Dark Christianity
.::: .::..:.::.:.
Back March 26th, 2006 Forward
dogemperor [userpic]
A Passionate Commentary on South Dakota.



dogemperor [userpic]


Chaplains Group Opposes Prayer Order
Guarantee on Using Jesus's Name Not Needed, It Says

dogemperor [userpic]

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]wyldraven)

A friend in Kansas (yeah I feel sorry for her too) just directed me to this Flash intro (titled "Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups") to "Answers In Genesis". Apparently, they now have at least one billboard up in Olathe (a suburb of Kansas City) directing people to the Science Proves It site.

The ability these people have to make spurious arguments, and to twist logic, is amazing. It's just bizarre. When did we pass through the looking glass?

EDIT: I've found a photo of the offending billboard here. I found it through DefCon here.

dogemperor [userpic]
Why does someone become a terrorist?


Note: This was originally posted in my journal in July 2005. I was reading through old posts, and decided that this one was appropriate to share with this community. Bear with me a moment, the relevance will soon become clear.

   Why does someone become a terrorist? I have seen discussions of economic disparity, cultural clashes and a host of other, less credible reasons. Read more... )

   How are we to fight terrorism from other places, when we use the same method to brainwash our own children? Goddess help, what happens when our terrorists take on their terrorists?

dogemperor [userpic]
We predicted there would be "me-too" legislation after SD abortion ban

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]wyldraven)

And Alabama has decided to be right there on the forefront of the copycats.

"I thought if South Dakota can do it, Alabama ought to do it, because we are a family-friendly state," said state Sen. Hank Erwin, R-Montevallo, who has introduced a bill in the Senate that would even ban abortions in cases where a woman became pregnant because of rape or incest.

Alabama considers similar abortion ban

dogemperor [userpic]

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]morchades)

Has anyone seen this article on polgamy yet? There's one paragraph that applies to this community In it, she's promoting a book of interest:

Unfortunately, the largest barrier to a healthy discussion will be the American instinct to treat religiously-motivated conduct as though it should not be held accountable - regardless of the harm that is caused. I document this phenomenon in my recent book, God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law, and it is a very real component of American debate.

Also, taken from my own journal last week (I haven't been able to find any reference to this in this community):
Found this lobbyist group through Mike the Mad Biologist. Sounds like it was started in reference to some new rule that lets Commanders endorse their religious beliefs to the troops in the USAF. The mission statement starts out wonderfully.

"The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is dedicated to ensuring that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

MRFF recognizes that military life requires individual adherence to shared patriotic principles. MRFF also recognizes the need for military personnel to at times temporarily relinquish some Constitutionally granted personal freedoms for the sake of military discipline and objectives.

However, MRFF believes that religious faith is a Constitutionally guaranteed freedom that must never be compromised, except in the most limited of military circumstances, because of its fundamental importance to the preservation of the American nation and the American way of life."

Back March 26th, 2006 Forward