Tammy Bruce: Religion Archives

Religion Archives

The Entire History of Mankind on a Single Page!

Maynard points to an interesting reference

Wow!

I was visiting my local library, trying to ignore the librarians' loud discussion about how it would be necessary to assassinate both Bush and Cheney at the same time in order to preserve democracy in America, when this book, mounted in an ancient display case, commanded my attention.

I had discovered a fascinating 15-foot wall chart in book form, a continuous timeline, wonderfully illustrated, that covers both Biblical and secular history, from Creation to the present day. This is an amazingly thorough job, first printed in 1890 as an English schoolbook. It's been updated for 20th century history, but it remains Victorian in heart and soul, and not lacking in delightful political incorrectness. I imagine you would be expelled for having this book in a modern public school.

Posted by Maynard · July 21, 2008 02:50 AM · Permalink · Comments (1)
Books | History | Maynard Post | Religion

A 'Mouthful of the Day' from the Vatican

"[P]hantasmagorical cocktail of inventions"

As the Vatican flips out and condemns a new film by the makers of "The Da Vinci Code" and bans them from accessing the Vatican, churches and other sites around Italy.

Vatican bans Dan Brown film Angels & Demons from Rome churches

The Vatican has banned the makers of Angels & Demons, the latest Dan Brown thriller to be filmed, from shooting scenes not only in the Vatican but in any church in Rome on the ground that it is "an offence against God" and "wounds common religious feelings".

Archbishop Velasio De Paolis, head of the Vatican's Prefecture for Economic Affairs, said that the author had "turned the Gospels upside down to poison the faith. It would be unacceptable to transform churches into film sets so that his blasphemous novels can be made into mendacious films in the name of business." [...]

"When a film is about the saints or about stories regarding the Church's artistic values, then we give permission without any doubts," Father Fibbi told the TV listings magazine Sorrisi e Canzoni (Smiles and Songs). "But when it is a question of content which does not relate to traditional religious criteria, then our doors are closed."

Now if they would just apply that same passion and rejection of child molester priests and their enablers...

Posted by Tammy · June 16, 2008 12:49 PM · Permalink · Comments (25)
Hypocrisy | Religion

Bardot Convicted in France for "Racial Hatred"

If you want a little window into what the Left has in store for everyone, take a look at this. Legendary screen actress Brigitte Bardot has been convicted in France for 'inciting racial hatred.' What did she do? She spoke her mind, in a letter, that Muslims are destroying her nation.

Interestingly, if people should be arrested for giving Islam a bad name, shouldn't the world be arresting Islamists instead of those who make that point?

Former screen siren Bardot convicted in race case

A Paris court on Tuesday convicted Brigitte Bardot of provoking discrimination and racial hatred for writing that Muslims are destroying France.

The court also handed down a $23,325 fine against the former screen siren and animal rights campaigner.

A leading French anti-racism group known as MRAP filed a lawsuit last year over a letter she sent to then-Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy. The remarks were published in her foundation's quarterly journal.

In the December 2006 letter to Sarkozy, now the president, Bardot said France is "tired of being led by the nose by this population that is destroying us, destroying our country by imposing its acts."

She was referring to the Muslim feast of Aid el-Kebir, celebrated by slaughtering sheep.

French anti-racism laws prevent inciting hatred and discrimination on racial or religious or racial grounds. Bardot had been convicted four times previously for inciting racial hatred.

So, Bardot is arrested, prosecuted and convicted for speaking the truth. The irony, of course, is that all of this simply proves and confirms her point.

The Vatican--Stuck in the First Century

Joan of Arc in prison by Paul Delaroche

Catholic leaders, having solved all the world's problems, turn to more important matters. Now where, damn it, is that stake and hay?

Vatican to punish women priests

The Vatican has issued its most explicit decree so far against the ordination of women priests, punishing them and the bishops who try to ordain them with automatic excommunication.

The decree was written by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and published in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, giving it immediate effect.

A Vatican spokesman said the decree made the Church's existing ban on women priests more explicit by clarifying that excommunication would follow all such ordinations.

Excommunication forbids those affected from receiving the sacraments or sharing in acts of public worship.

Father Tom Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Centre at Georgetown University, said he thought the decree was meant to send a warning to the growing number of Catholics who favour admitting women to the priesthood.

And that, as well know, would cause locusts to swarm, the sky to fall, and cats would start sleeping with dogs.

The Church said it cannot change the rules banning women from the priesthood because Christ chose only men as his apostles.

Hmmm, and he also never drove a car, never lived in a palace, was poor and Jewish. So were all his disciples. So when is Catholic leadership going to implement those rules for themselves? It would, after all, really change things up if only a poor Jewish men could be Pope or priests. Hey, when it comes to making rules based on the specifics of what Jesus represented two thousand years ago, all I'm asking for is a little consistency.

