Ah, the wonders of diversity.....

 

Where are the parents?

 

 

============================================================ Sickening. If anyone can locate a similar video of white kids, send me the link and I'll post it for a bit of balance, otherwise, things are what they are.

 

For additional consideration:

 

 Genesis 11:1-9
1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As men moved eastward, [a] they found a plain in Shinar [b] and settled there.

3 They said to each other, "Come, let's make bricks and bake them thoroughly." They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth."

 

5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building. 6 The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other." 8 So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel [c] —because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
=============================================

It's amazing how people can read the Bible for two thousand years and not see the forrest for the trees. In that passage God uses diversity as a punishment of mankind. White Christian English settlers landed in Jamestown in 1607 and less than 400 years later developed the technology and infrastructure to put a man on the moon. White Christian men did that...

 

Also, the book of Revelation is nothing more than a summary of the end of diversity and a unification of a homogenous Christian population. 

 

Now we return to..."as the pot stirs."

 

===============================

 

Thanks to Mark Webster for providing a link to this video of young white dancers:

 

=======================================

 

 

 

I find this second video disturbing as well, but there is a difference between the two. The parents of the second video are apparently misguided liberal morons while the parents of the first video clearly show that they have reduced mental faculties....as do their kids.

The Rich Man and Lazarus

Considering how things are going in the world today, I thought it might be a good time to revisit the story of the rich man and Lazarus. From Luke 16: 19-31: 19"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores."

22"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell,[a] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

25"But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'

27"He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'

29"Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'

30" 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'

31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

====================

Short version: What goes around, comes around.

And also we have Luke 18:25:

"For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

OK, so why all the dogging out of the rich? Well, I certainly am not an advocate of socialism or communism as it has been practiced, nor do I have any problem with capitalism, in theory. The issue is that when you provide for yourself at the expense of others (over and above fair and reasonable profit), then you have a problem.

Let's look at Rush Limbaugh's earnings for example. His latest contract with Clear Channel was for 400 million dollars. We know things work a bit differently in the media world than they do in other fields when it comes to money. Rush gets a piece of the advertising revenue, which even he admits is "confiscatory." (I'll point out that Rush considers himself a Christian)

Rush has about 20 million listeners a day and if an advertiser wants to tap the listenership then they pay what they are told to pay and if they do not like it then, tough. Basically, Clear Channel, like other media firms, extort money instead of charging more realistic rates for the numbers of viewers/listeners to the show in question. Rush, like most entertainers, gets his money by overcharging advertisers. There is nowhere else a radio advertiser can go to get their message to an audience of 20 million listeners other than to Rush. I heard Glenn Beck make a comment a while ago, that he felt he was worth the 25 million a year he gets because so few other people could do his job. It is this type of thinking that earns the rich their trip to the hot fire pit of hell.

So, should the rich just start giving away all their money to the poor? No, but they should understand that they do have an obligation to help those less wealthy than themselves. Once their needs have been met, they should consider distributing some of their surplus income (perhaps in the form of additional jobs or raises) to the needy....over and above the Biblically suggested minimum of ten percent. As it is, about 20% of the people in the U.S. have 80% of the wealth. Spreading some of that around could help restore the middle class. Henry Ford figured out, a hundred years ago, that you cannot make products your employees cannot afford to buy.

What ever happened to compassionate conservatism?

Iron Chef Cat Cora, her lesbian partner and the Bible

OK, so here is an excerpt from a Fox News article on Cat Cora:

Cat Cora, star of Food Network's "Iron Chef America," announced Tuesday that she was 4-1/2 months pregnant with a boy. But this is where it gets interesting. Cora's partner Jennifer, with whom she already has two sons, is also pregnant, and due in April, three months before Cora.
But we're not done. It gets even more interesting. Cora is carrying Jennifer's biological child. And their second child, now 23 months old, was conceived using Cora's egg, but carried by Jennifer.

-----------------------------

Now you are probably saying to yourself, "But Nutjob, the world is going to hell in a handbasket and you're wasting space on a couple of screwball carpet munchers." Well yeah, however, this is a good opportunity to bone up (sorry, bad pun) on what the Old and New Testament have to say about homosexuality. One thing for sure, Cat and her partner are extremely selfish and self-centered. (self-worship IS idol worship)They have no regard for the mental anguish their children will undoubtedly suffer. As long as they both get the gratification they are looking for, then to heck with everyone else, including their soon to be screwed up children.

Alrighty then, let's examine some old testament passages dealing dealing with gay folks:

Leviticus 18:22: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is abomination."

Leviticus 20:13: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

Deuteronomy 22:5: "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garmet: for all that do so are an abomination unto the Lord thy God."
(Ya got me, this passage does not specifically deal with homos, but it does address transvestism which, apprently was practiced by certain idol worshippers living in Canaan.)

Deuteronomy 23:17: "There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite (homosexual) of the sons of Israel."

There are many additional passages in Genesis, Leviticus, Judges, Kings, Ezekiel, etc that deal with homosexuality.

