Pat Robertson

[McCulloch]

Pat Robertson said, "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him [democratically elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez] , I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

Suppose there is an internationally known mullah in the United States, who has a TV show watched every week by millions of faithful Muslims. He is as fundamentalist in his faith as Pat Robertson is in his and equally extreme in his politics. One day this mullah puts out a call on his TV show for Prime Minister Tony Blair to be assassinated. I have little doubt that this person would be branded a terrorist or someone inciting terrorism and arrested. By the definitions laid out by the United States, Robertson is calling for an act of international terrorism.

Given the preacher's ties to Bush's christian supporters, should legal action be taken against Pat Robertson? The Venezuelan government said, "This public call to assassinate a head of state, considered a crime by all modern legislation, is prosecutable by its very nature. That is what the civilized would is expecting of the U.S. authorities." Are the Venezuelans right?

[AlAyeti]

Jesus was a Jew.

"Go and sin no more."

Think hippies will listen to that even now?

"Free love" the ultimate lie!

Better go buy a book on debate. Logic escapes you.

Also get one on Satanism. Free love there too.

[micatala]

I do not promote condom use against AIDS. I promote morality. If others do not follow that perfect advice then so be it. They kill themselves.

Liberals do not take a moral stand of abstinence as perfect, because they think everyone is like they are. Shallow and unable to control their actions. Hollywodd leftists are the perfect example.

So they just talk. And by the actions they will not curb, lead others into death and horror. How many children are being raised by Murphy Brown's coast to coast???

Yet it was dan Quayle that was caled stupid. A potatoe is not a fatherless child.

The last thing you want me to do is to start listing ALL of the insanity the left has inflicted on our world as "diversity and choice." You're not stupid, just complicit. You won't see what I write anyway. That is clear. Anyway, you have a pat answer to relegate me to the bigoted.

Martin Luther King Jr. TOOK ACTIONS and lost his life trying to show and say to others to do the right thing. AND sitting in front of evil and trying to stop it is an action.

I see the same comments mentioned to me that were mentioned to him from the racists. I am just called a homphobe and bigot or Right-Winger or whatever. But any trip to downtown city streets shows anyone what is influencing our society and it is not Liberalism!

I, like King, am pointing out the wrong done by liars that claim they have "civil rights" to make laws. Liberals have now become the intolerant of anyone that dissents.

I present science to oppose the sexualization of children and am called a bigot or homophobe.

Do the math.

Or visit any downtownn city corners after dark. Or juvenile halls, or group homes or welfare recipient. Liberalism is their religion and it is not getting them to heaven.

Rant?

Those people have names.

What does any of this have to do with the topic of this thread? WHy do you keep bringing up sexual issues? Is anyone else here bringing these up except you?

You mention Martin Luther King. King would have been considered a pretty radical liberal in his day. He was opposed by the conservatives, including a huge number of conservative Christians. He died at the hands of one of these conservatives. That you would cite him as an example to support your views is truly ironic and astonishing.

Is it possible for you to go back and actually read some of the examples provided by Magus, juliod and myself and specifically respond to our points?

[harvey1]

Wow, it comes close to breaking some pretty heavy laws. I think we'll see him off the air soon.

But, one of the problems with our society is that we are so politically correct that we don't do the smart things anymore.

It is absurd to press charges against an older man like that. I say take him off the air, and let him retire in peace. If he were a young guy, I would want the Attorney General to review the situation, but at this point he's just beyond the point to where he can speak effectively.

At some point it'll happen to all of us if we live long enough. Have some mercy.

[juliod]

I think we'll see him off the air soon.

I don't think so. He's a conservative and so immune from criticism. As far as I can see the issue has dropped down the 'ol memory hole already.

If there is any punative action taken I will eat my hat.

DanZ

[AlAyeti]

Pat Robertson would be a better candidate to be a man like King then a man that allows women to be called bithches and ho's and allows unwed pregnancies to be celebrated and not challenged. "My Babies Momma" is now somehow not a disgusting thing to refer to a child and mother that a man will not take care of.

Unlike the Imam's that call for murder and get an answer, Robertson found no tolerance from me or any other Christian that reads the Bible accurately. If he goes off the air, God will replace him with another good man.

Note that the Liberal forces of the airwaves do not go on 24-hour tirades against Muslim's that call for murder in the many Mosques even in the US. It seems that is a job that only Republicans will do.

Not good character I believe being shown by many Liberals these days.

What would King think of the content of character of the average liberal that promotes Condoms rather than morality, taxation to pay for licentiousness rather than promote honesty and learning, the sexualization of our children by the Hollywood (Liberal) crowd, Abortion to get rid of a child that gets in then way of more sexual licentiousness, same-sex marriage, teaching children sex acts in schools, opposing the challenge to murderous dictatorships that kill those it opposeses him, lawsuits to rid the school of religious expression etc., etc., etc..

King and Liberals have parted company. They have no content of character worth fighting for. Slavery and killing unborn children and redefining mariage is not something that brings good character. Especially to children who will see it as licensing every kind of licentiousness. Proven of course on the Five O'Clock news as already a fact.

[juliod]

What would King think of the content of character of the average liberal that promotes Condoms rather than morality, taxation to pay for licentiousness rather than promote honesty and learning, the sexualization of our children by the Hollywood (Liberal) crowd, Abortion to get rid of a child that gets in then way of more sexual licentiousness, same-sex marriage, teaching children sex acts in schools, opposing the challenge to murderous dictatorships that kill those it opposeses him, lawsuits to rid the school of religious expression etc., etc., etc..

