Oh Glorious Irony! [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

Furtherman

11-03-2006, 09:51 AM

mendyweiss wrote: johnniewalker wrote: Where does all this gayness come into play with the church?  I don't get it. What is it with these conservatives, that they love to get it in the ass?Repression.Don't do this, don't do that... until they get caught.It's an easy story.  He's gay.  But was brought up being taught that was wrong.  Evil.  So where to turn to repress these feelings?  The church!  He gets into it, people respond to him, he rises to a position of power.  Control.  Then one day he realizes he can still preach the faith, but act out on some of those internal feelings on the side.  No one will know.  No one would suspect.  Convinces himself that as long as he keeps spreading the word, god will forgive him.Sucker.

phixion

11-03-2006, 09:57 AM

Surely no policeman has ever borken the law.No lawyer has ever been disbbared.No teacher has ever done something inappropriate with a student ?Yeah I guess you're right.not many a policeman says give this man a life sentence for speeding and considering these preachers say gay poeple will go to hell. for ETERNITY. and amjor difference if those people in your example get cauhgt they get severely punished. what happens to a priest? he gets transferred. and yes i guess your right filling out those change of adress forms are punishment enough.........................

A.J.

11-03-2006, 09:57 AM

Furtherman wrote: Sucker.I think you meant "pitcher".

ChrisTheCop

11-03-2006, 10:07 AM

"surely no policeman has ever borken the law"Borking a law is better than borking a little kid, I always say.

keithy_19

11-03-2006, 10:13 AM

mendyweiss wrote: johnniewalker wrote: Where does all this gayness come into play with the church?  I don't get it. What is it with these conservatives, that they love to get it in the ass?<img height="288" src="http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0804/081604mcgreeveyjames.jpg" width="227" border="0" />

Furtherman

11-03-2006, 10:19 AM

The Rev. Ted Haggard admits he purchased methamphetamine from Mike Jones, the man who accuses Haggard of paying him for sex, but the pastor says he threw away the drugs. <div /> Uh huh.  <div /> How the hell does this guy suspect anyone will believe him?

This message was edited by Furtherman on 11-3-06 @ 2:20 PM

phixion

11-03-2006, 10:33 AM

How the hell does this guy suspect anyone will believe him?faith + 1

narc

11-03-2006, 10:34 AM

Furtherman wrote: The Rev. Ted Haggard admits he purchased methamphetamine from Mike Jones, the man who accuses Haggard of paying him for sex, but the pastor says he threw away the drugs. * />  This message was edited by Furtherman on 11-3-06 @ 2:20 PM <blockquote />    <img width="215" height="251" border="0" src="http://www.ks1075.com/images/home/mike_jones.jpg" />? Ron's favorite rapper. The whole fact that Crystal Meth comes into this now makes this REALLY gay.

narc

11-03-2006, 10:37 AM

I also thought this thread was going to be about this man:  <img width="119" height="131" border="0" src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/images/member_avatars/loi.jpg" />

UnknownPD

11-03-2006, 10:41 AM

He oughta do the honorable thing and paint the ceiling red

JimBeam

11-03-2006, 11:16 AM

So your perspective is a religious man saying that somebody may go to a place that they may not even believe in is worse than say a cop planting drugs or something on somebody to send them to a very real place called prison ?Surely the guy's reprehensible and gives anything he touches ( ha ha ) a bad name but what he did is nothing more than hypocrytical not criminal.

Jujubees2

11-03-2006, 11:24 AM

JimBeam wrote: So your perspective is a religious man saying that somebody may go to a place that they may not even believe in is worse than say a cop planting drugs or something on somebody to send them to a very real place called prison ?Surely the guy's reprehensible and gives anything he touches ( ha ha ) a bad name but what he did is nothing more than hypocrytical not criminal.While a policeman planting evidence is unquestionably wrong, he is not attacking an entire group of people as the evangelists do when they call all gays evil.  Are some gays evil?  Sure.  But just being gay does not make one evil.

phixion

11-03-2006, 11:45 AM

see while i hate most cops no offense chris, them planting evidence i can at least understand. they dont believe their case is strong enough so they lie. and luckily in our country we have DA's who are 'supposed' to do the right thing even if the police do not. their job isnt supposed to be the messangers of god. thats what a priests job is. so yes i believe him being text book case self loather in itself not so bad. but when he has people pledging their lives to the words that come out of his mouth, when people throw money at him because he says 'this is the road to heaven' then yes it s a bit worse. because people wont just believe that gays are evil, which is fine if you want to believe that that. they'll believe god is on their side when they gay bash. they will believe as so many idiots do that the bible supercedes the constitution and that infringing on a gay persons rights dont matter because they are sinners.

