Return Home Members Area Experts Area The best AskMe alternative! - You Have Questions? We have Answers! Answerway Information Contact Us Online Help
 Saturday 29th April 2017 06:38:18 PM




Join Now!

These are answers that Bishop_Chuck has provided in Christianity

paraclete asked on 06/04/06 - A worse crime than 9/11

Warming worse than 9/11: Thompson

June 4, 2006 - 2:37PM

September 11 attacks 'probably the most awful and spectacular incident in my life' ... Jack Thompson.

Famed Australian actor Jack Thompson says destruction of the environment is a worse atrocity than the September 11 terror attacks and the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined.

Thompson, who will today address a Melbourne rally on the eve of World Environment Day, said measurably more people were affected by global warming than by the three catastrophic events.

"That is not to diminish what happened on 9/11. That is probably the most awful and spectacular incident in my life since Nagasaki and Hiroshima," he said.

"But Hiroshima, Nagasaki and 9/11 all together, when you look at the meltdown of the Greenland ice-cap and the flow-on of that alone, the numbers of people affected, it is measurably more."

A US government website said the death toll from Nagasaki and Hiroshima was probably more than 100,000, possibly exceeding 200,000 within five years of the World War II bombings. About 3000 people died as a result of the attacks on September 11, 2001.

Thompson, who starred in films including Breaker Morant, The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith, The Sum of Us and My Brother Jack, said he was passionate about encouraging sustainable development.

Japanese Australians and the RSL today gave qualified support to Thompson's comments.

Committee member of the Australia-Japan society, Hiroko Fischer, said while Thompson may be exaggerating, it was possible that over the next 100 years global warming will have a bigger impact than the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

"It is hard to compare the two. The bombings were quite devastating ... the environment is slowly getting affected," Ms Fischer said.

RSL national president Major-General Bill Crews said global warming may eventually prove more catastrophic than the bombings, and the terror attacks.

"Global warming is a global situation, as far as it has been proved, and is far more extensive than more isolated incidents such as the bombings in Japan or the attacks on September 11," Major-General Crews said.

He said in terms of the total impact to humanity, global warming may ultimately have more impact.

Thompson most recently co-starred with Sean Penn in The Assassination of Richard Nixon.


I doubt Americans would agree with him but Christians should reflect that Nagasaki, in fact, was the A-bomb used by "Christians" on Christians, certainly an atrocity of huge proportions, since it was avoidable.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 06/04/06:

Of course not all by any means even agrees that there is a global warming, and for those that agree there is, they don't agree that man has caused any of it.

The guestions go back to the idea of the ice age ( what caused it) then the reverse what caused it to melt. ( global warming perhaps)

I believe man has a very high oppinin of hisself if he belvies he is the cause of all the doom in the world.

Perhaps this is merley the worlds own defense to eliminate us from the other harm we are doing to it.

next of course even if we were doing something, we can't have any way on a global method to control it.

We could make some changes in the US, maybe Canada and some in Europe, but we won'g have any effect in Russia or China or other nations, even mexico. We can't even get the US to build Nucular power plants in the US and we won't let other nations have them now like Iran.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 04/07/06 - "Logical proof" for no God: What is it?

"Many atheists became atheists not because they were born into it (like most theists), rather because we contemplated god in its many forms and decided it just doesn't make an ounce of sense. This isn't a choice, it's fact - a logical proof. We are simply too logical to believe God is anything more than fantasy."

I am not interested in atheist-bashing answers, but I do:

1) welcome evidence of the 'logical proof' of which the author of the quote speaks, and

2) welcome evidence that some theists are as logical in their faith as this atheist writer claims atheists are without it.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 04/08/06:

The earth and world exists, solid proof in my book,

No one could seriously think that it all just happened all by itself,

next on one can every prove how something started and existed. where did the material for a big bang come from, where did the energy for it come from.

And honestly, all life came from one cell that started, now if there ever was a fanticy that is one

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 04/04/06 - Is illegal immigrattion a vicrimless crime?

Check it out here.....

Bishop_Chuck answered on 04/05/06:

Let me see I pay taxes so that they can have free housing, get welfare, my hospital bills are higher because they are treated and don't have insurance, my car insurance is higher because they don't have insurance.

There are plenty of victims every citizen in the US

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HerrAirhorn asked on 03/27/06 - Afghanistan Inquisition?

I read that Muslims marched through the streets chanting, "Death to Christians" after being notified that the Afghani man who converted to Christianity was being let out of holding.

The man has requested asylum in another country not yet named.

Clerics have urged that Muslims kidnap him and kill

I find it odd that religious leaders would preach murder. What do you think?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 03/28/06:

I think we may have taken the wrong group out of power. If this is the government that we have put into power, this does not say much for a county of freedom that we are setting up

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
HerrAirhorn rated this answer Average Answer

excon asked on 03/23/06 - Donated stuff

Hello Christians:

You guys always know the right thing to do - help me out here.

I'm not a donater. I use my stuff up so bad, that there's nothing left to donate when I'm done. I don't even know where to donate anything.

So, here's the deal. I was at my sons house the other day, when he put a big box of stuff that he wants to donate, in the back of my car. He told me about this donation box somewhere near my house. I haven't looked for it.

Today, I'm headed to the trash place. I've got 6 huge bags stuffed all around the box. Would God strike me dead if I just threw out the donated stuff along with my trash?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 03/25/06:

I gave an extra pray and light a candle for you so you will live another day.

But seriously, those items often can do such good. In the outlet store at the mission, they bring funds for food for the homeless, to pay rent, to pay electric bills and the such.

Also clothes often help a homeless man have a clean change of clothes.

But if you will just put it to the side of the dumpster, often another will find it and put it to good use also

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Jesushelper76 asked on 02/26/06 - Church Question!

Do you believe the churches no matter the denomination should have dress codes for mass services? What is your opinion about this? Thanks in advance!


Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/26/06:

Yes, I beleive people should be dressed when they go to church, Church is no were to be naked.

Church is a place to worship Christ, it was often done by the early christians at a home prior to going to work, or hiden in caves. I doubt if there was a dress code.

In the first few centries fo the church, the entire reason incense caught on so well is because of the smell of the people.
(remember bathing was not an accepted thing to do)

When we require a certain level of dress we restrict who can come by economic reasons.

Jesushelper76 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

powderpuff asked on 02/22/06 - I need to be reminded


I have become a little worried since the other day when a couple terrorists were arrested just down the street from me. Not just right here in my home town, but, I can actually see where they lived from my yard. I walk past their apartment regularly and though I never knew who lived there, I never felt safe walking past. I learned after walking past the first time to cross the street and walk on the other side (the farm side) of the road every time I walked that way. It looked nice enough from the outside, but I could not get past the bad feeling when I walked past it.

That's all beside the point of my post. I need to be reminded of why I should not panic and become suspicious of all muslims in my area. These terrorists, who were my neighbors, are accused of recruiting since Nov. 2004 among other things. Three were arrested but, only 2 in my neighborhood.

What is the likelihood that there are more people in my town that were/are involved with these men that were arrested? I have heard conflicting news reports that these men were also connected to a local charity that was frozen over the weekend, accused of funding terrorists.

Now we are being told by officials to stay vigilant, but the Muslim community is asking us not to commit prejudice.

What is going to happen if all of "us" become too scared and suspicious of all of "them"?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/22/06:

Because it is not politicaly correct to do so, we could make someone feel uncomfortable by feeling this way.

We have to teach and be taught that Islam is a peaceful religion and that this is just a few radicals doing this.

If we teach other wise, it could be a hate crime based on race or religion and that would not be right at all to break the law merely to catch terrorists who have rights too you know.

*** The above was the basic BS I heard on liberal talk radio this week about the rights of the terrorist being violated.

powderpuff rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 02/19/06 - Why are the riots getting bloodier?

And why are they not getting less frequent?
At Least 15 Die in Nigeria Cartoon Protest
By NJADVARA MUSA, Associated Press Writer 54 minutes ago
Nigerian Muslims protesting caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad attacked Christians and burned churches on Saturday, killing at least 15 people in the deadliest confrontation yet in the whirlwind of Muslim anger over the drawings.
It was the first major protest to erupt over the issue in Africa's most populous nation. An Associated Press reporter saw mobs of Muslim protesters swarm through the city center with machetes, sticks and iron rods. One group threw a tire around a man, poured gas on him and set him ablaze.
In Libya, the parliament suspended the interior minister after at least 11 people died when his security forces attacked rioters who torched the Italian consulate in Benghazi.
Right-wing Italian Reforms Minister Roberto Calderoli resigned under pressure, accused of fueling the fury in Benghazi by wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with one of the offending cartoons, first published in September in a Danish newspaper.
Danish church officials met with a top Muslim cleric in Cairo, meanwhile, but made no significant headway in defusing the conflict.
And in what has become a daily event, tens of thousands of Muslims protested — this time in Britain, Pakistan and Austria — to denounce the perceived insult. On Sunday, some 400 protesters pelted the U.S. Embassy in Indonesia with rocks, tomatoes and eggs. They burned U.S. flags and smashed the windows of a guard post before dispersing.
But it was in Nigeria, where mutual suspicions between Christians and Muslims have led to thousands of deaths in recent years, that tensions boiled over into sectarian violence.
Thousands of rioters burned 15 churches in Maiduguri in a three-hour rampage before troops and police reinforcements restored order, Nigerian police spokesman Haz Iwendi said. Iwendi said security forces arrested dozens of people in the city about 1,000 miles northeast of the capital, Lagos.
Chima Ezeoke, a Christian Maiduguri resident, said protesters attacked and looted shops owned by minority Christians, most of them with origins in the country's south.
"Most of the dead were Christians beaten to death on the streets by the rioters," Ezeoke said. Witnesses said three children and a priest were among those killed.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/19/06:

Most only needed a good excuse to cause the damage and destrustion that they have.
Mamy are most liekly planned to what is being destroyed and what can be stolen in the process.

As long as they can get headlines and take advantage of this to kill and destroy without the world being against them.
Since people appear to feel sorry for them over a cartoon, get real, its not really the cartoon, the cartoon was an excuse to do what they have been wanting and planing for a while.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

curious98 asked on 02/19/06 - Has racism really really disappeared in the States?

An Associated Press release:

Officials: Tape Shows Fla. Boy Beaten Before Death at Camp

The Associated Press

TALLAHASSEE -- A videotape shows guards brutally beating a boy at a military-style boot camp for juvenile delinquents in Panama City not long before the teenager died, two lawmakers said Thursday.

The state refuses to release the tape to the public, but the Bay County sheriff on Thursday characterized the lawmakers' description of it as overblown and blasted the two lawmakers as "loose cannon politicians" interfering with his investigation.

