URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Love God Only
  HTML https://lovegodonly.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Politics
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 12987--------------------------------------------------
       Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: Kerry Date: October 3, 2016, 7:18 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Remember when Jerry Falwell, Sr. said he wanted to clean up the
       smut and talked about a possible boycott of businesses which
       sold magazines like Playboy?    From 1981, upi.com/archives
  HTML http://www.upi.com/Archives/1981/01/09/The-Rev-Jerry-Falwell-says-his-Moral-Majority-has/6669347864400/:
       [quote]He said the coalition will enlist some 1,000 people to
       monitor television programming for some three months -- possibly
       beginning in March -- to formulate a list of objectionable shows
       that will be targeted for extinction.
       Falwell also lashed out at Hugh Hefner, publisher of the
       Chicago-based Playboy Magazine, as one who is 'making a living
       from smut and running a smut pool.'
       He said Moral Majority members may promote a nationwide boycott
       of corporations which advertise in Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler
       and 'other smut papers' to rid magazine racks of such
       publications.[/quote]
       Now his son hobnobs with Donald Trump with a copy of Playboy in
       the background.
  HTML http://media.al.com/news_impact/photo/trump-falwell-playboyjpg-972da5730a94b2e2.jpg
       We've heard the talk about Donald's wife, but have you heard
       about Donald's appearance in a softcore Playboy movie?   Thank
       goodness, Donald kept his clothes on even if the girls didn't.
       Ha, ha, and he told us to check out the sex tape Miss Universe
       Alicia Machado made!   From the Hill:
       [quote]Trump's role in the start of the video consists of him,
       over a caption that reads "entrepreneur," saying “Beauty is
       beauty, and let’s see what happens with New York.”
       He then pops a bottle of champagne and pours it over a Playboy
       bunny logo on a limo with women surrounding him.
       BuzzFeed found the footage on an online New York-based adult
       video store.
       Trump on Friday blasted the former Miss Universe Alicia Machado
       for her "sex tape," apparently a reference to her appearance on
       a reality TV show in the 1990s.
       Trump cited the "sex tape" as evidence of the model's
       "disgusting" personality after Machado publicly criticized the
       GOP nominee for his comments regarding her weight. [/quote]
       What did Falwell, Jr. have to say of it when asked?  He compared
       himself to Jesus!   From the Blaze
  HTML http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/06/22/jerry-falwell-jr-responds-to-controversy-surrounding-playboy-cover-appearing-in-photo-of-him-and-trump/<br
       />(don't expect me to quote from this site too often):
       [quote]But several hours later, Falwell, who participated
       Tuesday in a forum between Trump and hundreds of other
       evangelical leaders,  finally took to Twitter to respond to his
       detractors, saying he was “honored” because the “same hypocrites
       who accused Jesus of being a friend of publicans and sinners”
       were “targeting” him over the Playboy cover.
       That comment alone set of a torrent of responses, many of which
       were digs at the high-profile Trump endorser. Much of the social
       media back-and-forth late Tuesday night was between Falwell and
       conservative writer Ben Howe, who is obstinately opposed to
       Trump.
       The two men exchanged barbs about Falwell’s father, Jerry
       Falwell, Sr., who famously lead the Moral Majority in the 1970s.
       It is important to note that, ironically, the elder Falwell was
       close personal friends with Hustler publisher Larry Flynt, who
       the televangelist iconically took to court over a satirical
       article published in the pornographic magazine that outlined a
       fake incestuous relationship between him and his mother.[/quote]
       How times have changed!
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4ziZVeuj9w
       It amazed me how he brags (shortly after the 2:30 mark) how
       Liberty University has become "the largest and most prosperous
       Christian university in the world."    What he doesn't say is
       that the American taxpayer is footing much of the bill.
  HTML https://thinkprogress.org/conservative-americas-favorite-christian-university-is-thriving-because-of-progressive-policies-a6ffd1670b7a#.y9w6ct1yt
  HTML http://www.politicususa.com/2015/07/18/american-taxpayers-fund-largest-christian-college-america-world.html
       My guess is Falwell thinks Trump is the best bet to keep all the
       government money flowing into Liberty University.
       Do you know what else Falwell said?   Every terrorist in the
       world will crawl under a rock" if Trump is elected.   Yes, he
       said that.  (Video at RightWingWatch
  HTML http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/falwell-every-terrorist-world-will-crawl-under-rock-when-trump-becomes-president.)<br
       />
       I believe the exact opposite.  I think ISIS wants Trump to be
       elected.   They think his actions would be good PR for them.