HBox

11-03-2006, 11:53 AM

JimBeam wrote: So your perspective is a religious man saying that somebody may go to a place that they may not even believe in is worse than say a cop planting drugs or something on somebody to send them to a very real place called prison ?Surely the guy's reprehensible and gives anything he touches ( ha ha ) a bad name but what he did is nothing more than hypocrytical not criminal.  He solicitied a prostitute and bought crystal meth from him. That's illegal.

JimBeam

11-03-2006, 12:04 PM

Yeah and about 1000 people in the US will probably all do the same thing tonight and 99% of them wont be religious people.

UnknownPD

11-03-2006, 12:14 PM

<h1 class="head">Evangelical Leader Admits to Buying Meth, Receiving Massage From Gay Escort</h1><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227159,00.html">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227159,00.html</a>

HBox

11-03-2006, 12:19 PM

JimBeam wrote: Yeah and about 1000 people in the US will probably all do the same thing tonight and 99% of them wont be religious people.   I am pretty sure that out of 1000 people who solicit gay prostitutes and buy meth that more than 10 of them are religious people. No, scratch that. I am completely sure of that.If you were talking about evangielcial leaders then you would be correct. But then again over 99% of people aren't evnagelical leaders.

JimBeam

11-03-2006, 12:42 PM

So HBOx now its more illegal soliciting a MALE prostitute ?

JimBeam

11-03-2006, 12:43 PM

Exactly my point.Being an Evangelical leader doesnt make the crime anymore illegal than the other 99% of the people.

Recyclerz

11-03-2006, 12:53 PM

JimBeam wrote: Being an Evangelical leader doesnt make the crime anymore illegal than the other 99% of the people.True, but it does make it more entertaining. It's not the crime, it's not even the coverup - it's the fucking hypocrisy that makes these things headline news.

reeshy

11-03-2006, 12:55 PM

You guys have forgotten one thing....This hasn't been proven yet......where's all the Liberalism that's supposed to be here?????

HBox

11-03-2006, 01:01 PM

JimBeam wrote: So HBOx now its more illegal soliciting a MALE prostitute ?  So what you are saying is that everyone should solicit gay prostitutes and buy meth from them?

HBox

11-03-2006, 01:04 PM

JimBeam wrote: Exactly my point.Being an Evangelical leader doesnt make the crime anymore illegal than the other 99% of the people.  The other 99% of people don't make a career out of publicly demonizing the behavior and trying to legislate against it, and at worst inciting hatred against gay people. If you don't understand the schadenfreude going on here you don't understand the human mind.When someone puts themselves on a pedestal they submit themselves to a higher standard.

Dudeman

11-03-2006, 01:06 PM

next hypocrite?<img width="255" height="301" border="0" src="http://www.harrywalker.com/photos/Reed_R.jpg" alt="rr" title="rr" />

WRESTLINGFAN

11-03-2006, 02:11 PM

Westboro Baptist Church will have a field day over this

FezPaul

11-03-2006, 02:15 PM

reeshy wrote: You guys have forgotten one thing....This hasn't been proven yet......where's all the Liberalism that's supposed to be here????? Liberalism is only extended to liberals.

Dudeman

11-03-2006, 02:49 PM

FezPaul wrote: reeshy wrote: You guys have forgotten one thing....This hasn't been proven yet......where's all the Liberalism that's supposed to be here????? Liberalism is only extended to liberals.from foxnews.com (to avoid the liberal media): "<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227159,00.html">Rev. Ted Haggard admits buying meth, getting massage from gay escort, denies having sex</a>." and remember, he did deny even knowing the guy yesterday. 

This message was edited by Dudeman on 11-3-06 @ 6:50 PM

DarkHippie

11-03-2006, 02:51 PM

reeshy wrote: You guys have forgotten one thing....This hasn't been proven yet......where's all the Liberalism that's supposed to be here????? In that Fox News article posted before, he admitted that he received a massage from the guy and bought meth from him (though he threw it out).  I think that its gonna come out that he did more.  I don't think what he did is necessarily wrong though.  If he wants to have gay sex with a prostitute, let him.  Its only his church that should care.

reeshy

11-03-2006, 02:53 PM

OK...I stand corrected....I didn't see that....that gay fucker!!!!!!