Martin Lee Anderson, 14, of Panama City, died Jan. 6 at Sacred Heart Hospital in Pensacola. The youngster collapsed after he complained of breathing problems while doing exercises that were part of intake procedures at the camp. The Bay County sheriff's office has said officers restrained him after he became uncooperative.

State Rep. Gus Barreiro, R-Miami Beach, called the videotape "horrific," saying he had "never seen any kid being brutalized . . . the way I saw this young man being brutalized.

"Even toward the end of the videotape, where you could just see there was pretty much nothing left of Martin, they came out with a couple cups of water and splashed him in the face," he said. "When you see stuff like that, you want to go through the TV and say, `Enough is enough. Please stop hitting this kid.' "

A lawyer for the family, Ben Crump, said the guards would force ammonia tablets up Anderson's nose in efforts to keep the youth conscious.

"We can never ever let anything like this happen again, and if we don't get this videotape out, people will never know the truth," said Crump, who demanded the tape's release on behalf of the family at a Panama City news conference Thursday. "Police brutality is unacceptable at any time."

"I don't think there's any question there was excessive force," said Rep. Dan Gelber, a Democrat from Miami Beach and former federal prosecutor familiar with custody cases, who also viewed the videotape.

"I think (the public is) going to be shocked at the treatment of this kid and the lack of attention that was paid to his core health needs," Gelber said. "This is a relatively small kid with a half a dozen of pretty strong men, and he seemed to be phasing in and out of consciousness."

Sheriff Frank McKeithen issued a prepared statement accusing Barreiro and Gelber of overreacting with "irresponsible, premature and incorrect statements" that "add fuel to an already volatile situation."

Bay County authorities and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement have refused to make the tape of the incident public, but Barreiro and Gelber said it would be released soon.

Associated Press reporters David Heller in Tallahassee and Melissa Nelson in Panama City contributed to this report.

Would the Florida governor such a good Christian as his brother claims to be?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/19/06:

No not as long as people like you wish to make this appear to be a race issue.

I don't see where it is a race issue, it is perhaps guards over reacting, but I will not even say that unless I read the reports of what this boy did, and see what happened, such as the boy keep refusing to obey commands to do this or that.

If you never worked in a prison you don't know what has to happen in them to make inmates behave and follow instructions. 13 year old can be almost the worst, because they think they are the toughest and won't do what they are told to do by the guards.

So it may be a over action by guards, but I would bet the inmate(prisoner) action before this was the action that caused it not his race.

Reporters and race haters are the ones that wish to make race a issue anytime anything happens.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
curious98 rated this answer Average Answer

excon asked on 02/18/06 - The ACLU

Hello Christians:

Some of you hate the ACLU. Why? Do you know what it does? Or do you know what somebody tells you it does? Do you think the ACLU is a government agency? Do you think the ACLU gets financial support from the government? Do you know what the initials ACLU mean?

Come on. Answer first - THEN look at what everybody else said. It's ok if you don't know much about the ACLU. I hate any organization that includes the words "family" or "values" in their name, and I don't know anything about them either.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/18/06:

American Cat Lovers Underground

It is for those who are ashamed to admit they really love cats.

Personally as a Dog lover, I beleieve these are the lowest level of people, ashamed of thier own feelings and loving "cats"

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sissypants rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sarnian asked on 02/16/06 - Now even the UN demands Guantanamo Bay to be closed

Today Kofi Anan called for closing of the Guantanamobay facilities. He called the continuing existence of these facilities a "DISCREDIT" to the UN Organisation, a place of excessive violence and torture.

Opened in January 2002 for prisoners from Afghanistan, today - after more than 4 years of operation - there are still prisoners of the original group of inmates who have not yet been sentenced by a Court.
Kofi Anan demanded that prisoners should now either be tried or released, and stated that the current treatment of prisoners is similar to torture.

From your (christian) perspective : do you agree or disagree, and why?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/16/06:

Actually they decided this without going there and looking, I guess if I interviewed several ex prisioners from any state prison in the US, looked at select pictures that were given me to look at, I could agree that any prison needed to be closed,

Just what do we do with the prisoners, I guess we could turn them over to Isreal to detain, I am sure they would get much better treatment there. Or perhaps the legal Afgan government could help detain them.

sarnian rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 02/16/06 - Cheney Confounds His Supporters by Telling the Truth.

Cheney: 'I'm the Guy Who Pulled the Trigger'
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
By Jane Roh

Cheney: I'm Authorized to Declassify Gov't Information

NEW YORK — Vice President Dick Cheney told FOX News on Wednesday that he alone is responsible for a weekend hunting accident in which he shot Austin attorney Harry Whittington.

"Ultimately I'm the guy who pulled the trigger that fired the round that hit Harry," Cheney said in his first interview since the incident. "I'm the guy who pulled the trigger and shot my friend, and that's something I'll never forget."

Cheney's first public response following the shooting comes more than 72 hours after the accident. His silence has been met with bewilderment and anger by some in Washington, D.C. But on Wednesday, the vice president seemed to express deep remorse.

"The image of him falling is something I will never be able to get out my mind," Cheney said, somberly. "It was one of the worst days of my life."

Cheney said that he, Whittington and one other person separated from the 10-person hunting party to pursue a covey of quail. All three fired their shotguns, but Whittington could not immediately find his bird. He walked away from Cheney and the other hunter to look for it.

Cheney then heard quail moving to his right.

"I turned and shot at the bird, and at that second, saw Harry standing there. Didn't know he was there," Cheney said. "I saw him fall, basically. It had happened so fast."

The vice president added that Whittington was standing in a gully so only his upper body was visible, and that the sun was facing Cheney, which "affected the vision, too, I'm sure."

Whittington, whom Cheney described as an acquaintance he's known for more than 30 years, was hit with more than 200 birdshot pellets from an estimated 30 yards away.

Upon realizing he had shot his hunting companion, Cheney rushed over to find a bleeding and dazed Whittington lying on his back with only one eye open.

"I said, 'Harry, I had no idea you were there,'" Cheney recounted. "He didn't respond. He was — he was breathing, conscious at that point, but he didn't — he was, I'm sure, stunned, obviously, still trying to figure out what had happened to him."

The accident took place at Armstrong Ranch, a 50,000-acre property in south Texas that is known as one of the best quail-hunting sites in the country.

A physician's assistant traveling with Cheney rushed to Whittington's aid, and accompanied the injured man to the hospital. Cheney said he did not go himself because the ambulance was too crowded.

Cheney said he had one beer at lunch, but that no alcohol was consumed during the late afternoon outing.

Earlier this week, the White House and Katharine Armstrong, the owner of the ranch and an eyewitness to the accident, implied that Whittington did not follow hunting protocol because he didn't announce to Cheney and the other hunter that he had returned from retrieving his kill. On Wednesday, the vice president made clear that Whittington wasn't responsible for being hit.

"It was not Harry's fault," Cheney said. "You cannot blame anybody else."

One thing for which Cheney was not apologetic was the way the news of the shooting was delivered to the media. Armstrong, a private citizen, went to a local newspaper about the incident on Sunday. The Corpus Christi Caller-Times published the story near 3 p.m. EST Sunday. The scoop upset many in the White House press corps, who were not with Cheney on the private retreat.

Before Wednesday's interview, the vice president's office issued two brief written statements acknowledging the shooting on Monday and Tuesday. Cheney said he and Armstrong agreed to let her take the lead.

"I thought that made good sense because you can get as accurate a story as possible from somebody who knows and understands hunting," Cheney said. "Then it would immediately go up to the wires and be posted on the Web site, which is the way it went out. I thought that was the right call. I still do."

FOX News' Sharon Kehnemui Liss contributed to this report.


That makes all those Cheney supporters who jumped in to say it was Harry Whittingham's fault look pretty silly.

Cheney has unseated them with a laudable if tardy display of honesty.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/16/06:

I just want to know where they buy that hunting stamp for lawyers.

But ok is this the truth, could Cheney really shoot a shoot shot gun, they have alot of kick to them. Is he in good enough health to really hold the gun and pull the trigger.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
kindj rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HerrAirhorn asked on 02/14/06 - Vas Ist Los??

I never go out hunting ven I'm drunk. Za reason is zat I always shoot someone in za face because ears look liken vings. Herr Lufthorn

Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/15/06:

BeelzeBUSH 02/15/06
"But all kidding aside, and in fairness to Dick Cheney, every five years he has to shed innocent blood or he violates his deal with the devil." —Jimmy Kimmel :):):)

I love myself,

The only trouble with that is he shot a lawyer, so there goes the innocent blood idea.

HerrAirhorn rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 02/12/06 - If you have nothing better to do and still believe that Bush always speaks the truth ....

If you are really really interested and if you have nothing better to do and if you can see your computer screen without having to leave your armchair you might just concevably on a marginal basis take a swift look at this website and its containments, but don't go there unless you really feel you have to or unless you cannot help yourself.

Please don't tell me what you think about it.

I feel ennui laced with lassitude coming on. Something to do with overload.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/12/06:

Sorry, I saw the planes hit on TV, and had friends who saw the planes in real life.

What is not always known is also what may have been stored in the building by the government, ( that may not be ever told or known)

The only thing that web site left out was the connection to either the New World Order or Space Aliens.

And the newspaper at the grocey store had news articles about Bush and the aliens also

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Angel25 asked on 02/09/06 - By accepting the behavior of homosexual friends and loved ones, are we doing them a favor?

We live in a day when "whatever" is the mantra, and no one dare say otherwise lest they be called narrow-minded. Since we have rejected the Bible as the plumb line by which we live, we have a society where "everyone does that which is right in their own eyes" and fits Paul's description of those who "profess themselves to be wise, yet they became fools." We prefer to have our ears tickled with lies that end up devouring us.

The facts regarding this self-destructive behavior speak for themselves. The median age of death for homosexual men without AIDS is 42, 44 for lesbians (see Omega: Journal of Death and Dying, 23:3 (1994): 249-272). The negative health effects of exchanging body fluids through anal/oral sex are so unhealthy that homosexuals die at nearly half the age of the general population. Instead of opinions as to whether this behavior is right or wrong, why not look at the evidence? Allow facts, not feelings, to be the standard of determining right from wrong. Love someone enough to tell them the truth by refusing to condone such lifestyles.

I speak not from a hateful heart but from one that grieves as I see so many deceived. Since homosexuals cannot reproduce, they must recruit. We should care enough for our friends and loved ones to alert them to the harmful consequences of sodomy and the myths perpetrated by those who accept such behavior.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/09/06:

Of course Jesus would have loved them and asked that they turn from the sinful ways.