       From Time
  HTML http://time.com/4480945/isis-donald-trump/:
       
       [quote]This year, ISIS isn’t simply a passive observer of
       American politics. Since the group’s rapid rise in 2014, ISIS
       has established a far-reaching, sophisticated propaganda
       machine. Its members rely on social media to shape public
       opinion, recruit new members and mobilize followers to carry out
       attacks. Now, some of them are using those channels to advocate
       for Trump. In August, one ISIS spokesman wrote: “I ask Allah to
       deliver America to Trump.” Another supporter declared: “The
       ‘facilitation’ of Trump’s arrival in the White House must be a
       priority for jihadists at any cost!!!” ISIS is working to drum
       up support for the candidate it has called “the perfect enemy.”
       That may come as a surprise to some. After all, Trump has spent
       this election season making a series of combative and bellicose
       comments on terrorism—from his pledge to kill the families of
       terrorists, his plans bring back torture of suspected terrorists
       and his call to ban all Muslims from entering the United States.
       But the truth is, Trump’s statements and extreme policies aren’t
       just contrary to our values—they play right into the hands of
       ISIS.
       Trump’s anti-Muslim proposals are likely to inspire and
       radicalize more violent jihadists in the U.S. and Europe.
       Specifically, his calls for a ban on Muslims visiting our
       country and for blanket spying on mosques reinforce ISIS’s view
       that the U.S. is hostile to all Muslims. As a former ISIS
       fighter told Revkin and Mhidi: “When Trump says hateful things
       about Muslims, it proves that jihadists are right to fight
       against the West, because the West is against Islam.” As a
       result, his ideas fuel the group’s efforts to radicalize and
       mobilize its followers to take action. In fact, Trump himself
       has been featured in ISIS propaganda videos following the
       Brussels attack and the Orlando massacre.
       Trump’s statements also serve to isolate and alienate the same
       Muslim Americans who must be our partners in this fight. They’re
       often on the front lines against ISIS in its effort to
       radicalize those who are disaffected or otherwise susceptible to
       its hateful message. And they are in the best position to
       recognize the signs of radicalization and to intervene before
       it’s too late. Marginalizing these Americans sows distrust of
       the government and law enforcement, and makes it more difficult
       to identify and disrupt attacks. Terrorist groups around the
       world are eager to capitalize on this opportunity: the al-Qaeda
       group in East Africa released a video quoting Trump to convince
       American Muslims to join the group because they are not welcome
       in their own country.[/quote]
       #Post#: 12989--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: Kerry Date: October 3, 2016, 9:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Here's what the Pope had to say about the American election as
       reported by Huffington Post
  HTML http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pope-francis-election-advice_us_57f1eb0de4b0c2407cde7f5a?:
       [quote]Vote your conscience.
       Pope Francis weighed in on the U.S. election on Sunday, but he
       didn’t endorse or criticize either candidate.
       “I never say a word about electoral campaigns,” the pope told
       reporters aboard his plane, according to the National Catholic
       Reporter. “The people are sovereign. I will only say: Study the
       proposals well, pray and choose in conscience.”
       Although Pope Francis didn’t mention Donald Trump or Hillary
       Clinton by name, he did say there were “difficulties” with each,
       Reuters reported. He also warned of the dangers of an electorate
       becoming too politicized:
       [quote]“When in any country there are two, three or four
       candidates who don’t satisfy everyone, it means that perhaps the
       political life of that country has become too politicized and
       that it does not have much political culture.
       People say ‘I’m from this party’ or ‘I’m from that party,’ but
       effectively, they don’t have clear thoughts about the basics,
       about proposals.”[/quote][/quote]
       [hr]
       Wow, that's in sharp contrast to Trump's new "Catholic liason"
       for Catholic affairs,  Joseph Cella.   From churchmilitant.com
  HTML http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/trump-appoints-33-catholic-advisors:
       [quote]DETROIT (ChurchMilitant.com) - Catholic influence is
       increasing on Donald Trump's presidential campaign as he
       announced the appointment of 33 respected conservative Catholic
       leaders to form a Catholic advisory council.
