Walker, Texas Ranger, Has Delusions About ‘Fighting The Good Fight’ – More Norris Nonsense
14 May 2007 by KA
Old Chuck is at it again. More martyrdom drivel.
This past week an ABC News debate aired on “Nightline,” which pitted popular theists against Internet atheists. While I’ll have more to say about that battle of wits in my next article, it testifies to the growing number (30 million Americans) of those who profess there is no God. Add to that what I believe is possibly three times the number of functional atheists, those who believe in a God but practically don’t show it, and America is facing a new religious horizon in which atheism is becoming a formidable foe.
Well, first and foremost, it wasn’t by any stretch a ‘battle of wits’, since Cameron and Comfort got their asses handed to them. If it was to be made into an action film, it’d probably resemble a vaudevillian rendition of the Gunfight at the O. K. Corral, with Ray and Kirk as the Clantons, fumbling for their guns before getting their fool heads blown off. Secondly, atheism’s not a religion, third, if atheists want a seat at the damn table; unless I woke up in Berlin in 1941, this is fucking America, Chuck, and neither you nor anyone else has the constitutional right to deny me or anyone else a seat at that table.
Though the majority of Americans continue to claim to be Christians, a Gallup poll discovered 45 percent of us would support an atheist for president, 55 percent would support a homosexual candidate and 72 percent would support a Mormon candidate.
Such a survey is a clear indication that most Americans are simply confused about what it means to be Christian. It also shows that the secularization of society is alive and well, especially when almost half would endorse an atheist president.
Ummm…most Christians are confused about what it means to be them, and you clowns still can’t agree on a standard.
Secularization is a bad thing, how exactly?
The opponents of God
Once upon a time, years ago, it seemed that the only major fire for atheism burned from the anti-Christian work of Madelyn Murray O’Hair and the American Atheist organization, whose claim to fame was the banning of prayer and Bible reading in public schools in 1963.
O’Hair was a primary figurehead in America in the 20th century, but atheism has been around since ancient Greece up until this century.
Today many more antagonist groups and individuals to theism abound, and they are using every means possible for global proliferation – from local government to the World Wide Web. Such secular progressives include the Institute for Humanist Studies, Secular Coalition of America, American Atheists, American Humanist Association, Internet Infidels, the Atheist Alliance International, Secular Student Alliance, Society for Humanistic Judaism, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, etc. Of course no list of atheistic advocates would be complete without mentioning the ACLU and Planned Parenthood, as well as the anti-God militancy of men like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris.
Cue the weird X Files whistle music…the creeping conspirators are hiding in the shadows, waiting to pounce!
Life ain’t an action movie, Chuck.
Though the U.S. Constitution outlaws religious discrimination, these organizations and individuals would love nothing more than to help society look with distain upon Christianity and, ultimately, make its components illegal. In fact, right now, they are coalescing and rallying at least 5 million of their troops to mount counter offensives to Christianity.
We have heard this particular nonsense before, have we not? Discrimination = criticism, and vice versa. I love how he make it seem as if it’s some sort of war of good vs. evil. Dontcha just love these folks, living in a comic book world?
For that reason I believe theistic patriots need to be wise to atheists’ overt and covert schemes, exposing their agenda and fighting to lay waste to their plans.
Wow, do I hear the thrumming chords of McCarthyism in all this? Yes I do.
Not too patriotic, Chuck.
Step 1: Initiate restrictions and legislation against theism and Christianity
In God we bust
For these liberal groups to win the war of ideological dominance, they know they must minimize the effects of Christianity, which many are doing (unbeknownst to others) behind the scenes through lobbying and legislation. In fact, two significant actions occurred on the National Day of Prayer just two weeks ago!
‘Minimize the effects of Christianity’? What effects? The crazies wandering the streets with sandwich boards, pronouncing the ‘End Of Days’? Women claiming that ‘gawd’ told them to kill their kids? GW sending our troops into a debacle based on a little voice in his head? Dominionists trying to take over our country in the name of their cosmic babysitter?
Shame on you. Shame on you all.
The London Telegraph noted that, while American Christians were praying across the land on the National Day of Prayer, atheists were petitioning the Texas Legislature against the civic display of the words, “In God We Trust.”
Umm…hello? Establishment clause of the First Amendment? Don’t let a little thing like constitutional rights get in the way, now.