He would not have forced them, but then he also would not forgive them if they did not repent.

those that wish to live in sin have though various court actions convinced American society that it has no right to object to this behavior. Given the chance the majority of states always vote not to allow gay marriage,

And yes, homosexal life style speads like any sin of the flesh does,

If they say ( they are born that way) then where do we draw the line on what is allowed, child molesters ( or as they call thierself man boy love, come back with the exact same defense, they really "love" the boy and they are born that way.

So we can call thier behvior criminal, even if they are born that way, so we are saying society can ban or make illegal sexual behavior it finds not acceptable.

But then those that want that life style will find all sorts of excuses to justify thier desires.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Angel25 rated this answer Above Average Answer

Laura asked on 02/08/06 - An abortion issue

Oklahoma is considering two laws to be added to their abortion bill.

1. Physicians must notify the patient that the procedure may be painful to the fetus.

2. The patient should see an ultrasound of her fetus before the procedure.

I don't know about these days but back in the seventies women were told that a fetus was nothing more than a glob of tissue and most women didn't realize that by the time they find out they are pregnant the fetus already has a beating heart, a circulatory system, a brain and the beginnings of arms and legs.

These days with the advent of invetro surgeries, doctor automatically give anasthetic to the fetus before any type of surgery. They know that the fetus feels pain.

These additions make sense to me.. Do they to you?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/09/06:

So from the resonses I see by pro abortion people is that it is ok to lie and not tell the truth to patients about the abotion process. So using false pretence is ok as long as a baby gets killed.

What does telling a person the truth and doctors being required to tell them the truth hurt. Should they not know the truth

ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 02/04/06 - JUST WONDERING ...

... if Catholics believe in the Immaculate Conception. Don't they believe that Mary was conceived by normal biological means, but her soul was acted upon by God at the time of her conception?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 02/04/06:

Immaculate Conception is not the birth of Jesus, but the birth of Mary, The virgin birth of Jesus is confused by most non catholics and many catholics because of the exchanging of simular words.

Immaculate Conception is the birth of Mary without orginal sin that the rest of us are all born with. The beleif is that Mary being blessed by God and though the Holy Spirit although born though parents was born with the sin of mankind on her.

The Immaculate Conception is a Catholic dogma that asserts that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was preserved by God from the stain of original sin at the time of her own conception. Specifically, the dogma says she was not afflicted by the privation of sanctifying grace that afflicts mankind, but was instead filled with grace by God, and furthermore lived a life completely free from sin. It is commonly confused with the doctrine of the virgin birth, though the two deal with separate subjects. Mary was conceived by normal biological means, but her soul was acted upon by God (kept "immaculate") at the time of her conception.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sissypants rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 01/30/06 - Abortion Issues ...

Fewer Abortions May Indicate a Change in Attitudes

from staff reports

Mothers with unexpected pregnancies may be bonding with their preborn children.

More women in America say their pregnancies are "unwanted" but fewer are choosing to abort their preborn babies. That may reveal a changing attitude among women regarding the sanctity of human life.

The National Center for Health Statistics released a study showing that out of every 100 pregnancies, 24 ended in abortion — a sobering number, but down 2 percent from 1995.

Anjani Chandra, the study's lead, said some women may be caught off guard when they find out they’re pregnant, putting them in the "unwanted" category, but they don’t always stay there.

"When we’re talking about births that were unwanted or mistimed at the time of conception," she said, "we make it very clear that people’s attitudes can be quite different over the course of a pregnancy."

Susan Wills, associate director for education at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, said it's not uncommon for women to have a change of heart over time.

"Even if it’s not a convenient time or it’s not really anticipated," she said, "most women, as they begin to bond with the child, even in utero, begin to realize this is really a blessing."

Experts say there may be several reasons for the decrease in abortions. One might be the ability to see babies in the womb through ultrasound, and another, the increase in information available to women through the Internet.

On the other hand, The Alan Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, argues it may be due to women having less access to abortion.

Betty Jean Wolfe, president of the Urban Family Council, said that's not likely.

"You can go anywhere in a city in the United States and find access to abortion," she said. "I don’t think it’s a lack of access."

The most important thing, she said, is that there are fewer abortions today and the rate has been steadily falling for several years now.

Copyright © 2006 Focus on the Family.
All rights reserved. International copyright secured.


Can you find a reaspon for the change?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/31/06:

There is no balance, it is called "women rights" which is not really a truth, since it denies "baby rights" and esp "father rights"

The issue of a baby and conception has been stolen away from a couple and thier "joint" choices and given to the women alone.
Even husband notification is not required.

And the abotions being done to underage teens without any parent notification, but let there be medical problems latter and guess who is legally responsible to pay the medical bills, yep the parent, not the abortion mill.

The nation went crazy giving rights that are not constitutional to women, what privacy issue? it is a medical procedue that is killing another person and taking thier rights away.

I do hope the new court appointments this year will bring back true constitutional law and stop some of the killing.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 01/30/06 - Here's a C & P some might enjoy readin, or not.

Exxon posts record profits

By Susan Diesenhouse
Tribune staff reporter
Published January 30, 2006, 9:06 PM CST

Exxon Mobil Corp. reported Monday that it earned a profit of $36.1 billion in 2005. It was the biggest annual profit ever for a U.S. company, economists and analysts said.

What will Exxon do with all that money?

Shareholders will benefit, but consumers certainly won't see a break at the pump.

The most interesting question is how much the energy behemoth intends to invest in its businesses, particularly in the exploration for new sources of energy.

"We'd love to invest more in the U.S. but the key is having access to the most promising areas," said Mark Boudreaux, an Exxon spokesman.

Such fertile grounds could be offshore along the West and East Coasts, off the west coast of Florida and perhaps Alaska, he noted. But these locations represent environmentally sensitive areas where drilling has been blocked by state and federal agencies.

Exxon's 2005 net income of $36.13 billion was up 43 percent from a year earlier. Revenue for all of its corporate operations amounted to $371 billion. It has $33 billion in cash on hand and only $8 billion in debt.

Just five years earlier, Exxon reported 2000 revenue of $227.60 billion and net income of $17.72 billion.

Since the decade began, Exxon's revenue has risen more than 50 percent and profit has nearly doubled.

U.S. consumers expecting to share in this bounty may have quite a wait, according to Arthur L. Smith, the Houston-based chief executive of John S. Herold Inc., an independent oil and gas research and consulting firm in Norwalk, Conn.

"It will take an economic recession for prices to drop at the pump," he said. "All indications are that demand for petroleum is unfazed by high prices."

Exxon has been generous with investors. In 2005, Exxon lavished shareholders with $23 billion in dividends and stock buy-backs, a 56 percent increase from a year earlier, the company reported.

Petroleum prices averaged more than $56 a barrel last year, a 36 percent increase over 2004, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Meanwhile, Exxon invested $17.7 billion in capital expansion and exploration activities that could increase future supplies. That was a 19 percent increase over the $15 billion that the company invested in 2004.

But that came on the heels of a six-year-period in which the outlay to expand infrastructure was relatively flat. Indeed in 1998, when oil was selling for about $10 a barrel, Exxon invested about $15 billion in capital and exploration, according to Boudreaux.

Exxon's investments in capital and exploration seem skimpy to some.

"I've been surprised at the extent to which companies like Exxon are using their cash flow to buy back shares rather than make additional investments in infrastructure," said James Hamilton, a professor of economics at the University of California at San Diego.

Energy prices have surged to meet the needs of growing economies in Asia, India and the U.S. They also rose after hurricanes interrupted supplies from the Gulf of Mexico.

In part, therefore, Exxon's banner performance in 2005 reflects that "demand continues to grow but supply hasn't been increasing," said Lysle Brinker, a senior analyst at Herold. He added that this supply-demand scenario isn't likely to change soon.

The company is also benefiting from its own operational efficiency, Brinker added. Compared to other oil companies like Chevron, he said, "Exxon appears to be doing a good job controlling costs while making wise, disciplined investment to replace maturing fields."

The company, which has operations in 200 countries and 85,000 workers worldwide, has invested in production facilities in Russia, China, Angola and Nigeria.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/31/06:

One simple question, what was thier percent, not dollar about, but percent of profit, it was under 10 percent, many companies make a much higher percent of profit, alot of companies would not stay in business if they did not make more than that.

It is very likely your local gas station made a much higher return on investment, ie percentage of profit than the oil companies did.

Also alot of their profit was also inventory profits, where the oil they already had in the tanks increased in value.

If they need to reduce thier profit percentage, then so will Walmart, Kroger

Also what about Google, thier percent increase was one of the largest of anyone, should they pay back money to thier advertisers

One can not look at just the sum, but how much did they spend to make that profit, thier actual percentage of profit was down from my understanding.

If you really want oil prices down, let them drill off shore at Fla, let them drill in Alaska, it is not the oil companies but the government that is keeping the oil prices high by requiring us to deal with the Middle east

sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

deardra asked on 01/31/06 - Is this true

Understanding the bible is kind of like belonging to a secret club or something people who are not christian make it complicated because it is supposed to be a mystery to them right?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/31/06:

No a non christian oftens sees it as a mystery because they can not accept the fact there is a supreme being and that he can and does do things that does not follow natural laws of man's science.

Too many people try to understand or make the bible fit mans rules or thier understanding, of even thier preset rules.

Also mans teachings make it hard for people to beleive since man ( at least in the USA) teach things contrary to bibical truths and they man first has to admit that man can be wrong but many prefer to find error because of thier understanding instead of accepting as correct truths.

sarnian rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
deardra rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 01/26/06 - New Taliban?