That's a good paragraph in a thread about Robertson's call for murder.

I count the word "condom" once, "licentiousness" twice, and "sex" (variations) no less than four times. You even got the word "ho" in an earlier paragraph.

I saw a graffito once that read "There is a sexual side to murder". You seem to be carrying that attitude way too far. Can we talk about the issue, please? Not every bad thing in the world is related to anal sex.

DanZ

[MagusYanam]

Note that the Liberal forces of the airwaves do not go on 24-hour tirades against Muslim's that call for murder in the many Mosques even in the US.

That says absolutely nothing. In this country, everyone knows that the Islamic extremists who call for murder are wrong, but there are still so many in this country who turn a blind eye to people like Bush. What it says about the liberals is that they stay on the issues.

The rightness or wrongness of Islamic extremists is not an issue - they are wrong to call for terrorism and murder. What is at issue is how to deal with them, and that's where Bush has gone terribly wrong.

What would King think of the content of character of the average liberal that promotes Condoms rather than morality, taxation to pay for licentiousness rather than promote honesty and learning, the sexualization of our children by the Hollywood (Liberal) crowd, Abortion to get rid of a child that gets in then way of more sexual licentiousness, same-sex marriage, teaching children sex acts in schools, opposing the challenge to murderous dictatorships that kill those it opposeses him, lawsuits to rid the school of religious expression etc., etc., etc..

Note that each of these gripes has to do with sexual behaviour except the last two. I know King would have approved of a peaceful foreign policy and sympathised with the pacifists (even with regard to dictators - he was a follower of Gandhi and thought that satyagraha would do more against brutality than violence) and he would have seen religious expression in public schools as a very minor issue.

But this tirade says more about the lasciviousness of the conservative mind than about the moral corruption of the liberal. Conservatives in this country seem unduly obsessed with sex. Homosexuality is not that big a deal - only 10% of people in this country, reflected by similar figures around the globe, are homosexual. I don't think we'll have to deal with an overthrow of this country, its legal system or its way of life from that corner.

People should be more mortified at the overabundance of violence in the media than at sex, and at the possibility children will become more desensitised to violence through TV or the movies. But no, people get more outraged at Janet Jackson at the Superbowl Halftime than at TV shows like Cops or movies by Jerry Brueckheimer.

Conversely, I was never taught sex acts in school or discouraged from praying or expressing my religious views, and I'm closer to that than AlAyeti is, so I'm just going to dismiss that as paranoid piffle.

I'm sorry, Al, but you've proven nothing.

[AlAyeti]

OK I stopped laughing.

My point is that it does seem that the liberal goals of society is licentiousness. I never cared about anything politically or otherwise in my life, until I started working with children (fifteen years ago) and just recently started seing what was going on.

Some of the richest people in the world are Liberals (George Soros, Ted kennedy) and absolutely the poorest in America, vote Democrat. While their communities are getting deadlier and deadlier.

Robertson was very accurate about the rise of Witchcraft with feminism movement (that was mentioned by a writer who wrote aboput Wicca appearing on the Tucker Carlson show last week) and he is correct that Chavez is a scumbag. The Left tries to cover that up with their barrage of Anti-Chritianism. The left in my opinion is now borderline and over it, Communist.

Where is the sex-slave trade of children the most active? Other than Tailand and other Asia countries . . . Communist countries.

I have started to become ann advocate of the rights of children to just be allowed to be children. Both the Right and left have much blood on their hands there.

I am not as much a conservative as one might think, but to opose what is happening in our schools is to oppose the Liberal agenda.

[MagusYanam]

Robertson was very accurate about the rise of Witchcraft with feminism movement

So you're just going to believe some nutter who writes in to the Tucker Carlson show, of all things? Not very wise; do your own research.

The left in my opinion is now borderline and over it, Communist.

Where is the sex-slave trade of children the most active? Other than Tailand and other Asia countries . . . Communist countries.

Firstly, Communism is for all intents and purposes dead. There are only two real communist countries left in the world: North Korea and Cuba. Even others that still use the Communist trappings (like China and Viet Nam) are rapidly becoming market-oriented economically.

Secondly, Thailand has never been a Communist country. This article is from before the Cold War was over:

Thailand, officially Kingdom of Thailand, Thai Muang Thai or Prathet Thai...

The economy. Thailand has a predominantly market economy based largely on services, agriculture and light industries. Foreign investment and loans have resulted in improvements in economic and social conditions...

Government and social conditions. Thailand is a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary government dominated by the military. A 1978 constitution makes the hereditary king head of state and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Legislative power resides in a bicameral National Assembly, comprising the 243-member Senate and the 324-member House of Representatives...

The head of government is the Prime Minister, appointed by the king on the advice of the National Assembly; the PM names a Council of Ministers (cabinet) for appointment by the king. A multi-party system operates and there is no dominant party or coalition. Insurgent forces of the outlawed Communist Party of Thailand were active until the early 1980's...

Social welfare programs are meagre but include assistance to children, families and the old and indigent, and disaster relief.

Apparently, not much has changed there in the last 20 years, except the Communist insurgency is gone and replaced with a Muslim extremist one (big surprise).

As far as the Democrats go, the left in the United States has fallen under this stigma before, and it was unfounded. I'm sure you've heard of Joe McCarthy? What makes you think it holds any more now than 50 years ago?

Paranoid piffle.

[AlAyeti]

It was a women author who wrote a book on Wicca's rise, who appeared on his show.

Not a caller. It proved Robertson was correct.

Taxation proves the communism of the Left.

Fact.