Eroding and erasing theistic language in culture is a growing trend. Earlier this year George Washington dollar coins were not only inscribed with the words “In God We Trust” on their edges, but many excluded them entirely! Such minting modifications are a flagrant defiance against theism and a public reflection of the place God is now relegated – to the fringes of society.
That was an error, Chuck, not some ‘evil atheist conspiracy’. Sheesh, I’ll lend you a quarter so you can by a clue. Or one of those mis-struck dollar coins, hehehehe.
Secularists of course have made repeated attempts to rid “under God” from “The Pledge of Allegiance.” Thank God the Legislature of Texas is moving along a bill to include the words in our state pledge: “Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God and indivisible.” I was also grateful to read in the Dallas Morning News May 1 that the House also embraced legislation “that seeks to clarify the rights of Texas public school students to offer public prayers at football games or graduation, hand out religious messages or hold religious meetings during the school day if they want.”
The Pledge of Allegiance, as anyone well-informed knows, was inserted in the last half of the 20th century during the…drum roll please!…Tah DAH! The McCarthy era.
If Texas wants to secede, I’m all for it. Ass-backwards state anyways.
Another example of atheistic advocacy can be found in the 10,000-member Freedom from Religion Foundation initiation of a Supreme Court case, which asserts that President Bush’s faith-based initiatives pose a violation of the wall of separation between church and state.
Surprise! Yes, they do indeed. Reading comprehension must be shot to hell, Chuck. ‘ Prohibiting or respecting’…guess where that comes from?
Atheists also received a proverbial shot in the arm by locating a representative and advocate of sorts in Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., who “is the first member of Congress – and the highest-ranking elected official in the country – to make known that he is a nontheist.”
No doubt Chuckles and his brownshirt buddies would forcibly eject Mr. Stark from office, if they could.
His election stands in stark contrast to the wishes of our Founding Fathers, who encouraged American citizens to vote Christians into public office. As John Jay, the first chief justice of the United States, wrote to Jedidiah Morse on Feb. 28, 1797, “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.”
So you may as well as ban Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and any other ‘alternate’ religions from attaining office as well.
I have illustrated amply both here and here, that not only is this horrendously incorrect, it’s discriminatory and yes, unpatriotic.
The tyranny of the state over the church
The other legal disgrace that occurred on the National Day of Prayer was that Congress passed what might become one of the most religiously restrictive pieces of legislation in history: H.R. 1592, “The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.” With Senate approval, this bill will expand the law against such hate crimes, allowing federal funds and other resources to assist local law enforcement to deter and punish acts of violence committed against an individual because of the victim’s race, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc.
LEGAL DISGRACE!?!? Let me get this straight – you want to become an advocate for violence committed against non-Christians? Wait for it…Chuckles tries to pull some rhetorical crap about this:
While the bill purports to target crimes of brutality, not speech, it could very easily end up (even inadvertently) restricting First Amendment rights of Christians to speak freely against such anti-biblical practices as homosexuality and transvestitism. As Janet Folger, the author of “Criminalizing Christianity,” has pointed out, “H.R. 1592 isn’t about hate. It isn’t about crime. It’s about silencing our speech.”
Obviously, Norris hasn’t read the damn thing.
As with other laws of this type, once enacted, local justices could easily expand its interpretive enforcement to encompass a wider meaning than originally conceived. Once enforced, what would stop a clergy from being accused as an accessory to a hate crime, after he preached to his church on Sunday about the woes of same-sex marriage and discovered on Monday one of his congregants got in a fight with a homosexual co-worker as a result of a moral altercation? The fact is, if the hate-crime bill passes, pastors could easily become pulpit partners in crime.
Read the whole bloody thing. It specifically mentions physical violence several times, along with kidnapping, and it’s hardly loose in its wording.
I agree with Rev. Henry Jackson, who said the law would “mandate unequal protection under the law and will pave the way for criminalization of thoughts and religious beliefs contrary to politically correct ideas.”
I call bullshit on that one. Denouncing something from a pulpit isn’t included, if you want to speak out against something, go to it, this is America, baby. But if you (as a pastor) specifically instruct the sheep to ’smite the unbeliever’, the homosexual or transvestite, then sorry buck-a-roo, your ass is in a sling. Freedom of speech doesn’t hand you a blank check to do as you like. It’s not a luxury, it’s a privilege and a responsibility, and if you cause violence by blathering about it, you share the blame.
