http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/3 … r=Religion
Church-sanctioned child abuse...
my exact thoughts. I couldn't even watch all of it. Clapping, smiling adults thinking it's cute. What sick minds, and the poor child being brainwashed at such an impressionable age.
Anytime I start doubting my parenting skills something like this emerges and makes me feel like Dr. Spock.
If anyone in my family... or really the world... tried to teach my child a song like this I think I would quite literally beat them to death.
That's no more child abuse than allowing a child to hear somebody say that homosexuality is A-ok.
So....yes, it is close to child abuse! Whereas, deliberately coaching a child into believeing it's okay to perform gay acts IS child abuse!
However, what the child said is true. The problem is that there was no message of forgiveness following the child's little ditty. No message about how becoming born-again makes a person a "new creature in Christ". Any good church would've actually spoken the Gospel surrounding the child's statement. Instead, there was judgement and condemnation without the qualifying factor of hope, repentance, and forgiveness attached. Now, maybe there WAS more to the message from that pulpit later; we dunno, do we? Because the video ended there.
Ron, really, you should check out some actually decent Christian churches or sermons instead of pulling up the freaky ones. Be careful, though, 'cause there are plenty on the other end of the spectrum (minor and mega-churches) that will tell you there is no sin; those are just as damaging to a child's (or adults') psyche as is the one you posted.
The same is true for unrepentant (i.e. still remarried) Christians in their second (third, fourth, etc.) marriage. I wonder why children like this one are never taught to sing that? There are far more remarried people than gay people.
Mr. Judgemental, if I really thought you'd try to understand anything about that, I'd try explaining it again. But not today. 'Cause you're still bent on condemning instead of handing out hope to people in sin and to Christians.
No, I will continue to point out your double standard. Remarried people can continue to sin but can be considered repentant, but gay people must permanently renounce homosexuality (as if that were possible) in order to be saved.
Note that your beliefs don't have any support in actual scripture. You just believe this to be true because you're remarried, and not gay, yourself.
What's really ironic is that in my particular case I would be going to hell for adultery for being remarried rather than being bi-sexual. So I guess Brenda and I will be serving our time together She is... after all... committing the same sin as I am.
Don't forget to mention the shellfish you've eaten and mixed-fabric clothing you've worn!
But, seriously, I'll be serving with you, too, since I'm not a Christian.
Actually LL with the particular loop hole in the bible you will possibly be fine while me and brenda burn... being one of God's chosen people and such. Now that would be irony
Depends on your interpretation, I guess. I've been told by plenty of Christians that Jews go to hell unless they accept Jesus. They might be right. Or they might be wrong. Naturally, I prefer the Jewish view that everyone ends up in the same place.
It's funny... as much as it's tossed around I really haven't given a whole lot of thought to where we end up when we die... at least the kind of thought that touches me personally. It just doesn't seem to be part of the makeup of my faith. I mean I assume that my son in in heaven but beyond that I don't really think about the afterlife.
ROFLMAO! Would it matter? I would still go to the same church
No, it doesn't matter. And I love that about the UUs: thoughtful nods towards the good in every religion.
No (no circumcision for girls), although some Jews celebrate a female birth with a ceremony called Zeved haBat.
Off topic but i have to ask. Do the Jews really believe that?
Yes, we do. The heaven-hell construct in Christianity came from its Greek roots, not the Jewish ones.
When one discovers that those for whom the Hebrew scriptures were written don't believe in hell, demons, original sin, fallen angels, an arch fiend of God aka Satan, the scales fall from our eyes.
And I'll be right there with you LL, Brenda and Melissa, given that I am twice divorced, fornicated more times than I care to remember and have told both of my children that being gay and having gay sex is fine, because it's part of a healthy relationship, just like having hetro sex is part of a healthy hetro relationship. Now, after this admission I am going to take my kids and flee the country in order to avoid being prosecuted for child abuse. Oh, and I'm an atheist to boot. I will no doubt burn for eternity
I hear it has Star Bucks and Hard Rock Cafes too... oh and Hooters (but that's more of a selling point for me... you not so much)
They might have Chippendales, though... (j/k; I never got into the big hair and bowtie look)
You really can't remember all of your fornications.....?
