The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

MSN devoted three articles to Kim Davis on their top stories section in the last two days. The Speaker of the House, John Boehner's, resignation didn't even rate a follow up article. The third most powerful man in America politics is pushed off the stage by Kim Davis. The first article Friday dealt with Kim suing the Governor of Kentucky for not granting her super special rights to be exempt from the law of the land. It is doubtful that Governor Beshear could over rule the federal government. But no doubt Kim believes another civil war should be declared to defend the rights of the ignorant.

The second article was about Kim changing political parties. She decided the party of the bigot (Republican Party) more closely reflected her political views, and she is right. You noticed that no Democratic candidate for president beat a path to Kentucky to defend her right to be a religious bigot. The Republican party believes America should be more like countries in the Dark Ages where religion controlled governments.

We have many award ceremonies in America including the Academy Awards, the Golden Globes, and the People's Choice, it is only fitting that there should be a Bigots Award Ceremony and there is an Kim won the Oscar for the Biggest Bigot. Called the Cost of Discipleship Award, it seems even ignorance comes at a cost. These Bigots wrapped themselves in the cloak of Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, and Abraham Lincoln heroes, two of whom gave their lives to secure the rights of others. These people would have gladly spat on the faces of these heroes and then wanted religious exemptions. Three of the Republican presidential candidates addressed this gathering of bigots but no democratic presidential candidates did. The Family Research Council name is not descriptive it should be changed to the "Religious Bigots for President Group."

Comparing Kim Davis to Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and Rosa Parks was not just an overreach it was ridiculous. I understand that Kim Davis like Martin Luther King has a dream, but her dream is more like Hitler's dream where one day she hopes that the world will be purified after all the homosexuals have been put in gas chambers. Would Kim pull the switch? You bet she would, if she believes in her religion she would because she is only doing what her religion demands. Jesus did not mince words he was clear kill them, kill them all. It makes no matter whether you kill them one at a time or in large groups you are helping Jesus reach his goal of sexual orientation purity.

One must remember that someone loses a right to grant rights to others. Hitler was in charge of Germany and had a right to kill who he chose but the world took that right away from Hitler because they decided the right of the Jews to live superseded Hitler's right kill. In Martin Luther Kings time blacks could not eat in a white restaurant. It was widely believed that restaurant owner had the right to refuse service to anyone but after Martin Luther King the law became that if you had a restaurant you were in business to serve the public and could not discriminate. Someone lost a right in order that others gained rights.

Most Christians pick a biblical passage or two and base their belief on those passages and try to ignore the rest of that horrible book. The trouble is that others believe in the literal truth of the whole horrible book. The evangelical movement was started to bring Christians back to the horrible truth of a primitive religion and many were more than happy to have enemies again.

The southern plantation owners claimed the rights so clearly spelled out in the bible, the right to own slaves. They claimed slavery was an exercise of their religious freedom but Abraham Lincoln put an end to that religious freedom. The religious freedom to own slaves had to be balanced against the freedom of blacks. There was no contest between the right of a man to be free and religious freedom to behave in the biblical way. If the biblical example was followed slavery would still be common today.

Rosa Parks refuse to give up her seat and move to the back of the bus just as the gays today have refused to go to the back of the bus and have stood up for their rights in Rowan County KY. Kim Davis is not the hero, she is the villain using her billy club of government power to force the Gays to the back of the bus.

Some would take me to task for saying that Jesus instructed his followers to kill homosexuals but is the word of the bible not the word of God? At least that is what the religious claim.

"The word of God: If a man also lies with mankind, as he lieth with a woman both of them have committed an abomination: they surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them. "

Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that Jesus was trying to achieve gender orientation purity? Hitler was trying to purify the German race by exterminate the Jews. God words does not limit the killing for not identifying with the proper sexual orientation to 1, 100, 1,000, or a million. He intended that all homosexuals should be exterminated each and every one. Hitler goal was no different only the qualifications of the victims separate the crimes.

Sexual orientation variations are a fact of every generation. If you believe in religion you believe God can do to wrong, make no mistakes but a trip to any nursery shows that birth defects happen, babies are born with no arms, hearts located outside their body, and other deformities that are far worse. God makes mistakes and plenty of them. Sexual orientation is determined before birth, so if you are religious God is personally responsible for Gays; this would be like Hitler setting up a school converting people to Jewish faith and having a gas chamber at the other end of the school to kill those who converted.

