It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Anti-Bush Members Are Voted Out of Church - article

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on May, 8 2005 @ 05:31 PM
This article is pretty amusing.

Apparently, more people are associating Bush with God. It's pretty clear that more and more churches are in the pockets of the government, but this is ridiculous. It looks like you gotta worship Bush along with Jesus and others in these kind of churches.

, it's real funny. Looks like some Christians can perpetrate conspiracies as well...
. Do you have any ideas why this church threw out anti-Bush members? I'm thinking it's because God wanted Bush to be president...

posted on May, 8 2005 @ 05:36 PM
Oh my......I am glad you brought up this, when I heard about this I started to laugh so hard I could not stop.

Now officially and publicly religion has become a tool for political propaganda.

Now I will like to see a bill for churches to pay taxes.

Amazing, what Jesus and the bible can do to political parties.

Officially Jesus is a politician.

posted on May, 8 2005 @ 05:37 PM
Yea, I read about this the other day. Funny how the preacher said that his decision wasn't based on politics. This guy must have had something funky in his wine. By the way, the quotes in your signature are hilarious!

[edit on 8-5-2005 by Jamuhn]

posted on May, 8 2005 @ 05:46 PM
You're right, Marg.

These kind of churches are becoming propaganda mouthpieces for the govt. It's actually kinda scary, because I'm betting you can push ideas on people pretty easily in a church.

Jamuhn, I'm glad you find the quotes funny; those are only 3 examples of the wisdom of old Dubya. That wine comment was pretty funny, too. Maybe the guy did have a little too much wine...
This would be better, cuz he would have an actual excuse.

Stories like this make me laugh my ass off. It's funny #.

posted on May, 8 2005 @ 05:48 PM
Nice, that censor thing actually worked.

Sorry about that last part of my post, but I had to test it to see if it worked. No more symbols for me now, I guess!

posted on May, 8 2005 @ 05:56 PM
Dont Mess With Jesus!

posted on May, 8 2005 @ 06:08 PM

Here is a website of the United Church of Christ. One of their basic things is full support of "our gay, lesbian, and transgendered brothers and sisters", and support of gay marriage. God (whomever she may be) help the poor jerk who says, "but... but .. the Bible is against that kind of thing!"

And, speaking of political whores and their influence on churches, shall we discuss the "Southern Christian Leadership Conference"?

The fact is that both of the bankrupt pseudophilosophies that scam the people of the United States today -- "liberalism" and "conservatism" -- will try to pervert any church or organization who will support their statist agendas.

posted on May, 8 2005 @ 09:57 PM

That picture is funny, Souljah!

You Islamiacs better beware, we don't play! You'll get a lead enema, True Crime style!

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 12:25 AM
Uh, let's set the story straight about the churches. For the last few decades, the churches have been used by the Democratic politicians as a means of garnering votes. To slam the pulpit over this one guy is to ignore the last few decades of political history. At the same time, some churches have had their tax exempt status revoked because they have pointed out the Democratic party's stance against moral issues.

Does anyone see a bit of a bias?

Now, back to the original point of this thread. This particular pastor has obviously been blinded by the easy use of words by the Republican party. Were he to stop and consider the lack of action to back up the words of the Republican party, he'd realize the futility in supporting either party. He'd do well in educating his congregation in the ways the two parties play the bait and switch game with the American public. On Saturday afternoons, the leaders of both parties probably sit down together over wine and cigars and talk about how much like sheep we average-Joe's really are.

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 01:45 AM
I think you may find that the reasons churches support bush over democratic challengers is because he supports christian ideas. Homosexuality is wrong, abortions should not be birth control, value life and the natural order of things. Im not saying churches are not way too involved in politics but they are out to preserve their philosphy.

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 01:54 AM
When you say churches, are you referring to the members of the church, and their chosen leader?

There has never been a time in U.S. history when it was constitutionally incorrect that the builders of the nation were supposed to keep quiet.

It might, however, help if the truth were spoken, rather than half-witted political positions prevail.

Bush has been more wind than substance.

Remember how Clinton was the same way with the liberal agenda?

See a pattern?

Clinton nuclear secrets and the delivery systems to the Chinese, Bush keeps the door open for the Chinese to clobber us, economically. The Chinese also control the security of the Panama Canal.

Any real conspiracy theorists here who see the big picture?

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 02:06 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Bush has been more wind than substance.

Remember how Clinton was the same way with the liberal agenda?

See a pattern?

Good post TC, although I like what you wrote before too.
I'm going to send a letter to all the politicians in America, it will simply be one document, the constitution.

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 02:06 AM
now everyone is gonna throw their hands up and say. ''holy #! jeezuz really is a fundamentalist!''


posted on May, 9 2005 @ 02:47 AM
Don't bother, Jam; none of them will recognize it, and none of them will read it.

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 03:06 AM
I dont even need to read the rest of this thread because I am already incredibly outraged. How dare those hypocrites do such a thing.

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 09:31 AM
what are morals? is there one set of morals that are absolute and applicable to everyone?

There are a large number who would answer that morals are clearly spelled out in the bible and, therefore, are clearly defined and absolute.

