a liar? probably. a puppet? most likely. the antichrist?

gotta love these nutcases that run our goverment and media.

seriously, how fricken pathetic!

Obama is erkel all grown up. Some of these people need to get a grip. seriously.

Originally posted by grover
I repeat religion is an issue because the religious right has continually made religious beliefs an issue and if they don't like the scrutiny then they should shut up about it.

Besides all of that... this thread is not about Palin's religious views... its about the anti-christ smear.

So stop trying to confuse the two.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by grover]

Repeat it all you want. Still doesn't make it fact.

Here are the real facts. Yes, the "religious right" has talked about religion, but where has it actually "been inserted" into anything that actually affects anyone? In spite of all the moaning and groaning and fearmongering from the left, it just hasn't happened, and won't - just as the possibilty of OBama turning the U.S. in to a muslim state just won't happen.

The above is what makes the Palin religion threads a smear. It should be obvious to all that a VP or even president does not and cannot set religious policy for the country. The "one heartbeat from the presidency" argument is therefore exposed as bogus. That fact renders all so-called news and resulting threads here on ATS about Palin's alleged religious beliefs to be nothing more than personal attacks on her. The exact kind of thing the mods supposedly have said will not be tolerated.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but aren't the Jews suppose to become Orthodox Christians before the antichrist comes(Romans 11,25-28)? As far as I can tell, that hasn't happened.

Furthermore, the thought that a temple will be built in Jerusalem to worship Obama instead of Christ is just ridiculous.

Hehe Grover

You state that religious fundamentalists are all of low intelligence, then what was Obama for going to wrights church for 20 years? Listening to the Fundamentalist rantings for 20 years....and not leaving... What does that make Obama?

Spouting how ignorant everyone is but listen to yourself. Obama doesn't have the requirements to be President, and Neither does McCain. If all of you its 1 or the other type of people would have actually voted for Ron Paul you would have a candidate that has made predictions and all of them have come to pass. I guess thats pretty ignorant to say. Ron Paul is the only person running for presidencey who has been trying to stop this Bailout before it was neccessary to actually need Government Intervention and here we all are debating over wether or not hes the AntiChrist There is no Anti-Christ only ignorant people who like to beleive in what the AntiChrist represents, greed, fear, corruption and ignorance. Congratulations.

Originally posted by Dronetek
How is this any different than the left constantly painting McCain as some kind of insane warmonger or wana-be slave owner?

Well right off hand I say it is different because the anti-christ is a fantasy and McCain is a real warmonger. So I would say it's a lot different.

I've been mulling over the 'just curious' aspect of this.

From an American legal stand point (and I ask as someone who's not American), how does using the term 'just curious' stand with regards to being slander/libellous? Is this similar to using the word 'allegedly' as a prefix to try and dilute any potential legal issue? Although I believe 'allegedly' doesn't actually hold any weight as a legal shield, at least in Britain.

If I was started a chain of emails about my being 'just curious' as to whether Danny Funderburk was a paedophile* would that really be any different? How would that stand in a court of (American) law?

I know paedophile is a harsh example, but I'm trying to view this from a Christian's perspective. Personally, if I was a devout Christian, I think being labelled the 'anti-Christ' would be actually worse than being deemed a paedophile.


*which I'm seriously not suggesting and is merely a hypothetical scenario using the discourse framing that Funderburk initiated. Again, I'm not saying he is a paedophile or even suggesting it.

If Obama is the Anti-Christ, then everything we think we know about the Anti-Christ is wrong.

... turns out he's a decent, friendly, hard working, lovable guy after all.


lol.


How many people have been accused of being the "Anti-Christ" now?
Heck, even I've been accused.

... and as the Anti-Christ (lol), I am offended that I could be confused with a politician!


Seriously... isn't religion a direct violation of natural selection by now?

Obama the AntiChrist? I thought he was the Messiah? "The One" we have been waiting for. Pelosi thanked God for sending him at this time. Spike Lee wants to change time from BC and AD to BB and AB. Jesus was a community organizer just like Obama. Millions across the globe hang on his every word. Hey wait a second...........Wouldn't this be the scenerio that would introduce the real AntiChrist???


HMMMMMM?

[edit on 30-9-2008 by RRconservative]

I laugh at the following notions..

1. That Obama is the anti-christ
2. That Obama is an "honest, lovable guy" or whatever that post was all about

He is ZBIGGY'S NWO puppet, that is all Obama is..

I would think the "anti-christ" would have real authority, "behind the scenes" to protect his identity. If there even is an anit-christ to begin with...

Some of the descriptions of the A.C. you could say "hmm, Obama fits the bill", I do agree with that, but you could say the same thing about almost any other politician.. So, no, Obama is no A.C.

However, Obama is not "honest" or "lovable", and quite frankly I can say the same exact thing about the entire "establishment".

I'm one sided on the whole thing, but I won't give obama that much credit as of being the anti christ. I have noticed his boyish charm wit and charisma has decreased as the november comes closer, he seems agitated, mad and just plain unhappy when I see him on tv. The antichrist will probably be well...... I don't know her name but the Woman leading the Church of Latter day Saints, the one protesting at Army funerals and decapitated mens graves. She is Psycho!

thats amazing..that there is still so much unspoken racial tension in our country, even amongst our 'leaders' who are supposed to be making choices on our behalf. Upsetting to me, and most of you I'm sure, that it seems many people in the US will vote against Obama based on his skin color and PRESUMED ethnicity alone.

The effort is to rely on source amnesia to instill a desired belief over a period of time. Source amnesia is basically when you recall a piece of information, but have no idea where you heard it before. The human mind will often determine such information to be "fact."

For example, most people "know" that humans only use 10% of their brains. Nobody recalls where they heard that statistic, they just know they heard it, and most people assume that it's true. Meanwhile, it's completely bogus. Cut out 9 tenths of your brain, and I assure you, you will not be having a good day afterward.

Another interesting effect of "source amnesia" is that it also tends to make people forget the context in which they heard something. So the following headlines:

Barack Obama denies being a Muslim
Barack Obama is a Muslim
Is Barack Obama a Muslim?

Would, a few months down the road, both be registered in the mind of somebody influenced by source amnesia as something like:

I heard that Barack Obama is a Muslim!

Source amnesia differs from regular amnesia because it is a normal function of the human brain. It does not require any type of injury or traumatic experience to take effect. The brain is actually wired from the start to behave this way.

This is due to the split between short term and long term memory. The brain doesn't have enough room to store every piece of information it takes in, so it tends to save the "important bits" in long term memory and let the "details" slip away as the short term memory is filled with new information.

This is especially problematic when reading the news, because the headline is usually the part we consider the "important bits," while the article is the part considered to be the "details."

Source amnesia is often considered an excellent propaganda tool for this reason. If one entity (for example a mayor in South Carolina) wishes to discredit another (for example, a presidential candidate,) they could draw attention to a silly rumor (for example, the possibility that candidate is the antichrist.) Even if the resulting discussion widely and soundly discredits the rumor, months down the road people will often forget the discussion and remember only the rumor.

Scary how sheeplike we people really are, isn't it?

Just like the Palin threads about her "religion", I also call for this thread to be closed by the mods as a violation of their own rules that political threads must be about a candidate's ohis party's platform, and not hearsay or smears.

I also apologize for for not calling for this sooner instead of participating in this "discussion".