Maggie's Farm

agree -- a class act that ain't no act --

Leag -- unless you have some info i don't have, i have to characterize that comment as "horseshit".

You should be better than that, what with JFK having had to face the exact same slur re Catholicism in 1960.

Look it up -- JFK would be "working for the Pope, not the People".

Doubtless there are documents in Mormonism which can be used ag/ a Morman's holding authority positions.

But you are wrong that the same documents do not exist in Catholicism.

Why, until Pope John said different, only a Catholic could go to heaven, in the doctrine.

If that cannot be used to say that non-Catholics are considered by Catholics to be sub-human (or 'untermenschen'), then i'm a monkey's uncle, all due respect to a fine, and admirable, religion, which has, as all do, controversial--in the earthly multi-tongued realm-- doctrinal issues.

''It is not suppose to have become available to us gentiles under pain of death and property confiscation but it has''

Sure you don't mean the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion"? The 'Blood Libel' used since the Middle Ages to pillage the Jews whenever some king wanted their property?

and actually, it's not a red herring -- tho calling it a red herring "is" a red herring.

well, i guess Mass. & the Olympics & Bing Capital all were just damn lucky the prophet didn't happen to instruct his zombie Mitt to destroy the organizations rather than making them swimmingly successful and prosperous.

Try looking at the state balance sheet before and after gov Mitt. Sheesh -- is there a better place to start an evaluation process?

i don't know enough about the faith to argue it. I just know what my eyes ears and senses tell me, and that is pretty much what what Mitt says about it -- that it's good for folks to have a faith. The cult talk seems a smear -- it doesn't hold up in the empirical reality.

Is he a member of the Trilateral Commission? The Bilderbergers ? The Masons ? What about all them Masons -- how many presidents HAVE we had who belonged to organizations that have codes of conduct ? forty, maybe ? This is a foolish and embarrassing line of enquiry, Leag. Foolish, embarrassing, and just plain dumb. and strictly political, too. And if i may so say, dirty.

for crying out loud, ALL the Mormons are fully invested in America -- what are you saying, this is a move by Utah to take over Idaho, then Wyoming, then DER VORLD ? Good gravy -- i'm fast losing faith in you, Leag.

what you're saying is, Mitt is a Mormon manchurian candidate who has evil in mind for USA.

the logic of that thought is, you yourself will have to vote for the Dem candidate -- whatever the hell marxist secret agenda is one million times more likely than that mitt is the mormom manchurian -- marxism having an actual rather than dubiously imaginary record of evil intent for USA -- and THAT, leag, makes you, in terms of asset/liability for the USA, a "liability". AKA "a dangerous fool".

whole argument collapses on bad premise -- i'd just as soon have any of the three Mitt, Fred, Rudy. In fact Rudy's tax plan revealed yest makes him edge forward to top again for me. to defend a guy against religious smearing is a far cry from being a cult follower.

when did i defend him except as nice guy? when have you attacked him except as demon?

well how 'bout you, leag -- what if the chinee were landing on long beach and the pope told you not to resist ? how can i be sure you wouldn't obey the pope ? hell, you better be kept out of politics -- you too dangerous.

but you're rationalizing and equivocating, leag. the essence is still the same -- a religious authority which may run counter to the civil authority. it's an ancient dichotomy -- Jesus's 'render unto Caesar' was all about as you well know.

The point is, nobody's loyalty can be predicted with 100% certainty. human hearts change in a trice and secretly.

try to look for clues as to your fears. for example, re your Mormom law which you've repeated a half-dozen times in support of your fears -- the pain of death and confiscation of property. Why have i never heard of case one of anyone filing any murder or wrongful death or fraud or theft charges by oath-breakers against the Mormon church?

Are there no -- have there never been any -- oath-breakers? if so, then it is a very benign oath indeed--and one which offers no evidence of being anything to fear.

Or are oath breakers -- centuries of 'em -- afeared to rely on the law and the police against the church? now that would be to descend into deep, deep nut territory, i hope hope hope you can see.

As i said -- when your senses are failing ya, look for clues. remember the fundamental boundaries of that empirical reality that reasonable people agree we live inside of.

And back to rationalization: the Pope is God's representative on Earth. As such he is doctrinally infallible.

Now you tell me I should fear something (the LDS oath) that is orders of magnitude less encompassing and inclusive and thoroughly mind-boggling as a Catholic's relationship with civil citizenship under God thru the Pope?

Yet, i do not fear the Pope -- in fact, tho a protestant, I greatly admire Benedict, and loved JPII with all my heart. Why, when I am excluded from their brief? Because I'm not a religious bigot, that's why.

now you're cherry-picking your cherry pickings. i go out of my way to draw a parallel with religious intolerance, and from that, from my effort to imagine a parallel circumstance of bigotry, i myself become a bigot?

real argument needs more than adept cherry-picking and twisting the cherrypicks into pretzel accusations of ignoring the oath problem, when all you yourself have said about the oath problem is that you say there is an oath problem.