Hate-crime laws are not only a violation of our First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion, but a violation of the 10th Amendment’s limitations on the power of federal government.
The 10th amendment is hotly contested, even today. A reserved powers clause hardly applies here. Besides, most hate-crime laws are targeting people who would infringe on other people’s ’ life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’, don’t they?
Hang together or hang separately?
Thank God our president’s senior advisers have gone on record that they will advise him to veto the bill if it reaches the doors of the White House. We, too, must follow his lead by speaking up and taking a stand against this unnecessary and unconstitutional bill – and any others like it. Just as atheists are gathering to combat God, we patriots must come together to sustain the godly heritage we’ve been handed. As Benjamin Franklin said, “We must all hang together, or most assuredly we will all hang separately.”
Oh, goodie – more false dichotomies, religious oppression, and comic book histrionics. The ‘Evil Atheist Conspiracy’ is conspiring to take religion away!
Get real. Better yet, get bent.
I urge you to write the president and your representatives today to encourage the overturning of this ungodly, religiously restricting and unconstitutional piece of legislation, erroneously titled by the misnomer, “Hate Crimes Prevention Act.”
There must be something incredibly potent in the water table in Texas – it seems to make folks more than a little crazy.
Final analysis – intolerant, unbelievable, the Karate Kommando is cognitively dissonant.
In laymen’s terms, he’s thoroughly addled.
Not a very good American, I might add.
14 May 2007, on 6:36 am
I am curious as to what tactice he deems despicable. Most of what religious organizations do I think is despicable. Lets see how we compare.
14 May 2007, on 6:37 am
His election stands in stark contrast to the wishes of our Founding Fathers, who encouraged American citizens to vote Christians into public office. As John Jay, the first chief justice of the United States, wrote to Jedidiah Morse on Feb. 28, 1797, “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.”
So the guy’s really saying “You can vote for whoever you want! Except non-Christians of course, THAT’S CRAZY! Because Christian rulers are right and anyone who thinks different is of the devil I tell ye! Satan… ye.”
14 May 2007, on 8:43 am
He wants us to do the exact thing our ancestors left England in the first place, create a theocracy where only his religion has any power. I knew he was crazy when I was channel surfing and saw him on TBN(the bullshit network) talking about how he thought the babble should be used as a text book in schools.
14 May 2007, on 10:16 am
Two things: 1) If atheists are going to combat gawd, then we’ve already won since there isn’t one. And how, exactly, does he think we can actually fight an indivisible entity who is no where to be found? Does he think atheists are going to walk around punching the air?
2) Freedom of speech DOES give you a blank check to SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT. You are right that it doesn’t give you a blank check to DO whatever you want. There is a difference between thoughts/words and actions. I can say I want to kill the prime minister of Djbuti. Doing so is a whole thing.
Seriously though, the reaction to atheists seems to me more like the desperate flailings of a near dead fish. They know their power is waning, they know their influence is gone, but they are desperate to hold onto power, and we all know that the first step to hold onto power is to create a perceived enemy in which to “rally your base.”
Every group needs an enemy. Few groups actually have one.
14 May 2007, on 11:01 am
And, of course, he throws in The Big Lie about prayer being banned in schools.
The whole thing was about preventing coerced prayer! Duh!
14 May 2007, on 12:01 pm
KA, I still say someone is writing these things for him. Chollie is not that well educated – I’ve heard him speak, for crap’s sake!
He’s a whore-puppet, taking money from desperdoes who trade on his name and fame. Pay no attention to the fact that his “cultural warrior” persona was “made in Hollywood”. They are speaking to the brain-dead xians, through Chollie’s mouth, in coded language only they respond to. Idiot christobots!
We just need to lift the whore’s skirt to see who his mouthpiece is. (Either I mixed my metaphors or there’s an “eeyew” in that sentence…)
14 May 2007, on 12:08 pm
KA,
Thanks to this post, my IQ went into the basement. Chuck (”repeated kicks to the head do NOT cause brain damage…what was I talking about?”) Norris has assembled a great example of misinformation, misinterpretations, straw men, blantant hypocrisy (the whole discrimingation thingy), scare tactics, flawed arguments, and bold faced lies.
All I can say is that if Chuck Norris is your apologist, you’ve lost.