       Members of the council were named September 21 and include such
       heavyweights as former Pennsylvania's Republican senator Rick
       Santorum and the president of the pro-life Susan B. Anthony
       List, Marjorie Dannenfelser, whom Trump recently picked to head
       his campaign's Pro-Life Coalition.
       Another Catholic council appointee is Joseph Cella, founder of
       the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast, who didn't support Trump
       in the primaries, but who is now backing his bid for the Oval
       Office.
       [quote]If you look at the totality of Mr. Trump's positions,
       such as preserving and protecting religious liberty, the
       sanctity of human life, providing an uplifting and empowering
       economic agenda and opening wide the opportunity for school
       choice, particularly to Hispanics and African Americans in urban
       areas, the difference couldn't be more stark on these core
       issues between Mr. Trump and Hillary Clinton.[/quote]
       Another council member is Matt Schlapp, a Catholic who chairs
       the American Conservative Union. Schlapp observed, "What I am
       seeing in my community with my friends, in my church, is that
       more and more practicing Catholics, conservatives, Republicans,
       independents are waking up to the fact that he's the right
       choice to make for president."
       Irish Catholic Steve Bannon — on hiatus from running
       Breitbart.com — is overseeing Trump's entire campaign, while the
       politically savvy Kellyanne Conway, a longtime Catholic from New
       Jersey, is manager of the operation.
       Trump was fighting an uphill battle trying to obtain the
       Catholic vote, which makes up roughly one-fourth of the
       electorate. A Pew Research poll in July showed 57 percent of
       churchgoing Catholics would vote for Clinton while only 38
       percent were leaning towards Trump.[/quote]
       What is so very odd about that is how vehemently opposed to
       Trump Cella was during the primaries when he signed an
       anti-Trump statement.    From the National Review
  HTML http://:
       [quote]In recent decades, the Republican party has been a
       vehicle — imperfect, like all human institutions, but
       serviceable — for promoting causes at the center of Catholic
       social concern in the United States: (1) providing legal
       protection for unborn children, the physically disabled and
       cognitively handicapped, the frail elderly, and other victims of
       what Saint John Paul II branded “the culture of death”; (2)
       defending religious freedom in the face of unprecedented
       assaults by officials at every level of government who have made
       themselves the enemies of conscience; (3) rebuilding our
       marriage culture, based on a sound understanding of marriage as
       the conjugal union of husband and wife; and (4) re-establishing
       constitutional and limited government, according to the core
       Catholic social-ethical principle of subsidiarity. There have
       been frustrations along the way, to be sure; no political party
       perfectly embodies Catholic social doctrine. But there have also
       been successes, and at the beginning of the current presidential
       electoral cycle, it seemed possible that further progress in
       defending and advancing these noble causes was possible through
       the instrument of the Republican party. That possibility is now
       in grave danger. And so are those causes. Donald Trump is
       manifestly unfit to be president of the United States. His
       campaign has already driven our politics down to new levels of
       vulgarity. His appeals to racial and ethnic fears and prejudice
       are offensive to any genuinely Catholic sensibility. He promised
       to order U.S. military personnel to torture terrorist suspects
       and to kill terrorists’ families — actions condemned by the
       Church and policies that would bring shame upon our country. And
       there is nothing in his campaign or his previous record that
       gives us grounds for confidence that he genuinely shares our
       commitments to the right to life, to religious freedom and the
       rights of conscience, to rebuilding the marriage culture, or to
       subsidiarity and the principle of limited constitutional
       government.
       We understand that many good people, including Catholics, have
       been attracted to the Trump campaign because the candidate
       speaks to issues of legitimate and genuine concern: wage
       stagnation, grossly incompetent governance, profligate
       governmental spending, the breakdown of immigration law, inept
       foreign policy, stifling “political correctness” — for starters.
       There are indeed many reasons to be concerned about the future
       of our country, and to be angry at political leaders and other
       elites. We urge our fellow Catholics and all our fellow citizens
       to consider, however, that there are candidates for the
       Republican nomination who are far more likely than Mr. Trump to
       address these concerns, and who do not exhibit his vulgarity,
       oafishness, shocking ignorance, and — we do not hesitate to use
       the word — demagoguery.
       Mr. Trump’s record and his campaign show us no promise of
       greatness; they promise only the further degradation of our
       politics and our culture. We urge our fellow Catholics and all
       our fellow citizens to reject his candidacy for the Republican
       presidential nomination by supporting a genuinely reformist
       candidate. [/quote]
       So now Cella is supporting and advising someone he said  this
       about less than a year ago?