FezPaul

11-03-2006, 03:03 PM

Dudeman wrote: FezPaul wrote: reeshy wrote: You guys have forgotten one thing....This hasn't been proven yet......where's all the Liberalism that's supposed to be here????? Liberalism is only extended to liberals.from foxnews.com (to avoid the liberal media): "<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227159,00.html">Rev. Ted Haggard admits buying meth, getting massage from gay escort, denies having sex</a>." and remember, he did deny even knowing the guy yesterday.  This message was edited by Dudeman on 11-3-06 @ 6:50 PM Fair enough,  my point is that all of us love to jump on the downfall of those with whom we disagree. If some high profile liberal was accused of something the consevatives would be dancing around singing nah nah nah nah nah nah. Which is basically what the people who hate religious conservatives are doing in this thread.It isn't so much the fact or the act, it's the delight in seeing someone suffer. The lovely and talented HBox put it best:If you don't understand the schadenfreude going on here you don't understand the human mind.

Yerdaddy

11-03-2006, 03:06 PM

How IN GOD'S NAME did this cock get in my mouth???

Bulldogcakes

11-03-2006, 03:41 PM

JimBeam wrote: Exactly my point.Being an Evangelical leader doesnt make the crime anymore illegal than the other 99% of the people. In the eyes of the law, no. In the eyes of everyone else, yes.  You cant go around condemning the gay lifestyle, be against gay marriage, against gay rights and then get caught being fucked in the ass by your personal trainer. Please.  <blockquote />

Bulldogcakes

11-03-2006, 03:45 PM

Yerdaddy wrote: How IN GOD'S NAME did this cock get in my mouth??? You got that one wrong, Daddy. He said "MWAAA HUMMMFF MWAMWAMWA GURGLE GURGLE GURGLE heh heh Hey! How did this cock get in my mouth!" <blockquote />

HBox

11-03-2006, 05:15 PM

FezPaul wrote: Dudeman wrote: FezPaul wrote: reeshy wrote: You guys have forgotten one thing....This hasn't been proven yet......where's all the Liberalism that's supposed to be here????? Liberalism is only extended to liberals.from foxnews.com (to avoid the liberal media): "<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227159,00.html">Rev. Ted Haggard admits buying meth, getting massage from gay escort, denies having sex</a>." and remember, he did deny even knowing the guy yesterday. This message was edited by Dudeman on 11-3-06 @ 6:50 PM Fair enough, my point is that all of us love to jump on the downfall of those with whom we disagree. If some high profile liberal was accused of something the consevatives would be dancing around singing nah nah nah nah nah nah. Which is basically what the people who hate religious conservatives are doing in this thread.It isn't so much the fact or the act, it's the delight in seeing someone suffer. The lovely and talented HBox put it best:If you don't understand the schadenfreude going on here you don't understand the human mind.  It's not just the delight of seeing someone suffer, it's the delight in seeing someone suffer from the prejudices he himself helped perpetuate. Circling all the way back to JimBeam's point: if this was some Joe Schmoe no one would care.

ADF

11-03-2006, 05:56 PM

JimBeam wrote: There's infinitely more gays and kid touchers that are teachers, lawyers, doctors , and policemen but they don't make for much in the headlines.How influential was this guy ?I hadn't heard his name mentioned in the news until this story.   Why do homophobes always lump homosexuals and kid-touchers together?  Oh, that's right.. to demonize them.

TheMojoPin

11-03-2006, 06:04 PM

ADF wrote:  JimBeam wrote: There's infinitely more gays and kid touchers that are teachers, lawyers, doctors , and policemen but they don't make for much in the headlines.How influential was this guy ?I hadn't heard his name mentioned in the news until this story.   Why do homophobes always lump homosexuals and kid-touchers together?  Oh, that's right.. to demonize them. I remember seeing stats in a psych class that showed that kid-touchers who are actually able to sustain adult relationships tend to be in heterosexual ones than homosexual.  Having a "thing" for kids typically isn't defined by gender...it's that they're kids, period.  The age/identity thing is apparently the primary and the gender is secondary or even incidental.Man, that was a depressing class.

FezPaul

11-03-2006, 06:05 PM

HBox wrote:  FezPaul wrote: Dudeman wrote: FezPaul wrote: reeshy wrote: You guys have forgotten one thing....This hasn't been proven yet......where's all the Liberalism that's supposed to be here????? Liberalism is only extended to liberals.from foxnews.com (to avoid the liberal media): "<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227159,00.html">Rev. Ted Haggard admits buying meth, getting massage from gay escort, denies having sex</a>." and remember, he did deny even knowing the guy yesterday.  This message was edited by Dudeman on 11-3-06 @ 6:50 PM Fair enough, my point is that all of us love to jump on the downfall of those with whom we disagree. If some high profile liberal was accused of something the consevatives would be dancing around singing nah nah nah nah nah nah. Which is basically what the people who hate religious conservatives are doing in this thread.It isn't so much the fact or the act, it's the delight in seeing someone suffer. The lovely and talented HBox put it best:If you don't understand the schadenfreude going on here you don't understand the human mind.  It's not just the delight of seeing someone suffer, it's the delight in seeing someone suffer from the prejudices he himself helped perpetuate. Circling all the way back to JimBeam's point: if this was some Joe Schmoe no one would care. http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f281/FezPaul/billboard2.jpg<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/tongue.gif" border="0" />

keithy_19

11-03-2006, 06:37 PM

Geez. Like no one on this board has been an evangelist, hired a male prositute for a massage, and bought meth before. Hypocrites. <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smoke.gif" border="0" />

