of him?

You don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with the Pope.



Tell that to Sinead O'Conner. Oh, how the Left LOVED it when she 'stood up' to the Pope then, but now, even after he's waded into the political arena, if anyone dares to question or challenge him, they're CRAZY !!


If psycho Sinead O'Conner is the new standard-bearer of what is appropriate and acceptable behavior, we're in a lot more trouble than anything this Pope has to say.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 2:50 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Sure wouldn't be nice if every time anyone who might possibly be left-leaning does or says something, Rap didn't turn it into "The Left".

My problem with the Catholic Church has been that they previously focused almost exclusively ON abortion and homosexuality, to the exclusion of the aspects of Christianity which I always thought WERE "Christianity"; that and their pedophilia scandals and coverups. I've resented and spoken up mostly against their ACTIONS, like prayers of exorcism against gay weddings, attacking homosexuals physically, harassing people at abortion clinics, and their many, many political activities. To castigate the Pope because of his espousing of actual Christian values as supposedly "wading into the political arena", given just how energetically active the Church has been politically in this country for how long, is pretty amusing, actually.

ETA: I just noticed what Jong posted, which about says it for me. I remember some kerfuffle about O'Connor, but didn't pay attention to it at the time, any more than I pay much attention to what any celebrity says.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 4:46 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
If psycho Sinead O'Conner is the new standard-bearer of what is appropriate and acceptable behavior, we're in a lot more trouble than anything this Pope has to say.



And you're missing the point, entirely. No one is using Sinead as any sort of standard for how to disagree w/ the Pope. No one on the Right is tearing his photo apart , on live TV. ( SNL, Niki. Look it up )

All I'm saying is it's curious how the Left celebrated her antics, yet act all mortified the Right has its own points of contention.

Quote:

but didn't pay attention to it at the time, any more than I pay much attention to what any celebrity says.



Yeah, I'm gonna save this one for later.


Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 6:15 PM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
If psycho Sinead O'Conner is the new standard-bearer of what is appropriate and acceptable behavior, we're in a lot more trouble than anything this Pope has to say.



And you're missing the point, entirely. No one is using Sinead as any sort of standard for how to disagree w/ the Pope. No one on the Right is tearing his photo apart , on live TV.

All I'm saying is it's curious how the Left celebrated her antics, yet act all mortified the Right has its own points of contention.

Are you sure that no one on the Left was actually upset and against what she did? I seem to recall a mainstream media backlash at the time.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 6:42 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Maybe these Cons should get together and impeach or recall His Holiness. (Oh, wait, it doesn't work that way, does it?) Or maybe they should organize and vote against him when he's up for re-election. (Oh, it doesn't work that way either?) Maybe they could just oppose everything he does and accomplish nothing until he's out of office. Or maybe they should shut up and butt out of something that isn't any of their business. The College of Cardinals, no bunch of fools or dummies, picked him for, among other things, holiness and spiritual truth. Anybody who disagrees can go worship at some other church.

He's not MY Pope, I'm not one of his flock, but he's the boss of that church, and he's entitled to say or do whatever he wants. His followers are supposed to obey him, or leave his church.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 8:22 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Funny how the libs are all praising the Pope on some issues, but will turn on a dime when he still speaks out against abortion.


Wow, is this an illuminating statement as to how the RWA brain works.

To me, when an authority figure backs issues that I believe in, I will speak my agreement and even praise the person. If that same person backs issues I do not agree with, of course I will not agree and praise. This is a no brainer to me. I support or not based on the issues, and I realize that I will not agree with any person 100% of the time. When I do I do, when I don't I don't. No need to hide it, no need to force it to be all black or all white.

Rappy, on the other, finds it "funny", by which he clearly means inconsistent and certainly a weakness to be criticized, to both agree and disagree with an authority figure. Once he has praised a person, he has chosen a side and must never switch over. Ditto with criticizing a person. All black or all white.

This is supported by all those years when Rappy licked W's jackboots (to use a Frem-word) no matter what and by his inability to say anything good about O now. Also supported by how he (and Geezer and Jongs) will NEVER start a thread praising a Dem or criticizing a Repub. That would only make him seem inconsistent and weak, I guess.