       [hr]Also named to  Trump's panel of Catholics advisors was
       Marjorie Dannenfelser who signed an even more scathing letter
       earlier in the year.    From sba-list.org
  HTML https://www.sba-list.org/home/pro-life-women-sound-the-alarmdonald-trump-is-unacceptable:
       [quote]Dear Iowans,
       As pro-life women leaders from Iowa and across the nation, we
       urge Republican caucus-goers and voters to support anyone but
       Donald Trump. On the issue of defending unborn children and
       protecting women from the violence of abortion, Mr. Trump cannot
       be trusted and there is, thankfully, an abundance of alternative
       candidates with proven records of pro-life leadership whom
       pro-life voters can support.  We have come to this conclusion
       after having listened patiently to numerous debates and news
       reports, but most importantly to Donald Trump’s own words.
       The next president will be responsible for as many as four
       nominations to the Supreme Court. Mr. Trump has given us only
       one indication about the type of judges he would appoint, and it
       does not bode well for those who would like to see the court
       overturn Roe v. Wade. Mr. Trump has said his sister, Judge
       Maryanne Trump Barry, who struck down the Partial Birth Abortion
       Ban in New Jersey, would be a “phenomenal” choice for the court.
       Earlier this month, Mr. Trump also said he thought pro-choice
       Senator Scott Brown would make a “very good” Vice President. If
       one truly believes, as we do, that abortion is the taking of an
       innocent human life and is committed to the pro-life priorities
       of ending abortion after five months, and defunding the nation’s
       largest abortion business, Planned Parenthood, it would be a
       disaster to have a vice president who disagrees.
       Moreover, as women, we are disgusted by Mr. Trump’s treatment of
       individuals, women, in particular.  He has impugned the dignity
       of women, most notably Megyn Kelly, he mocked and bullied Carly
       Fiorina, and has through the years made disparaging public
       comments to and about many women. Further, Mr. Trump has
       profited from the exploitation of women in his Atlantic City
       casino hotel which boasted of the first strip club casino in the
       country.
       America will only be a great nation when we have leaders of
       strong character who will defend both unborn children and the
       dignity of women. We cannot trust Donald Trump to do either.
       Therefore we urge our fellow citizens to support an alternative
       candidate.[/quote]
       That letter is right about Trump being behind the first strip
       club casino.   July 4, 2013 -- from nj.com
  HTML http://www.nj.com/atlantic/index.ssf/2013/07/strip_club_coming_to_atlantic_city_casino_reports_say.html:
       [quote]The country’s first strip-club-in-a-casino will open in
       August.
       Scores, the New York-based franchise, will open its $25 million
       entertainment complex in the Trump Taj Mahal in August,
       according to a company spokeswoman.
       The site was about two years in the making and will be 36,000
       square feet of adult entertainment, the company said in a
       release.
       Scores will be located on the second floor of the Trump casino,
       in a space that was formerly occupied by three restaurants.
       There will be eight distinct areas – including a main showcase
       area, a sports bar, a nightclub, a lounge, a cabaret and a male
       revue.
       "It is certain to become a distinct competitive advantage in the
       Atlantic City marketplace," said Bob Gans, a managing partner of
       Scores Atlantic City.
       The state Division of Gaming Enforcement ruled way back in
       December 2011 to allow the club inside the Taj Mahal Casino
       Resort. At that time, officials said the it would be a $3
       million project.
       At the time the project was approved, the division said dancers
       could strip down only to a G-string and pasties. Lap dances
       would be prohibited, as would any simulation of sexual activity.
       However, the state Division of Gaming Enforcement has since
       agreed to allow a form of "modified" lap dancing not involving
       touching in the new club, said Cathleen Kiernan, a spokeswoman
       for Scores Atlantic City.[/quote]
       Did the strippers and lap dancers save the Taj Mahal?  Nope.
       It's due to close soon -- October 10.   Trump no longer owns the
       majority stake; and Carl Icahn has lost a lot of money and is
       calling it quits.  From Fortune
  HTML http://:
  HTML http://fortune.com/2016/08/04/atlantic-city-trump-taj-mahal-closing/
       [quote]Icahn told The Associated Press this week that he’s lost
       almost $100 million on the Taj Mahal in the 18 months since a
       federal judge approved a bankruptcy restructuring plan that saw
       him take control of the casino’s prior owner, Trump
       Entertainment Resort, which had filed for bankruptcy in 2014. At
       the time, the Taj Mahal was also threatening to close its doors
       unless it received concessions from the Unite Here union
       members, who eventually reached a deal to keep the casino open
       and the pave the way for Icahn’s takeover.