The other possibility is that the bible is just 2,000 year old ignorance and we are dealing with people who were not only ignorant but intolerant. So either God was the original Hitler or he lives only in the imagination of the religious. By declaring the bible divine knowledge we bind ourselves to all the all the ignorance of a primitive people. We now have access to thousands of times the information the primitive people of biblical times had. We can understand how they were taken in but to turn a blind eye to the knowledge we posses today is a true abomination.

It has been three days since MSN had an article about Kim Davis. There should have been article about her being taken back to jail for altering government records to reflect her personal religious views. When the religious are able to flaunt the law of the land we all have a problem. In Utah the Mormons routinely rape 14 year old girls and declare it is their religious freedom to do so and the government turns a blind eye. Some marry 20 t0 30 women and have hundreds of children that are supported by the welfare system and the government turns a blind eye because of religious freedom. The Mormons believe the government is the great Satan but it is alright to fleece the Great Satan for everything you can get. It is high time the government stops making special accommodations for religion.

We all know that you have no right to yell fire in a crowded theater unless it is on fire. We also know that if you threaten to kill someone you can be charged with terrorist threatening. But yet Christianity has not only threatened to kill homosexuals but they have historically killed them. The terroristic threatening remains in the bible and is recited in churches to this day. The religious are always asking for accommodations it is time the rest of us got some accommodations, remove that passage from that evil book. If it was the KKK saying black people were an abomination and advocating their death, there would be a public outcry but when a church does the same thing the religious want special accommodations.

What is a special accommodation? If you had a couple hundred of employees and one wanted off on Sunday you might make a special accommodation but if all 200 wanted Sunday off you could not make an accommodation for everyone. A Sunday off is an accommodation a special exemption from the law is not an accommodation. We exist today because we are a nation of laws when some are made exempt from those laws we have a problem. The bible is ignorance incarnate and even most of the religious know that but they still go through the motions. We all know what terroristic threatening is and when the bible says "their blood shall be upon them" it is clear. There are some accommodations that need to be made but not by the government. The religious realize that it is no longer practical to kill homosexuals today but they still wants to reap the fruit of the poison tree.

Kim Davis is back in the national news after a three day break. She is reporting that she and her husband met with the Pope secretly while he was in Washington. The Vatican has so far not denied the meeting but the report of what took place are one sided. Kim and the bigot squad will make it look like the Pope is a bigot also but the Pope public stance on homosexuality has shown a radical change he has decided to no longer make homosexuals a target of hate. The Pope is on the public record saying who is he to judge a homosexual priest. I don't think this pope will go on a public crusade against homosexuals and I am surprised he would ever want his name linked to a Kentucky bigot.

I caught part of the pope's speech about the benefits of family life and reading between the lines wondered if he was not endorsing gay marriage. When gays are married are they not a family. They can raise children and function as a family. Why would the pope want to deny them and the children they raise the opportunity for family life? We know why Kim would but the pope is much more intelligent than Kim.

One can only hope that when Kim Davis met with the Pope that he told her, "Kim do you remember where you read on the internet that God doesn't even like you? Well he has asked me to tell you that is right." Francis has already taken the most liberal stand on homosexuality of any Pope. Why he would want his name associated with an American bigot that would make the Grand Dragon of KKK proud is beyond me. While the Pope may view the issue narrowly as a religious freedom issue it is not we cannot let people pick and chose which laws they want to obey. The rule of law is undercut when laws only apply to certain people and others are free to ignore them. Kim Davis has the religious freedom to quit her job and take one at Wal Mart.

Every check out girl What if Kim Davis refused to serve married homosexuals couples at Wal Mart? Morehead, Ky. is a small town and the married homosexual couples would be well known. As the homosexual couple came down her checkout line Kim could say I am exercising my religious freedom and refusing to serve you. You can check out in another line at which time after waiting through that line the next girl also declined to serve them citing her religious freedom. By the time the homosexual couples waits through every checkout line in Wal Mart they find no one will check them out. Wal Mart would fire every cashier could they successfully sue Wal Mart to get their job back?