Posted by Tammy · May 29, 2008 03:47 PM · Permalink · Comments (18)
Authentic Feminism | Cultural Commentary | History | Incompetence | Religion

Let's Get Global Warming Back on Track

Three cheers for Global Warming!

Nature is doing the shenanigans and messing with the Global Warming. As an example, this last month was the coldest April in the last 100 years.

The average temperature in April 2008 was 51.0 F. This was -1.0 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 29th coolest April in 114 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade.

Now that's just not right. What about that extra beach Algore promised and I was looking forward to? And the warmer winters, which will save people's lives?

Will Global Warming Save Lives?

Global Warming: A study done for the British government says that global warming will kill thousands. It also says lives will be saved due to warmer winters. OK, which is it? Or is it neither? A report commissioned by Britain's Health Department says that one blistering hot summer between now and 2017 could kill more than 6,000 Britons. The panel of scientific experts that compiled the study believes the chance of that is 25%...The panel also said global warming will bring warmer winters, which will cut down on cold-related deaths in Britain.

So should we fear human-created climate change or embrace it?

Surprisingly, the BBC stood out as one media agent that took enough care to balance its coverage. Under the Web site headline "Global Warming 'May Cut Deaths,' " it reported 20,000 deaths are linked to the cold each year in the U.K. and that those deaths fell 3% a year from 1971 through 2003...

While we are still skeptical of global warming claims, let us for a moment speculate what warmer winters — and a warmer world in general — would bring in addition to fewer cold-related deaths:

• Longer growing seasons and more land available for agriculture, two factors that will yield greater crop production.

• A reduction in respiratory and cardiovascular diseases that tend to be higher during colder months.

• Increased precipitation that will help the world solve its water scarcity issues.

• Lower heating bills by $12 billion a year, the Energy Department reckons.

I hate the cold. Can we just get Global Warming back on track please?

The Audacity of Not Keeping His Mouth Shut

Wright at the National Press Club

I know I'm not the only one not impressed by Obama's oddly late repudiation of Jeremiah Wright. After all, he knew of the “divisive and destructive,” “ridiculous,” “outrageous” and “wrong” paranoid and hate-based Wright comments long ago. When he first addressed the issue he further embraced Wright in the famous Gramma-Under-the-Bus speech. Now, when Wright had the audacity of not keeping his mouth shut, Barry decides that he can disown a man he suddenly realized his father-figure for all his adult life "gives comfort to those who prey on hate."

My question is this: If Barack Obama had no idea what his father-figure's intentions and beliefs were after two-decades plus of knowing him, how can we trust this man to be able to assess the intention of men like Ahmadinejad and Jong-Il? One of two things is happening here: Either Obama truly is clueless and completely unable to judge people, or he feels a kinship with those who are bitter, angry and hate this nation. In his own life we have his bitter and recriminating wife, Wright, and unrepentant terrorist Ayers. On the international scene Obama has already expressed an interest in establishing talkative, friendly relationships with the world's monsters.

In the meantime, word is slipping out from Wright's friends that he didn't intend to hurt Obama, he was just hurt and lashing out in the moment. I guess that makes everything okay. But it does make us question if it's a good idea to have a man in the White House who has such a vengeful and hateful father-figure in the wings always ready to strike out. Really, is this a soap opera we need in the White House during a time of war?

Father Michael Pfleger of St. Sabina Church said he has been speaking to both men as the events of the past 24 hours unfolded. He counseled Obama Tuesday morning, and while CBS 2 talked to him Tuesday evening, Rev. Wright called his cell phone. "I don't think he had any intention to hurt Barack. He loves Barack," Pfleger said. "I think the pain and the moment took over." That moment was in a place Pfleger called "a lion's den" – The National Press Club.

Yeah, the pain of not having the Man Who Would Be President be subservient and respectful to you? All of these people are reaping the rewards of living in a world of contempt and bitterness. What do they want from each other? Emotional healthy response from each other?

Whether his problem is a pathological inability to see bad people for who they are (and good people for that matter, too. His issue is very probably a Malignant Narcissistic lack of empathy, an inability to comprehend the feelings and motives of others), or identifying sympathetically with those who hate this country, we and he are in trouble.

Got "Expelled"?

A post by Maynard

I don't know whether I'm going to like "Expelled", which opens in theaters this Friday. But Hollywood and the mainstream media have been doing their darndest to immerse us in a cauldron of political correctness. Being a disagreeable creature, I thirst for anything that promises to be contrary.

What is "Expelled" about? The press clips indicate it focuses on the conflict between evolutionists and creationists in the academy. I hope there's more to it than that, because that is a battle I would rather not linger on. We're here by the will of God, but is it unthinkable that He might have used an evolutionary process to do the job? Why must the pursuit of this question become prickly? In a nutshell, science tells us how and religion tells us why. These two outlooks should work together (like body and soul) to seek a uniform vision.