Hamas Government to Be New Taliban?
Terrorists plant group's flag on parliament, declare beginning of hard-line Islamic rule

by Aaron Klein

JERUSALEM – Moments after official election results this afternoon certified a large Hamas victory in Palestinian ballots, members of the terror group planted their green flags on the main parliament building in Ramallah, with some Hamas gunmen declaring hard-line Islamic law will soon be imposed in the West Bank and Gaza, Palestinian security sources in the area told WorldNetDaily. The Hamas demonstration prompted clashes with rival activists from the currently ruling Fatah Party and highlighted longstanding worries Hamas will use its gains to impose a Taliban-like Islamist regime on the Palestinian population. Final results released by the Palestinian Central Election Commission showed Hamas won 76 seats in 132-seat parliament, with the Fatah garnering only 43 seats. Hamas chief Mahmoud al-Zahar told WorldNetDaily his terror group will seek to create a coalition with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Party, but some Fatah officials said the group may bolt the government and place themselves in the opposition. This would make Hamas the main Palestinian powerbroker. "We are holding emergency meetings to decide our next course of action," chief Palestinian negotiation minister Saeb Erekat told WND. "I don't think Fatah is going to join. This is not our way [to be in the minority]." At least 13 people were injured in the clashes outside the Ramallah parliament, and light damage was done to the building, security sources in Ramallah said. "The Hamas members were dancing with their flags, and they announced Sharia law will soon rule in the Palestinian territories," said a source. Today's clashes were the latest in a series of reports indicating Hamas is seeking to impose Taliban-like Islamic rule on the Palestinians. A Hamas-run council in the West Bank recently barred an open-air music and dance festival, declaring it was against Islam. "This is not acceptable," festival head Eman Hamouri told reporters at the time, accusing Hamas of trying to force its values on others. "We condemn this and we have sought the help of the Palestinian parliament to discuss this serious issue." In response to the incident, al-Zahar told WND: "I hardly understand the point of view of the West concerning these issues. The West brought all this freedom to its people but it is that freedom that has brought about the death of morality in the West. It's what led to phenomena like homosexuality, homeless and AIDS." Israeli officials say Hamas in the Gaza Strip has established hard-line Islamic courts and created the Hamas Anti-Corruption Group, which is described as a kind of "morality police" operating within Hamas' organization. Hamas has denied the existence of the anti-corruption group, but the group recently carried out a high-profile "honor killing" widely covered by the Palestinian media. Last April, Yusra al-Azzami, a young female university student from Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, was caught by Hamas, together with another female, riding in a vehicle with two men. The Hamas members, reportedly officers of the Anti-Corruption Group, suspected the vehicle occupants of "immoral behavior" and shot at the car, killing al-Azzami and wounding the other occupants. Reuven Erlich, director of Israel's Center for Special Studies, told WND the murder of al-Azzami, which was later reportedly settled in a hard-line Hamas Islamic court, "demonstrated several alarming factors. Among them that Hamas is imposing Islamic law and order, and also that they have their own Islamic courts and enforcement system." Erlich compared Hamas' governing intentions to the rules imposed by the Taliban until it was ousted from leadership in Afghanistan following the United States-led invasion in 2001. The Taliban reportedly used "morality police" to enforce Islamic extremist laws, including the public stoning of suspected adulterers, cutting off the arms of thieves, banning education and work for females, and the imposing of harsh sentences for those in possession of "disgraceful material," such as Western music or books. Asked if he will impose similar Islamic law on the Palestinians once his group assumes power, Hamas chief al-Zahar told WND: "The Palestinian people are Muslim people and we do not need to impose anything on our people because they are already committed to their faith and religion. People are free to choose their way of life, their way of dress and behavior." Al-Zahar said his terror group, which demands strict dress codes for females, respects women's rights. "It is wrong to think that in our Islamic society there is a lack of rights for women. Women enjoy their rights. What we have, unlike the West, is that young women cannot be with men and have relations outside marriage. Sometimes with tens of men. This causes the destruction of the family institution and the fact that many kids come to the world without knowing who are their fathers or who are their mothers. This is not a modern and progressed society," al-Zahar explained. The terror chieftain told WND the West can learn from his group's Islamic values. "Here I refer to what was said in the early ྖs by Britain's Prince Charles at Oxford University. He spoke about Islam and its important role in morality and culture. He said that the West must learn from Islam how to bring up children properly and to teach them the right values." Yudit Barsky, director of the division on Middle East and International Terrorism at the American Jewish Committee, explained Hamas has in the past few years provided social welfare services to endear itself to the Palestinian population, but once in power, it will likely impose hard-line rules. "Hamas has used social welfare organizations in competition to the lesser or nonexistent services of the [Palestinian Authority] to garner support for its political candidates. The result is that Hamas has outstripped the PA in providing services to the Palestinian population," said Barsky.

The terror group has long administered social services in Gaza, including medical, charitable and educational resources. Hamas also maintains a civilian infrastructure in Gaza that owns several shopping centers and local businesses, sources say.

But, Barsky said, "The Palestinians are falling for the same trick the Taliban pulled in Afghanistan. Hamas has set itself up as the non-corrupt alternative to the PA. It provides important social services the Palestinian population enjoys. Once Hamas gains control, it will pull the rug out and impose the same harsh lifestyle as the Taliban. The Palestinians clearly have not learned the lessons of the Taliban's rise to power."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/27/06:

I guess no one every thought they may actually elect the "evil" people back into power. I had wondered what would had happened in Iraq if the election had went the other way. But of course anyone pro Sadam right now would be a criminal and arrested. But if Sadam had been allowed to run would he had been elected???

The right to vote is a powerful tool, but one that is not controled ( unless you are from Memphis TN and get dead people and ex felons to vote you into state office)

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 01/26/06 - A long tunnel indicates a determined effort!!!!!

The Border Patrol found an almost mile long tunnel under the USA Mexican border.
It was equipped with electric lights and water. Also big enough for a person to walk though carrying smuggled goods, drugs, and weapons into the USA
I’m not a miner so I don’t have any idea of how long it would take or how many men would be needed to dig and equip such a tunnel.
Do you?
I wonder how long it was in use before being discovered.
Have you any idea or information about that?
Peace and kindness,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/27/06:

And how could they build it without people knowing, just unbelievable.

But illegals into the USA is BIG, very big business for Mexico. The amount of money they send home to thier families is a driving force in the Mexician ecomoney.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 01/22/06 - To smack or not to smack - that is the question!

Total smacking ban demand

Jan 22 2006

Britain's four child commissioners have called for a total ban on the smacking of children in the UK.

In a joint statement, the commissioners for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales said there was "no room for compromise" on the issue.

An amendment to the Children Bill outlawing the "hitting" of youngsters was rejected in the House of Commons in November 2004.

The Bill instead allowed mild smacking, while barring any physical punishment which caused visible bruising.

But the commissioners criticised the attempt to define "acceptable" smacking and said that the UK was still falling foul of European human rights standards.

Story continues Continue story

The statement said: "Children have the same right as adults to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity and to equal protection under the law, in the home and everywhere else.

"There is no room for compromise, for attempting to define 'acceptable' smacking."

It added: "We call upon Government to allow further debate and free votes in the relevant parliamentary assemblies to introduce legislation that will ban the defence of reasonable chastisement throughout the UK."

Peter Clarke, children's commissioner for Wales, said a free Parliamentary vote was needed because it was an "issue of conscience".

Mr Clarke said: "(The 2004 vote) was not a free vote and we would like a free vote because we think it is an issue of conscience. We think that a free vote would be different. We want to remove the law of reasonable chastisement so that the common law of assault applies to children as it does to adults."


My personal view is that smacking is a result of parental failure to cope with and teach the child in other ways.

Nanny 911 has demonstrated that physical violence towards children, even in the smallest degree, is not only unnecessary also counter-productive.



Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/22/06:

The problem with todays children is that too many parents have stopped proper spanking.

A parent MUST spank a child when the proper need arises. To so less is in my opinion the real child abuse since they are not being proper parents and not properly raising the children.

Failure to spank a child when it is called for shows a lack of concern of the parent.

Thank God England still has some commom sense.

Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

deardra asked on 01/18/06 - rules about sex

Does christianity have rules against masterbation? If so what is the penalty? Is there a reward for not masterbating? I heard it is healthy to do but if you are christian you might go to hell if you do it.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/18/06:

The bible gives us rules to live by,not just Christians, but the rules are for all mankind even those that refuse to accept them, since they are universal rules, not merely rules for one group, information that if followed can help us live a more healthy life.

The over all issue is that people who prefer to live in sin and not turn in repentance will be punished in hell forever, not a eartly punishment.
And the reward is not for one action, since we know even evil people and those who do not accept Christ often do good to one another since it is in thier best interest, so doing good gets no reward, since no level of good, is good enough for God.

The bible says little if anything directly about masterbation, but it does address proper sexual relationships.

Next masterbation can give a person first an unhealthy imangination of what sex is and what it is suppose to be, the enjoyment between a man and a women.

Where the sin enters into it is often if not most of the time when a person is in the act of masterbasting they think of someone else, have a fantisy, this is the sin of lust. Thus more times than not sin is invovled in the act.

Next of course it is more an act of pleasure, and can become aditive also if a person lets it.

As for as what you hear, we hear many things,

As for as hell, you go there if you have not accepted Christ as your Savior, plain and simple, as a Chrsitian when we are saved we want to do those things that are right.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
deardra rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

excon asked on 01/17/06 - The Right to Die

Hello Christians:

There you have it. Wanna die? Move to Oregon. Well, it's not quite like that, although I'm sure some of you will characterize it as such.

The Supreme Court just upheld (6-3) the right of Oregon’s doctors to end the life of terminally ill patients. Who dissented? Well, duh! Scalia, Roberts and Thomas.

So, it doesn't appear that Alito is gonna change the balance on this right to life (death) issue. What do you wrongwingers think about that?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/17/06:

I think that most people have Alito wrong, he is not political, ok maybe some kiss ass to get some jobs.

he really appears to rule according to the rule of law, not what the popular vote has to beleive the law should be but by the constitution.

I beleie he would have ruled it was legal, but we may never know. But again this was a state law issue

That is what the abortion people are concerned about, that it will over turn federal protection and return it, where it belongs, to a state issue to be voted on by the voters.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 01/16/06 - if the new medicare program confuses you ,you are not alone

With tens of thousands of people unable to get medicines promised by Medicare, the Bush administration has told insurers that they must provide a 30-day supply of any drug that a beneficiary was previously taking, and it said that poor people must not be charged more than $5 for a covered drug.

The actions came after several states declared public health emergencies, and many states announced that they would step in to pay for prescriptions that should have been covered by the federal Medicare program.

Republicans have joined Democrats in asserting that the federal government botched the beginning of the prescription drug program, which started on Jan. 1. People who had signed up for coverage found that they were not on the government's list of subscribers. Insurers said they had no way to identify poor people entitled to extra help with their drug costs. Pharmacists spent hours on the telephone trying to reach insurance companies that administer the drug benefit under contract to Medicare.

Many of the problems involve low-income people entitled to both Medicare and Medicaid.

In a directive sent to all Medicare drug plans over the weekend, the Bush administration said they "must take immediate steps" to ensure that low-income beneficiaries were not charged more than $2 for a generic drug and $5 for a brand-name drug.

In addition, it said insurers must cover a 30-day emergency supply of drugs that beneficiaries were taking prior to the start of the new program.

In an interview yesterday, Dr. Mark B. McClellan, administrator of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said that "several hundred thousand beneficiaries who switched plans" in December may have had difficulty filling prescriptions in the last two weeks.

In California, officials estimate that 200,000 of the state's 1.1 million low-income Medicare beneficiaries had trouble getting their medications.

Despite these problems, Dr. McClellan said, Medicare is now covering one million prescriptions a day. With the latest corrective actions, he said, "all beneficiaries should be able to get their prescriptions filled."

In the past, such predictions proved to be premature. New problems appeared as old ones were solved, and some insurers were slow to carry out federal instructions.