That is so hot...
I'm sure Brenda could probably find some scriptural support for her double standard if she looked hard enough. Therein lies one of the major problems with religion and why it's a bad idea to use a holy book as a foundation for morality. Instead of having to provide a rational basis for their moral choices, believers too often feel they can just pull something from scripture and that is considered justification enough. The fact that people glean different meanings from the same passages or selectively choose one passage over another just muddies the moral waters further. How can you have a reasoned debate with someone who relies on "God said.." for a moral defence?
Those little kids are something else. They remind me of those little blond twins who sang about white supremacy to an enthusiastic audience of neo-nazis. Religion is not the only fanatical ideology to breed hatred.
I can assure you Brenda has no interest in dealing with scripture that she does not find convenient to her socially-conservative political views. We've seen that played over and over and over again, and she's not alone.
You're right, though: any form of ideology or dogma can be abused. I do enjoy pointing out the double standards and hypocrisy, though; the more that hypocritical double standards are brought to light, the less of a voice that those who use them have in the public square of ideas. Sunshine is the best disinfectant, after all.
Well, that's really the point I was making about Biblical morality The same could be said for those who have progressive views and try to whitewash or ignore the fact that the Bible has homophobic passages and other suspect moral directives.
When you try and use a holy book as a moral justification for something instead of rational argument, you are apt end up in a moral quagmire.
What is the rational reason for using your money to support a person struggling an ocean away?
Hey LL, you should use a different word than "support". Just saying.
I guess my reasons would be emotional and rational but if you're really asking *can there be a solely rational basis for morality?*, then my answer would be no because we need emotion in the mix to motivate us. Without human feelings like empathy and compassion, we would be cold machines. The rational part comes in by asking *does this or that moral decision make sense and why or why not?* It's the only way to do it, (that I can see anyway) and what bothers me about religion is that it can sometimes seriously get in the way of that rational process.
Just look at that video and the overwrought emotional response of the audience.Those people aren't interested in thinking rationally about homosexuality - it's enough for them to have found a scriptural basis to decide for them or maybe to justify a prejudice that is already in place. It doesn't make any difference if you can find an alternative translation or another passage that contradicts it - that just creates more "God said' conflict. it's not so much what is written as it is people firmly believing that the only justification they need make for an ethical position is something written in a morally static and supposedly irrefutable religious text. They have God and certainty - who needs reason?
I know religious belief can be a motivator for helping others (as it can for hating others) but I think the compassion and empathy in religion, (as well as the violence and intolerance), is a reflection of us- we already have it, religion doesn't give it to us. It's in religion because we put it there and if religion disappeared tomorrow we'd still have compassion and empathy, just as we'd still have violence and intolerance.What we wouldn't have is moral certainty.
For me, whether religion or morality came first is a bit of a chicken and egg argument; they have been intertwined with each other for so long that it's impossible to tease out what our morality would look like without it. Is there a culture that has existed without religion for centuries that we could look to?
I also think it's immaterial, since you can be moral today without religion, and there are plenty of immoral religious people.
I also agree that our morality is not simply a matter of rationality; there is no rational reason to care about the welfare of people you will never know, or that you think could compete with you for resources.
Moral certainty doesn't come from religion, it comes from dogma. Non-dogmatic religions evolve as the ethics of their adherents evolve. And there are plenty of other forms of non-religious dogma; they're just as dangerous.
I'm sorry, but I would disagree with this statement.
I know there's a rational reason for caring about the welfare of other people you will never know and it has nothing to do with worrying about whether or not, they compete with you about resources.