The clash of evolution versus intelligent design has become a proxy war as our culture wrestles with issues of atheism versus theism. Radical secularists attempt to misrepresent the Establishment Clause as a call for state-mandated atheism; an aggressively wrong-headed agenda that I vigorously oppose. I'm on board for the war, but the enemy is the repressive political ideology. Is it really necessary that we scrap with the evolutionists?

I view intelligent design ("ID") as a discipline that is more philosophical than scientific. And it's certainly appropriate that the hard sciences be cross-pollinated with philosophical questions; that's what we're doing when, for example, we expect a medical doctor to also learn medical ethics. ID, like ethics, raises hard questions and important challenges. But I can't see it as a science in the sense that biology is. (I know some people put forth a rigorous technical argument in favor of ID, and I'm not dismissing that position; however that's a long discussion in itself, which I'll skip for the sake of brevity.)

Of course, it must be remembered that evolution is also something of a theory. That's why they call is the theory of evolution. Duh!

Back in the bad old days, Galileo offended the dogma of the Church when he advanced his theory of heliocentrism. He was forced to recant this heresy, and spent his latter years under house arrest on orders of the Inquisition. We tell ourselves we've passed beyond the era of dogma into an enlightened age. But these days, the guardians of the One True Church of Political Correctness are equally aggressive in defending their canon. Recently Nobel laureate James Watson was forced into retirement when his observations gave offence to the Anointed Ones.

(As the song goes: "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." But let's move along.)

Anyway, with respect to the academic community, I lament to note that mine is apparently a minority opinion. This study indicates that only 7% of scientists believe in a personal God, as opposed to 72% that disbelieve — in sharp contrast to the general public, where a large majority accept God. Other studies suggest that the more educated an individual is, the more likely that person is to be an atheist.

For the record, I (Maynard) have a degree from Starfleet Academy, and in fact my faith was nurtured as it became clear that our most essential questions could not be answered by materialistic inquiry. I love science and I am grateful to the students of the material arts, to whom we all owe a great deal. But it's Man's vanity, rather than objective facts, that tempts us to think we can get by without God.

« Close It

Purim

A post by Maynard; bumped from 2007

This has been the week of the annual commemoration of Purim (pronounced POOR-im), which is a Jewish celebration of the events in the Bible's Book of Esther.

A short description of the background of Purim is here. I recently noted the 2006 movie, One Night with the King, which dramatized the tale.

The story is set in Persia (Iran!), and the villain is Haman, an evil advisor to the King who contrives to have all the Jews of the kingdom killed. Ultimately the plot is thwarted, and Haman is hanged. "Haman" is a name that lives on in infamy, much like "Hitler".

I'll mention a couple interesting of specific details. One is that the Book of Esther is unusual in that it doesn't specifically mention God, nor are there any instances of overt divine intervention. Rather, the story plays out in a logical way. We may read into this that the will of God may come about through subtle means. Not everything He does is as dramatic as the parting of the Red Sea.

In Esther 8, the King issues an edict to save the Jews from Haman's plan. But there was a problem to be overcome:

5 "If it pleases the king," [Esther] said, "and if he regards me with favor and thinks it the right thing to do, and if he is pleased with me, let an order be written overruling the dispatches that Haman son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, devised and wrote to destroy the Jews in all the king's provinces.

6 For how can I bear to see disaster fall on my people? How can I bear to see the destruction of my family?"

7 King Xerxes replied to Queen Esther and to Mordecai the Jew, "Because Haman attacked the Jews, I have given his estate to Esther, and they have hanged him on the gallows.

8 Now write another decree in the king's name in behalf of the Jews as seems best to you, and seal it with the king's signet ring — for no document written in the king's name and sealed with his ring can be revoked."

In other words, for technical and legalistic reasons, the King's earlier order authorizing the murder of the Jews could not be revoked. So the King cleverly issued a proclamation which would effectively block the implementation of the earlier orders without actually revoking them. The King issued this special authorization to the Jews:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Of course I'm kidding on that point. Sort of. But the reality is quite similar. The King authorized the Jews to defend themselves with deadly force against anyone who came against them. The actual Bible quote is this:

11 The king's edict granted the Jews in every city the right to assemble and protect themselves; to destroy, kill and annihilate any armed force of any nationality or province that might attack them and their women and children; and to plunder the property of their enemies.

And you know what happened? The people who were going to kill the Jews decided to let them live. In fact:

17 In every province and in every city, wherever the edict of the king went, there was joy and gladness among the Jews, with feasting and celebrating. And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them.

So aside from everything else, you now have the Biblical derivation of the Second Amendment.