Yes, we already knew that RWAs follow authoritative personalities rather than being guided by issues (or facts), but I seldom see Rappy come right out and state it so bluntly. By the quoted post, he considers it is a character flaw to both praise and disagree with an authority figure, no matter what issues are involved.

Really: interesting.

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 10:04 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Okay, I looked it up. She tore up a photo of the Pope on SNL. This is something Rap uses to show how "The Left" loves attacking the Pope? Weird. And yeah, google "Sinead O'Connor Pope backlash" and you'll find all kinds of stuff decrying it, like:

"It's been 20 years since she did this. I remember the outrage."

"I still remember when they came back from break, they had a darkened theater with the host explaining that something happen, they apologize, and it won't be seen again. It might have been done for the rerun. I can't remember, but you would have thought someone shot someone in the studio."

"No, everyone was just stunned. It was one of those times you literally couldn't believe what you had just seen, whether you approved or condemned."

"Madonna mocked it months later on SNL."

"The week after, Joe Pesci said he would have slapped her in his opening monologue and had the picture taped up."

"Then a few weeks after that, Jan Hooks cameo'd as O'Connor in a couple of skits, one being "Sinead O'Connor's Good-Time Jamboree" where she had a green bow on her head, got booed, cried and Kris Kristofferson walked her off (like at the Dylan concert.) Then they had Hooks as Sinead trying to explain why she did it, making no sense and saying it was the devil."

So it appears she was mocked and put down by any number of people, and a lot of people were shocked and disgusted...obviously only those on "The Right", according to Rap...

Or something. Seems a really strange thing to make a huge deal out of in comparison to supposedly knowledgeable, right-wing spokesmen calling the current pope a Marxist, etc.

ETA: Thank you Magons, NewOld and Jong for words of sense.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 8, 2013 10:34 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


To be fair to O'Connor, Ireland was, and still is to some extent, a Theocracy in which the Catholic Church had an enormous amount of power, and largely power without checks and balances. O'Connor's protest, as was her anger, was valid.

The right have no reason to love Francis, he is a reformist, softening the churches hardline attitudes to gays. Not certain where he stands on abortion, contraception et al. But he's certainly vocal about the inequities in the current system.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 6:06 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
If psycho Sinead O'Conner is the new standard-bearer of what is appropriate and acceptable behavior, we're in a lot more trouble than anything this Pope has to say.



And you're missing the point, entirely. No one is using Sinead as any sort of standard for how to disagree w/ the Pope. No one on the Right is tearing his photo apart , on live TV.

All I'm saying is it's curious how the Left celebrated her antics, yet act all mortified the Right has its own points of contention.

Are you sure that no one on the Left was actually upset and against what she did? I seem to recall a mainstream media backlash at the time.



The outrage was in the manner which she chose to display her dislike for the Pope.

M4P - Wow. You sure did go through a lot of contortions and extrapolations to get from point A to point B. As well as some revisionist history, too. But I get that from folks like you. I really do.



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 11:20 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Sure wouldn't be nice if every time anyone who might possibly be left-leaning does or says something, Rap didn't turn it into "The Left".



But that would require a modicum of integrity, and two brain cells for him to rub together.




"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 11:23 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Funny how the libs are all praising the Pope on some issues, but will turn on a dime when he still speaks out against abortion.


Wow, is this an illuminating statement as to how the RWA brain works.

To me, when an authority figure backs issues that I believe in, I will speak my agreement and even praise the person. If that same person backs issues I do not agree with, of course I will not agree and praise. This is a no brainer to me. I support or not based on the issues, and I realize that I will not agree with any person 100% of the time. When I do I do, when I don't I don't. No need to hide it, no need to force it to be all black or all white.

Rappy, on the other, finds it "funny", by which he clearly means inconsistent and certainly a weakness to be criticized, to both agree and disagree with an authority figure. Once he has praised a person, he has chosen a side and must never switch over. Ditto with criticizing a person. All black or all white.