Since the program began on Jan. 1, many low-income people have left pharmacies empty-handed after being told they would have to pay co-payments of $100, $250 or more.

About 20 states, including California, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and all of New England, have announced that they will help low-income people by paying drug claims that should have been paid by the federal Medicare program.

"The new federal program is too complicated for many people to understand, and the implementation of the new program by the federal government has been awful," said Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, a Republican. On Saturday, he signed an emergency executive order making the state a "payer of last resort" for the out-of-pocket drug costs.

The Bush administration said it was rushing to provide insurers with correct information about the extra subsidies available to low-income people enrolled in their plans.

"We sent files to all plans providing complete information on dual-eligible beneficiaries" entitled to both Medicare and Medicaid, Dr. McClellan said. "The plans now have all the information in one place."

The new drug benefit is the most significant expansion of Medicare since creation of the program in 1965.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/16/06:

The insurance program that medicare set up had the major problem that it allowed each insurance company to decide what they were going to cover. There was no uniform coverage. So no one knew what was going to be covered, and the companies have the ability to change coverage after the plans start going.

But the worst part is that many of those signed up ( as I signed up my MOM) after they went to get thier drugs the government did not have them entered into the data base. Even with a letter from the insurance companies saying she had coverage, they could not honor it since the computer was not showing it.

If she did not have enough money to pay full price she could not have gotten her medicine.

This is a disgrace

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Itsdb asked on 01/13/06 - And the survey says...

A quick survey - yes I know it has nothing to do with Christianity per se, but anyway, this is the other politics board isn't it?

Are you for or against gun control?

If yes, what type of gun control - as in how far would you go, ban all guns, require licenses, etc.?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/13/06:

yes we all need to control our guns well enough to hit a target.

Control of guns, even to the point we have now is not constitutional, The American public have had since the beginning of our nation the right to own guns.

Gun control was one of Hitlers things done to unarm the german public, so it was easier to take over.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 01/13/06 - something of a magnificient obscession I think?

Warren to buy Saints, build Purpose-Driven Field

NEW ORLEANS — Pastor and author Rick Warren has signed a deal to purchase the New Orleans Saints football franchise for $320 million from current owner Tom Benson, and has pledged to pour his time and energy into helping the city and team rebuild.
"This is the start of the Saints' turnaround," a Warren spokesman said. "America is going to see what a purpose-driven team can accomplish."
The Saints have desperately needed a home and a vision since Hurricane Katrina devastated their season. They were keenly disappointed with the NFL's response to their plight.
But Warren took an immediate interest in the team on visits to the damaged city, and he surprised his church in November when several Saints players joined him onstage. The church prayed for the team, which won its next game. Warren took this as confirmation of his plan to buy the franchise.
"I like the guy," says one player who met Warren at a practice in San Antonio. "I was skeptical about a minister owning a team, but he wants to win, just like us."
The centerpiece of Warren's purchase will be Purpose-Driven Field, to be located just north of New Orleans. Stadium construction will create thousands of jobs for the local economy, and will give Warren's ministry a foothold in the South, where he hopes to gain greater influence. During the week, Purpose-Driven Field will host conferences, outreaches and short-term missions groups stopping over on their way to Central America, or helping to rebuild New Orleans. Warren already refers to the New Orleans location as Saddleback South, friends say.
The Saints will now operate differently than most NFL teams. Players will be required to go through the 40 Days of Purpose program. Alcohol will not be served in the stadium, and every attendee will receive a copy of the Purpose-Driven Life. Halftime shows will offer "edgy, cool" evangelism and worship concerts, says a spokesman. Warren intends to be as visible as Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, who often walks the sidelines during games.
"We're marching into New Orleans," Warren told partner churches recently to rousing applause.•

So the question is; is Christianity and american football compatiable?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/13/06:

Of course I don't rate Rick Warren up their in Chisitianity, He in my opinion is a snake oil salesperson who has sold his bill of goods on the Christian people.

At least part of them. Many see the error in his teachings and there are even books showing so many of these errors.

This appears to be no different than another business person using a team to be an outlet for advertising, a tax right off or perhaps the start for a new book or something.

I hope he does go to sports since he has done enough harm in religion and American churches are better off with him at the football field on sunday instead of in thier churches.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 01/11/06 - The BIG QUESTION is: "Has Pat "Assassin" Robertson puts his devil's foot back insid

Pat Robertson told viewers of his 螌 Club" that God gets angry "against those who 'divide my land'."

Is Robertson right to say that God has struck General Sharon down for 'dividing' the State of Israel by returning some of the occupied land to its rightful Palestinian Arab owners?

Please answer the question as asked.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/11/06:

Since I can't speak for Pat, if God told him personally that he did it, I guess Pat is right, if Pat is giving his opinion then he should have said it was his opinion.

but "my opinoin) if God was going to strike someone down for diving a nation, Kennedy would have never been standing in the Senate today.

Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 01/08/06 - Supporting the troops - yeah right.

Hello Christians:

I asked this question on the politics board, but I wanted to find out what real Christians thought.

Yeah, I support the troops too. But, instead of putting a bumper sticker on my car (so my neighbors will think highly of me), I wrote to my congressmen and demanded they give the Marines the body armor they needed to save lives.

Well, they didn't. I dunno why. Maybe they needed the money for a submarine or something.

And, your boy's died.....

So, what are you GOING TO DO, about your governments laze fare interest in your sons lives? Put a bumper sticker on your car?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/08/06:

if you are still there excon, heard those black helicopters heading your way this morning

But your troops should be the most well prepared and most well armoured in the world. There is no excuse for it.

It should have been done all along.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 01/06/06 - Cuba Paid to kill Kennedy. Is this true?

Cuba paid Oswald to kill Kennedy, new film says

By Mark TrevelyanWed Jan 4, 11:12 AM ET

Cuba lay behind the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Lee Harvey Oswald and its agents provided the gunman with money and support, an award-winning German director says in a new documentary film.

Wilfried Huismann spent three years researching "Rendezvous with Death," based on interviews with former Cuban secret agents, U.S. officials and a Russian intelligence source, and on research in Mexican security archives.

The film, shown to journalists in Berlin on Wednesday, says Oswald traveled to Mexico City by bus in September 1963, seven weeks before the Kennedy shooting, and met agents at the Cuban embassy there who paid him $6,500.

Oscar Marino, a former Cuban agent and a key source for the documentary, told Huismann that Oswald himself had volunteered for the assassination mission and Havana had exploited him.

"Oswald was a dissident. He hated his country...Oswald offered to kill Kennedy," Marino said in the film.

"He was so full of hate, he had the idea. We used him...He was a tool."

He said he knew with certainty that the assassination was an operation of the Cuban secret service G-2, but would not say if it was ordered by President Fidel Castro.

Oswald was shot dead by Jack Ruby two days after killing Kennedy in Dallas on November 22, 1963.

The film argues Cuba wanted to eliminate Kennedy as the chief enemy of its Communist revolution, and portrays him and Castro as dueling opponents each trying to assassinate the other first.

Former CIA official Sam Halpern told Huismann: "He (Castro) beat us. He bested us. He came out on top, and we lost."


Laurence Keenan, an officer of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) who was sent to Mexico City immediately after Kennedy's death to investigate a possible Cuban connection, said he was recalled after just three days and the probe was aborted.

"This was perhaps the worst investigation the FBI was ever involved in," Keenan said. "I realized that I was used. I felt ashamed. We missed a moment in history."

Keenan, 81, said he was convinced Kennedy's successor, Lyndon Johnson, blocked further investigation because proof of a Cuban link would put him under irresistible pressure to invade the island, a year after the Cuban missile crisis had brought the United States and Soviet Union to the brink of nuclear war.

"Most likely there would have been an invasion of Cuba which could have had unknown consequences for the whole world," he told journalists at the screening, saying that was why Johnson preferred to accept Oswald was "a crazed lone Marxist assassin."

Interviewed for the film, Alexander Haig, then a U.S. military adviser and later secretary of state, quoted Johnson as saying "we simply must not allow the American people to believe that Fidel Castro could have killed our president."

"And the reason was that there would be a right-wing uprising in America, which would keep the Democratic party out of power for two generations," Haig said.

He added that Robert F. Kennedy, brother of the assassinated president and attorney general in his administration, had personally ordered eight attempts on the life of Castro, who is still in power to this day.

Cuban and Russian sources interviewed in the film say the KGB alerted the Cubans to Oswald in mid-1962 after he left the Soviet Union, where he had lived for three years, and returned to the United States with his Soviet wife and their daughter.

Cuban intelligence first made contact with Oswald in November 1962, according to the film.

Huismann also unearthed a U.S. intelligence report shown to Johnson which said Cuban secret service chief Fabian Escalante flew via Mexico City to Dallas on the day of Kennedy's assassination, and back again the same day.

Tracked down by the film maker, Escalante denied he had been in Dallas and evaded questions about Cuba's alleged role. "What is truth, what are lies?" he said, smiling.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/06/06:

Every good conspiricy expert knows that Kennedy was killed by the driver of his car and the other gun man was merely a decoy of the real event.

Kennedy is said by those people "in the know" of conspiricy things, was getting too close to the UFO cover up and had to be taken out before the truth came out.

I think that would make a much better movie also.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ATON2 asked on 01/05/06 - Is this what he meant???

Is this what Bush meant when he said "we are making great progress in Iraq:


Reuter's. Thu Jan 5

"Two suicide bombers killed 120 people and wounded more than 200 in attacks near a Shi'ite holy shrine, and a a police recruiting center on Thursday, the bloodiest day in Iraq in four months.

SEVEN U.S. soldiers were killed in two roadside bomb attacks. three bombs exploded in Baghdad and insurgents sabotaged an oil pipeline near the Northern city of Kirkuk, causing a huge fire.

Coming a day after 58 people died in a wave of bombings and shootings, the latest bloodshed ratcheted up tension between Iraq's minority Sunni Arabs and majority Shi'ite Muslims......

....the bombings shattered hopes Iraq might start 2006 on a more peacful footing than in 2005, allowing for a swift withdrawal of some of the 150,000 U.S. troops in the country.

In all, violence has killed more than 240 people and wounded more than 280 in the five days since the New Year started...."

This conjures up pictures of DUBYA in phony combat gear, standing on the deck of an aircraft carrier, with a smarmy grin on his face, under a banner proclaiming "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"!!!!!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/06/06:

Schools are open, shopping centers are open, people have running water, electrical power, and TV dishes in thier yards

there are lots of great improvements. The activities of a few can never be stoped. One man who wishes to die and kill others can and will always happen.

But yes, Iraq is showing great signs, sadly TV only wishes to show the killing, not the greatness that is happening there

ATON2 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 01/05/06 - Did Muhammad or did he not lead his followers to war?