Posted by Maynard · March 20, 2008 04:06 PM · Permalink · Comments (11)
Jew-Hatred | Maynard Post | Religion | Second Amendment

The Night of the Hunter

A post by Maynard

On Wednesday afternoon, after the Tammy Bruce Show, Turner Classic Movies (the cable channel) will screen "The Night of the Hunter". (Check local listings; it's at 1:30 PM Pacific Time and 4:30 PM Eastern.)

This semi-classic film is particularly relevant to events that have been in the news during the past several days. Robert Mitchum and Lillian Gish play characters that are both ostensibly religious, but one of them is a false prophet with evil intent. And yet the bad guy moves freely and is assisted by ordinary folk that see nothing but a holy man.

In a world filled with liars and deceptive snares, how do we know who is on the side of the angels? Lillian Gish addresses this question in an early sermon by referencing Matthew 12:33:

Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

Judge the tree by its fruit. It's a lesson to take to heart.

Posted by Maynard · March 19, 2008 03:16 AM · Permalink · Comments (7)
Hollywood/Films | Maynard Post | Religion

Obama and His Racist, America-Hating "Pastor"

The very cozy Obama and Wright.

**Television programming note**: Gateway Pundit is noting that Major Garrett will have Barack Obama tonight on Hannity & Colmes/Fox News to discuss the Wright situation. They also have the full collection of Wright video spew. Perhaps now we know the real reason the Obama campaign has been desperate to paint Hillary and her supporters as 'racist'--to distract from their own ugly, racist underbelly.

After working feverishly to ignore the extraordinary racist, hate-filled comments by Barack Hussein Obama's "pastor", Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., they finally have been forced to admit he exist. Initially, Obama refused to outright condemn comments that ranged from urging black Americans to sing "God damn America," to proposing the theory that America engineered the AIDS virus to genocide people of color and deliberately distributes drugs to me of color, and that America is a terrorist nation. When you hear these remarkably paranoid assertions Michelle Obama's paranoid and America-hating rants make a lot more sense. After all, this is the man who has been Obama's mentor for 20 years, married the Obamas, and baptized their daughters (which means those two bright little girls are exposed to this racist, hate-based insanity.

Ron Kessler, who is associated with the McCain campaign, provided an opinion piece in today's WSJ, the first national newspaper to address this remarkable relationship between the leading Democrat candidate and a hate-monger:

Obama and the Minister

In a sermon delivered at Howard University, Barack Obama's longtime minister, friend and adviser blamed America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs and creating a racist society that would never elect a black candidate president.

The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Mr. Obama's Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, gave the sermon at the school's Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel in Washington on Jan. 15, 2006...Mr. Wright thundered on: "America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. . . . We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns, and the training of professional killers . . . We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Ghadhafi . . . We put [Nelson] Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God." [...]

As for Mr. Wright's repeated comments blaming America for the 9/11 attacks because of what Mr. Wright calls its racist and violent policies, Mr. Obama has said it sounds as if the minister was trying to be "provocative."

Hearing Mr. Wright's venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out. Instead, Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle have presumably sat through numerous similar sermons by Mr. Wright.

Indeed, Mr. Obama has described Mr. Wright as his "sounding board" during the two decades he has known him. Mr. Obama has said he found religion through the minister in the 1980s. He joined the church in 1991 and walked down the aisle in a formal commitment of faith.

The title of Mr. Obama's bestseller "The Audacity of Hope" comes from one of Wright's sermons. Mr. Wright is one of the first people Mr. Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.

Mr. Obama obviously would not choose to belong to Mr. Wright's church and seek his advice unless he agreed with at least some of his views. In light of Mr. Wright's perspective, Michelle Obama's comment that she feels proud of America for the first time in her adult life makes perfect sense.

The WSJ piece follows ABC News and their coverage of Wright stating we were to blame for 9/11 and that blacks should condemn the United States. Finally, of Obama and his racist mentor. Finally, Obama responds with a little fluff piece, on the lefty hate blog Huffington Post of all places, which once again waxes on about how great the 'pastor' is but Obama rejects his comments. He skips over the intense relationship they have, including the fact that it was Wright with whom Obama consulted when he was deciding whether or not to run for president, and then "prayed" with him as he decided to do so. Obama also thanked Wright prominently when he first won his senate seat. Yet Obama claims, absurdly, that Wright was never a mentor, and that he never, ever heard this man say anything at all ever close to what has been revealed in the past few weeks.
Yeah, sure.

This last week has been rather priceless--here we have Obama and his minions still pushing the absurdity of the entire Hillary campaign as racist, including the smear against Geraldine Ferraro. Ferraro leaves the Clinton campaign, and HiIllary apologizes to every black person on Earth for everything that ever happened. Yet the stench of racism and hate emanates from only one place--the Barack Obama campaign, his closest friend and adviser, and arguably from Obama himself and his wife. Yet no one has apologized. In fact, big news has been made of the fact thatWright stepped down from one Obama campaign position he held yet the Obama campaign insists he will stay on as a "spirtual adviser." I guess that would be the Racist, Hate America First fort of spirituality.