       Icahn previously bought Tropicana Entertainment, which owns the
       Tropicana Atlantic City hotel and casino, out of bankruptcy in
       2010.
       Donald Trump once touted the Atlantic City behemoth, which cost
       $1 billion to build in 1990, as the “eighth wonder of the
       world.” But, the man who is now the GOP nominee for president
       has not been involved in managing the casino that bears his name
       since its most recent bankruptcy. As Fortune has written before,
       the Taj Mahal and Trump’s other former casino and hotel holdings
       also went through multiple previous bankruptcy proceedings that
       saw the billionaire’s ownership of Trump Entertainment Resorts
       dwindle to a 10% stake.[/quote]
       So why would Marjorie Dannenfelser change her mind about Trump?
       She was right in pointing out he was behind opening the first
       strip club casino, a new low in "entertainment."    It's bad
       enough to make money encouraging gambling and encouraging people
       to drink booze so they gamble more.   Did Trump think using sexy
       women would be a sort of magic cure-all for the troubled casinos
       in Atlantic City?
       I can only think Dannenfelser thinks Trump is serious when he
       said he switched his position from being "very pro-choice" to
       hers.  She seems to be convinced, even penning an article about
       it at Townhall
  HTML http://townhall.com/columnists/marjoriedannenfelser/2016/05/09/the-prolife-case-for-trump-n2160264.<br
       />
       This reminds me of Reagan's promises about abortion when he ran.
       So far as I can determine, he never seriously tried to do
       anything about it except talk.
       What almost no one talks about is that the abortion rate has
       declined during Obama's term.   The number of abortions could be
       lowered even further without passing new laws about it but by
       addressing poverty and other social factors.
       I don't understand some Catholics' position on abortion.  Italy
       is a good example.   The abortion rate declined when it was
       legalized -- at least among Italians.  Of course, birth control
       was also available.   The rate of abortions among foreign
       workers however who face uncertain futures is a lot higher.  So
       why hold demonstrations demanding the banning of abortion?
       Why not demand better conditions for the foreign workers in
       Italy?
       #Post#: 12993--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: HOLLAND Date: October 3, 2016, 6:57 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I wonder, Kerry, if religious leaders really matter as much as
       before.  There is a lot of libertarianism in religion in
       America.  Religious leaders are still leading, but one can
       wonder about the followers.
       It is ialso nteresting, Kerry, as a sidelight issue, how many
       religious leaders and people are addicted to internet porn.
       Given that this is a church problem, it really has an effect on
       how the church can make political struggle on issues regarding
       sexuality and pornography in the media.
       Curiously, Playboy magazine is eliminating the soft port
       pictures and focusing on articles.  I understand that Playboy
       made the determination that there is so much soft and free porn
       on the internet that it is no longer profitable to promote and
       display soft porn in their magazine.
       I suppose one could advocate the censorship and governmental
       control of the internet, but I wonder if such a cause could be
       successful.
       #Post#: 12996--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: Kerry Date: October 3, 2016, 9:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=HOLLAND link=topic=1126.msg12993#msg12993
       date=1475539021]
       I wonder, Kerry, if religious leaders really matter as much as
       before.  There is a lot of libertarianism in religion in
       America.  Religious leaders are still leading, but one can
       wonder about the followers.[/quote]
       My opinion is that religious leaders have eroded their moral
       authority.  I think history shows that.   The state acts in a
       secular way, according to Paul, its role is to stop evil.
       Romans 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to
       the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that
       which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
       I believe the government is there to protect  people from the
       evil deeds of others.   The role of religion is to encourage
       good while respecting free will of everyone.   Thus government
       depends on its ability to use force and to frighten people while
       religion should depend on its appeal to love -- while realizing
       you can't force anyone to love or be good.
       When governments go bad, it means they are not existing to
       protect their citizens.  They often go in the direction of
       fascism or authoritarianism; and when people see the government
       is not there to protect them, they are apt to want to rebel or
       disobey.  In this kind of situation, bad secular leaders often
       try to hang onto their power by getting religious leaders to
       support them.    We see this happening in several countries now.