Oh, and he really sucks as an “actor”.
14 May 2007, on 12:41 pm
I JUST DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY FUNDAMENTAL RELIGIOUS PEOPLE OF ANY ILK CAN’T SEPARATE NON RELIGIOUS PEOPLE OF ANY ILK WANTING TO KEEP RELIGION AWAY FROM POLITICS AND THEIR RIGHT TO HAVE RELIGION.
Ouch that hurt. No, I don’t want to take away your church, but I don’t want you to take away the right of my gay brother to marry his long time partner. Maybe this is just too simple in my mind. The minute the religious step away from the rights of the minority, is the minute I will step away from being pissy about your church!!!
I better go get my blood pressure checked now.
14 May 2007, on 12:44 pm
I had to mentally say to myself “Oh puhleeze!” when he wrote that atheism is becoming “a formidable foe.”
So, Chucky considers atheists to be his foes? I thought we were all supposed to be Americans!
The problem for me is not religion per se, it is faith and dogma inserting itself into the public square and public policy with things like faith based funding initiatives, abstinence only programs, and putting “intelligent design” into our school curriculums.
And like so many others, Norris either willfully or ignorantly misses the mark regarding hate crime laws. The purpose of these laws is not to punish thoughts or deeply held beliefs. These laws are a response to those who, in targeting victims because they either are or are perceived to be part of the group that the perpetrator is trying to intimidate. When African-Americans were lynched in the South many decades ago, the intent was to terrorize the entire African-American population of the area. If a synagogue or a mosque is vandalized, or two gay men are assaulted while visiting Boise, Idaho on their vacation, the message being conveyed to all members of those groups “You are not welcome here.”
14 May 2007, on 1:12 pm
AUM:
Ummm, no it doesn’t.
You can’t threaten to kill the president, yell fire in a crowded theater, or incite to riot. & if some perv walks up to a little kid & makes a disgusting comment/proposition, that freak’ll get hauled off toot sweet.
Naomi – you’re probably right, he may have a ‘ghost writer’ doing the columns for him. I think the main reason he was enlisted, is an argument from force. Note that WorldNutDaily’s caption reads, “What does Chuck Norris write? Anything he wants to.” Chances are, the idea is that people will be AFRAID to criticize. It’s all so middle-school – CN is the ‘toughest kid on the playground’, & us evil ‘libruls’ are all spineless fops, too scared to pipe up.
14 May 2007, on 1:24 pm
Wow, I used to have a bit of respect for Norris. I had no idea he was such a fundie.
Why is it that guys like Norris never acknowledge the fact that they have no more proof for their christian god than other religions have for their god?
14 May 2007, on 3:40 pm
KA,
LOL. I love how you’ve turned Chuck into your personal nemesis! Keep on fightin’, brotha!
Still, I have a very modest objection to something you wrote:
[Free speech is] not a luxury, it’s a privilege and a responsibility, and if you cause violence by blathering about it, you share the blame.
I was under the impression that free speech is a right, which includes some measure of responsibility, yes, but I disagree strongly that it is a luxury. I certainly agree if someone — ANYONE — is commissioning crimes then, yeah, you can’t use the “free speech defense”. But when you’re not commissioning a crime, defaming others or your speech isn’t putting people in immediate threat (the old “yelling fire in a crowded movie theater”) then freedom of speech is a right.
14 May 2007, on 4:07 pm
Our Christian friends are becoming more and more marginalized, and the paranoia deepens by the day.
14 May 2007, on 4:55 pm
It surprises me how militant the attitude has become these days, though it’s anything but new. Chuck Norris looks and sounds like several redneck jerk-offs I grew up around. Wannabe manly-men, always know what’s right even though they can barely pass a middle school achievement test. Take your jesus-fu and stuff it!
Makes me think-if this is the best that a religious mindset can produce, maybe that’s part of why religious right-wingers are so hip to breed cannon fodder. If Chuck Norris is representative of the physical and mental ideals of American Christendom, it makes sense that life would be cheaper than potatoes in Boise.
14 May 2007, on 5:38 pm
Chris – thanks. I tend to go after bully pulpits pretty strongly, which is what I think this bit of rhetorical strong-arming is. I hate bullies to an astonishing degree.