UnknownPD

11-03-2006, 07:05 PM

Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'reilly, Mark Foley, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker and the list goes of do as I say not as I do goes on

This message was edited by UnknownPD on 11-4-06 @ 1:50 PM

HeyGuy

11-03-2006, 09:38 PM

Recyclerz wrote: JimBeam wrote: Being an Evangelical leader doesnt make the crime anymore illegal than the other 99% of the people.True, but it does make it more entertaining. It's not the crime, it's not even the coverup - it's the fucking hypocrisy that makes these things headline news.Rec, I agree with you. Its not any worse when a conservative does it. What makes these things an issue is the moral high ground that conservatives preach. Dems and liberals think all these things are ok, fine, do what you want. The reason they attack these people everythime they come out of the closet or get caught doing something is 100% because these same people preach against the exact same thing they are doing. Do as I say not as I do.I think all these religious and consevative assholes need to be honest with themselves and let all people do as they wish as long as it doesnt effect others. If they did this then they will be not have to hide in the closet and out up these fronts. If gays want to get married it doest effect your marriage. If a women wants to have an abortion it doesnt effect your rights at all. People need to do as they want with the so called freedoms we have in this country. As long as it doesnt effect anyone directly then mind your own fucking business1 more thing about abortion. If abortion was illegal the past 30 years then who would be taking care of the 30million goo (which would now be babies and humans) that were aborted? Conservatives want to tell everyone how to live yet republicans and conservatives do not want anyone getting public aid. They cut all types of programs to help the poor. So overturn roe vs Wade and I want all the republicansto adopt all these unwanted kids.Everyone is allowed their own oppinions, but at the end of the day we all should make our own choices. You shouldnt choice for me and I shouldnt choice for you. If you overturn roe v wade then you make the choice for everyone. But if that freedom stays you can choose to have a baby and other can choose not to.

This message was edited by CampoNJ on 11-4-06 @ 1:43 AM

JimBeam

11-04-2006, 09:07 AM

I said from the start that what this jackass did was hypocritical but the actions of one man don't define or discredit those of millions of others.Why do homophobes always lump homosexuals and kid-touchers together?  Oh, that's right.. to demonize them.But wait if you're a male and you're porking a boy aren't you a homo ?So if you're a man who likes little boys are you gay first and then a pedophile or are you just a pedophile ( so as not to smear the gay community ) ?And surely if the same thing had happened to somebody that wasn't a conservative we'd be seeing as much glee from the conservative side.I'm not saying the story shouldnt be told, or even that it's not a big deal, I think it has zero to do with how the rest of us will live our lives.The Foley thing is much more reprehensible as he was an agent of the gov't.I find him to be more vile as he now tries to shift blame to a priest that more or may not have abused him when he was younger.If the case was true he should've revelaed it years ago to prevent as best he could from it happening to another child.I think he's sensationalized it and thinks that even if it did happen he excuses him from what he did.

UnknownPD

11-04-2006, 01:47 PM

You're Fired<a href="http://www.newlifechurch.org/pressrelease110606.pdf">http://www.newlifechurch.org/pressrelease110606.pdf</a>

DarkHippie

11-04-2006, 01:51 PM

But wait if you're a male and you're porking a boy aren't you a homo ?So if you're a man who likes little boys are you gay first and then a pedophile or are you just a pedophile ( so as not to smear the gay community ) ?The difference between a gay man and a pedophile is that gays like men, kid touchers like kids.  A normal human being should have no sexual reaction to a child, gay or not.