Let's change the scenario a little bit. Say it is an unmarried heterosexual couple living in sin. Now the cashiers refuse to serve them because on the grounds of religious freedom. No one would hesitate to demand they be fired but they would just be exercising their religious freedoms. Isn't living in sin as offensive as married homosexuals? Who would decide? Being refused service at Wal Mart would humiliating but it is much more offensive from a government office.

What if the executioner at a prison refused to execute the prisoner citing religious freedom but wanted to keep his job and his salary? He would be told to find another job that didn't offend his religious sensibilities.

The controversy rages on between Pope and Kim Davis's lawyer. It seems that Kim Davis's lawyer version of the Papal visit does not agree with the Pope's version. The Pope says there was only one Papal visit and that was with a gay couple one of which was a student of the Pope and that student said the Pope approved of his relationship. It seems there was also a receiving line where hands were shook and rosaries handed out. Kim may have been part of that line. Who are you going to believe the Pope or the Kim's lawyer?

It is unlikely the Pope even knew that Kim was invited a Archbishop with an agenda was responsible for the invitations. The Archbishop no doubt had a personal agenda and decided to use the Pope's popularity to further his personal agenda. That is why Kim had to keep quiet about the "visit" until the Pope had returned Rome. With the Pope thousands of miles away the archbishop did not think Rome would dispute Kim's version but the Pope did publicly dispute Kim's tale.

Kim's lawyer hoped to use the tale to further his agenda only to find out that the Pope is not going to let himself be used by the red neck right bigots. As for the archbishop it is rumored he will be the new archbishop of Siberia.

According to the Glen Beck the Catholic church has two factions a liberal contingent and conservative contingent. Beck states that a new book is about to be released by a Catholic priest, who is an insider in Rome, that states a living Pope was replaced by Pope Francis in a mafia style takeover. I doubt it would live up to the "Godfather" but this is Italy. Of course Glen Beck is not the most trusted source but if the book actually is released it may provide interesting insight into church politics. There is no doubt in my mind that there are two competing contingents in the Catholic Church how treacherous the politics are is open to question. This Pope is the most liberal Pope in history and has already radically changed the churches positions on many issues including homosexuality. The house of cards that Francis spoke of may be much closer than even he thinks and a major fissure may soon open in the Catholic church.

The Kim Davis incident shows that the factions exist and are active. By sitting up the Pope to be associated with Kim Davis it undermined the Pope's previous public statements on homosexuality. Pope Francis' visit to America was about to be remembered for one thing and one thing only is support for a backwoods bigot and only strong denial by the Pope of Kim Davis story prevented further damage to the Pope's reforms.

Kim Davis's Papal visit was no doubt orchestrated by the conservative contingent in America Catholic church and is reminiscent of Machiavelli's report of two priests with knives hanging out a tower windows swing on ropes stabbing each other. We sometimes forget even religious organization there are liberals and conservatives struggling for power and even the most powerful can be duped by an underling.

There was more evidence of the civil war raging in the Catholic Church this morning on MSN. The battle lines are forming between the ignorant and the extremely ignorant. The extremely ignorant have claimed the position that the bible is the word of God and can not be altered or interpreted any other way. But this is position would require them to execute over have of the congregation as adulterers on Sunday morning, over half of the population gets a divorce and they are considered living in sin. Add to that figure those that are playing around and there is going to be shortage of stones and Catholics at most Catholic churches. I hear they have plans to raid Wal-Marts Sunday mornings and execute those violating their religious beliefs. They would also have to burn at the stake all those who have listed witchcraft as their religion. This is the position of the conservative element of the Catholic Church because this is what would be necessary to believe and practice the word of God. That position is so absurd it defies any and all logic and this is also the position of the evangelist movement in America, think Kim Davis.

It has been hundreds of years since the Catholic Church sanctioned witch burnings even though God says you will not suffer a witch to live and the liberals in the Catholic Church realize that burning old ladies at the stake had to stop despite the fact it was entertaining. They realize that the word of God cannot be taken literally or followed to the letter. They realize the biblical moral code is nothing more than the moral code of an ancient civilization that was big on murder and cruelty and small on common sense. They realize there is a good deal of distance between the practice of religion now and the practice of same religion 2,000 years ago. If it is agreed that we no longer burn witches, stone adulterers, or kill people who work on Sunday then religion can be reformed in other ways.