So, with the New Testament comes a new covenant via Jesus. Is the New Testament covenant more kinder and gentler to poofters than the Old Testament?:

1 Corinthians 6:9-10: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers (bye bye congress) will inherit the kingdom of God." The passage continues that you can become justified if you repent.

Romans 1:26-27: "For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."

There are other passages in Galations, Colossians, Timothy, Titus etc. These passages deal with uncleanliness, defilement, abominations and so forth.

Some additional commentary from Wikipedia on translational issues, in this case 1 Corinthians 6:9-10:

The word translated as "practicing homosexuals" has challenged scholars for centuries, and has been alternately rendered as "abusers of themselves with mankind" (KJV), "sodomites" (YLT), or "men who practice homosexuality". The original term is very unusual, ἀρσενοκοίτης (arsenokoitēs), thought to mean "one who has sexual intercourse with a male" (Greek ἄῤῥην / ἄρσην [arrhēn / arsēn] "male"; κοίτην [koitēn] "sexual intercourse"), rather than the normal terms from the Greek culture. Within the Bible, it only occurs in this passage and in a similar list in 1 Timothy 1:9-10. Paul may have been drawing from the Greek (Septuagint) translation of Leviticus 18:22: καὶ μετὰ ἄρσενος οὐ κοιμηθήσῃ κοίτην γυναικός· βδέλυγμα γάρ ἐστιν (kai meta arsenos ou koimēthēsē koitēn gunaikos. bdelugma gar estin "And you shall not have sexual intercourse with a male as with a female. For it is unclean.") Boswell (1980) argues that this is a term specifically created by Paul. Given its unusual nature, the fact that Paul did not use one of the more common Greek terms, and given its direct reference to the Levitical laws, it is a matter of debate whether Paul was referring generally to any person having homosexual sex, or whether (as discussed below) it referred only to anal sex of any form (cf. Elliott 2004). Other translations of the word include Martin's (1996), who argued it meant "homosexual slave trader" and Boswell (1980) who argued it referred to "homosexual rape" or homosexual prostitutes. Scroggs perceives it as referring to pederasty.[36

and an extra-Biblical account of Sodom:

The Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo (20 BC - 50 AD) described the inhabitants of Sodom in an extra biblical account:
"As men, being unable to bear discreetly a satiety of these things, get restive like cattle, and become stiff-necked, and discard the laws of nature, pursuing a great and intemperate indulgence of gluttony, and drinking, and unlawful connections; for not only did they go mad after other women, and defile the marriage bed of others, but also those who were men lusted after one another, doing unseemly things, and not regarding or respecting their common nature, and though eager for children, they were convicted by having only an abortive offspring; but the conviction produced no advantage, since they were overcome by violent desire; and so by degrees, the men became accustomed to be treated like women, and in this way engendered among themselves the disease of females, and intolerable evil; for they not only, as to effeminacy and delicacy, became like women in their persons, but they also made their souls most ignoble, corrupting in this way the whole race of men, as far as depended on them" (133-35; ET Jonge 422-23).[10]

---------------------------------------------

The Old and New Testament are actually pretty unequivocal in their condemnation of homosexuality. Romans 1:26-27 specifically mentions lesbianism. Groups such as Religious Tolerance.org attempt to twist otherwise contextually precise translations and ignore passages which do not suit their agenda. From their website: "Similarly, in order to comprehend what the Bible says about gay and lesbian relationships, we must pass over the references to homosexual rape, male sexual abuse of boys, and homosexual prostitution, same-sex orgies by heterosexuals, Pagan sexual rituals in temples, etc. We would be left with only those references relating to consensual sexual activities within homosexual partnerships. There may not be any of these."

This just makes me want to reach for the barf bag. Hmmmmmm, let's see....if we remove all Biblical references to activities that fags engage in and we look for specific approval of consensual sexual activities within homo partnerships, of which we can't locate any references, then it must be OK. See, since the Bible considers homosexuality an abomination, then ANY type of sex between people of the same sex is an abomination and the Bible will never approve of any specific sex act between homosexuals.

Here is yet another gem from their site:

"Homosexuality and sodomy are not ethical sins. No one is being hurt, no one is being cheated, no body's rights are being infringed upon. Homosexuality is a religious sin, analogous to other Biblical prohibitions, like not eating the carcass of a dead animal, or not sleeping with a woman during her menstrual cycle." American Orthodox Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

I just love liberals, oops I mean Satanists. So, by Rabbi Shmuley's standard, if I go boink a goat, that is not an ethical sin and is not prohibited by the Bible despite any scriptural references to the contrary.
(all non-public domain excerpts claimed under fair use doctrine)

Although Cat Cora and her partner is the specific issue, it illustrates a much larger problem. Despite any statistics to the contrary, America today is largely a Godless society getting ready to reap our just reward. Ninety five percent or more of clergy today are either wolves in sheep's clothing or have been emasculated to the point that they are not only ineffective, but counterproductive. God help us all.