Yerdaddy

11-04-2006, 02:15 PM

JimBeam wrote: The Foley thing is much more reprehensible as he was an agent of the gov't. From the original news article:Haggard resigned as president of the National Association of Evangelicals, an umbrella group representing more than 45,000 churches with 30 million members. Foley represents, what, about 50,000 constituents? This guy has a major impact on how Christianity is preached to 30 million people, and even moreso how those evangelical organizations act politically since he was on the phone with Bush on a regular basis.Haggard was one of a group of religious leaders who regularly participated in conference calls with White House aides, Time magazine reported.On Friday, the White House sought to downplay Haggard's influence within the administration. Spokesman Tony Fratto told reporters Friday that it was inaccurate to portray him as being close to the White House, insisting Haggard was only an occasional participant in weekly conference calls between West Wing staff and leading evangelicals. "He has been on a couple of calls," Fratto said. "He's been to the White House one or two times."Last year, Time -- citing Haggard's White House access -- put him on its list of the nation's 25 most influential evangelicals. (<a href="http://www.ronfez.net/time/covers/1101050207/photoessay/11.html" target="new">Time.com article</a><img class="cnnOffsite" height="9" alt="external link" hspace="0" src="http://i.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.3/misc/icon.offsite.gif" width="12" vspace="1" border="0" />)Many religious leaders had rallied to the pastor's defense when the allegations broke earlier in the week.You can't downplay this guy's responsibilities to millions of Christians or influence in pushing the anti-gay agenda in Washington.

Yerdaddy

11-04-2006, 02:17 PM

And why are you defending this guy so strongly? With arguments that are all over the map and even to the point of comparing him to cops and teachers?

johnniewalker

11-04-2006, 05:28 PM

DarkHippie wrote: But wait if you're a male and you're porking a boy aren't you a homo ?So if you're a man who likes little boys are you gay first and then a pedophile or are you just a pedophile ( so as not to smear the gay community ) ?The difference between a gay man and a pedophile is that gays like men, kid touchers like kids. A normal human being should have no sexual reaction to a child, gay or not. I've had to a chance to think about this for 50 minutes at a workout facilty in my dorm on a stupid eliptical machine which I had to use because I developed <a target="_top" href="http://www.sportsinjuryclinic.net/cybertherapist/front/foot/plantar-fascia-strain.htm">a Plantar fascia strain</a> from running on a bunched up sock for 4 miles.  Well, I was doing the whole machine thing when a girl starts running in directly in front of me on a treadmill.  I have a fetish for a cute nice girls.  This girl had a really cute face, but her arms were the circumference of a silver dollar.  She was clearly anoerexic.  Her little heart couldn't muster more than 5 minutes on a treadmill.  My thing is when she is so small like that she looked like she was 13 or 14 at the most.  I know b/c she is in a dorm she has to be 18.  By law I would have to have sex with her, but morally I would feel like a pedophile.   I also wondered do girls that haven't aged yet and look like kids at 18 or 19 feel weird when guys hit on them.  Is it like they are getting hit on by pedos?  I don't get it, but I don't think its just a normal and not normal thing.  I feel creepy, but I 'm still going to go find that girl.

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 12:02 AM

I've had to a chance to think about this for 50 minutes at a workout facilty in my dorm on a stupid eliptical machine What's the point of that damned eliptical machine? I never understood the rationale for having you work your lips and testicles at the same time. Couldn't you do them in some sort of circuit routine? which I had to use because I developed a Plantar fascia strain OK. I get it. You were planting trees with your mouth and strained your face and got a hernia at the same time. So the eliptical machine was a good idea. I stand corrected. Because I work out on the efeetical machine.from running on a bunched up sock for 4 miles. I'm sure the sock did something to deserve it. Well, I was doing the whole machine thing when a girl starts running in directly in front of me on a treadmill. That's the one where the act of reading powers a machine that grinds wheat into flour? How's that give you a workout? I think that's a scam by the gym industry which is in cahoots with the bread and muffin industry to get cheap labor. Those gyms are sweatshops! Shut them down! Shut them down! Shut the... ooh! A roachclip! I have a fetish for a cute nice girls. You're a monster! I mean we all have our fetishes and all, but... That's just SICK!This girl had a really cute face That's from using the eliplabia machine they have in the women's section. but her arms were the circumference of a silver dollar. She should move to France. The conversion to the Euro would make her arms 27% bigger right there.She was clearly anoerexic. She does anal in Tijuana? She's a keeper!Her little heart couldn't muster more than 5 minutes on a treadmill. Mustard too slippery?My thing is Caught in the eliptical machine?when she is so small like that she looked like she was 13 or 14 at the most. Pounds?? She was doing ALOT of anal in Tijuana!I know b/c she is in a dorm she has to be 18. Yes, but they lowered the age requirement after the birth of Christ. All those dead first born sons or something.By law I would have to have sex with her That law must have been from the Clinton administration.but morally I would feel like a pedophile. In a rapid circular motion?I also wondered do girls that haven't aged yet A.k.a girls.and look like kids Walking across my goddamn lawn!?at 18 or 19 feel weird when guys hit on them.Like the skin of a sea cucumber? I'd hit that!Is it like they are getting hit on by pedos? You mean are their shins all busted up? Why would that be? This is a really strange story.I don't get it Ride a bike with mustard on the pedos - you'll get it!, but I don't think its just a normal and not normal thing. Right. Like having 2.3 children. It's the normal amount, but that .3 kid freaks me out! I feel creepy,Leave that sea cucumber alone! but I 'm still going to go find that girl.Tijuana. And wear a rubber! I hear it rains alot down there.