Love and compassion makes all the difference in the world. Love and Compassion comes from wisdom one has about self and their purpose of living. Once a person understands that, then love and compassion can blossom within self and translate into their actions.
Doing what is right for the sake of it being right is always rational.
I'm not saying love and compassion are bad, or that they don't have value. But love and compassion for people outside your tribe is not rational; when you have limited resources, you tend to take care of your own exclusively. This is the law of nature; we are nepotistic, not altruistic.
Compassion for others you will never know comes from somewhere else (not necessarily religion).
Love and compassion have no value? Oh, Wow!
Maybe in the animal kingdom and ignorant cultures, but not in reality.
Yes, it comes directly from one understanding their own life.
We're nepotistic and altruistic. Doing good makes us feel good. Altruism even happens with primates - chimpanzees have been known to take on the burden of an orphaned young, when there is no obvious personal benefit for themselves.
There are still plenty of rational, as well as emotional reasons for caring about the welfare of people you don't know. For example, taking care of the health and welfare of others in a society means less conflict, reduces crime and helps to contain diseases. We know that laws, human rights and safety nets that protect others, also protect us if we need them. Foreign aid is an important element in global stability. We can rationally recognise concepts like injustice, inequality and suffering and decide that a world where we aim to reduce these things will be a better one to live in. Co-operation and consideration for the interests of others are essential to human survival.
I can't really see a chicken and egg - religion is a byproduct of human morality and not the other way around, though I agree they have been intertwined for a long time. it's likely religion developed as a way to codify morality, nullify a fear of death, give us answers to the unknown and provide incentives to behaviour via reward and punishment. It was probably a very handy and necessary tool in our development. As we've progressed through the centuries, many of those religious codes have been transformed or fallen by the wayside, at least in advanced, secular societies. Reason and science have tended to trump religion in many areas but religion can still win out when it comes to fulfilling emotional need.
Only religion claims an endorsement from God and thus moral certainty. This makes it potentially more potent and dangerous than other ideologies, and certainly more tenacious. True, soft-core versions of religion have developed as a kind of rational compromise between reason and spirituality and in secular societies, religion has lost a lot of practical and political power but in some parts of the world, it's still as uncompromising and immune to reason as ever.
Don't forget eating bacon. That's supposed to be a big sin too.
But they *want* to eat bacon. And get divorced and remarried.
They never want to "go gay" (because they can't anyway) so it suddenly becomes the cheap road to piety if you act as if homosexuality is the only sin worth talking about. If homosexuality weren't the ultimate evil in their worldview, how many preachers and evangelists would be good people?
You say that the message is basically OK, then you say the church is freaky. Are you saying it's OK to be freaky?
I know of a church at the opposite end of the spectrum, one that you would certainly hate because they preach tolerance, inclusion, thoughtfulness..., that is located within 100 miles of the church in this video.
The hate-spewing church is in Greensburg, Indiana, the other is in Camby, Indiana - Fairfield Friends Meeting. The pastor at Fairfield, Philip Gulley, is also the author of several fine books about faith, family, and life in small town Indiana.
Looks like a good groups of people, I had a friend who was a Quaker ages before I came to faith, we never discussed religion!
Well, thank you Ron for warning me about the Camby Church. I've actually driven by there before and wondered if it's a good church. Now I know just to keep on drivin'. Unless, of course, you have witnessed about it wrongly; I can safely assume that your definition of tolerance may actually mean something else to that preacher; he could be simply exercising patience in the hopes that you'll finally accept Christ. So, I can't make a snap judgement of him since I've never conversed with him.
By the way, I've had the experience of visiting a church near there that's similar to your description of the Greensburg one. An awesome, awesome sermon that suddenly turned nasty on the issue of homosexuality. That man, like the little kid in your video, spoke the truth, too, but then neglected to spread the Good News of repentance and forgiveness. I won't tell you where that church is, because it's just as bad as you describe the Camby one as being. So, there ya go----the spectrum is broad, just like the road to hell.