       The religious leader who falls into this, believing his own
       influence will be enhanced, has been seduced by Our Lady of
       Babylon, that's what I think.     He will eventually lose
       influence instead.   They often retain some followers but not of
       the peaceful type.   The good shepherd has sheep who follow him
       out of love that goes both ways.   False shepherds collaborate
       with the government a la Revelation 18 -- and their message is
       not about love but about fear.
       What I find interesting is that as their influence wanes, they
       become increasingly irrational; and the more irrational they
       become,  they lose even more followers.     Let's take the
       radical  fake-Muslims of ISIS for an example.  There were
       fascinating photos of people after they got routed.   Men were
       shaving each other's beards on the streets, and women were
       smoking cigarettes and taking off their veils.   You will never
       convince those people that ISIS is worth following.  Their crazy
       tactics proved to people they were fake, false Muslims.
       It may not be that extreme in the US; but if I have time to keep
       finding things about it,  I think we will see that some of our
       religious leaders seem to be losing their minds.    For example,
       here Jim Bakker  is saying the Devil wants to kill Donald
       Trump.
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r57ePfxdtx0
       He appears desperate to me, trying to hang onto some of
       influence and trying to make a few bucks at the same time -- I
       see he's still trying to sell his food for emergencies.
       [quote]It is ialso nteresting, Kerry, as a sidelight issue, how
       many religious leaders and people are addicted to internet ****.
       Given that this is a church problem, it really has an effect on
       how the church can make political struggle on issues regarding
       sexuality and pornography in the media.[/quote]It seems to me
       the more people rail against something and condemn others for
       something, the more likely they are to be guilty of it
       themselves.  It's popular in some circles to rail against gays;
       and people often cite Romans 1 to bolster their views.  But
       they fail to read on.
       Romans 2:2 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou
       art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou
       condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
       2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth
       against them which commit such things.
       3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such
       things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment
       of God?
       Judging others is a dangerous matter.  If we think this or that
       is such a big problem that Heaven can't handle it, we have
       created an idol in our minds where a situation is bigger than
       God.    The people who who do this often have the base motive of
       trying to wiggle out of their own feelings of self-condemnation.
       They struggle with something which seems to be bigger than God.
       That's why they see it as so big and so powerful.   They
       haven't mastered it yet in themselves.    Thus to look at
       someone else and to judge him as "worthless" means we see him as
       someone God isn't big enough to help.
       I'll go a step further.   If someone isn't tempted by a
       particular thing but says to himself, "It's safe for me to judge
       others on this," he will often begin to be tempted by it.    The
       more he thinks and talks about it, the more he will find himself
       tempted.  For all I know, Bishop Eddie Long could have been
       almost completely heterosexual when he started out; but the more
       he condemned others for it, the more he was tempted himself.
       [quote]Curiously, Playboy magazine is eliminating the soft port
       pictures and focusing on articles.  I understand that Playboy
       made the determination that there is so much soft and free ****
       on the internet that it is no longer profitable to promote and
       display soft **** in their magazine.[/quote]And Penthouse gave
       up their print editions, going to online only.
       I always found the whole Playboy thing dull.   Allegedly it was
       to tell men how to experience the finest things in life.   Good
       grief!  If you like a particular wine or brandy, drink it.  Do
       you really need Hugh Hefner's approval?   I happen to like some
       really cheap red wines.   I haven't bought any lately; but I
       don't care what Playboy says about wines.   Nor would I go to
       Trump's new DC hotel to buy a spoonful of wine for $140.    Why
       would I do that?  Just so I could say I had tasted such-and-such
       a wine?   I also found the photos of Trump Plaza dull --
       pretentious, gaudy,  and silly.   It also brings the word
       "deliciously" to mind:
       Revelation 18:7 How much she hath glorified herself, and lived
       deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith
       in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no
       sorrow.
       Revelation 18:9 And the kings of the earth, who have committed
       fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her,
       and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her
       burning,
       Peddling the idea that happiness depends on such things is
       peddling false hope to me.
       Proverbs 15:17 Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, than a
       stalled ox and hatred therewith.
       Of course, having fine things isn't a sin; but I think it's
       misguided if we fall into the trap of thinking acquiring things
       or power or living deliciously will make us happy.  I would not
       want to trade places with either Donald Trump or Hillary
       Clinton.  I feel sorry for  them more than condemn them.   I'm
       more likely to condemn avaricious religious leaders who, in my
       opinion, should know better.