This is supported by all those years when Rappy licked W's jackboots (to use a Frem-word) no matter what and by his inability to say anything good about O now. Also supported by how he (and Geezer and Jongs) will NEVER start a thread praising a Dem or criticizing a Repub. That would only make him seem inconsistent and weak, I guess.

Yes, we already knew that RWAs follow authoritative personalities rather than being guided by issues (or facts), but I seldom see Rappy come right out and state it so bluntly. By the quoted post, he considers it is a character flaw to both praise and disagree with an authority figure, no matter what issues are involved.

Really: interesting.



No kidding.

Agreeing with people on issues because they have a stance you endorse, vs. Standing by (or steadfastly against) an authority figure NO MATTER WHAT, because of their party (or other distinction) regardless of the actual ideals they espouse.

It's scary just how many people see that as productive or even workable.




"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 3:54 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

M4P - Wow. You sure did go through a lot of contortions and extrapolations to get from point A to point B. As well as some revisionist history, too. But I get that from folks like you. I really do.



And Rap does the condescending cock act when his obvious wrongness is pointed out... nothing illuminating about that! It happens so often.

Pray tell, what did I revise? Let's see if you can clarify:

Quote:

Funny how the libs are all praising the Pope on some issues, but will turn on a dime when he still speaks out against abortion.


Can you expand on what's so "funny" about sometimes agreeing and sometimes disagreeing with an authority figure based on issues? Or by "funny" did you really mean to praise and envy the lefties on this board for the way we are steadfast on principles?

Go ahead, revise your posting history, though it's quoted word for word.


*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 6:25 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:


The outrage was in the manner which she chose to display her dislike for the Pope.




She was actually protesting against child abuse within the church, 20 years before the full horror became public. yes her protest outraged, and that's kind of the point of protest. It has to be a gesture that sparks controversy and comment, otherwise no one notices.

My problem with the fox columnist is that I disagree with him, whereas I agreed with Sinead. They are different popes, different arguments, different circumstances.

I don't believe anyone here is saying 'you shouldnt criticise the pope' so your argument is kind of null and void.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 6:58 PM

BYTEMITE


For the record, Pope Francis is still against contraception and also about allowing women into the priesthood. Gay men are fine though.

I don't think the Catholic church is really all that inclusive or modern yet.

And honestly I don't know how much of the church for the poor stuff is really meant and how much is propaganda that the church has cooked up - Francis probably believes it, being a Jesuit, and has made choices to not live in the resplendent papal residence, but I have doubts he will really be able to enforce anything in the rest of the church.

I think the Catholic church will continue to be corrupt and I think Pope Francis, while having a lot of good points about materialism, is a human being elected to a position by other human beings.

(still a cynic)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 7:26 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
I think the Catholic church will continue to be corrupt and I think Pope Francis, while having a lot of good points about materialism, is a human being elected to a position by other human beings.


Indeed.

But despite not being Catholic, and in fact being in most cases diametrically opposed to their beliefs, I do kinda like the guy already, he horrifies the Vatican, winds up and annoys the mighty, and has an element of humanity I respect.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/12/03/3011421/pope-francis-homel
ess
/

More love-thy-neighbor and less burn-the-heretic can only do them good.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 7:38 PM

BYTEMITE


Yeah.

Hell the only Saint I ever LIKED was Saint Francis, and the only monks I ever liked were the Franciscans/Jesuits.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 10:54 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


One of the problems with catholism is the its own system of power is basically the same medievel model that was based upon the Roman system of governance. All of them not only open to power abuses, but down right enabling of abuse. And that's the thing with the church, you have an instition where there are good people, but there are no checks and balances on power, no transparency and lots of rigidity. While it helps that Francis is probably more of a good guy than he predecessors, the whole system is wrong, and that includes taking your day to day philosophy from an ancient yext written for a bunch of desert tribes, and relying on a mythical being to uphold the law.

What could go possibly go wrong?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 9, 2013 11:43 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
While it helps that Francis is probably more of a good guy than he predecessors, the whole system is wrong, and that includes taking your day to day philosophy from an ancient yext written for a bunch of desert tribes, and relying on a mythical being to uphold the law.