Maybe you'll actually one day take interest in a Church that teaches the correct Way. But I ain't holdin' my breath.
I provided a link just so you could hear him for yourself. You may have to adjust the settings on your Commodore 64's tolerance filter to enable viewing though...
Yeah, I saw the link. Hmm....do I wanna even listen to him after your description?
Tell ya what---if I do, I'll let ya know what I think.
Nope you don't. You will surely go into spontaneous apoplexy. He has a sense of humour, seems sincere, and actually seems like he loves other people. It might be too much for you.
You could just put the no homos song on a continuous loop. You will sleep the sleep of the self-righteous...
???? You didn't take the time to look st the YouTube link. Shame on you Brenda. There's none so blind as those who will not see.
Well, that was a few minutes near-wasted.
That preacher only mentioned the Lord one time that I recall, and that was at the end of the spiel about how cool the pews are and how his Quaker church "reels in" people and then mocks visitors! No wonder people don't go back, with that cocky judgemental attitude he exhibits!
From just that video, one inevitably draws the conclusion that the guy's trying to be a mix of stand-up comedian and advocate for Quakerism (or whatever religion/denomination that is).
And nothing said about homosexuality. He hinted at that I guess when he said he's liberal and sits on the "Left hand of God". What an admission! He might as well have just said he sits at the hand of Satan! And the sin of pride he demoted to the definition of "pleasure" for the sake of making him and his church look good! LOL.
What the hay was that video supposed to show me, Ron??
The only redeeming value that was evident might be that it's possible that that little snippet of church snobbery isn't all there is.......maybe there's some actual worship that goes on? But who would possibly even know from that video?!
Are you now gonna recommend that I buy his books or go visit his church to find out more? Not likely. The guy mocked people who bring their own Bibles to church there!
Oh my. Please tell me you don't go to that church, Ron? Or if you do, that you're not under the spell of his snobby personality?
I can tell you, from having visited lots of different churches in my life, and from having seen the results of "churches" like Jim Jones's and such, that that (from that video's spiel) church is more likely to be part of a cult than a place to freely worship God. Seriously. If a person isn't careful, they can get swayed by any preacher who doesnt' give a whit what comes outta his mouth. I guess it's the boldness with which they speak......that's the liberal way; and people think that just because someone says something with a voice of "authority" that it's right and true. Not so at all. All voices should be tested, weighed on the balance scale of Biblical authority. That's sometimes hard for people, especially unBelivers, because they don't take the time to take the Bible in context. And the context of the entire Bible is that there is sinful mankind in need of the Savior, who forgives all sin upon true repentance. His mercy is broad, enduring "forever"; but the road one must walk is strait, narrow; the only way anyone at all can even walk it is to carry their cross onto it and have Jesus there with them. 'Cause we're gonna veer off that road time after time if we don't hold onto His hand. The only way anyone can even ENTER onto that road is to recognize that we have sin that needs to be forgiven.
By all discerning accounts so far, Ron, that Quaker preacher is not your "friend". I doubt he's anybody's friend, if indeed that segment of video is any clue to his overall personality or preaching style.
How DARE he sit in a church and not condemn homosexuality!!
What's your problem, Ron?
I just had thought that the video was about the issue of this thread. I wasn't trying to judge his every word. Just the words in the video. Which were, as I said, so rude and snobby and judgemental that I can't imagine WHAT he would say about homosexuality! Did you not hear him mock people who bring their own Bibles to church?! By the way, ya reckon the Quaker bibles are different from Christian Bibles? Just what is his deal anyway?
Brenda, you are being hilarious today. You....YOU who condemn, judge, and belittle 99% of humanity with your postings see fit to call this most gracious and inclusive minister judgemental?
I don't condemn judge and belittle "99% of humanity". Are you delirious? What does "99% of humanity" even mean? To what "99% of humanity" are you referring to?