Again, let's see a link to some police reports, some trial cases, where the oath has been invoked. LDS is going on two hundred years old, so there must be a body of evidence of this oath's effects. Where is it?

And Rushdie is a classic red herring, o master of accusing others of red herrings.

hahaha --wot a freakin' joke, "links available @ google" -- okay, here's an equally hard-workin rebuttal:

"rebuttals available @ google"
:-D

but seriously folks -- google the oath -- and go read what Storm Front thinks? No thanks.

How 'bout any respectable, known thinkers and/or commentators and/or political, social, cultural, academic leaders and/or opinion makers? Got any? Got one ?

churl -- sounds like you getting a little churlish yourself there, o master of the oath-knowers. watch out for Mormons on yer pie trip -- BOO!

i don't like rudy's social issues, but i do believe his promise re judge appointments -- where the rubber meets the road anyways. I like your guy Fred on everything he says but want to back the GOP candidate regardless. If Fred's the guy, I'm all for him 100%. I resent your trying to cast legit Mitt supporters as cult acolytes. can't you see how foul play that is ?

and, you're cherry-picking faster than a cherrypicker on the Mass. record. what's the matter with looking at both sides of a ledger ? That is, you know, how objective truths are arrived at.

Ask Arnold what a debt-soaked & poor quality balance sheet does to the taxpayers. Mitt came in with what is about to crash california's bond ratings -- and he fixed it as painlessly as anyone would have thought possible. he did it with a panoply of rather bold & creative executive actions including hundreds of actual vetos & control by threat of even more.

yet all you can talk about is some dreary far-fetched medieval village torch-and-hayfork gossip about cults. Bah. go to your room and grow up.

yep, all the phoney did was get born poor in Austria, and immigrate to the USA and self-make himself Mr. Universe, a billionaire, an in-law of a hyper-powerful dynasty which he then ran against to become the two-term governor of the most significant population and economic power in the union.

oh, jeez --why am i wasting my time --- i admire a major life effort of a guy who by demonstrating on the world stage the truth and reality of America's message to the world -- the American Dream that is -- and i get back "hero worship" and a slobbering "did you like the quads or the pecs?"

Yep, stinky is right alright.

''...didn't qualify him for governorship''

Right -- it was all them bitches and girlymen voters out in californy what did dat. you should go whip them into shape, leag. cast out the demons and sort out all them conspirators and perverts and cultists.

that's to defend the ''when did you stop beating your wife'' question.

instead why don't we address the real topic here: religious bigotry.

the idea is that, to address some sorts of questions is to validate them as worthy of discussion. it's a well-known category, google "wife-beating question" -- i didn't mean you, Leag -- anyway for all i know the bitch deserved it.

Religious bigotry is not my topic but yours -- all i did was name it.

well we finally agree on something -- you don't know whodats, nor do you know your ass from a hole in the ground, and probably not shit from shinola neither.
:-)

yep. like Bigfoot and Atlantis and little gray aliens who kidnap humans but only the nut cases -- that LDS oath has never been invoked, never acted out, never created any death or property transfer, never made a footprint or an unfaked photo or a reliable sighting, never made a ripple anywhere that any rational adult has felt -- yet mmm boy, i is 'spose to be SORELY terrified o' it!

Why, it could come and git me in my sleep!

Who says it won't?

How can i be sure I'm safe?

I'm in agony here!

Somebody DO something!

oh hell -- now i'm a girlyman -- guess you win the debate!

i agree -- it's gone to shit. let me end my part of it with a hearty "fuck you, leag".

well -- i try not to talk that way -- so i retract that -- but really, watch out for dat religious bigotry -- or at least don't associate yourself with the church or with fred while engaging in it. just do it on the sly, as a hobby.

well that's just wonderful, leag --glad you have a good opinion of yourself -- i can hardly contain my elation.

''...I can still ignite a Cuban stogie....''

Are ANY of you littoral yankees NOT in the contraband business ?
:-D

Ha -- yep, i can see some similar dogged determination to drive it in the ground and break it off -- izzat whut you mean?

rufus, wonder what happened to the comments section over @ Kudlow's ? I checked in a while back to see if it was still troll-infested and the comments were skidood, gone.

yeh --i see what you mean -- and true. Re Kudlow's site, it's easy enough to scroll past all those embarrassingly idiotic posters, but there is definitely an overload point at which the site just exudes unpleasantness and a body tends to skip it completely. Shame, tho -- good stuff over there in the comments if ya could make yourself sift.

sharp was who i had in mind -- and some cat named ''rufus'' too.

hahahahhha -- good one --