Amen to this and several posts prior.

An eye-opening experience for me was when certain long inactive posters here claimed that an atheist has no reason to be moral if they have no belief in God. This shocked me. I have considered the place of God in my life and decided that if my excuse for being moral is my fear or love of HIM (cue the angel's voices) then I would not actually be moral. I would only be sheep, concerned with my own survival and self glorification. I would exist only as a reflection of some other (imaginary) creature.

I choose to act for the greater good because that is what *I* choose, and if I lose faith with everything around me (which I do) that's a bummer but it doesn't change the person I am. Unlike those who place all their morality at God's feet: if by some unfortunate chance they lose their faith and have nothing else, they spiral deep, and have no way of knowing or even caring about right versus wrong. They are weak, they are nothing without their God.

Whoa to a people so primitive that they require a mythical fantasy to uphold morality for them. They have no solid standing in their own selves, but are fair game to be manipulated by any fad or charlatan who claims to speak for God. The don't have their own center to rely on. It must be horrible to live like that.

And now for something completely different, as Monty Python would say...

Not completely, but still... I am pleased with this pope for sure. He's making the waves that need to be made to pull this church into the present times. As much as I abhor religion in my own life, I fully believe that it is a positive and useful part of other lives who use it in a less horrifying way as I describe in the first half of this post. A majority of religious folk are A-OK, they take from it what makes life better for them and leave the rest alone.

The church needs to catch up with these people. Francis is a start.


*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 9:05 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
They are different popes, different arguments, different circumstances.



Yep.

Quote:


I don't believe anyone here is saying 'you shouldnt criticise the pope' so your argument is kind of null and void.




Well, if the Pope wades into politics, and is sounding like a Marxist, why isn't it OK to criticize him ?

The problem I have , and that many conservatives have, is the attempt to some how connect caring for the poor, which is a fine thing indeed, as being some virtuous holy ground on which Marxism resides, and is therefore exempt from any criticism. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. As Bono so clearly points out. Promoting Statism as a means to combat any " crisis " , be it poverty or AGW, is a very real threat which DOES deserve attention and commentary.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 9:26 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Amen to Magons and others, too, and especially what Mal4 wrote:
Quote:

....if my excuse for being moral is my fear or love of HIM (cue the angel's voices) then I would not actually be moral. I would only be sheep, concerned with my own survival and self glorification. I would exist only as a reflection of some other (imaginary) creature.

I choose to act for the greater good because that is what *I* choose, and if I lose faith with everything around me (which I do) that's a bummer but it doesn't change the person I am. Unlike those who place all their morality at God's feet: if by some unfortunate chance they lose their faith and have nothing else, they spiral deep, and have no way of knowing or even caring about right versus wrong. They are weak, they are nothing without their God.



That's exactly how I feel, and part of why I went from agnostic to buddhist.

And by the way, Mal4, "an atheist has no reason to be moral if they have no belief in God" is an argument MANY "Christians" make, and precisely the argument which I posted Palin made about our Constitution; if you don't believe in God, you have no morality, ergo the Constitution would be meaningless. Didn't shock me, I've heard variations so many times, but does rather disgust me.

As to "They have no solid standing in their own selves, but are fair game to be manipulated by any fad or charlatan who claims to speak for God. The don't have their own center to rely on. It must be horrible to live like that", that's the aspect of religion I hate the most, because it is what CREATES and enables the power structure Magons described...and for some people, it makes them self-righteous in believing they know it all and have the right to condemn others for whatever their religious leaders tell them is "right" and "wrong". There are many good things about religion, but the worst is the power it gives some over others' minds and lives.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:04 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Well, if the Pope wades into politics, and is sounding like a Marxist, why isn't it OK to criticize him ?


You can criticize him for that, but, the comparison is sorta faulty. He doesn't really sound like a Marxist, he sounds like previous popes. The catholic church was and is still corrupt as hell, but in ye olde days it was also one of the biggest charitable institutions around.