Maybe I used the wrong word, but let’s take a prisoner in jail as an analogy. To a jailbird, most of these rights ARE a luxury, as that person’s been deprived of a multitude of them. Freedom of speech? Nope – lip off to a prison screw in the wrong manner, or the wrong gang member – likelihood is a stiff beating at best, no protest marches or petitions. Freedom of religion? Yes – surprisingly so. Life, Liberty, pursuit of happiness? Not hardly.
When the social compact is broken, consequences follow, contingent on how much of said compact is violated. More the violation, more the stripping away of rights.
So I think in that circumstance, yes, it is a luxury.
14 May 2007, on 6:22 pm
Benjamin Franklin also said: “Lighthouses are more useful than churches.” Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Chucky.
14 May 2007, on 6:46 pm
I never liked Norris much as an actor (*stifles derisive laugh*), and my dislike of him grew incrementally with every episode of Walker, Texas Ranger broadcast, since at the time I lived with my aunt and she literally lived for that show.
Now I really can’t stand him…
14 May 2007, on 7:55 pm
Atheism is not the foe of religion. Reason and truth are the foe of religion. And Atheism is the natural stance for those of us who have sufficient reason to challenge the religious status quo. They really are becoming shrill, angry weiners aren’t they? What with Armegeddon just around the corner and all. By the way have any of you been invited to be part of that 5 million man troop? They didn’t ask me.
14 May 2007, on 9:09 pm
KA, are you one of those supporters of “hate speech” laws?
Rights are not luxuries. They only become luxuries when people want to justify removing them. Maybe we should tax our speech like we tax every other luxury.
14 May 2007, on 10:11 pm
KA,
Most of us are not prisoners in jails, tho’. It’s not a good analogy, I feel.
Like AtheistUnderMask said, if it’s a luxury you can do stuff like tax it, or even just remove it (like we’ve done to many recreational drugs). Rights can be traditionally and reasonably removed from individuals who have demonstrated their inability to be responsible for them. Not so with luxuries, which can be dispossessed from society quite easily.
14 May 2007, on 10:25 pm
Why does he consider the ACLU and Planned Parenthood atheistic advocates? Their missions are not religious, and their followers include many believers.
15 May 2007, on 1:14 am
AUM:
Depends. Are we talking about the bill mentioned in the post?
All right, I retract the usage of the word luxury. It is, however, a privilege, & 1 not to be taken lightly.
Zipi:
Big part of the Republican party line. The RR absolutely loathes the ACLU, mostly because they go to bat for anyone whose rights are being violated.
15 May 2007, on 2:00 am
Is that the banana guy on the left in that nightline link?
15 May 2007, on 2:10 am
Don’t confuse ‘hate speech’ codes with ‘hate crimes’ laws. They are two different animals (metaphorically speaking of course)
15 May 2007, on 6:38 am
Caution my friends: the powerful generate fear in their subjects. The MOST powerful of them usually make themselves beloved but provide an enemy of sorts to fear. Religion is a very handy tool for them.. built in guilt, shame, “enemies”, and subject propensity toward obedience. Also allows them a cloak of respectability (false but good enough) and the ability to do NOTHING worthwhile while seeming to be doing something (”Laura and I have you in our prayers”).
My point .. do NOT get too cocky.. the real thing we fight is “man’s” eager willingness to turn over his heart and mind to some asshole. It is not god or religion per se our battle is with … it is the willingness of people to become slaves and abondon reason!! That’s what threatens those of us that want to live FREE!!
15 May 2007, on 7:34 am
Why does he consider the ACLU and Planned Parenthood atheistic advocates? Their missions are not religious, and their followers include many believers.
Because they defend rights that many religious fundies believe that we shouldn’t have.
And remember, in a the mind of a fundie, if you’re not for them you are strictly against them and are their evil enemy in an epic battle of spiritual warfare!
15 May 2007, on 9:04 am
[...] Now please take a moment and visit God is for Suckers to read their take on the article. [...]
15 May 2007, on 10:38 am
The ACLU told the following story in their newsletter (paraphrased by me):
A group of fundies came to the ACLU headquarters to stage a protest about the “war on Christmas” or some such. Their form of protest was to stand outside singing christmas carols. The thinking of the fundies was that the atheists at headquarters would somehow melt or turn to salt upon hearing the message of god in christmas carols. (Not sure if they included “Good King Wenceslaus” I never really understood the connection there…I digress).