There is an even larger number, practically everybody according to many scholars, who say that it is their own morals that are true, absolute, and indisputable. OK. It would be pretty simple to settle this question if it weren't for that one little problem that keeps popping up: people do not agree with other people's definition of morals.

Sure, most everyone would agree that murder is wrong - morally wrong. I know I do. The sticky wicket is the definition of murder. Some excuse murder if it happens in war. Some excuse it if it happens in self-defense. To many, abortion is murder. (I do not want to discuss abortion - just using the example.)

There are many other examples - but, the point is, of course, that YOU cannot impose your morals on ME. I cannot impose my morals on YOU. We can try - the trying has been going on since before recorded history. So, in the end, any attempt to say that this group or that group is moral, immoral, amoral, etc. is simply a matter of opinion.

According to the history of the bible, God has blessed many who killed those who refused to accept this God. Read about the mass slaughter of the Albigensian Crusade - was God really blessing those who threw babies from the city walls because their families were heretics? A very great many people believed that God was pleased with that - it was the moral thing to do.

Finally, to argue in favor of the morals and moral judgement of this particular Baptist minister offends my God. If it doesn't offend your God, maybe you picked the wrong one.

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 12:00 PM
of the sheep being led to slaughter. I pity the poor pastor when he heads "north". I'm sure he will get a wonderful reception and a one way ticket down on the elevator.

Thomas Crowne is correct. I am a Christian. However, I think the time has come to tax all churches mainly because the church has become such a political tool for one's without sense.

One can't pick and choose which one to tax-therefore tax them all.

posted on May, 9 2005 @ 12:18 PM
By what I hear, this pastor came right out and said t hat his church was going to be politically active, and well, if members of the congregation don't agree, they should leave...
This was on the Good Morning American show this morning.

Well, if he did indeed say this, and it can be proven, then his church should have their tax exempt status taken away, along with any other church where it can be proven to be chosing to be politically active.

I think this is how the laws work..

As far as the religious doctrine and such, well, I think the guy should lose his position, or at least the heads of his church sect should sit down and have a serious chat with him.

The people that were being interviewed on the tv weren't liberal, the were republicans, and well, all they want is "their church back" as they put it.
They just disagree with the idea of the church playing t his role. And, I think they are right.

I don't believe we should remove the tax exempt status of all the churches any more than I think that these churches should be trying to dictate the political beliefs of their congregations. Not unless we want those churches who are in favor with our government because of their religous teachings of support for them, convincing the governments that other churches just aren't teaching the right doctrine, and therefore should be taxed a little more...or whatever....

Keep church and state separate, and the churches are free to teach the doctrines as they wish, blend it in w ith the state, and well, sooner or later, all the doctrines will have to blend together, and teach the same doctrines, weather they believe them or not.

posted on May, 10 2005 @ 07:20 AM

Originally posted by Al Davison
what are morals? is there one set of morals that are absolute and applicable to everyone?

To answer your first question, morals are nominally defined by the terms of "good" & "evil", but very few actually try to define what those terms mean...Preferring to make it seem "obvious" to the "sheep" that they need their "shepard" to "guide" them. Overall, in a nutshell, the difference between good & evil is analogous to the difference between "selfless" & "selfish"...The selfless work to benefit humankind as a whole, while the selfish work only towards their own benefit. Ergo, organized religion itself can be called "evil" as some of the people within the church seek to manipulate the "flock" with dogma while the "shepard" himself grows fat & wealthy. If judged by the same terms, career-politicians are just as "evil".

For your second question, the answer is "yes"...Whether you ascribe to them or not, the only words attributed to being written by the Hand of God Himself were literally scribed on stone; The Ten Commandments. Everything else has been wrought by the hands of Men...Divinely inspired or not, those men have been & are just as fallable as any other man born in this world.

Even so, one of the tenants of the "modern christian" religion holds that those same Commandments do apply to all, whether or not a person may believe in God or not; These Laws mean absolutely nothing if not applied to everyone equally...But "paradise on Earth" may actually be fulfilled if they are applied equally to all.

Organized religion is and always has been infested with the conspiratoral-minded. Just as thoroughly & for as long as politics has been, organized religion has always been subject to the plots & plans of those who are fond of manipulating others for their own benefit. My own studies on human history have already been summed up here.

So if, for example, when God commands you not to kill, that means "Don't Kill--Period!". If your church tells you that God says this "heathen unbeliever" must die, or the politicos say that war is justified by God, then they are lying to you.

Before you get the wrong idea about me, I think I need to clarify something on a personal level; I do believe in the existence of God & have a deep Faith in Him...I just have no faith at all in human-run organizations, even if they happen to use His name to do their dirty work.

posted on May, 11 2005 @ 07:18 AM
He Quit!!!

"WAYNESVILLE, N.C. May 11, 2005 — A Baptist pastor accused of threatening to banish from his church anyone who didn't vote for President Bush has himself chosen to depart, leaving in his wake a divided community and a cultural chasm.

The Rev. Chan Chandler, 33, walked out of the church he had led for three years Tuesday night after delivering a brief statement of resignation. With him went many of the young congregants he had attracted to the modest brick church on the outskirts of this small mountain town in western North Carolina."

yep, he divided the church, and did enough damage, time to move on!!

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in