Se7en

11-05-2006, 12:23 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: Haggard was one of a group of religious leaders who regularly participated in conference calls with White House aides, Time magazine reported. On Friday, the White House sought to downplay Haggard's influence within the administration. Spokesman Tony Fratto told reporters Friday that it was inaccurate to portray him as being close to the White House, insisting Haggard was only an occasional participant in weekly conference calls between West Wing staff and leading evangelicals. "He has been on a couple of calls," Fratto said. "He's been to the White House one or two times."  Ah, so that's what the BBC was babbling about.  In their typical <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770" target="_self">biased </a>fashion, they made it seem as if this guy was Bush's own personal pastor, personally delivering sermons to W every Sunday morning.Oh well.  This guy can burn in hell.  Not for being gay, but for being a fucking hypocrite, and pushing that anti-gay shit onto millions of people.

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 01:04 AM

Se7en wrote: Yerdaddy wrote: Haggard was one of a group of religious leaders who regularly participated in conference calls with White House aides, Time magazine reported. On Friday, the White House sought to downplay Haggard's influence within the administration. Spokesman Tony Fratto told reporters Friday that it was inaccurate to portray him as being close to the White House, insisting Haggard was only an occasional participant in weekly conference calls between West Wing staff and leading evangelicals. "He has been on a couple of calls," Fratto said. "He's been to the White House one or two times."  Ah, so that's what the BBC was babbling about.  In their typical <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770" target="_self">biased </a>fashion, they made it seem as if this guy was Bush's own personal pastor, personally delivering sermons to W every Sunday morning.Oh well.  This guy can burn in hell.  Not for being gay, but for being a fucking hypocrite, and pushing that anti-gay shit onto millions of people.An opinion from the Daily Mail. Swell.The Daily Mail is a <a title="United Kingdom" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/United_Kingdom">British</a> <a title="Newspaper" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Newspaper">newspaper</a>, a <a title="Tabloid" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Tabloid">tabloid</a>, first published in <a title="1896" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/1896">1896</a>. It is Britain's most popular paper after <a title="The Sun (newspaper)" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/The_Sun_(newspaper)">The Sun</a> and arguably the most right-wing.Let's see... Just how right-wing is this source of yours?[QUOTE]In <a title="1922" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/1922">1922</a>, when Lord Northcliffe died, Lord Rothermere took full control of the paper.In <a title="1924" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/1924">1924</a> the Daily Mail published the forged <a title="Zinoviev Letter" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Zinoviev_Letter">Zinoviev Letter</a> which indicated that British <a title="Communists" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Communists">Communists</a> were planning violent <a title="Revolution" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Revolution">Revolution</a>. It was widely believed that this was a significant factor in the defeat of <a title="Ramsay MacDonald" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Ramsay_MacDonald">Ramsay MacDonald</a>'s <a title="Labour Party (UK)" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)">Labour Party</a> in the <a title="United Kingdom general election, 1924" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1924">1924 general election</a>, held four days later. (In some Labour circles, eg by former Labour leader <a title="Michael Foot" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Michael_Foot">Michael Foot</a>, the paper is often referred to as 'The Forgers' Gazette')<a name="Support_for_Nazism_and_Fascism"></a><h4>[<a title="Edit section: Support for Nazism and Fascism" href="http://www.ronfez.net/w/index.php?title=Daily_Mail&action=edit&section=4">edit</a>] Support for Nazism and Fascism</h4>In early <a title="1934" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/1934">1934</a> Rothermere and the Mail were sympathetic to <a title="Oswald Mosley" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/Oswald_Mosley">Oswald Mosley</a> and the <a title="British Union of Fascists" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/British_Union_of_Fascists">British Union of Fascists</a>. Rothermere wrote an article, Hurrah for the Blackshirts, in January <a title="1934" href="http://www.ronfez.net/wiki/1934">1934</a>, in which he pr

HBox

11-05-2006, 01:05 AM

I have a fetish for a cute nice girls.That's not a fetish, it's called heterosexuality my friend.Now if you said you were into mean ugly bitches, that's a fetish.