Oscar Wilde once asked a woman at a party whether she would sleep with him for a million dollars and she said of course she would. Then he asked if she would sleep with him for $10? She was insulted and said, what do you think I am a whore? Madam we already know what you are we are just negotiating the price. That is where we are with this argument we already no what they are they are just determining the distance from the actual biblical word each party is comfortable with. There is not a government on the face of the earth that would allow Christians to practice religion like it is spelled out in the bible. As soon as the corner church starts stoning adulterers to death the police would haul them off to jail. It is an absurd position and they known it. It is just a question of how long they can play stupid.

Kim Davis lying lawyer showed a picture of 100,000 people praying for Kim Davis in a soccer stadium in Peru at the bigot convention sometimes known as "The Family Values Convention" in Washington a week ago. This was to show how widespread the support for Kim Davis was the problem is that the picture was taken over a year ago and no one in Peru even knew who Kim Davis was. Lying for the "cause" is acceptable at the bigot convention most of what they believe is a lie anyway.

It seems that Kim's lawyer's organization, "The Liberty Council," is listed on the national registry of hate organizations along with the KKK. The Liberty Council regularly portrays gays as perverse, diseased pedophiles, putting Western civilization at risk. The Liberty Council also blamed higher rates of promiscuity and incest on homosexuality even though evidence shows otherwise. I am having a hard time figuring out the incest one as that usually involves heterosexuals. in most of the cases.

The Liberty Council, which is the laws firm defending Kim Davis has been classified as a hate group by Southern Poverty Law Center a group that tracks hate groups. The Southern Poverty Law Center says, "the Liberty Council is an anti-gay hate group for spreading false information," think of the photo of a 100,000 people crammed into a Peruvian soccer stadium to pray for Kim Davis. The bigots at "Values Voter Summit" held in Washington DC a week ago were shown the photo blown up on a wide screen. They applauded the lie wildly. It seems Kim Davis has far more followers then Jesus Christ did in his lifetime. In spite of the fact that Kim has never been to Peru. doesn't speak the language and could not even find it on the map, she has the following of a rock star. The lie sounds so reasonable to those who want to believe.

Birds fly, dogs bark and the Liberty Council spreads lies, that is simply what they do. The Liberty Council's lies about the 100,000 praying for Kim in Peru was to advance their anti-gay agenda. Do you think they would hesitate to tell other lies about gays if they thought it would advance their anti-gay agenda? Of course they wouldn't and it has never stopped them from spreading lies and hate across America.

Kim Davis' 15 minutes of fame may be over there has not been an article about her on MSN in a few days. I was really hoping the Federal Judge would put her back in jail for altering the marriages licenses that were issued while she was in jail. I guess we could send her to Peru since she is so popular down there, oh that right her lawyer lied about that.

Religious freedom, everyone wants it the trouble is that the religious freedom of one group would destroy the religious freedom of another. Those who campaign for religious freedom do so with tunnel vision, they ignore all of the freedoms that would be taken from others in the practice of their "religious freedom." I have never met a religious person that had the ability to truly understand interchangeable perspective. Religion provides a blind spot that blocks interchangeable perspective. Divine knowledge can not be questioned but it blocks one from ever achieving interchangeable perspective. If the book of evil dictates that homosexuality is an abomination there is no need to see the world from the prospective of the homosexual there is only the need to wipe out the abomination. When one religion competes for followers with others, killing seems reasonable solution, so burn the witches they follow another religion

All morality is based on the principal of interchangeable perspective when religion blocks this society suffers. How can one achieve interchangeable perspective with an abomination or a devil worshiper?

Hillary Clinton told her audience that Kim Davis should have went to jail for not doing her duty. America has a lot of strange religions if each got to claim religious freedom for their illogical beliefs it would be like herding cats.

Don't read the next paragraph because it may be harmful to unprepared readers.