The next question needs to be, does Hillary and Co. have what it takes to demand an apology from Obama and his minions for the racism and hate they've been spewing? Will she demand Obama apologize for Wright, and that Wright be banished from his campaign entirely? If she doesn't have the cajones to face down a bunch of political thugs and a depraved, paranoid, how can we expect her to deal with the world's tyrants?

This is a test for Hillary. I noted weeks ago, that with all we detest about th Clintons, it's safe to say they do not hate this country. Now we know the Obamas truly do.

« Close It

The Real Grapes of Wrath, When It's Not Virgins You're Getting

Probably 72 in this bunch, I'd say.

Was Muhammad really a foodie? Grapes or virgins...virgins or grapes. Well, they do have one thing in common, once you have them they're not what they used to be. (HT Pat S.)

The Lost Archive

On the night of April 24, 1944, British air force bombers hammered a former Jesuit college here housing the Bavarian Academy of Science. The 16th-century building crumpled in the inferno. Among the treasures lost, later lamented Anton Spitaler, an Arabic scholar at the academy, was a unique photo archive of ancient manuscripts of the Quran.

The 450 rolls of film had been assembled before the war for a bold venture: a study of the evolution of the Quran, the text Muslims view as the verbatim transcript of God's word. The wartime destruction made the project "outright impossible," Mr. Spitaler wrote in the 1970s.

Mr. Spitaler was lying. The cache of photos survived, and he was sitting on it all along. The truth is only now dribbling out to scholars -- and a Quran research project buried for more than 60 years has risen from the grave.

Quranic scholarship often focuses on arcane questions of philology and textual analysis. Experts nonetheless tend to tread warily, mindful of fury directed in recent years at people deemed to have blasphemed Islam's founding document and the Prophet Muhammad.

A scholar in northern Germany writes under the pseudonym of Christoph Luxenberg because, he says, his controversial views on the Quran risk provoking Muslims. He claims that chunks of it were written not in Arabic but in another ancient language, Syriac. The "virgins" promised by the Quran to Islamic martyrs, he asserts, are in fact only "grapes."

Don't you hate it when that happens? Especially when you're hungry for something else.

Posted by Tammy · January 14, 2008 03:49 PM · Permalink · Comments (5)
History | Religion

Pope: Against War, Except If It's Satan

Then war's okay. As opposed to the bad war against the human enemy that cuts off the heads of innocent people, blows up buses of kids, and murders schoolchildren. That war=bad. War against invisible evil spirit=good.

Pope's exorcist squads will wage war on Satan

The Pope has ordered his bishops to set up exorcism squads to tackle the rise of Satanism.

Vatican chiefs are concerned at what they see as an increased interest in the occult. They have introduced courses for priests to combat what they call the most extreme form of "Godlessness." [...]

"Thankfully, Benedict XVI believes in the existence and danger of evil - going back to the time he was in charge of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith." The CDF is the oldest Vatican department and was headed by Benedict from 1982, when he was Cardinal Ratzinger, until he became Pope in 2005.

Just one question: when was the last time a Satanist or Occultist assassinated a political leader, oh, like Benazir Bhutto or all the Christian leaders in Lebanon? And when was the last time a Satanist cut off someone's head, made a tape of it, and demanded all America convert to Satanism?

Don't get me wrong--I think Satanists are bad and shouldn't be encouraged, but let's get real. I'm against evil, too, and last time I checked the nihilistic Death Cult running around committed to slaughtering as many innocent people as possible aren't Satanists. The Pope would be well advised to focus on the real threats facing Christendom and peace on earth in general.

In the meantime, the Vatican has denied the story.

Posted by Tammy · December 29, 2007 11:02 AM · Permalink · Comments (3)
Religion

Romney's Speech, "A Symphony of Faith"

I have to tell you, I was impressed. You know I view him very skeptically, so that fact that I was moved by his sincerity impressed me. The problem is, I don't hear that kind of authentic commitment from him on anything else. It also bothers me that he was at the GHW Bush library with the former president. I'll be expanding more on this on Tammy Radio. Remember, if your local affiliate doesn't carry the show, or if you're at work, etc, you can get the free stream of my show at Talk Radio Network. Just clock on my pic and your stream options will appear.

If you missed the Romney speech, Hot Air as the complete recording, and Townhall has the transcript. It's worth watching. I'm curious to see what all of you think.

Here's are the excerpts the Romney camp has chosen to highlight.