Plus, know who else was depicted as a Jesuit/Franciscan monk? Friar Tuck of all those Robin Hood stories.

This really is not all that surprising that he would have and express these points of view.

His talk about some sort of global economic council is more a reflection of the church and it's continuing greed for power and control than about communism. Ask yourself who exactly Francis benevolently thinks should be in CHARGE of the purse strings there - for the sake of the poor, of course. He BELIEVES his message, I think, but he's just a useful figurehead for those in the church who don't care snot about the poor and just want more money.

He's arguing for theocracy, not communism. Which is bad in different ways. But you should be precise.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:12 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:

He's arguing for theocracy, not communism. Which is bad in different ways. But you should be precise.



Well, both desire power, under the guise of taking control " for the greater good ", and are threats to freedom, imo.

A socialist pope, well hell, that's just the worst of the worst.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:39 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Well, both desire power, under the guise of taking control " for the greater good ", and are threats to freedom, imo.

A socialist pope, well hell, that's just the worst of the worst.



All governments do that.

Francis endorses theocracy.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 3:04 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
I have considered the place of God in my life and decided that if my excuse for being moral is my fear or love of HIM (cue the angel's voices) then I would not actually be moral. I would only be sheep, concerned with my own survival and self glorification. I would exist only as a reflection of some other (imaginary) creature.

I choose to act for the greater good because that is what *I* choose, and if I lose faith with everything around me (which I do) that's a bummer but it doesn't change the person I am.


Booyah, on this we have an accord - of course, my claim to any morality is a bit shakier as I do some "good" things out of sheer spite against a society built around rewarding sociopathy while punishing altruism.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 4:53 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Well, if the Pope wades into politics, and is sounding like a Marxist, why isn't it OK to criticize him ?

The problem I have , and that many conservatives have, is the attempt to some how connect caring for the poor, which is a fine thing indeed, as being some virtuous holy ground on which Marxism resides, and is therefore exempt from any criticism. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. As Bono so clearly points out. Promoting Statism as a means to combat any " crisis " , be it poverty or AGW, is a very real threat which DOES deserve attention and commentary.




Please, feel free to criticise. Again, it's not the 'criticism' that is the problem, its the stupidity of the argument.

ie Sounding like a Marxist. Do you even know what Marxism is?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 4:57 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

People must stand united against the scandal of hunger while avoiding food waste and irresponsible use of the world’s resources, Pope Francis has said.

People should “stop thinking that our daily actions do not have an impact on the lives of those who suffer from hunger firsthand,” he said in a video message launching a global campaign of prayer and action against hunger.

Organizsed by Caritas Internationalis, the Vatican-based federation of Catholic charities, a global “wave of prayer” was due to begin at noon today on the South Pacific island of Samoa and head west across the world’s time zones.

Pope Francis offered his blessing and support for the “One Human Family, Food For All” campaign in a video message released on the eve of the global launch.

With about one billion people still suffering from hunger today, “we cannot look the other way and pretend this does not exist”, he said in the message.

There is enough food in the world to feed everyone, he said, but only “if there is the will” to respect the “God-given rights of everyone to have access to adequate food”.

By sharing in Christian charity with those “who face numerous obstacles”, the Pope said, “we promote an authentic cooperation with the poor so that, through the fruits of their and our work, they can live a dignified life.”

Pope Francis invited all people to act “as one single human family, to give a voice to all of those who suffer silently from hunger, so that this voice becomes a roar which can shake the world.”

The Caritas campaign is also a way to invite people to pay attention to their own food choices, “which often lead to waste and a poor use of the resources available to us,” the pope said.

Caritas Internationalis invited its 164 member organisations and local churches to pray for an end to hunger and malnutrition, by acting on a local, national or global level against food waste and in favor of food access and security worldwide.

Caritas is urging Catholics to take a few moments at noon Dec. 10 to join the world in praying against hunger, and to engage in long-term action through raising awareness, advocacy, charitable work or other efforts supporting food security.

The right to food is part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Food For All launch date of December 10 marks the UN’s Human Rights Day.