Some people say Muhammad did not lead his followers to war. Others say he did.
What do you say?
Here is what the on line encyclopedia says.
Muhammad (məhăm'əd) [Arab.,=praised], 570?–632, the name of the Prophet of Islam, one of the great figures of history, b. Mecca.

Early Life

Muhammad was the son of Abdallah ibn Abd al-Muttalib and his wife Amina, both of the Hashim clan of the dominant Kuraish (Quraysh) tribal federation. Muhammad was orphaned soon after birth, and was brought up by his uncle Abu Talib. When he was 24, he married Khadija, a wealthy widow much his senior; he had no other wife in Khadija's lifetime. Khadija's daughter Fatima was the only child of Muhammad to have issue. His position in the community was that of a wealthy merchant.

Call to Prophecy

When he was 40, Muhammad felt himself selected by God to be the Arab prophet of true religion. The Arabs, unlike other nations, had hitherto had no prophet. In the cave of Mt. Hira, N of Mecca, he had a vision in which he was commanded to preach. Thereafter throughout his life he continued to have revelations, many of which were collected and recorded in the Qur'an. His fundamental teachings were: there is one God; people must in all things submit to Him; in this world nations have been amply punished for rejecting God's prophets, and heaven and hell are waiting for the present generation; the world will come to an end with a great judgment. He included as religious duties frequent prayer and almsgiving, and he forbade usury.

Enemies and Converts

In his first years Muhammad made few converts but many enemies. His first converts were Khadija, Ali (who became the husband of Fatima), and Abu Bakr. From about 620, Mecca became actively hostile, since much of its revenues depended on its pagan shrine, the Kaaba, and an attack on the existing Arab religion was an attack on the prosperity of Mecca. While he was gaining only enemies at home, Muhammad's teaching was faring little better abroad; only at Yathrib did it make any headway, and on Yathrib depended the future of Islam. In the summer of 622 Muhammad fled from Mecca as an attempt was being prepared to murder him, and he escaped in the night from the city and made his way to Yathrib. From this event, the flight, or Hegira, of the Prophet (622), the Islamic calendar begins.

Muhammad spent the rest of his life at Yathrib, henceforth called Medina, the City of the Prophet. At Medina he built his model theocratic state and from there ruled his rapidly growing empire. Muhammad's lawgiving at Medina is at least theoretically the law of Islam, and in its evolution over the next 10 years the history of the community at Medina is seen.

Medina lies on the caravan route N of Mecca, and the Kuraishites of Mecca could not endure the thought of their outlawed relative taking vengeance on his native city by plundering their caravans. A pitched battle between Muhammad's men and the Meccans occurred at Badr, and the victory of an inferior force from the poorer city over the men of Mecca gave Islam great prestige in SW Arabia. More than a year later the battle of Uhud was fought but with less fortunate results. By this time pagan Arabia had been converted, and the Prophet's missionaries, or legates, were active in the Eastern Empire, in Persia, and in Ethiopia.

As he believed firmly in his position as last of the prophets and as successor of Jesus, Muhammad seems at first to have expected that the Jews and Christians would welcome him and accept his revelations, but he was soon disappointed. Medina had a large Jewish population which controlled most of the wealth of the city, and they steadfastly refused to give their new ruler any kind of religious allegiance. Muhammad, after a long quarrel, appropriated much of their property, and his first actual conquest was the oasis of Khaibar, occupied by the Jews, in 628. The failure of several missions among the Christians made him distrustful of Christians as well as Jews.

His renown increased, and in 629 he made a pilgrimage to Mecca without interference. There he won valuable converts, including Amr and Khalid (who had fought him at Uhud). In 630 he marched against Mecca, which fell without a fight. Arabia was won. Muhammad's private life—the fact that he had nine wives—has received a vast, and perhaps disproportionate, amount of attention. His third wife, Aishah, was able and devoted; he died in her arms June 8, 632.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 01/06/06:

Any study of his life shows that most of his conversions were done though military use. There are books on the subject. This is a nice politically correct version that has little to do with the real facts only the overview.

This is like saying Hitler was accepted in France and Italy as thier ruler and he ruled over them from Germany. Same difference

Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/30/05 - What rights do parents have about public schools teaching a religion?

A federal appeals court is being asked to reconsider its ruling that allows public schools to teach junior high students how to "become Muslims." The Thomas More Law Center, a national public-interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, is asking the entire Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to rule on what can be done in public schools with regard to teaching Islam and other religions.

Several parents sued California's Byron Union School District for requiring their 7th-grade children to participate in a three-week class activity in which they not only had to study important Islamic figures and wear traditional Muslim attire, but were also required to observe the "five pillars" of the Islamic faith, adopt Muslim names, recite a portion of a Muslim prayer, and even stage their own "jihad" or "holy war." The plaintiffs' attorney, the Thomas More Law Center's Ed White, believes the school district violated the parents' and children's constitutional rights to free exercise of religion.

Earlier, White had asked a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit to overturn a previous San Francisco federal district court's ruling that the Byron Union School District did not violate the U.S. Constitution. However, the Ninth Circuit panel of judges upheld the lower court's determination in a brief, unpublished memorandum decision.

In that ruling, however, the panel overlooked and failed to rule on the plaintiff's claims that their free exercise and parental rights had been violated. The Thomas More Law Center has asked the three-judge panel to reconsider their decision and to issue a ruling on the claims not previously addressed. The Law Center has also asked all 24 active judges on the Ninth Circuit to consider and rule on the case.

White says the Byron Union School District never informed the parents about an exercise that would be grading their children on how well they observed the tenets of Islam. In fact, he points out, "The parents were never told that there was even a way to opt their child out of such an activity."

Actually, the only way the parents found out about the school's Islamic exercise, the attorney points out, was virtually by accident. He says a Byron Union District mom was "looking through her son's book bag and asked, 'Hey, what's all this stuff?' and the kid said, 'Oh, we're doing this in school now.' So the parents objected, but it was after the class [activity] was over."

So it was after the fact that parents learned how, for three weeks in 2001, their children were told they would "become Muslims" and had worn identification tags bearing their new Muslim names along with the Star and Crescent Moon symbols of Islam. The children received materials telling them to "Remember Allah always so that you may prosper," and they made banners to hang in the classroom, inscribing them with the Basmala, a phrase from the Koran used in Muslim prayers that is translated, "In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate."

Richard Thompson, chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, was disappointed by the San Francisco district court's ruling and the Ninth Circuit panel's decision to uphold it. He commented that if students had been instructed on Christianity in the same manner as they were on Islam in this case, the court would most likely have found a constitutional violation.

Ed White agrees. The parents' lawyer says the courts should not be allowing this apparent double standard on the teaching of religion in public schools. When the Byron Union School District's teachers taught the children other religions in the seventh grade," he asserts, "they didn't go into any of these activities. When they taught Buddhism or Christianity, they didn't engage in these simulations [of Islamic observances]. They didn't have to practice the faith, memorize various parts of the Bible, et cetera."

White has filed a petition for a rehearing of the case before the entire Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Chief counsel Richard Thompson says the appellate court needs to clarify in a published opinion just how far public schools can go in teaching about religion.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/31/05:

Maybe they could teach a few to be sucide bombers, maybe kill some of the other student muslims for learning or beleiving it different from theirself.

That would be teaching them real life religion.

maybe next they can all dress up like one of the past popes and learn to speak latin.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

Choux asked on 12/29/05 - Problem with any Dictatorship

""BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese tradition holds 2006 will be a year of bad luck for people born under the sign of the dog, but misfortune has come early for some looking for jobs, state media said on Wednesday.

Chinese companies looking for new recruits had deliberately passed over candidates born as dogs in China's ancient 12-animal astrological cycle to ward off the bad luck expected for people in years of their same sign, the China Youth Daily said.

The dog denials were just one example of widespread employment discrimination in China, a Chinese legislator told parliament during discussions about a new labor law on Tuesday, the newspaper said.

Many Chinese companies showed illegal hiring biases, even according to such factors as **height and blood type**, it said.

A rule that women applying for government jobs in central Hunan province had to **show they had symmetrically shaped breasts** sparked a public uproar last year and calls for stronger legal protection against job discrimination.

Hunan scrapped its requirement, but China still does not have clear-cut laws ruling out such hiring prejudices.""

Democracy may not be perfect, but it is the best kind of government there is.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/29/05:

Just in case there are Chinese american companies also doing this, should being a "dog" become a protected class under the constitution.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 12/27/05 - well, that's certainly putting the blame in the right place, or is it?

Canada blames U.S. for gun violence

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 Posted: 2343 GMT (0743 HKT)

TORONTO, Ontario (AP) -- Canadian officials, seeking to make sense of another fatal shooting in what has been a record year for gun-related deaths, said Tuesday that along with a host of social ills, part of the problem stemmed from what they said was the United States exporting its violence.

Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and Toronto Mayor David Miller warned that Canada could become like the United States after gunfire erupted Monday on a busy street filled with holiday shoppers, killing a 15-year-old girl and wounding six bystanders -- the latest victims in a record surge in gun violence in Toronto.

The shooting stemmed from a dispute among a group of 10 to 15 youth, and the victim was a teenager out with a parent near a popular shopping mall, police said Tuesday.

"I think it's a day that Toronto has finally lost its innocence," Det. Sgt. Savas Kyriacou said. "It was a tragic loss and tragic day."

While many Canadians take pride in Canadian cities being less violent than their American counterparts, Toronto has seen 78 murders this year, including a record 52 gun-related deaths -- almost twice as many as last year.

"What happened yesterday was appalling. You just don't expect it in a Canadian city," the mayor said.

"It's a sign that the lack of gun laws in the U.S. is allowing guns to flood across the border that are literally being used to kill people in the streets of Toronto," Miller said.

Miller said Toronto, a city of nearly three million, is still very safe compared to most American cities, but the illegal flow of weapons from the United States is causing the noticeable rise in gun violence.

"The U.S. is exporting its problem of violence to the streets of Toronto," he said.

Miller said that while almost every other crime in Toronto is down, the supply of guns has increased and half of them come from the United States.

Miller said the availability of stolen Canadian guns is another problem, and that poverty in certain Toronto neighborhoods is a root cause.

"There are neighborhoods in Toronto where young people face barriers of poverty, discrimination and don't have real hope and opportunity. The kind of programs that we once took for granted in Canada that would reach out to young people have systematically disappeared over the past decade and I think that gun violence is a symptom of a much bigger problem," Miller said.

The escalating violence prompted the prime minister to announce earlier this month that if re-elected on January 23, his government would ban handguns. With severe restrictions already in place against handgun ownership, many criticized the announcement as politics.