The fundies were shocked when several ACLU staffers came outside and joined them in their caroling.
And when you look at what the ACLU has done to defend these idiots, they are really much more beholden to the ACLU than they are to Dobson, Falwell or Robertson.
15 May 2007, on 11:41 am
Hey all, sorry I haven’t posted in a while. Been dealing with Kidney stones and haven’t felt like doing much more than wallowing in my own pain…
Anyway, not going to try and read through the hundreds of comments I missed, so starting anew…
15 May 2007, on 12:55 pm
Hey, Revenant…
I’m sure I wasn’t the only one wondering about your sudden absence from the comment threads.
OUCH!…What!…”POOR BABY!”?
Anything regarding organ ’stones’ sounds repulsive…erm…and/or somewhat ‘weirdly’ scarey. I know people who’ve had similar things…like gall stones & subsequent removal; kidney transplant; very complicated with lifetime meds etc…and obviously, not pleasant to live with, indeed; but certainly much better than dialysis!
Hope everything ‘comes out’ OK…ummm…resolves, dissolves…whateva.
Glad you’re back, friend; and hope you’re totally pain free…soon?
15 May 2007, on 1:45 pm
Are there sheeple that take Chuck Norris’ theology seriously?
If so, (and I’m afraid that there are), I don’t know how much longer I can live on this planet.
15 May 2007, on 2:15 pm
Well, it looks like Chuck’s got one less ally on his side to fight against us evil atheists, cause Jerry Falwell just died!
No doubt it was the Evil Atheist Conspiracy who had him assassinated. The coroner will probably say it was a heart attack, but that’s just because those godless heathens probably paid him to keep quiet.
15 May 2007, on 2:32 pm
lol, thanks ChuckA. All’s well as ends well. no more pain till the next stone comes along.
Are we going to have a dead Falwell party?
15 May 2007, on 3:12 pm
Oh, I second the dead Falwell party idea!!!
15 May 2007, on 4:13 pm
Hey, he declared war on the secular tide washing over ‘murica.
War’s hell. Now you’re a casualty.
Do you think his last words were: what the fuck? where’s my jeebus? I was promised the jeebu..erggh. ______________^_______^___________________________________________________________________(flatline)
15 May 2007, on 4:14 pm
Wow, he ^ seems to have basically just dropped dead in his office…
I find myself fighting the urge to respond to the news with glee; it must be my morals that normally prevent me from rejoicing in another human being’s death – albeit the death of someone arrogant and hateful enough to found an organization called the “Moral Majority,” and who would probably never have considered me a “moral” person.
I’m sure I’ll get over it.
15 May 2007, on 4:17 pm
Uhhh, I’d like to leave it as: Jerry’s gone Home –
and thereby fucked up my tripartite Jerry Dobertson! Until Pat and James join him, it’s useless as a neologism.
15 May 2007, on 4:18 pm
Wow, maybe prayer really does work!
15 May 2007, on 4:30 pm
More interesting background on Falwell: his father was an alcoholic bootlegger who hated preachers and his grandfather a “staunch” (according to NPR) atheist.
This tidbit makes me wonder even more how many of our decisions in life are based upon how much we’re rebelling against what we grew up with. It also gives me hope that the kids of fundies may turn out completely different from their parents.
Or not…
15 May 2007, on 5:24 pm
Eve, I don’t think ole’ Jerry was really religious; he was probably a very, very good con-man. Religion has always been a great refuge, and source of wealth, for the scoundrels. A good knowledge of human nature, and the lack of ethics to exploit it, and YOU, too, can be a millionaire many times over, with worshipful sheep at your feet…
15 May 2007, on 5:55 pm
Wouldn’t surprise me one bit, Naomi; from the little bit of research I’ve done on him already, I’ve found that he wasn’t above flip-flopping on certain issues when the wind wasn’t blowing his way.
16 May 2007, on 8:48 am
No truer statement has ever been uttered. Just look at Peter Popoff, Robert Tilton, the Bakers, Swaggert, Robertson, all of them rich from religion. Popoff has made a dramatic comeback after being revealed as a fraud by James Randi some 20 years ago. To me it proves how gullible and stupid most people are, ignoring the facts right in front of them.
16 May 2007, on 2:12 pm
^ Sad but true, Rev; sad but true…