The Caritas campaign is calling on the United Nations to hold a session on the right to food at its 2015 General Assembly and is asking governments to guarantee the right to food in national legislation.



Of course, that directly goes against the far right notion that, while gun ownership is a human right, freedom from hunger is not. So I can see why their panties are all twisted about this Pope. I mean poverty is a sign of weakness and stupidity, is it not?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 5:02 PM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Well, if the Pope wades into politics, and is sounding like a Marxist, why isn't it OK to criticize him ?



So, the teachings of Jesus are Marxist now?

I love how you simpletons like to apply words like Marxism and Socialism to anything you don't like, regardless of how or even if the term applies.

It makes you so much easier to mock and dismiss as the idiots you are.




"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 11, 2013 11:44 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 12, 2013 4:24 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Ever since I was a kid I wondered about the hypocrisy of my fellow parishioners - one minute the priest ask that you spread the peace, the next their talking about you like dogs, frequently even before you left the church to go home and sin.

So here we have a Pope, the leader of the catholic world, born and raised among the poor, declaring the church has turned the other cheek and ugly Americans are calling him out to be some sort of Simon Bolivar, or, in my case, Roberto Cofresi, a freedom fighter/pirate ready to rob the rich to give to the poor. It is these very people of which I speak. Hypocrites and heathens all, accusing a simple man, who was thrust into the world stage, of nothing short of murderous intentions and low behavior used to describe child molesters and people who speak at the theater, the special hell for him.

No matter your religion, no one should be accusing a man of the cloth of low dealings, especially the leader of nearly 2 billion followers who believe that their God is the one true God above all. And this one true God teaches, above all else; tolerance, love, peace and extending a hand to your fellow man. He sent his son to die for our sins, how can anyone even begin to form the words on their lips to cast aspersions on the pious leader of the faithful.

Even the humble beginnings of the Christian persuasion teaches loving Jesus is equal to loving thy neighbor. Yet we hear the awful, and sometimes vulgar, disparaging remarks from the right wing conservatives. The very people who claim that they are on the right side of the Lord, and built their mansions of glass - are throwing stones the size of basketballs. These are the same people that, a handful of years ago, were blowing up abortion clinics with the doctors still in them, in protest of the law allowing same. Wait, killing doctors to prevent abortions. Weren't they killing the babies who grew up to adult size. Does that make any sense to you? Isn't that still killing? Which thou shalt not.

As long as I live I will never understand that. I'm often told of the power of prayer, which, by the way, is strongly recommended in the book known as the Bible. This book also suggests, no commands, that it's followers behave in a certain way. Funny how that seems to escape most people, but don't worry, I'm told that God forgives your sins, but only if you follow his commands........seems like many are going to that Special Hell.


SGG

Quote:

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
I have considered the place of God in my life and decided that if my excuse for being moral is my fear or love of HIM (cue the angel's voices) then I would not actually be moral. I would only be sheep, concerned with my own survival and self glorification. I would exist only as a reflection of some other (imaginary) creature.

I choose to act for the greater good because that is what *I* choose, and if I lose faith with everything around me (which I do) that's a bummer but it doesn't change the person I am.


Booyah, on this we have an accord - of course, my claim to any morality is a bit shakier as I do some "good" things out of sheer spite against a society built around rewarding sociopathy while punishing altruism.

-F


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 12, 2013 9:21 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Well said, Shiny, and I agree...it has always mystified me how they can't see the hypocrisy and downright unChristianity of their actions, as well.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 12, 2013 8:13 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Well, if the Pope wades into politics, and is sounding like a Marxist, why isn't it OK to criticize him ?



So, the teachings of Jesus are Marxist now?

According to Liberation Theology, absolutely. It's absurd, I agree, but that's how LT types frame their "teachings "

Quote:



I love how you simpletons like to apply words like Marxism and Socialism to anything you don't like, regardless of how or even if the term applies.

It makes you so much easier to mock and dismiss as the idiots you are.



Just because you don't like someone who disagrees with you doesn't make them into " simpletons ". In fact, it's YOUR ignorance on the matter which paints you in that exact corner.