       [quote]I suppose one could advocate the censorship and
       governmental control of the internet, but I wonder if such a
       cause could be successful.[/quote]Perhaps we should start a
       thread on this.  It is possible to an extent that might amaze
       you.   Governments however often find it useful to let almost
       anything appear on the internet -- so they can spy on people and
       find people to prosecute.  It used to be that the FBI had the
       largest collection of child pornography in the world.   They'd
       run ads so people would buy the stuff; and once it got
       delivered, they'd move in to arrest them.  Today, the FBI is
       still at it, but now on the internet.
  HTML http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/31/the-fbi-distributes-child-pornography-to
  HTML https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/23/fbi-improved-dark-web-child-porn-site-lawyer/
       And let's not forget that the American government invented the
       Tor browser.
       Ever wonder why sites don't clamp down completely on things like
       ISIS?   I think  governments use those sites to find and track
       people.   A lot of people seem to get caught by posting stuff on
       the internet.   If sites closed them down, it might make it
       harder for the government to find them.
       #Post#: 13000--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: Kerry Date: October 4, 2016, 5:50 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       So Ted Cruz showed up on Glenn Beck's radio show trying to
       explain his decision to endorse Trump; and Beck was most
       unhappy.
       But first a little background.  Remember how Ted's father Rafael
       said God had called Ted to run for President?
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v9JYj4jaA0
       Six months in prayer?  And then he lost to Trump?  Oh well.
       Rafael also once said we should end the separation of church and
       state, but never mind that for now.   Glenn Beck told Rafael
       Cruz -- from Right Wing Watch
  HTML http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ted-cruz-campaigned-gods-chosen-candidate-conceding-defeat:
       [quote]Beck emerged as one of Cruz's most prominent surrogates
       and turned his daily radio program into an infomercial for
       Cruz’s campaign.
       He told his fellow Cruz supporters that they were sure to be
       victorious because "we have the Almighty God on our side." He
       also insisted that God was using his audience to elect Cruz with
       because the senator was "truly raised up for this purpose at
       this time."
       "Everybody was born for a reason," Beck told Rafael Cruz in an
       interview at his radio studio, which he had turned into a
       replica of the Oval Office. "As I learned your story and saw the
       fruit of that story, now in your son, I am more and more
       convinced in the hand of divine providence."[/quote]
       And here Beck is telling us God raised up Ted Cruz and we are to
       choose between good and evil!  Of course, Beck is also the guy
       who said God killed Justice Scalia to make us all vote.
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRPMaaNfjy0
       Beck isn't a minister; but I think his Mormon background may be
       influencing his views.   But there were ministers who chimed in.
       Kenneth Copeland had a very strong feeling that Cruz would be
       our next President.
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0_KKg6Wh3Q
       Now never mind that Beck was off track himself -- predicting
       more or less than Cruz was intended by God to be our next
       President.   Here's the first bit.  Beck is relatively calm
       during it.   I had to laugh when Beck reminded Cruz he had
       called Trump a sociopathic liar and asked him if that had
       changed.  Some of this video is a bit boring.
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNjgAUzUwCI
       The fireworks started after the commercial break when Beck has a
       meltdown.
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BshqMopwv2E
       I wonder if Beck is going to stop thinking he's a prophet?
       #Post#: 13004--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: HOLLAND Date: October 4, 2016, 8:31 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       ^^^^Really interesting material, Kerry.  You've spot on with
       your observations.
       It will be interesting to see how religious leaders take up with
       the Vice-Presidential candidates.  I suppose there has been some
       activity here as well.  I suppose that it will be that religious
       leaders have diminished influence given the nonsense attached to
       the Presidential candidates.
       #Post#: 13008--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: Kerry Date: October 7, 2016, 5:46 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=HOLLAND link=topic=1126.msg13004#msg13004
       date=1475631085]
       ^^^^Really interesting material, Kerry.  You've spot on with
       your observations.
       It will be interesting to see how religious leaders take up with
       the Vice-Presidential candidates.[/quote]I didn't know much
       about Pence before this election.   When I had a TV and watched
       C-SPAN, I had a favorable view of him, seeing him on the floor
       of the House arguing to end wasteful spending.  I thought that
       was his major thing.
       I did not know he identified himself as a "born-again,
       evangelical Catholic" -- I can't say I even understand what that
       means.  He was born into a Catholic family, but later began
       attending an evangelical church.