And other analysis:

Fox: Mitt Romney Pledges to Serve No One Religion in Faith Speech

WaPo: Romney's "Faith in America" Speech: What Worked and What Didn't

Posted by Tammy · December 6, 2007 08:40 AM · Permalink · Comments (10)
Politics | Religion

What's that Smell?

Oh, it's Pat Robertson endorsing Rudy Giuliani.

Pat Robertson Endorses Rudy Giuliani For President

Evangelical Christian leader Pat Robertson on Wednesday endorsed former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who has struggled to bridge with conservatives some of his socially moderate policy positions on abortion and gay rights.

The endorsement is a coup for the Giuliani campaign, especially after opponent Mitt Romney recently racked up two major endorsements from social conservatives.

Robertson on Wednesday said Giuliani is the best candidate to handle the War on Terror. He said Giuliani understands the need for a conservative judiciary, and that he is a "true fiscal conservative" who is tough on crime.

"The overriding issue before the American people, is the defense of our population against the bloodlust of Islamic terrorists," Robertson told the National Press Club audience. "Our world faces deadly peril...and we need a leader with a bold vision who is not afraid to tackle the challenges ahead."

Robertson's right and I've been saying that for ages, but this is weird because right after 9/11 Robertson blamed the attacks on people like me--pro-choice lesbian feminists. And just a few years ago he suggested liberal judges were "probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings."

And does this mean Robertson thinks Giuliani deserved to get prostate cancer? And here he is endorsing the man who has the more liberal social views than any other Republican about people like me.

So, gee, do ya think Robertson is simply hitching his horse to the man who appears most likely to win the nomination? Robertson--a rank and cynical opportunist? If Robertson wants to endorse Giuliani, fine. I would be even more concerned if Rudy in some fashion endorsed Robertson and his God-Hates-and-Hurts-People rhetoric. Robertson is like a Fred Phelps Lite who condemns people on television instead of at funerals.

Yeah, I'm afraid that smell isn't going away anytime soon.

UPDATE:

Here's the video of the announcement. Despite the focus of this event being on Robertson, I do like seeing Ted Olson who is with the Giuliani campaign. Another reason to support Rudy.

Posted by Tammy · November 7, 2007 07:47 AM · Permalink · Comments (16)
Hypocrisy | Politics | Religion

The Second Temple Wasn't There

A post by Maynard

The former mufti of Jerusalem claims there never was a Jewish temple on the Temple Mount, and so the Western Wall (the "Wailing Wall", generally accepted as a remnant of the Second Temple and one of the holiest sites of Judaism) was really part of a mosque. From a Jerusalem Post article:

"There was never a Jewish temple on Al-Aksa [the mosque compound] and there is no proof that there was ever a temple," he told The Jerusalem Post via a translator. "Because Allah is fair, he would not agree to make Al-Aksa if there were a temple there for others beforehand. The wall is not part of the Jewish temple. It is just the western wall of the mosque. There is not a single stone with any relation at all to the history of the Hebrews."

Palestinian leaders, most notably the late Yasser Arafat, have consistently denied Jewish claims to the Mount.

A summary of accepted history:

The First Temple was built by King Solomon in the 10th century BCE, and destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE. The Second Temple was built 70 years later, enlarged during the first century BCE by Herod, and destroyed by the Romans in the year 70. The Dome of the Rock and Al-Aksa Mosque were constructed on the Temple Mount site in the late seventh century.

Jerusalem is claimed as a Muslim holy city, but this is also a matter of historical revisionism. Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran (in contrast to hundreds of references in the Hebrew Bible), and it was generally ignored by Arab leaders while it was under Arab rule from 1948 to 1967.

The Temple Mount mosque was named the "Farthest Mosque" as a matter of political expediency. The Koran speaks of Mohammed's "Night Journey" on a flying horse from Mecca to the masjid al aksa (the farthest temple). However a geographic location is not specified, and many scholars consider the "farthest mosque" to be a transcendental metaphor rather than a real place. The builders of the mosque figured they could put their outlying turf on the map by giving it the name that would nail down the endpoint of Mohammed's dream. So we now face a Twilight Zone alternative history in which this is Islamic holy territory and nobody else's. During the period of Jordanian control from 1949 to 1967, Jews were denied access to the Wailing Wall (for the record, a violation of the 1949 armistice).

If I may be so bold as to editorialize...Okay, everybody is entitled to their fantasies. We'd all like to think we're richer than we are, sexier than we are, more important than we are...whatever. So I'd be happy enough to leave people with their kooky illusions as long as those kooky illusions aren't malignant. The problem with these Islamist kooky illusions is they tend to encourage acts of mass murder, and that's carrying the jest a tad too far.