From Wiki : Liberation theology[1] is a political movement in Roman Catholic theology which interprets the teachings of Jesus Christ in relation to a liberation from unjust economic, political, or social conditions. It has been described as "an interpretation of Christian faith through the poor's suffering, their struggle and hope, and a critique of society and the Catholic faith and Christianity through the eyes of the poor".[2] Detractors have called it Christianized Marxism.[3]


You see, this debate existed long before Rush Limbaugh mentioned it on the radio.

@ Niki - "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's "

I'm pretty sure most Christians and FOX NEWS viewers would understand those words, and not be confused , as you'd like to believe.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 12, 2013 9:09 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Jesus and the Money Changers.

Matthew 21:12-13

12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

13 And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.


Matthew 19:24


24 I repeat: it is much harder for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle.”

Luke 4:16-19

When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written:

'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour.'

Mark 10:21-22

Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me." When he heard this, he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions.

Luke 16:19-25


19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’

25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony.

And so on....

Seems Jesus was quite big on wealth distribution and quite harsh on capitalists and the wealthy. Why almost like socialism...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 12, 2013 9:53 PM

BYTEMITE


Are any of us even Christian? Why does it MATTER what Jesus was if we don't believe in his messages anyway?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 12, 2013 10:50 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Nothing matters.

We should not post here anymore.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:02 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Are any of us even Christian? Why does it MATTER what Jesus was if we don't believe in his messages anyway?



I believe in some messages from other folks who aren't real too. Is that o.k. ?



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 2:11 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Nothing matters.

We should not post here anymore.



Well yeah. Yet we (I?) do anyway.

I don't think Jesus was divine, and I thought a lot of the people in this thread were also atheists. We're talking about the bible and the teachings of Jesus as though they have some relevance 2000 years later in regards to politics and socio-economics.

Even if the guy is a pope, that's all he's got. So why is it particularly important how his message is interpreted? It's not divinely inspired or anything.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 4:14 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Even if the guy is a pope, that's all he's got. So why is it particularly important how his message is interpreted? It's not divinely inspired or anything.


Because he is the figurehead and spiritual leader/example/exemplar for a very large faction of people.
Besides, divinity be stuffed, being a good example is something worthy.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 9:27 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


"Why does it MATTER what Jesus was if we don't believe in his messages anyway?"

I don't have to "worship" someone to believe in their messages; I don't have to believe someone was a god to believe in their messages. I believe in many of Jesus' teachings, just as I believe in many of Buddha's, Mohammed's and others.

Second, Jesus' messages are literally taken as "gospel" by millions of people, and the Christian church is a very big influence around the world. That his teachings have been perverted in order for some to utilize their power is a very real problem which affects me as well as others.

If we can discuss Mandela's beliefs, why not Jesus'?

As to rendering unto Ceasar:




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 12:12 PM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Even if the guy is a pope, that's all he's got. So why is it particularly important how his message is interpreted? It's not divinely inspired or anything.


Because he is the figurehead and spiritual leader/example/exemplar for a very large faction of people.
Besides, divinity be stuffed, being a good example is something worthy.

-F



And how many people are going to take his messages to heart?

Look at the push-back he's already getting just on this board. His decrees are up against human greed and self-interest.

Even catholics are just going to do their own thing. Ultimately, nice sounding words are still just words.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 12:41 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
. . . Ultimately, nice sounding words are still just words.

The anxious leaders of the Soviet Union made false accusations then expelled Solzhenitsyn because he wrote The Gulag Archipelago. Commies can't tolerate criticism very well. Neither can capitalists.

And both commies and capitalists go berserk when questioned about their fundamental beliefs, wildly striking out at anyone who finds their faults. The Pope rejected the capitalistic notion that money and pleasure are the very soil from which all things good must grow.