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 01:08 AM

HBox wrote:  I have a fetish for a cute nice girls.  That's not a fetish, it's called heterosexuality my friend.Which, on this board, is a fetish.

furie

11-05-2006, 07:23 AM

<hr color="cococo" align="left">
megachurch
<hr color="cococo" align="left">

i seriously dislike that phrase

This message was edited by furie on 11-5-06 @ 11:24 AM

JimBeam

11-05-2006, 09:00 AM

I'm not defending the guy as much as the attack on religion.Why are you so against this guy ?Did he prevent you from getting a job, did he ever restric anybody you know from obtaining something because they may or may not have been gay ?Whats your vested interest in this keeps you so passionate about it ?This guys the first person who represnted a religion that embarassed that, and all, religions ?As far as Foley he may have only represnted 50,000 people but he was elected and those that supported him and those that didnt had no choice once he was in office.You have all the choice in the world of what religion you follow so people could either buy into what this guy was saying or they could go elsewhere. Not the case with your Representative who's supposed to be looking after everybody's interests not a congregation.What you think now all religions are going to accept homosexuality because one guy was hypocrytical ?You've gotta remember the anti-gay opinion is what religious folks believe in and its not like this clown came up with the idea. He was carrying the message that obvioulsy he had no belief in. Simple as that.Much like, and I dont think it was that much off of a comparions, a cop who takes an oath to uphold the lawa and then breaks that himself.Any walk of life or occupation where you stand for something and then get caught doing what it is you were supposed to be against makes you a hypocrit.

HBox

11-05-2006, 11:18 AM

I'm not defending the guy as much as the attack on religion.It was more an attack on these sanctimonious blowhards than anything else.Why are you so against this guy ?Because other than his discrimination of gays he is part of a movement that is attempting to enforce his religious views on us all through US law. The rest of us don't appreciate that.Did he prevent you from getting a job, did he
ever restric anybody you know from obtaining something because they may
or may not have been gay ?Yeah, he's helping restrict gays from getting married and adopting children.Whats your vested interest in this keeps you so passionate about it ?Because guys like this don't stop. Because guys like this have had a lot of power over the last few years.This guys the first person who represnted a religion that embarassed that, and all, religions ? No, but I enjoy this stuff every time. I don't see what this has to do with anything. You've gotta remember the anti-gay opinion is
what religious folks believe in and its not like this clown came up
with the idea. He was carrying the message that obvioulsy he had no
belief in. Simple as that.He was exploiting it for his own gain and made himself quite a life by doing it. Aree you telling me that if President Bush left office and said that he never believed in the Iraq War, he just did it to further his own goals you would not be upset?Any walk of life or occupation where you stand
for something and then get caught doing what it is you were supposed to
be against makes you a hypocrit.Obviously. But if a cop breaks the law at least he was doing something noble in the first place. This guy was trying to ostracize an entire group of people. So it isn't the same thing.

JimBeam

11-05-2006, 11:34 AM

I disagree that the role of religion is to ostarcize gays.While it is one of the core beliefs in most religions I think the good religious organizations do, more than likely including this guys following ( as I've said in one of the first posts I know nothing at all about this guys church ), far outweighs the negatives.You think its justthis guy and his followers that are anti-same sex marriages ?I can guarantee there's millions of Catholics, Muslims, and Jews, that have nothing at all vested in this guys church, that are as much against it.This guy going down isnt going to clear the way for those marriages.I think its more disgusting for a person doing a tangible job that has an immediate effect on people's everyday lives ( again the policeman example ) breaking their code than for a person who only spews opinions to a portion of people.

HBox

11-05-2006, 11:44 AM

JimBeam wrote: I disagree that the role of religion is to ostarcize gays.While it is one of the core beliefs in most religions I think the good religious organizations do, more than likely including this guys following ( as I've said in one of the first posts I know nothing at all about this guys church ), far outweighs the negatives.You think its justthis guy and his followers that are anti-same sex marriages ?I can guarantee there's millions of Catholics, Muslims, and Jews, that have nothing at all vested in this guys church, that are as much against it.This guy going down isnt going to clear the way for those marriages.I think its more disgusting for a person doing a tangible job that has an immediate effect on people's everyday lives ( again the policeman example ) breaking their code than for a person who only spews opinions to a portion of people.   I never said that. Since you can't stop putting words in my mouth I'm finished here.

JimBeam

11-05-2006, 11:52 AM

A lot of what I said in the previous posts were responses to YerDaddy.As far as forcing people's opinions wouldn't forcing a pro-gay marriages lifestyle on anti-gay marriage people be equal to the same thing ?isnt it all about perspective ?Also as far as guys like this having " power " over the last few years I think you're severaly underestimating the role of religion for the last 200+ years at the very least.Look at abotion. Whether you're for it or against it I think that it's more a strong belief of the Catholics than the Evangelicals.Its hard-wired into the beliefs of a strong Catholic more so than it is into those of various Protestant beliefs. IMO.

spoon

11-05-2006, 12:09 PM

keithy_19 wrote: mendyweiss wrote: johnniewalker wrote: Where does all this gayness come into play with the church?  I don't get it. What is it with these conservatives, that they love to get it in the ass?<img height="288" src="http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0804/081604mcgreeveyjames.jpg" width="227" border="0" />And a big difference is that he never told people how to lead their lives and preach the opposite of what he actually did/does.  Of course what he did to his wife really sucks and the appointments to important positions are idiotic, but that's really not the topic here.  The hypocrits in the religious and political world right now amaze me so fucking much.  I guess it's always going to happen, but I wish our generation would progress a little.

FezPaul

11-05-2006, 12:26 PM

I never said that. Since you can't stop putting words in my mouth I'm finished here.<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/clap.gif" border="0" /><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/clap.gif" border="0" /><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/clap.gif" border="0" />...... ...<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/tongue.gif" border="0" />............<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/wink.gif" border="0" />

FUNKMAN

11-05-2006, 01:04 PM

everybody has to have something to believe in... believe in yourself

FUNKMAN

11-05-2006, 01:08 PM

be true to your school. just like you would with your girl or guy...

FUNKMAN

11-05-2006, 01:09 PM

don't take any wooden nickels. or preachers wood also

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 01:21 PM

HBox speaks for me.I don't mean to shun you, JimBeam, but you're throwing out just a list of bad arguments over and over. It just sounds like defensiveness. You're probably a Christian who is embarassed by this guy because when we all pile onto him because he was an extremely powerful representative of Christianity and the it sounds like we're bagging on the religion and not just him. Most of the pople who take my position are not anti-Christians. There are a few here who belittle the concepts of the faith and those get vented in the faith threads usually. But here in this thread I think the main motivator for it to be open season on this guy is the politics. Christian organizations in America have become activist organizations seeking to inject religious beliefs into the laws, schools, courts, and even foreign policy. The way I see it, and probably most of us, is that 1. You enter politics, you don't get special treatment for being religious-based. 2. Religion is beliefs, not facts. In theory, when making policies the secular route, the best interests of all interested parties are weighed and rational, practical solutions are found. There are obviously many ways in which actual policy-making strays from this idea. But with religious politics there are all those other poor ways of doing things plus one more huge one. With religious politics there can be no compromise. Religion proclaims to speak for god and what people ploclaim wants comes before all other considerations. Including my rights. This is why Jefferson fought for a separation of church and state and his was the same argument. This guy was working hard to impose his religious beliefs into my democracy, and thus on me. So, yes, I'm stoked that he got caught cranked up and hog-breathed. I hope it hurts all the organizations he was involved with and the evangelical movement to impose religion on the rest of us. I hope this aids to keep religion in the churches where it belongs.But, this takes nothing away from practicing Christians. If ever the government starts shutting down churches or synagogues or any other legitimate houses of worship, I'll be on your side. But that's not what's happening. The churches are the aggressors here, and I think most of us who are happy about this see: we hate the politics of the man, not the faith.

Yerdaddy

11-06-2006, 12:53 AM

<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061106/ap_on_re_us/haggard_sex_allegations" target="_blank">This guy REALLY hates gays.</a>Haggard apologized Sunday in a letter read from the pulpit of the 14,000-member church he founded.Some in the standing-room-only crowd wiped away tears and embraced each other as they heard Haggard's words read by a member of the board that fired him a day earlier."The fact is I am guilty of sexual immorality. And I take responsibility for the entire problem," Haggard wrote. "I am a deceiver and a liar. There's a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring against it for all of my adult life."

A.J.

11-06-2006, 04:04 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061106/ap_on_re_us/haggard_sex_allegations" target="_blank">This guy REALLY hates gays.</a> Haggard apologized Sunday in a letter read from the pulpit of the 14,000-member church he founded.  Some in the standing-room-only crowd wiped away tears and embraced each other as they heard Haggard's words read by a member of the board that fired him a day earlier."The fact is I am guilty of sexual immorality. And I take responsibility for the entire problem," Haggard wrote. "I am a deceiver and a liar. There's a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring against it for all of my adult life."  The words of another closeted, self-loathing homo.

Furtherman

11-06-2006, 06:12 AM

JimBeam wrote: You have all the choice in the world of what religion you follow so people could either buy into what this guy was saying or they could go elsewhere.  When we you given the choice of religion?When you were a child, were you taught various different religions and then left to decide on your own?You inheridly do not have a choice.  You are taught by whomever raises you.  What they learned is passed down to you. When you are older, of course you have that choice.But when?  12?  15?  If any child under the age of 18 wanted to change their religion, would their family be open and accept it? It is a poison that creeps up every family's tree thoughout the generations.  Everyone feels their religion is the right religion and that makes them naive and ignorant.Believe in yourself.