Scientology teaches that 75 million years ago an evil ruler of Galactic Confederacy bought billions of people to earth in a space ship resembling a Douglas DC 8 and proceeded to stacked them around volcanoes then he set off hydrogen bombs in the volcanoes. This produced thetans that clustered and stuck to the bodies of the living. These thetans are still here today. Scientology isolates the thetans and neutralize them. Tom Cruse believes every word of this. Tom knows thetans are much more likely to be found on gays. He does not want to issue marriages licenses to gays because he might be infected by their thetans. Should he be able to play the religious freedom card? After all he has paid millions to rid himself of thetans.

I know L Ron Hubbard (the founder of Scientology) was a science fiction but this is the worst science fiction story ever. But as a religion it is practiced by many Hollywood stars. Watch out for those thetans.

Religious freedom is the freedom to worship any God you chose even the family cat if you so chose. That freedom should not be extend into the workplace. Most people if asked would be in in favor of religious freedom, at least for their own religion without realizing what that would entail. If religious freedom is granted to one religion than it must be granted to all religions. There are all sorts of religions in America and some of these are strange indeed. Anyone is free to found their own religion. Some religions believe that they should do everything in their power to rip off the government and taxpayers, the Fundamentalists Mormons come to mind. When you have 50 wives and 300 children someone has to pay and that someone is taxpayers. Do you believe that you should be taxed to support those 300 children? The Mormons believe that it is their religious freedom. Is that really any different than the religious freedom Kim Davis claims? If a religion claimed that paying taxes is against their religion be forced to pay or given the religious freedom not to pay?

A new religion can be created every minute in America and assert its right of religious freedom. What if a religion claimed the right to rape as a religious freedom? Would you be in favor of granting them that religious freedom to do that? The Fundamentalists Mormons claim this religious freedom and 14 year old girls are married off to middle age men and even to ninety year olds and the government turns a blind eye because of religious freedom. Are you in favor of raping 14 year olds? Rape is one of the religious freedoms practiced in America each and every day. Who decides when what religious freedom can be granted and what cannot? What about those that don't believe in medicine? They believe that God decides and it is against their religion to have a sick child see a doctor. My mom watched as a husband refused to let his wife receive a blood transfusion that would have saved her life. She died and three small children were left with no mother. Religious freedom encase far more than refusing to issue marriage licenses. Could you stand by as one of these Jesus freaks let a three year old die without medical treatment and say that was their religious freedom?

In Utah, the state home to the Mormon religion, the age of consent is 18 for men and 16 for women. But the consent comes with limits, a female between 16 years old and 18 years old can only legally consent to sex with a partner ten or less years older than she is. Yet Fundamentalists Mormons continually "marry" females who are 14 years old. Of course they only marry the first two wives legally all other wives are married in a religious service with no civil involvement. This means these Mormon molesters are doing just that, they are child molesters molesting in plain sight of authorities. The authorities in Utah know that it is going on and take no action. However if someone of another religion was molesting a 14 year old up the street they would be arrested and taken to jail. This is religious freedom at work the authorities turn a blind eye and some even participate some sheriffs and judges in Utah take a few 14 year olds for themselves. Do you want to ask them to enforce the law against rape?

The Fundamentalist Mormons towns have been raided on a couple occasions in the last 70 years and the Mormon molesters jailed but the politicians that pushed the enforcement of the law were quickly voted out of office and any politician in Utah who enforces the law knows he is committing political suicide because in Utah they believe religious freedom trumps morality. Kim Davis would fit in nicely.

In America religion comes in all shapes and sizes, take the World Church of the Creator the followers of this religion believe in white power. This is truly that old time religion they don't believe in deity they believe in white people. Now if they worked in a restaurant they would refuse to serve blacks or Jews and claim freedom of religion. If they lynched blacks should that be their religious freedom? Many people who see nothing wrong with Kim Davis refusal to grant marriage licenses would have a problem with lynching but both would come under religious freedom.

The Nation of Yahweh is a black supremist church. They worship Yahweh ben Yahweh as their God. Their goal is to return the blacks to Israel as they were the original Israelites. I bet the Church of the Creator would help them if they asked nicely. Of course calling them white devils might not go over good. This group is listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center just like the group defending Kim Davis. Nation of Yahweh believes its mission is to vanquish whites. Do you believe they should have the religious freedom to do so?