Solzhenitsyn had a mighty influence, for a writer. He returned to Russia after the collapse of communism. Maybe capitalists are right to be anxious about what the Pope writes and what might follow for capitalism if the Pope lives a life as long, influential and productive as Solzhenitsyn.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 12:42 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I guess that not many people here remember Pope John XXIII, who was Pope when I was a child. The message that was preached from the pulpit every Sunday was love and compassion, and there are a lot of examples of THAT in the New Testament. It was also the basis for the development of Liberation Theology... which led to the assassination of Archbishop Romero by reichwing terrorists in El Salvador in 1980, when nuns and priests who worked with, and on behalf of the poor were routinely tortured and killed.

In any case, ever since Pope John XXIII the Cardinals have elected one rightwing asshole after another, possibly until now.

Somewhere along the way, I realized that religion was just a fairy tale, but the basis of my morality is still the message that I got as a child. Better that than Ayn Rand, I guess!

Calling Pope Francis the "Catholic Church's Obama"... only proves how much the rechiwing hates Obama. Because Obama has not been a particularly effective humanitarian or socialist. In fact, he's been something of a riechwing dick himself, constantly bowing and scraping before money- bailing out banks and big businesses, snooping on everyone everywhere (even World of Warcraft and other online games, if you can believe it!) and arrogating for himself the right to kill anyone (even US citizens) anywhere with some sort of Star Chamber proceedings beyond anything that the Founding Fathers had sought to prevent.

Given Obama's record, calling Pope Francis the Church's Obama is like saying that Pope Francis is going to talk a good line but try and ride two horses with one ass, or that Pope Francis is going to be the ultimate sellout. As far as I'm concerned, calling Pope Francis ANYTHING is far too early. We will have to see what Pope Francis DOES as well as what he SAYS. For example, is he going to reform the Vatican Bank?

This opinion by Fox News is hysterical, inaccurate, designed to stir controversy and gain readership. It has nothing to do either with the Pope or with Obama.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 12:47 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


"As far as I'm concerned, calling Pope Francis ANYTHING is far too early. We will have to see what Pope Francis DOES as well as what he SAYS." I agree completely, Sig. I have hope, but no expectation. It is, however, nonetheless nice to hear a Pope talking about ACTUAL Christian values for a change.

And I agree especially with "Calling Pope Francis the "Catholic Church's Obama"... only proves how much the rechiwing hates Obama." That's absolutely right on--Obama HASN'T been the "socialist" the right works so hard to convince their base he is, but they need him to fit that mold, so the Pope espousing truly Christian values makes it convenient to trash them both with the same brush.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 1:01 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The only thing that would creep out the rightwing even more would be if Pope Francis were half-black. If that were the case, their heads would blow up from hysteria. It's bad enough (for them) that he's a "spic" who should be cleaning toilets or picking fruit or something.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 2:27 PM

BYTEMITE


Uh.

...I humbly take back my "just words" comments.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 13, 2013 3:01 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Nothing in the world to be humble about, Byte; your point is a reasonable one. Most people WILL act out of self-interest, greed, etc., but at the same time, the Church carries a lot of weight, and how God's or Jesus' teachings are put forth does affect some, and how the Church is used by politicians can have quite an effect. Ergo, what he says IS "just words", and deeds ARE more important, but "words" from a Pope mean more than words from you or I.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
More Mostly Peaceful Rioting and Looting...
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:24 - 3 posts
"The Bulwark" Podcast: "Did The Neocons Just Take Over The Democratic Party?" "Don't Say That" "Don't Say It!"
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:22 - 2 posts
The predictions thread
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:18 - 1175 posts
Pedophile US Judges orders pet Racoons and Squirrel to be executed...Police Raid home as if man is a 'Terrorist', Famous squirrel named Peanut seized and killed by authorities.
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:16 - 2 posts
No matter what happens...
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:12 - 26 posts
The parallel internet is coming
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:10 - 172 posts
Elections; 2024
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:05 - 4454 posts
Aid for Israel
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:05 - 99 posts
Other Elections on Planet Earth.
Sat, November 2, 2024 15:02 - 35 posts
Where are the swing voters? Where are the swing states?
Sat, November 2, 2024 14:30 - 16 posts
Where are the Libertarians?
Sat, November 2, 2024 14:11 - 90 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sat, November 2, 2024 13:33 - 4662 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL