Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

This is a perfect 8:00 minutes for JSO...
Reza Aslan talks about how Evangelical Christians have surrendered morality for power
Includes for interesting data too / the first 5:00 minutes is pure gold

Like Jesse Ventura, like The Donald.



You gave me power in your own god's name
I'm every person you need to be
Oh, I'm the cult of personality

Chizzang wrote:This is a perfect 8:00 minutes for JSO...
Reza Aslan talks about how Evangelical Christians have surrendered morality for power
Includes for interesting data too / the first 5:00 minutes is pure gold

phpBB [video]

Please tell me you're kidding.

But the alternative!

93henfan wrote:But the alternative!

JSO will help you out if you're confused... Stand by please



Best quote from video:
In the span of a single election cycle evangelicals have gone from being the group most likely to say "a politicians Morality matters" to the group that is now least likely to say a politicians morality matters... Atheists in America think that a politicians morality matters more than evangelicals - for the first time in American history



*Zing!!!

Chizzang wrote:

93henfan wrote:But the alternative!

JSO will help you out if you're confused... Stand by please



Best quote from video:
In the span of a single election cycle evangelicals have gone from being the group most likely to say "a politicians Morality matters" to the group that is now least likely to say a politicians morality matters... Atheists in America think that a politicians morality matters more than evangelicals - for the first time in American history



*Zing!!!

It’s about time atheists believed in something!

93henfan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
JSO will help you out if you're confused... Stand by please



Best quote from video:
In the span of a single election cycle evangelicals have gone from being the group most likely to say "a politicians Morality matters" to the group that is now least likely to say a politicians morality matters... Atheists in America think that a politicians morality matters more than evangelicals - for the first time in American history



*Zing!!!

It’s about time atheists believed in something!

Ba Da Boom..!!!1!1

Chizzang wrote:Best quote from video:

Was when he made the outlandish claim that blacks vote for Dems.

I love it when Cleets tells us what to think.

andy7171 wrote:I love it when Cleets tells us what to think.

Yes. I would never do that.

-The Pope

andy7171 wrote:I love it when Cleets tells us what to think.

How exactly am I telling you anything..?



and I would never assume you actually "Think" Andy...

Chizzang wrote:This is a perfect 8:00 minutes for JSO...
Reza Aslan talks about how Evangelical Christians have surrendered morality for power
Includes for interesting data too / the first 5:00 minutes is pure gold

phpBB [video]

Reza Aslan?



(Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz were on Rogan last week and let’s just say Aslan was not treated well.)

kalm wrote:

Chizzang wrote:This is a perfect 8:00 minutes for JSO...
Reza Aslan talks about how Evangelical Christians have surrendered morality for power
Includes for interesting data too / the first 5:00 minutes is pure gold

phpBB [video]

Reza Aslan?



(Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz were on Rogan last week and let’s just say Aslan was not treated well.)

Aslan is an absolute twat
But I thought this would get some mileage around here
You know, for team JSO...



Oh...
don't forget to tell Andy what to think while you're here

Chizzang wrote:This is a perfect 8:00 minutes for JSO...
Reza Aslan talks about how Evangelical Christians have surrendered morality for power
Includes for interesting data too / the first 5:00 minutes is pure gold

phpBB [video]

I've thought about this several times

Since Trump won the election I haven't been able to figure why I don't find this really all that remarkable

then it hit me a couple weeks ago and I almost commented on it in a different thread

To the religious...criticizing a social liberal on moral grounds is easy and natural to do. And to Christians in particular, supporting a sinner/heathen/whatever who is perceived to be doing the work if the bearded man in the sky is also easy and natural to do

Christianity is literally steeped in story and tradition of reluctant pagan warriors for God - all the way back to Longinus who converted after piercing Jesus on the cross

In fact, good works for God performed by flawed heroes is the bedrock of the religion itself-- Trump is in some ways more fit for Christian adulation than someone on the other end of the morality scale

So yes - it is hypocritical - but it is also perfectly understandable if not predictable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CID1990 wrote:
I've thought about this several times

Since Trump won the election I haven't been able to figure why I don't find this really all that remarkable

then it hit me a couple weeks ago and I almost commented on it in a different thread

To the religious...criticizing a social liberal on moral grounds is easy and natural to do. And to Christians in particular, supporting a sinner/heathen/whatever who is perceived to be doing the work if the bearded man in the sky is also easy and natural to do

Christianity is literally steeped in story and tradition of reluctant pagan warriors for God - all the way back to Longinus who converted after piercing Jesus on the cross

In fact, good works for God performed by flawed heroes is the bedrock of the religion itself-- Trump is in some ways more fit for Christian adulation than someone on the other end of the morality scale

So yes - it is hypocritical - but it is also perfectly understandable if not predictable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I still don't see the hypocrisy of voters, voting for a candidate that promises them to support their causes. The candidates background may turn off a few, but it comes down to who has the better chance of supporting your cause. So that's why, IMO, Trump had 46 % of Evangelical Christians voting for him. He vocally supported their cause.

If Trump promised these Evangelicals $100,000 each for their vote, but vocally was pro-abortion, then that would be hypocritical.

Gil Dobie wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
I've thought about this several times

Since Trump won the election I haven't been able to figure why I don't find this really all that remarkable

then it hit me a couple weeks ago and I almost commented on it in a different thread

To the religious...criticizing a social liberal on moral grounds is easy and natural to do. And to Christians in particular, supporting a sinner/heathen/whatever who is perceived to be doing the work if the bearded man in the sky is also easy and natural to do

Christianity is literally steeped in story and tradition of reluctant pagan warriors for God - all the way back to Longinus who converted after piercing Jesus on the cross

In fact, good works for God performed by flawed heroes is the bedrock of the religion itself-- Trump is in some ways more fit for Christian adulation than someone on the other end of the morality scale

So yes - it is hypocritical - but it is also perfectly understandable if not predictable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I still don't see the hypocrisy of voters, voting for a candidate that promises them to support their causes. The candidates background may turn off a few, but it comes down to who has the better chance of supporting your cause. So that's why, IMO, Trump had 46 % of Evangelical Christians voting for him. He vocally supported their cause.

If Trump promised these Evangelicals $100,000 each for their vote, but vocally was pro-abortion, then that would be hypocritical.

It is hypocritical to make morality a qualification (see Bill Clinton) and then support Trump.

CID1990 wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:
I still don't see the hypocrisy of voters, voting for a candidate that promises them to support their causes. The candidates background may turn off a few, but it comes down to who has the better chance of supporting your cause. So that's why, IMO, Trump had 46 % of Evangelical Christians voting for him. He vocally supported their cause.

If Trump promised these Evangelicals $100,000 each for their vote, but vocally was pro-abortion, then that would be hypocritical.

It is hypocritical to make morality a qualification (see Bill Clinton) and then support Trump.

Still appears to be voting for a cause vs moral values of the candidate, when the vote is cast.

I would take a wild guess, and say Bill got around 25-30% of the Evangelicals in America.

CID1990 wrote: I've thought about this several times

Since Trump won the election I haven't been able to figure why I don't find this really all that remarkable

then it hit me a couple weeks ago and I almost commented on it in a different thread

To the religious...criticizing a social liberal on moral grounds is easy and natural to do. And to Christians in particular, supporting a sinner/heathen/whatever who is perceived to be doing the work if the bearded man in the sky is also easy and natural to do

Christianity is literally steeped in story and tradition of reluctant pagan warriors for God - all the way back to Longinus who converted after piercing Jesus on the cross

In fact, good works for God performed by flawed heroes is the bedrock of the religion itself-- Trump is in some ways more fit for Christian adulation than someone on the other end of the morality scale

So yes - it is hypocritical - but it is also perfectly understandable if not predictable

I'm fascinated by this also
and am curious to know if there's an acceptable equivalency for Liberal / Agnostics..?
Can any monster do their Liberal political bidding
and then Liberals request a pass because "reasons" ?

Evangelicals are basically saying what Gil has just posted - which is - the end justifies the means
Because that is what pretty much all evangelicals are saying in unison except a scant few

So do the ends to all political endeavors justify any means by which they are accomplished
or should we really have some kind of moral compass



Who knows..?
But I'm glad Evangelicals are finally showing their true form

Blah, blah, blah. What’s most interesting in this thread is JSO posting an L7 video.

Ill bet 89hen loves L7...

Chizzang wrote:

CID1990 wrote: I've thought about this several times

Since Trump won the election I haven't been able to figure why I don't find this really all that remarkable

then it hit me a couple weeks ago and I almost commented on it in a different thread

To the religious...criticizing a social liberal on moral grounds is easy and natural to do. And to Christians in particular, supporting a sinner/heathen/whatever who is perceived to be doing the work if the bearded man in the sky is also easy and natural to do

Christianity is literally steeped in story and tradition of reluctant pagan warriors for God - all the way back to Longinus who converted after piercing Jesus on the cross

In fact, good works for God performed by flawed heroes is the bedrock of the religion itself-- Trump is in some ways more fit for Christian adulation than someone on the other end of the morality scale

So yes - it is hypocritical - but it is also perfectly understandable if not predictable

I'm fascinated by this also
and am curious to know if there's an acceptable equivalency for Liberal / Agnostics..?
Can any monster do their Liberal political bidding
and then Liberals request a pass because "reasons" ?

Of course they can

we have numerous examples from the 20th century of monsters doing the leftist lord's work

and coffeehouse socialists making "yes, but" caveats about how their hearts started out in the right place ... or their rage was justified they just took it too far, or it just wasnt done correctly- this time we'd get it right, or hey look (yes, but) they have single payer healthcare in Cuba


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You guys still don’t get it. The Dems with all their bashing of Christians, threatening to revoke donations as tax deductible, fight the Little Sisters of the Poor and other groups over abortion on demand, demanding that feds pay for abortion and other things, leave us no choice but to vote and support Trump.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

CID1990 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
I'm fascinated by this also
and am curious to know if there's an acceptable equivalency for Liberal / Agnostics..?
Can any monster do their Liberal political bidding
and then Liberals request a pass because "reasons" ?

Of course they can

we have numerous examples from the 20th century of monsters doing the leftist lord's work

and coffeehouse socialists making "yes, but" caveats about how their hearts started out in the right place ... or their rage was justified they just took it too far, or it just wasnt done correctly- this time we'd get it right, or hey look (yes, but) they have single payer healthcare in Cuba


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. The next progressive Hitler/Pol Pot is just waiting to be unleashed!

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
Of course they can

we have numerous examples from the 20th century of monsters doing the leftist lord's work

and coffeehouse socialists making "yes, but" caveats about how their hearts started out in the right place ... or their rage was justified they just took it too far, or it just wasnt done correctly- this time we'd get it right, or hey look (yes, but) they have single payer healthcare in Cuba

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. The next progressive Hitler/Pol Pot is just waiting to be unleashed!

Many already parade this guy around as some sort of hero ...

And you complain about Conks whitewashing Reagan's history.

CID1990 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
I'm fascinated by this also
and am curious to know if there's an acceptable equivalency for Liberal / Agnostics..?
Can any monster do their Liberal political bidding
and then Liberals request a pass because "reasons" ?

Of course they can

we have numerous examples from the 20th century of monsters doing the leftist lord's work

and coffeehouse socialists making "yes, but" caveats about how their hearts started out in the right place ... or their rage was justified they just took it too far, or it just wasnt done correctly- this time we'd get it right, or hey look (yes, but) they have single payer healthcare in Cuba

Don't laugh (you asshole)
But I think I just figured out who the Liberal Equivalent is... (you're already laughing I can hear it)

Hilary Clinton is the monster that would do the Lefts bidding
at any cost and with zero moral accountability



This was not a set-up gag, I literally just figure that out 3 minutes ago
Sorry, I'll show myself out - I just "but Hilary'd" myself



Never mind:
Just delete the whole thread please