God Must Have Suggested a Vacation

After telling his congregation that God spoke to him about certain pesky legal trouble, the president of Oral Robert's University has decided to take a leave of absence. He will, however, stay on as chairman and chief executive of Oral Roberts Ministries. Because, you know, allegedly misappropriating supporters donations and saying God speaks to you doesn't at all suggest you should be locked up somewhere.

Oral Roberts president to take leave

TULSA, Okla. - Oral Roberts University president Richard Roberts has asked the school's board of regents for a leave of absence amid accusations of lavish spending at donors' expense and illegal involvement in a political campaign.

On Wednesday, Roberts, 58, said he would continue in his role as chairman and chief executive of Oral Roberts Ministries.

"I don't know how long this leave of absence will last, but I fully trust the members of the Board of Regents," Roberts said in a statement released by the university. "I pray and believe that in God's timing, and when the Board feels that it is appropriate, I will be back at my post as president."

Whatever he's thinking, it absolutely needs to be longer. Like forever.

And since they were purchased with Ministries funds, can someone ask Richard if God prefers his wife's new Lexus SUV over her new red Mercedes convertible? Thanks. I always knew God was a car geek.

Posted by Tammy · October 17, 2007 05:21 PM · Permalink · Comments (2)
Corruption | Just Wrong | Religion

God=1, Pelosi=0

After the congressional "Acting Architect" removed the word "God" from a flag certificate for an Eagle Scout, we all got mad and the situation is magically reversed. I have a feeling God will always prevail, but it sure can get irritating sometimes.

Capitol Architect Lets 'God' Fly On U.S. Flag Certificates

The Architect of the Capitol, responding to a public outcry, ruled Thursday that, from now on, the word "God" may be inscribed on certificates accompanying flags that have flown over the U.S. Capitol.

Acting Architect Stephen T Ayers said in a statement that the policy of disallowing political and religious statements on flag certificates has been inconsistently applied and does not fulfill the objectives of the office.

"It is inappropriate and beyond the scope of this agency’s responsibilities to censor messages from members," Ayers said.

"The Architect’s role is to certify that flags are appropriately flown over the U.S. Capitol, and any messages on the flag certificates are personal and between a Member of Congress and his or her constituents,” Ayers said.

Well, that's nice, but it sure isn't what he was saying a few days ago. It's amazing how much sense angry Americans can instill in the cowards in Washington.

God Now Speaking Directly to Oral Roberts' son, Richard

Like father like son.

Twenty years ago Oral Roberts claimed God told him to raise $8 million or he would be "called home." (It's believed he didn't, and wasn't). Now his son, in charge of Oral Roberts University also has a hotline to the Big Guy who apparently advised him how to address allegations of serious financial wrongdoing with donations.

All I get from God is the occasional head-shake or giggle. Never have I received legal advice or death threats involving money. Go figure.

Scandal Brewing at Oral Roberts U.

Twenty years ago, televangelist Oral Roberts said he was reading a spy novel when God appeared to him and told him to raise $8 million for Roberts' university, or else he would be "called home."

Now, his son, Oral Roberts University President Richard Roberts, says God is speaking again, telling him to deny lurid allegations in a lawsuit that threatens to engulf this 44-year-old Bible Belt college in scandal.

Richard Roberts is accused of illegal involvement in a local political campaign and lavish spending at donors' expense, including numerous home remodeling projects, use of the university jet for his daughter's senior trip to the Bahamas, and a red Mercedes convertible and a Lexus SUV for his wife, Lindsay.

She is accused of dropping tens of thousands of dollars on clothes, awarding nonacademic scholarships to friends of her children and sending scores of text messages on university-issued cell phones to people described in the lawsuit as "underage males."

At a chapel service this week on the 5,300-student campus known for its 60-foot-tall bronze sculpture of praying hands, Roberts said God told him: "We live in a litigious society. Anyone can get mad and file a lawsuit against another person whether they have a legitimate case or not. This lawsuit ... is about intimidation, blackmail and extortion."

While the allegations don't involve having a wide-stance in the bathroom or trolling for men in a park restroom, they do include:

Posted by Tammy · October 5, 2007 07:35 PM · Permalink · Comments (7)
Corruption | Just Plain Stupid | Just Wrong | Religion

Hillary's Retoractive Religion

A post by Maynard

Drudge linked to this Washington Post article about Hillary's religiosity. It's a puff piece of historical revisionism. It describes of Hillary's long religious history, and indeed the long religious history of the Democrat party in pursuit of the Christian ideal of "economic justice".

This would all be well and good if the story were "truthy". But anyone who lived through the Clinton presidency knows we didn't hear much in the way of religious rhetoric from co-President Rodham until recently. Neither did Bill Clinton exude any particular religiosity, except for frequent politicking in black churches (because he was the self-proclaimed "first black president"). This isn't to say that there were no church-oriented publicity photos, but nobody ever accused the Clintons of being "too religious", as they do with Mr. Bush.