Martin, who says up to half of the gun crimes in Canada involve weapons brought in illegally from the United States, raised the smuggling problem when he met with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in October.

Martin offered his condolences in a statement Tuesday, saying he was horrified by the shootings.

"What we saw yesterday is a stark reminder of the challenge that governments, police forces and communities face to ensure that Canadian cities do not descend into the kind of rampant gun violence we have seen elsewhere," Martin said.

John Thompson, a security analyst with the Toronto-based Mackenzie Institute, says the number of guns smuggled from the United States is a problem, but that Canada has a gang problem -- not a gun problem -- and that Canada should stop pointing the finger at the United States.

"It's a cop out. It's an easy way of looking at one symptom rather than addressing a whole disease," Thompson said.

Two suspects were arrested and at least one firearm was seized soon after the shootings Monday. Kyriacou said it was an illegal handgun.

Three females and four males were injured, including one male who is in critical condition. Police believe they were bystanders.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/27/05:

Those wild guns running around all by thierself just shooting people.

I have wondered time and time again, that no one seems to mention, that a person shot someone, the gun was merely the tool they used to do it.

Normal anti gun bull witten into a politically correct news article to make people blame guns not the person doing it

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
cavil rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 12/27/05 - JUST WONDERING ...

... how many Experts ACTUALLY read long posts and clarifications.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/27/05:

I seldom read the cut and paste posts,

first the print is way to small normally, and second, normally it is political in nature not religious.

But sometimes even the religious cut and pastes are just too long ( and normally boring) to read.

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Itsdb asked on 12/27/05 - Guide to the origins?

Museum helps workers tackle evolution fight

Published Sunday, December 25, 2005

ITHACA, N.Y. (AP) - Educated as a geologist in her native Hungary, Eniko Farkas knows, understands and firmly believes in the science behind evolution.

Still, she was caught off guard last year when a visitor to the Museum of the Earth, where she volunteers, angrily confronted her, denouncing evolution and insisting the museum teach creationism instead.

"I had a difficult time getting out of the situation," said Farkas, a retired Cornell University librarian and volunteer at the museum for the past seven years. "It got personal and very negative, and I got so flustered and frustrated that I know I didn’t make much sense trying to explain myself."

With challenges to the theory of evolution becoming more widespread, museum Director Warren Allmon developed a special workshop and a 13-page guide book to help volunteers and staff answer questions about evolution, creationism and intelligent design.

"This is not a defensive reaction or an attempt to change anyone’s mind," Allmon said. "It’s just that we find most people are uninformed about evolution or have been given misinformation."

Since running the first workshop in July, Allmon said the museum has received more than 70 calls from other museums and organizations around the country.

The guide provides information on the scientific method - using observations about the natural world and the rules of logic to test hypotheses - the theory of evolution, creationism and intelligent design.

It also offers a script for how to answer frequently raised challenges, such as, "Is it true that there is lots of evidence against evolution?" Answer: "No. Essentially all available data and observations from the natural world support the hypothesis of evolution. No serious biologist or geologist today doubts whether evolution occurred."

Read the rest of the article here.

Is the 'script' correct?

Does "Essentially all available data and observations from the natural world support the hypothesis of evolution"?

Is it true that "No serious biologist or geologist today doubts whether evolution occurred"? Or is it just that any biologist or geologist that questions evolution can't be taken seriously?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/27/05:

The truth is there is alot of doubt and that is why they still call it a theory and why evolution is still a hypothesis,
that means in real terms it can not be proven but it is an accepted beleif by many in the science community.

Thier bais is that if you don't agree with us then you are not a serious researcher, whih is basicly saying no matter how many good educted people disagree with us, their opiions are not valid, since they don't agree with us.

But it is jsut a idea and beleif, which is not proven beyond any doubt.

One good example of this is the Institute for Creation Research.

Review of thier web site will show that many don't agree and that alot of science facts may disprove alot of the evolution BS

Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Tex78 asked on 12/26/05 - Thank You for Wiretapping Mr. President. You may have saved the lives of your critics, and others.<

Why the Founders made presidents dominant on national security.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold wants to be President, and that's fair enough. By all means go for it in 2008. The same applies to Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who's always on the Sunday shows fretting about the latest criticism of the Bush Administration's prosecution of the war on terror. But until you run nationwide and win, Senators, please stop stripping the Presidency of its Constitutional authority to defend America.
That is the real issue raised by the Beltway furor over last week's leak of National Security Agency wiretaps on international phone calls involving al Qaeda suspects. The usual assortment of Senators and media potentates is howling that the wiretaps are "illegal," done "in total secret," and threaten to bring us a long, dark night of fascism. "I believe it does violate the law," averred Mr. Feingold on CNN Sunday.
The truth is closer to the opposite. What we really have here is a perfect illustration of why America's Founders gave the executive branch the largest measure of Constitutional authority on national security. They recognized that a committee of 535 talking heads couldn't be trusted with such grave responsibility. There is no evidence that these wiretaps violate the law. But there is lots of evidence that the Senators are "illegally" usurping Presidential power--and endangering the country in the process.

The allegation of Presidential law-breaking rests solely on the fact that Mr. Bush authorized wiretaps without first getting the approval of the court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. But no Administration then or since has ever conceded that that Act trumped a President's power to make exceptions to FISA if national security required it. FISA established a process by which certain wiretaps in the context of the Cold War could be approved, not a limit on what wiretaps could ever be allowed.
The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."
On Sunday Mr. Graham opined that "I don't know of any legal basis to go around" FISA--which suggests that next time he should do his homework before he implies on national TV that a President is acting like a dictator. (Mr. Graham made his admission of ignorance on CBS's "Face the Nation," where he was representing the Republican point of view. Democrat Joe Biden was certain that laws had been broken, while the two journalists asking questions clearly had no idea what they were talking about. So much for enlightening television.)
The mere Constitution aside, the evidence is also abundant that the Administration was scrupulous in limiting the FISA exceptions. They applied only to calls involving al Qaeda suspects or those with terrorist ties. Far from being "secret," key Members of Congress were informed about them at least 12 times, President Bush said yesterday. The two district court judges who have presided over the FISA court since 9/11 also knew about them.
Inside the executive branch, the process allowing the wiretaps was routinely reviewed by Justice Department lawyers, by the Attorney General personally, and with the President himself reauthorizing the process every 45 days. In short, the implication that this is some LBJ-J. Edgar Hoover operation designed to skirt the law to spy on domestic political enemies is nothing less than a political smear.
All the more so because there are sound and essential security reasons for allowing such wiretaps. The FISA process was designed for wiretaps on suspected foreign agents operating in this country during the Cold War. In that context, we had the luxury of time to go to the FISA court for a warrant to spy on, say, the economic counselor at the Soviet embassy.
In the war on terror, the communications between terrorists in Frankfurt and agents in Florida are harder to track, and when we gather a lead the response often has to be immediate. As we learned on 9/11, acting with dispatch can be a matter of life and death. The information gathered in these wiretaps is not for criminal prosecution but solely to detect and deter future attacks. This is precisely the kind of contingency for which Presidential power and responsibility is designed.
What the critics in Congress seem to be proposing--to the extent they've even thought much about it--is the establishment of a new intelligence "wall" that would allow the NSA only to tap phones overseas while the FBI would tap them here. Terrorists aren't about to honor such a distinction. As Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," before 9/11 "our intelligence agencies looked out; our law enforcement agencies looked in. And people could--terrorists could--exploit the seam between them." The wiretaps are designed to close the seam.

As for power without responsibility, nobody beats Congress. Mr. Bush has publicly acknowledged and defended his decisions. But the Members of Congress who were informed about this all along are now either silent or claim they didn't get the full story. This is why these columns have long opposed requiring the disclosure of classified operations to the Congressional Intelligence Committees. Congress wants to be aware of everything the executive branch does, but without being accountable for anything at all. If Democrats want to continue this game of intelligence and wiretap "gotcha," the White House should release the names of every Congressman who received such a briefing.
Which brings us to this national security leak, which Mr. Bush yesterday called "a shameful act." We won't second-guess the New York Times decision to publish. But everyone should note the irony that both the Times and Washington Post claimed to be outraged by, and demanded a special counsel to investigate, the leak of Valerie Plame's identity, which did zero national security damage.
By contrast, the Times' NSA leak last week, and an earlier leak in the Washington Post on "secret" prisons for al Qaeda detainees in Europe, are likely to do genuine harm by alerting terrorists to our defenses. If more reporters from these newspapers now face the choice of revealing their sources or ending up in jail, those two papers will share the Plame blame.
The NSA wiretap uproar is one of those episodes, alas far too common, that make us wonder if Washington is still a serious place. Too many in the media and on Capitol Hill have forgotten that terrorism in the age of WMD poses an existential threat to our free society. We're glad Mr. Bush and his team are forcefully defending their entirely legal and necessary authority to wiretap enemies seeking to kill innocent Americans.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/27/05:

Even if he had gotten a warrent do you think this would still not be a political issue. "President uses secret court to spy on 1000's of US citizens"

"President forces telecommunictions to turn over infomatoin of America Citizens with secret court, citizens have not knowlede or rights to be heard"

It is all political play, no matter what happens. It is obvoius from the dribble we get about the war, this many dead, that many attacked. compare it to the dead in the US from gun shots over the holidays and where were the most killed at?

Compare the number dead to drunk driving and see where the most deaths are at.

I don't like the war either, and really don't believe we will ever stop terror attacks there. Look are Ireland for an example of how long things can go on also.
A man with a bomb straped to him will and can kill when he wants, nothing will stop that.

I just wish the Presidet would call them what they are , heck he is not up for re-election, but I guess he has to ball.

Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 12/25/05 - not your average Christmas mass?

Could this be a trendy way to get people back to church?

Naked teenager streaks through church mass
By Greg McLean

December 26, 2005

A NORTHERN Territory teenager has run naked through a church and jumped up on the altar in the middle of a midnight Christmas mass.
About 150 Catholic churchgoers in Alice Springs were stunned by the prank yesterday but reacted quickly to hold the naked reveller until police arrived.

Father Brian Healy said the 18-year-old ran naked through the aisle before jumping up on the altar.

"He must have planned it," he said.

"As he ran into the church he was yelling something and then he ran around a bit and jumped on the altar.

"He wasn't a part of the congregation.

"Besides that I was quite pleased with the turnout - you always like to see more people at church but the people here had a lovely spirit and it was very Christ-like."

Police were quick to arrest the streaker and he was charged with indecent exposure and disturbing a religious worship.

He was granted bail on the condition that he not go within 200m of a place of worship.

Alice Springs police watch commander Henry Sattler praised the efforts of churchgoers who held the streaker until police arrived.

"As I understand it he was dancing around the altar provocatively," he said.