That man IS judgemental and prideful. Why would anyone want to go hear him mock anyone at all? UNLESS, of course, that snippet of video wasn't representative of his overall thinking.
I'll tell you, that's one reason I refused to keep going to another church near there. I told you this before. The Pastor of a church gave an awesome awesome sermon, but veered it over into mocking gays. He tried to cover it up by also mocking drunks and thieves. But the damage was done. He may have been trying to do the right thing, but he didn't do the right thing. He told the congregation that if anyone didn't like what he said, there was the door. Now, he could've actually shown some consideration for the fact that there are many sinners in the world in need of Salvation, welcomed anyone and everyone into church meetings and told them that ANY sin can be forgiven upon repentance. But he didn't. He deliberately shunned homosexuals. ...Could be that he had heard about the incident in another State where gays went into a church meeting and deliberately insulted the church and threw fliers around and had to have the police called....who knows? That kind of homosexual activism doesn't belong in any place, especially a church. That would make any Pastor want to avoid that stuff. So...actually, it is that bold liberal kind of action that attempts to deter even a homosexual who wants to come to God from even considering going to church. And then is when preachers like your Quaker preacher swoop in and say hey everything's okay, come into this church, we'll accept you like you are 'cause the Bible is wrong anyway, so come change the lightbulbs in our church and wind the clock and you'll be A-okay. Well, if you wanna sell your soul for the opportunity to wind the clock in that church, go ahead. But if you want to actually find the Way to get your life in order and find true Peace, look for a church that tells you there's an altar where you can meet the Lord, repent, and receive the forgiveness that He died on the Cross to obtain for you.
There should never be condemnation spoken from a pulpit without showing how to get out from under the condemnation!
Gays, Democrats, socialists, Muslims, conservative nut-jobs who aren't quite kooky enough to suit you, Amish, Mennonites, Catholics, Zoroastrians, Canadians, Mexicans, black presidents with Muslim-sounding names who were probably born in Kenya, doctors who perform abortions, Mormons, Gays (you seem to hate them doubly), carp fishermen, ....
I can roll these out in segments....
Don't forget Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, heterosexuals who favor equal rights for gays ("heterophobes"), etc.
Jason, you and Ron can take your false insinuations and personal bias against anyone who speaks the truth, and put 'em all back in your biased little pockets where they came from.
Forgive me for thinking that you thought heterosexual, conservative, American evangelical Christians are better than everyone else. Have no idea how I ever got that idea...
Truth? You wouldn't know truth if it bit you in the A$$.
Like I said, the list will require more than one post. Now I have something to do this summer....
Teaching a child to love everyone no matter who they are or what the believe is a healthy home life.
My kids were all taught tolerance and love; they have homosexual friends and don't have a problem with them because they realize they can't "catch" it and they are some of the most wonderful people we know.
Brenda Durham - "That's no more child abuse than allowing a child to hear somebody say that homosexuality is A-ok."
Allowing a child to learn that homosexulality is natural in the animal kingdom (which includes humans, by the way) is NOT child abuse. Drilling the idea of a man made god in their head since infancy is another story. Brainwashing can be a form of child abuse. To tell the child to accept this, and other Biblical nonsense, without question with the threat of death is unacceptable.
It's really sad to think ignorance such as that is allowed to go unchecked. Those parishioners are probably patting each other on the backs as the rest of us sit in shock and disgust. Sure that our outrage is little more than them being persecuted for Jesus.
That child should be removed from that home and every adult who cheered him on should be charged with child abuse. If life were fair.
If life were truly fair they would be sterilized... as it is they should all be shipped to their own little island... They can call it hypocritica...
Hmmm. I don't know. The level of intelligence that breeds that mentality might be more comfortable with less syllables in the name of their new country.
Just call it Heaven and ship them off. Apparently, they want to be there anyways.
Two syllables? That might be one too many, but we could give it a shot.
Too many? Most of them can pronounce it already so it could not be that difficult.
You're right. I'm still so offended by that video I'm being insulting for the sake of it.
And the saddest part is someone is going to read this and accuse someone of picking on Christians.
Probably. It's part and parcel of the "persecution complex" most of them are told is going to happen to them if they believe. Nothing like a good self-defeating persecution complex that is so ingrained, that it becomes a literal disease of the mind.
That child should be removed from that home and environment. Disgusting.
It's a prime example of the willful ignorance of some of the religious folk in America. Completely foolish, disturbing and many other words which I'm unable to say because I would get banned for breaking the forum rules.
Not sure I want to go to heaven in that case, some of the coolest, funniest guys I have known were flaming. Not sure I want to go to a heaven full of straight men, sorry guys but your just not as much fun when there is always that trying to get in a girls pants thing going on. A nice gay guy can be a great friend, non threatening for a woman not interested in being hit on by another walking penis.
"If the church were Christian, Jesus would be a model for living, not an object of worship.
If the church were Christian, affirming our potential would be more important than condemning our brokenness.
If the church were Christian, reconciliation would be valued over judgment.
If the church were Christian, gracious behavior would be more important than right belief.
If the church were Christian, inviting questions would be more important than supplying answers.
If the church were Christian, encouraging personal exploration would be more important than communal uniformity.
If the church were Christian, meeting needs would be more important than maintaining institutions.
If the church were Christian, peace would be more important than power.
If the church were Christian, it would care more about love and less about sex.
If the church were Christian, this life would be more important than the afterlife.
In the end, what I'm hoping for is a church a little less full of itself, and a little more full of love. It wouldn't take much, for love and grace and kindness have a way of multiplying. We can start with just a few bones of it, and watch it build into something so vast it boggles the mind -- a divine extrapolation, if you will."
From Philip Gulley's "If the Church Were Christian"
"The greatest commandment is that you love one another." Jesus said that.
Philip Gulley! A true Christian. A real Holy man.
What a great contrast to the hellfire and brimstone prophet we have here on hubpages.
This would be a great topic for the sandpit...
Why I am going to Hell...
If you are asking me, I will tell you this. This is hell, but it is also heaven. Open mind, closed mind. Open eyes, closed eyes. Open ears, closed ears. These are the same keys which Jesus gave to Peter. I just gave them to you. May they serve you well.
If I accept your gifts, must I worship you?
Well, if there ain't no heaven, who the hell cares?
As a self important religious person myself I think that is a step too far!
Surely they could find something better to sing....cum by yar m'lord cum by yar!
How very un-christian of the parents and community of the children involved.
I'm so glad that the bible doesn't preach that half-breeds like me aren't welcome.
Or does it.
Of course they are going to defend their position, however ridiculous their position is in reality. It's pathetically disgusting.
If TRUTH is what they claim to be what they are teaching, then not only have the Preacher of this pathetic church deluded adults, but are purposely teaching division among others who live within society.
So much for teaching Grace of a G/god.
Breaking Story: The kid was actually an actor working on behalf of a local atheist group. When he sang "ain't no homos..." he meant homo sapiens. When these morons finally figure out what they were applauding...
What'd that kid say?
Ain't no Hamas gonna make it into heaven?
Now we're gonna have a whole bunch of unemployed suicide bombers refusing to work.
And of course that will bring our unemployment numbers up even higher.
Oh wait -- that's the plan!
Just another layer of the anti-Obama plot by the far right. And shows how low they will stoop. Using a poor innocent little kid in an racist campaign.
He could also have been singing ain't no hummus....
The crowd looked rather carnivorous.
Ron is St. Peter, gaurding the Pearlies from all those rump rangers.
I don't know the meaning of "gaurding" or "rump rangers".
Oh, MM, you made me lol - literally!
Now I'm singing "Ain't No Moutain High Enough," with different lyrics:
Ain't no Hamas big enough,
No terrorist is smart enough,
Ain't no Jidad great enough,
To get past that kid!
I just had a thought.
What about the closet homos?
You know the ones.
Those (self) righteous Christians who make a big fuss about homosexuality.
They'll make it to Heaven on the basis of their faith, right?
But will they be turned away because they are really homos and God rejects homos from Heaven?
Or because they lied about it?
I'm pretty sure there are closets in heaven.
Who told you that?
No closets. No clothes. No need.
Are you picturing who I'm picturing?
Hell is sounding better by the minute...
I say if homos want to do it in a closet, it's no one's business but theirs'.
Mighty Mom wrote:
I just had a thought.
What about the closet homos?
You know the ones.
Those (self) righteous Christians who make a big fuss about homosexuality.
They'll make it to Heaven on the basis of their faith, right?
But will they be turned away because they are really homos and God rejects homos from Heaven?
Or because they lied about it?
You do know. ...... don't Cha? ... that when ever you/we are 180 degrees opposit of that which we are argueing against .... we become a mirror image of it ??
And that's not the worst of it Brenda. This preacher has actually.....questioned the authenticity of many Bible verses!!!!!
Ah! It figures. So that's why he mocks visitors. So...it would seem he mocks Christians and praises Quakers. That explains a lot. Explains why you like him, correct?
It gets worse Brenda. Speaking through a character in one of his books, he even goes through a period where he questions God's existence....
OH THE HUMANITY !!!!!!
Like I said, Ron, if what you say is true about it, then that's not even a church; it's a cult.
I can tell you this---there are some good churches in that area (just as there are in any area), dwindling though the numbers may be of any good church. Since you found that one, surely you can Google all of them and take your pick. But indeed, you sought out the one that's "inclusive" as you put it. So you should be happy as a lark, right? No need for us to converse further about this.
LOL Love the death threats that go along with religion! What do we need religion for again?
If there is a hell, there will be so many cool people there the temperature will drop down to a very pleasant degree. Of course, imagine how heaven would become stifling with all of the fire and brimstone believers in attendance.
Ah, an epiphany! That god, he's a tricky dude after all!
Thanks Holle! I try to stop in between bans. I wish they'd change the ban photo of Maddie riding on the segway though. I suppose they think it's cute or something. Congrats on your new son-in-law!
Thanks! You haven't met him, have you? He's a nice guy...so far.
I might have welcomed you back sooner myself (Welcome back) ..except I haven't been getting on here enough to notice you were gone. My had?
This is on CNN headline news as we speak.
I don't get the impression Anderson Cooper likes this whole kiddie song in church deal.
Per another forum thread querying whether AC is himself homo, I believe his reaction is conclusive evidence.
I think all hubbers except Brenda have been "left behind". You would think that FoxNews would have covered the rapture, but maybe it cut too far into their - "must destroy Obama" programming.
by Peter Owen5 years ago
I find myself questioning every day all the beliefs that the nuns beat into me for 8 years. It's not only how they taught us, it is what they taught us. Those women had a very simplistic view on life and religion. To...
by augustine725 years ago
I have talked to many atheists and some say that atheists are people who do not believe in the concept of God. But in the past people said that atheists were people who believed that there was "no God". What...
by Mark Knowles7 years ago
http://www.bvcsm.com/Check this out. LOLDear oh dear..............
by Grace Marguerite Williams3 years ago
Many traditional and fundamentalist religious parents raise their children to what is tantamount to abuse. Such children are brainwashed into thinking that the only legitimate and acceptable construct is the religious...
by JKSophie7 years ago
I know, you want to answer both. But for the sake of sharing thoughts, we may want to take our stand and justify it. It's something for us to reflect on the importance of both as well, by knowing their importance.
by Catherine Giordano17 months ago
I wrote a hub on this topic (using this title) explaining my belief that although religion does some good in the world, it does more harm than good. This sparked a debate in the comments section. I thought that debate...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.