When one decides to start granting religious freedoms it encases far more than one realizes.

With sheep dung, warmed beneath an earthen pan and kneaded, the swelling attendant upon wounds are reduced and fistulous sores and epinyctis are cleansed and made to heal. But it is the ashes of a burnt dog's head that the greatest efficacy is found; as it quite equals spodium in its property of cauterizing all kinds of fleshy excrescence, and causing sores to heal. Mouse dung. too, is used as a cautery and weasels' dung born to ashes.

from the "Remedies for Ulcerous Sores and Wounds" by the philosopher Pliny the elder.
________________________________________________
This knowledge comes to us from the first century about the same time Christianity was founded. I don't know of any hospital that uses sheep dung today. Matter of fact smearing bacteria on wounds would make them far worse. Pliny the elder was one of the more intelligent people of his time but was totally ignorant of bacteria and the damage it did. Those who founded Christianity were every bit as ignorant as Pliny the elder but millions still believe in that ignorance.

Pliny the elder seems to be an expert on dung. There was no need for a drug store, all you needed to was locate the right type of dung. It was plentiful and cheap. I will always wonder if they used a control group which did not smear dung on their open wounds and if they did better than those smearing dung on their open wounds. But the important part was that they believed dung smearing would make them better. The ashes of a burnt dog head seems to have been a super cure of course it didn't do anything for the health of the dog.

Nobody has any idea how really ignorant these people really were we have a natural aversion to dung for a good reason it carries diseases. But no doubt cause and effect were at work some people recovered in spite of the dung smeared into their wounds and that was prof that dung smearing worked of course those that had their limbs amputated or died were not right with God.

You always have to take the source into account and the source of the three religions that are destroying the world were smearing dung on themselves to heal their wounds. You would not rub dung into you wounds why would you believe in an invisible God who only rewards you after death. That is the perfect con. What other conman could tell you your payoff would come after you died and get away with it?

What if Pliny the elder dung remedies were handed down as divine knowledge and anyone who voiced any opposition to them was put to death. Doctors to this day might be treating wounds with the ashes of a burnt dogs head.
_____________________________________________________
Blaspheming or cursing the Lord: "And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregations shall certainly stone him: as well as strangers, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death."

(Leviticus 24:13-16)
______________________________________________________
There are two ideas here one that rubbing dung into a wound will heal it. The second is that there is an invisible old man who created the world. Both ideas are equally absurd but one idea survived. Why? Anyone who criticized the old man theory was put to death. Killings and threats of killings go a long way in making believers. If the dung theory was enforced by the penalty of death hospitals today would have a good stock pile of dung on hand. Any theory that is enforced with death or threats of death shows how hard it was to convince the first true believers. In America during the baby Bush administration some of the Christian far right actual pushed for the death penalty for blasphemy.

Christianity was spread by the most immoral of actions, it may have pretend to be about morality but it never had any problem with killing. You could be killed for simply criticizing their God. The Christians could provide absolutely no proof of their con, life after death, but they could kill any amount of people to convince the masses to believe. Faced with a choice between believing in nonsense or being killed most decided to believe in nonsense.

If one looks as ISIS today and all the religiously motivated killings one is abhorred by the vicious methods of killings . But Christianity was spread in the same area of the world by the same manner. The bible may say thou shall not kill but then it gives you many reasons to kill your fellow men. It encourages mod violence and insights people to form murderous mobs, "all congregations shall stone him as well as strangers." All the killings done by ISIS today pale in comparisons to all the killing done in the name of the bible.

Religion always conveys the idea that their religion should control the world. As Christianity declines in the more advanced countries (only 17% regularly practice Christianity in America) the Muslim religion is surging as people are attracted to the violent extreme. The Christian religion has been stripped of its righto kill by governments, now all those directions in bible about who to kill and how to kill them are just meaningless directions. If religion is indeed the gospel truth then it should be able to kill whoever and at whatever time it wants. A religion that can't exercise its right to kill is like a toothless pit bull it can still bark loudly but it can't bite. ISIS is that viscous dog that all religions long to be again.