politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Evangelicals took Christianity and circles back around to pagan idea. They literally think they can summon their god.
It's also evident when they talk about how weather events are linked to sinful behavior. Their idea of god is something that can be controlled through gay sex.
They are of course incapable of the logical thinking to understand how blasemous their own behavior is towards the Christian god.
I wish it were real just so I could see the looks on their faces when he rejects them
The Bible I read definitely had something to say about nobody except god knowing when jesus was supposed to come back.
Certainly never said you could summon God with a blood sacrifice.
Then again, most Christians have never read the Bible. If they had, they would probably be like me and no longer believe.
Its mostly coming from Revelation. If the signs are fulfilled then the second coming is now a possibility whereas before that it's not. I remember growing up in the cult there was news about a dam being built in the middle east which got everyone hyped because that could be the catalyst for one of the signs since in theory it could change the flow of a river...
One of the other things called out is Israel being beset from all sides by the world or something then the 40k elect will show up and you get the second kingdom or something. Idk been a while since I read Revelation much longer since I took it literally
I remember getting in an argument with a rather strident xtian and he questioned where I got my "information" from. I said: from your Bible [1], and pointed him in the direction of skeptic's annotated bible.
His reply: "of course you'd use a resource like this". Did it matter to him that it is annotating phrases from his supposedly revealed text? No, it did not. Having the word "skeptic" in there put him off of it and so, therefore, he just declared victory, I guess, LOL. A whole lot of xtians seem to think that "skeptic" is the same as "cynic" as a term.
[1] He was one of those annoying xtians - and probably everyone has run into them, because they seem to be everywhere - they often resort to one of the most presumptuous phrases in the English language and it's: "read your Bible".
It's presumptuous as fuck to assume I own a Bible. It's also presumptuous as fuck to assume that there is only one version of "the" bible - because there is not. And lastly, it's especially presumptuous because it seems to take as evident that the person saying it has read a version of "the" Bible, when odds are quite high that if they read it at all, it was select passages in a study group or something like that.
In his case it was especially ridiculous since he refused to even read his Bible at the prompting of something with the term "skeptic" in it, LOL.