Clinton briefly found God when the Lewinsky affair came crashing down, and he decided his repentance would be accomplished with the aid of rigorous spiritual counseling. The Reverend Jesse Jackson heard the call and rushed to Washington, accompanied by Karin Stanford, Jackson's assistant (and also his mistress and mother of his "love child" — but we didn't know about that part yet).

Okay, so the Clinton White House was not the most pious of places, and that's okay. What irks me is the blatant lying. These people must think we're incredibly stupid.

Contrast the Post's newly-minted history with your own memories, and add this little note about how Hillary hired an evangelical consultant to boost her stock with the non-Left, and the picture becomes clearer:

Burns Strider, one of the Democratic Party’s leading strategists on winning over evangelicals and other values-driven voters, will join Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as she prepares to launch her 2008 presidential campaign.

Strider now heads religious outreach for the House Democratic Caucus, and is the lead staffer for the Democrats’ Faith Working Group, headed by incoming Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.).

Incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) created the working group in 2005 when Democratic strategists recognized that the party lost ground in the previous election because of trouble appealing to centrist and conservative voters in rural areas, who tend to be church-goers driven by moral issues. Strider was an aide to Pelosi when the group formed and joined Clyburn’s staff as policy director of the Democratic Caucus in 2006.

Strider’s move to Clinton’s camp suggests that Democrats will woo so-called faith voters in the 2008 election. The plan is buoyed by the Democrats’ success in winning over religious voters in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania in the midterm elections.

In this critical era, it's disturbing that so many politicians are either themselves morons, or they believe we are morons.

Posted by Maynard · September 29, 2007 01:20 PM · Permalink · Comments (7)
Hypocrisy | Mainstream Media | Maynard Post | Politics | Religion

A Word on the Jewish High Holidays

A post by Maynard

Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, started at sundown last Wednesday night. This marked the 5768^th year since Creation, and the beginning of the ten "Days of Awe" prior to Yom Kippur. These are the High Holidays.

Jewish tradition has it that God judges the world at Rosh Hashanah. His judgment goes into His book, and the fate of every man for the coming year is written.

But it's not yet a done deal. The book is not sealed until Yom Kippur. These are days of self-examination and atonement. Religious Jews who are uncertain of their standing (and that means everybody!) will make a special effort to right any wrongs they may have committed during the previous year. One cannot hide from the Judge of the Universe, but He may be moved by active repentance.

Thus a religious Jew will be particularly inclined towards charitable causes during these interim days. If you're soliciting on behalf of a beneficial foundation, this could be your best opportunity.

Yom Kippur itself (starting this year at sundown on Friday) is a day of fasting and intense ritual. Upon the final blowing of the shofar (ram's horn), our fates for the coming year are sealed.

Posted by Maynard · September 19, 2007 02:04 PM · Permalink · Comments (3)
Maynard Post | Religion

Global Warming Strikes Again

God help us all.

Arctic August: NYC Sets Record For Coldest Day

(CBS) NEW YORK Don't forget to bundle up if you're headed out in New York City today. After all, it is August 21. The city along with the rest of the tri-state region is feeling the chilly effect of a cold front sweeping through the region, accompanied by cool rain showers.

Tuesday's high temperature in Central Park was just 59 degrees. The normal high for today is 82 degrees. The normal low is 67.

Lesson for Catholic Church on How to Handle Child Rapists

Cardinal Mahoney, who avoided testifying with this settlement

And it's not jerking around the victims for 4 1/2 years only to settle the day before jury selection begins. Oh, and it's not helpful to then try to mitigate your evilness by complaining that you're not the only people who sexually abuse children.

Instead, try chasing down the freaks and stabbing them with a meat fork. That certainly is the better, effective, and more decent option.

Deshaun Ridge, who couldn't avoid the meat fork

By Category

By Month

Religion Archives

The Entire History of Mankind on a Single Page!

A 'Mouthful of the Day' from the Vatican

Bardot Convicted in France for "Racial Hatred"

The Vatican--Stuck in the First Century

Let's Get Global Warming Back on Track

The Audacity of Not Keeping His Mouth Shut

Got "Expelled"?

Purim

The Night of the Hunter

Obama and His Racist, America-Hating "Pastor"

The Real Grapes of Wrath, When It's Not Virgins You're Getting

Pope: Against War, Except If It's Satan

Romney's Speech, "A Symphony of Faith"

What's that Smell?

The Second Temple Wasn't There

God Must Have Suggested a Vacation

God=1, Pelosi=0

God Now Speaking Directly to Oral Roberts' son, Richard

Hillary's Retoractive Religion

A Word on the Jewish High Holidays

Global Warming Strikes Again

Lesson for Catholic Church on How to Handle Child Rapists