       My impression of him now is not good.  I think his signing the
       so called Religious Freedom Restoration Act was an attempt to
       garner support for his next election as Governor.   It was an
       absurd law.  And when corporations said they'd stop doing
       business in Indiana, the bill got rewritten.  His commitment to
       this idea of religious freedom got flushed down the toilet when
       money was at stake.  So the religious right lost out again.
       His refusal to grant a pardon to Keith Cooper known now to have
       been wrongfully convicted is the last straw for me.  The fact
       that it's a black man also makes me wonder if he's secretly a
       bigot.   His excuse?  Out of respect for the judicial process.
       Give me a break.  Why are Governors given the power to pardon
       then?   What a cold heart Pence must have.
       Kaine is Catholic; and while I disagree with his views on
       abortion, at least he can separate his religious and his
       political views.   I was also favorably impressed when he quoted
       Matthew 6:45:  "There is a great line from the gospel: From the
       fullness of the heart the mouth speaks . When Donald Trump says
       women should be punished, or Mexicans are rapists and criminals,
       or John McCain is not a hero, he is showing you who he is.”
       #Post#: 13011--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: HOLLAND Date: October 7, 2016, 11:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       ^^^I would agree, Kerry, concerning Pence for much the same
       reasons that you have drawn.
       I tend to agree with Kaine in the matter of abortion.  I accept
       in principle, as normative,  the Jewish law spoken of in the
       Mishnah, based on Exodus 21:22-25, that until a baby's head
       emerges from the birth canal, it's life is not subject to the
       law of talion.  Until that happens, the life and rights of a
       woman cannot be diminished in any way in respect to her yet,
       undelivered, offspring.  The Jewish law certainly does not
       encourage abortion, but considered it, given circumstances, a
       necessary evil.  Such is my belief in the matter of abortion.
       It is interesting that Kaine is going counter to the Catholic
       Church on this matter; and, some Catholics are going to be
       hostile towards him.
       I am struck that the Vice-Presidential debate will be lost in
       the hurricane storm hitting the East coast.  So how it goes.
       #Post#: 13015--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: Kerry Date: October 7, 2016, 6:14 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There is evidence too that the early Christian church thought
       abortion a sin, but they did not equate it to murder from the
       moment of conception.
       My opinion is that the religious extremists lost ground by being
       so extreme and by trying to use religious arguments to make
       laws.  I  argue against abortion by saying no one knows
       precisely when a fetus become a person.    We should not make
       laws that reward acting from ignorance.   It is reckless to fire
       a gun into a house.  Perhaps there isn't a person in it; but
       perhaps there is.  Similarly running red lights is against the
       law, not because you are killing a person every time you run a
       light, but because you might.
       It is also a dangerous precedent for the government, any
       government, to makes rules saying this or that form of human
       cells is not a person.    Indeed people in the past used to
       argue that black people and the Australian aborigine were not
       really people.
       We could argue that mentally defective people are not persons.
       We could say handicapped people who can't take care of
       themselves are not persons -- and pro-abortion people make a
       similar argument about fetuses, saying it's not a person as long
       as it can't live on its own but depends on the mother.    While
       it may be convenient for some people to ignore the  rights of
       other people,  we are on a slippery slope when we start mounting
       arguments based on ignorance.  We could also argue that old
       people who can't take care of themselves are not persons.  The
       logic that a fetus being dependent on the mother gives the right
       to the mother to terminate it is seriously flawed. . . if the
       fetus is a person.
       But the people on the right used extreme arguments and tried to
       use religion.  That is a failing proposition.
       I'm not sure you're right about Catholics being hostile to Kaine
       about this.   Over a quarter of abortions in the US are for
       Catholics.
  HTML http://reverbpress.com/religion/abortion-rates-highest-among-christians-according-stunning-survey-results/
       Church hierarchy may rail about it and Catholic activists on
       television may; but they appear to be out of step with many
       Catholics over birth control and abortion.    We all know that
       lots of Catholics use birth control; and I think it's a good
       thing since their abortion rate would probably be even higher if
       they didn't.
       #Post#: 13019--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Religious Leaders and Politics
       By: paralambano Date: October 8, 2016, 12:25 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power (1
       Corinthians 4:20).
       I suppose some could not even talk if it were possible for them.
       para .  .  .  .
       *****************************************************
   DIR Next Page