Right wing is God, Mom, and apple pie?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
|
Right wing is God, Mom, and apple pie?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Mine is... which is more than can be said about most of NK's socialist dogma. Even Lenin would have rejected their definitions of things. Though I'm sure they have a dog-eared copy of Sol Alinsky's Rules for Radicals in a prominent location on a bookshelf.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I'm a socialist now? LOL!Quote:
NK's socialist dogma
Jesus was too, so you're in good company.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Read your posts... it really is that obvious.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I'm just like Jesus. :-)
I implied nothing, I stated a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
He refused to create an earthly kingdom.. How can he be socialist ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Show me anywhere where he requires a government to take care of the poor and the needy ? There are plenty of passages that require families ,individuals and the church to take on the responsibility . And of course there are passages requiring individuals to take care of themselves.
“Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth.”
"All hard work brings a profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty.”
“The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”
What's your definition of socialist?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Jesus espoused a socialist society.
Jesus didn't say any of that.Quote:
“Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth.”
"All hard work brings a profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty.”
“The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”
By all means, please show us where Jesus espoused a "socialist society."Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
That's because you've just witnessed Cafeteria Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaQuote:
Jesus didn't say any of that.
The Lord helps those who help themselves doesn't sound too socialist to me...
Or give a man a fish and you feed him for a day... teach him how to fish and you feed him for life.
Socialists demand everything be handed to them... its immoral to have to break a sweat and work for anything.
Um, no. Tom gave legit bible passages and whether Jesus said them or not is irrelevant, He never contradicted them.Quote:
That's because you've just witnessed Cafeteria Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Next thing the left will claim Jesus loved Stalin and Mao.
The related term "cafeteria Catholicism" is a pejorative term applied to Catholics who dissent from Roman Catholic moral teaching on issues such as abortion, birth control, premarital sex, masturbation or homosexuality.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
No that wouldn't be me.
(QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS (On Socialism)Quote:
For, indeed, although the socialists, stealing the very Gospel itself with a view to deceive more easily the unwary, have been accustomed to distort it so as to suit their own purposes, nevertheless so great is the difference between their depraved teachings and the most pure doctrine of Christ that none greater could exist:
Pope Leo XIII 28 December 1878.)
1878??
That's the world they live in.Quote:
1878??
Why not smoothy they have already claimed he was a socialist, he fed people for free and took the kid's lunch to do it, he healed the sick and didn't ask a fee for it, he advocated paying taxes, his people held property in common and had social welfare programs.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
The right wing want to claim him but they won't implement his programs
A Papal encyclical is timeless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
To whom?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Because there is a huge difference between helping someone in a particular single instance... and giving them a free ride for life for everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Acts 5 : 1-4... did not Ananias and Sapphira own the land they sold... and the money from the sale “at [his] disposal.” ?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
So truth is no longer truth because of a date?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Right to bear arms was written for single shot muscats, now you guys claim it means semi automatic rifles with 30 round clips.
The second amendment was written for a purpose, not a weapon.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
And what happened to those two? And why?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The men who wrote that had no clue what the next decade years would bring, much less what this millennium would be like.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
They died because they lied to the Holy Spirit... not because they lied to men about the sale. As the passage clearly points out... the land and the money was theirs to do as they pleased... ie private property ownership.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
And the lie was about what?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Irrelevant, it was written for a purpose and that purpose has not changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
We are governed by a foreign nation with hired soldiers we must fight?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
It was adopted in 1791, roughly 8 years after the Revolutionary War ended.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
But they might have recaptured us.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Precisely, self defense against enemies foreign or domestic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
It also could have easily said MUSKET... but it didn't , it said arms... for a very good reason as you said. It meant a variety of weapons... unlike the average liberal... these guys were able to actually think.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Well, they did sack Washington indicating that as a policy, it was a failure, but the diehards never admit their mistake and two hundred years later they still cling to the idea of vigilantism as the answer to societies crises
Who will be fighting? About what? And using what against drones, various gases, bazookas, tanks, and nuclear bombs?Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Quote:
Who will be fighting?
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/02/13...home-invasion/Quote:
Police say that just before midnight Wednesday, two armed men burst into Harris's home in the 4300 block of NW 16th Avenue, demanding cash.
Stewart and her 11-year-old daughter were asleep at the time.
Harris's mother-in-law, Annie Streeter, said, “When the mother came into the room, someone put a gun to her head and made the father get down on the floor.”
Harris's cousin, Arnica Perez, said “When one of the gunmen tried to go to the daughter's room, that's when they wrestled and they struggled and he shot him.”
Maurice Harris deserved the chance to defend himself ,his family ,the home from invaders who would obtain a weapon regardless of the law prohibiting it . That's who the law abiding citizen is fighting against. The police as usual are there to do the post incident report.
I thought the arming is for a militia against the government.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Harris is lucky his daughter didn't get her hands on the gun.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:24 AM. |