"Some of the church members lost patience with him after he started dancing around the altar and grabbed hold of him.

"I don't know if he was affected by alcohol or not.

"It was a pretty busy night for police but other than that it was just your usual drunken revelry on Christmas Eve."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/25/05:

poor taste but sounds like a teen prank.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 12/25/05 - A MERRY AND JOYOUS CHRISTMAS

Whoever you are,
Wherever you are, and
Whatever you believe,
I wish you a Merry and
Joyous Christmastide.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/25/05:

And to you and your family on this glorious day to celebrate the birth of the Saviour and Lord of the world.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 12/25/05 - Working on Christmas?

Working on Christmas?

Why is getting Christmas presents for your kids just like a day at the office?

You do all the work and the fat guy in the suit gets all the credit.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/25/05:

I do know the feeling, it is only the last few years I have not had to work Christmas Day.

We never did the Santa thing with our kids, they always new he was not true but still could get excited over the Santa hype anyway.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 12/24/05 - pray we have a safe trip

hi folks just imagine an old codger who can hardly walk spending next week at a ski lodge in WV we are taking the grandkids Gran will prob just sit by the fire in the lodge drinking hot cocoa but its a 900 mile trip up there so keep us in your prayers and have a great christmass and neww year Y"all

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/24/05:

put those skis on that powerchair or scooter and have at it

Good luck and safe trip

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ROLCAM asked on 12/24/05 - Christmas Greetings.

To all the members of ANSWERWAY.


Enjoy this magnificent day.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/24/05:

and to you and yours

ROLCAM rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 12/24/05 - Will President Bush have a Merry Christmas?

Would it be mere wishful thinking to wish Mr Bush a Merry Christmas?

Bush bubble burst by troubled 2005

By Matt Frei
BBC News, Washington

This time last year
the graphic artists at Time Magazine were putting the finishing touches to an oil portrait of President Bush.

Two months after his re-election the picture would grace its cover and celebrate him as the recipient of one of the most eagerly awaited accolades in the US media, the person of the year award (2004):

George W Bush, "revolutionary president".

Twelve months later the same man finds himself again on the cover of a magazine.

This time it is Newsweek and the commander in chief looks impish and helpless inside a soap bubble floating over the headline:

"Bush's world. The isolated president.
Can he change?"

President Bush has become "bubble boy", according to the New York Times, and his revolution seems to have popped.

Before most of Washington prepared to flee the capital for the holidays they dealt with one final pre-Christmas surprise.

Inside the Beltway dinner party conversation is currently dominated by a vocabulary that sends shivers down most civilised spines: 'extraordinary renditions', 'black sites' and 'water boarding'

The New York Times published an article, which it had been sitting on for a year, according to which the president personally allowed the super-secret National Security Agency to bug the e-mails and phone calls of Americans without getting the requisite approval of a secret court.

After a day's embarrassed silence the White House decided to go on the offensive, claiming that Congress had given Mr Bush the green light to use all necessary means to protect the country after 9/11.

Democrats - and quite a few Republicans - jumped up and said: "We only allowed you to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and defeat the Taleban. We didn't permit you to bug Americans without court approval!"

It is not clear whether this scandal will survive the Christmas turkey and the recess, but it has raised an issue at the heart of this presidency:

How far can the president push his executive powers in the middle of a war?

George Bush has no doubt had his share of difficult years before, but in political terms 2005 must go down as his worst year in office.

Mr Bush was forced to back-pedal on his Supreme Court pick, Harriet Miers

His approval ratings had plummeted and are only now inching their way up the ladder.

The political capital he sought to spend after his re-election has been squandered on the flopped mission to reform social security.

The renewal of the Patriot Act, once considered a keystone piece of post-9/11 legislation in the war on terror, came unstuck in Congress.

Harriet Miers - his personal lawyer, friend and cherished pick for the Supreme Court - was humiliated and then hounded from nomination even though President Bush had given "his word" that she was the right choice.

The president has been forced to back-pedal on the much heralded overhaul of immigration, thanks to opposition from his own party.

At the end of 2005 there is a lot to be depressed about around the White House Christmas tree. But in the current gloom it is easy to miss the seeds of recovery.

Hurricane Katrina showed the alarming shortcomings of the administration in disaster relief, an area it had prided itself on.

Criminal indictments have washed up on the doorstep of the White House. His chief lieutenant on Capitol Hill, Tom DeLay, aka "the hammer", is facing the gavel of justice in Texas, over allegations that he misused corporate funds for election campaigns.

And hanging over everything is a war of choice that continues to haemorrhage lives, money and public support. Iraq will decide the president's legacy and will probably do so next year.

Torture, security and liberty

Inside the Beltway dinner party conversation is currently dominated by a vocabulary that sends shivers down most civilised spines: "extraordinary renditions", "black sites" and "water boarding".

The land of the free is debating exactly how painful the enhanced interrogation of prisoners needs to be before it can be called torture.

According to the administration anything short of organ failure and death is OK.

According to the Oxford dictionary and the Geneva Conventions that is going too far.

As a friend of mine - a Republican - put it over the din of a recent child's birthday party:

"I am not surprised the rest of the world hates us!"

In recent weeks the White House has gone on the rhetorical offensive over Iraq by basking in humility and contrition

Despite 9/11, America is still a nation more comfortable with being loved than hated.

Today even supporters of the president are wondering whether in the tussle between liberty and security that defines the war on terror, liberty is biting the dust and security is creating some serious "blowback".

A week before Christmas, the White House was forced to bow to the wishes of John McCain, a Republican senator, who had himself been tortured during the Vietnam War.

He argued persuasively that even the most limited application of torture is morally reprehensible, politically counter-productive and ultimately misleading, because people tend to lie under torture just to make the pain go away.

Senator McCain did in Hanoi. His torturers asked him for a list of American spies and air crews.

He gave them the names of the Green Bay Packers football team and they went away satisfied.

The Iraqi parliamentary elections have turned out to be a resounding success. The Sunnis have broken the shackles of fear to flock to the polls in droves.

The challenge of building a viable coalition government is immense but the democratic instinct in Iraq is alive and kicking and that vindicates the president.

Moreover much of the security for the voting was provided by newly trained Iraqi troops.

The administration has already outlined the exit strategy from Iraq: as Iraqi troops stand up, American soldiers can stand down.

If there is a new mood of optimism at the beginning of 2006 the president needs to seize it with some key personnel changes at the White House and a clear vision of achievable goals

If the coming months of coalition horse trading don't disintegrate into chaos and the training of Iraqi troops continues apace - both admittedly big "ifs" - it is possible that the insurgency will lose its quorum of support and become marginalised.

In recent weeks the White House has gone on the rhetorical offensive over Iraq by basking in humility and contrition.

The president who was famous for never admitting fault cannot stop saying sorry: about failed intelligence on WMD; about strategic mishaps in handling the insurgency; about not being welcomed with bouquets of flowers.

The fragile Christmas bauble of contrition is then wrapped in the crisp paper of defiance:

"We won't cut and run! We will do what it takes to achieve total victory."

Those who favour immediate withdrawal are labelled cowards. The mixture of defiance and contrition seems to work.

The most recent opinion polls have the president recovering just enough lost ground to end the year on a higher note.

Robust growth

Mr Bush's biggest assets are the apparent determination of the Iraqi people to rebuild their own country and the inability of the Democrats to proffer any coherent alternatives to the current policy.

In one corner Senator Joe Lieberman - who has been tipped by the rumour mill as a possible replacement for Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon - cries out that any criticism of the president is detrimental to the troops.

In the other corner, respected veterans like Rep Jack Murtha charge that the administration has bungled and that the troops should come home soon.

Meanwhile the economy has refused to tank. US growth is robust.

The US Federal Reserve is expected to slow down if not shelve the string of interest rate rises, Americans are spending less on petrol than they were two months ago and the barrage of hurricanes that careened through the Gulf Coast has done less damage to the economy than most soothsayers had predicted.

If there is a new mood of optimism at the beginning of 2006, the president needs to seize it with some key personnel changes at the White House and a clear vision of achievable goals.

The 2005 State of the Union address soared rhetorically to Mars and Middle East democracy. The next one could strike a humbler note.

The spirit of 9/11, when the administration wrapped every political move in the Stars and Stripes and even the opposition was afraid to ask awkward questions, is wearing off.

Officially America is at war - in Iraq and against terror - but most Americans don't feel as if they are living in a time of sacrifice. This is the schizophrenia of the second Bush term.

Starting on 4 January, 2006, Matt Frei will be writing a fortnightly diary from Washington for the BBC News website.

* BBC (C) Copyright Notice2005


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/24/05:

I wish everyone including our great commander in Chief a Merry Christmas

* even if he did not invite me to the White House for Christmas and wire taped my phone.

And I am not sure the DVD is not watching me either.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 12/24/05 - Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report

Published: December 24, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 23 - The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials.

Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts (December 16, 2005)
Daschle Says Congress Never Authorized Program
Alito Wrote on Wiretaps
The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said.

As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain backdoor access to streams of domestic and international communications, the officials said.

The government's collection and analysis of phone and Internet traffic have raised questions among some law enforcement and judicial officials familiar with the program. One issue of concern to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has reviewed some separate warrant applications growing out of the N.S.A.'s surveillance program, is whether the court has legal authority over calls outside the United States that happen to pass through American-based telephonic "switches," according to officials familiar with the matter.

"There was a lot of discussion about the switches" in conversations with the court, a Justice Department official said, referring to the gateways through which much of the communications traffic flows. "You're talking about access to such a vast amount of communications, and the question was, How do you minimize something that's on a switch that's carrying such large volumes of traffic? The court was very, very concerned about that."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/24/05:

Someone authorised the building of all those giant antennas used to listen to these calls, someone authorised all the buildings and electric equipment needed to do this, and I doubt they have been sitting there empty for the past 10 years waiting to be used.

This has been an ongoing thing for years, they listen and listen, and if they find someone worth listening to longer, they get thier warrants. They are allowed to listen all they want untill they start finding one specific person to listen to, then they have 72 hours to get a warrant to continue listening.

I have never heard that they found anything or anybody that was listened to after a 72 hour peoriod after being picked out on the phone calls.

And I have never heard of this infomation being used in court against anyone, if it has, it can merely be thrown out as illegally gathered. Police and others gain evidence all the time "illegally" it is not able to be used incourt.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 12/24/05 - ID slapped down

Hello Christians:

Wow! Old Judge Jones, the right wing Republican, church going Christian, appointed by Bush himself, said ID was religion. He also said that the Church going, right wing members of that Pennsylvania town school board are liars.

What do you think of that "activist" (hee hee) judge? Maybe he should be replaced with a REAL Bush appointee....... Wait a minute....


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/24/05:

ID, is indeed religion, since it deals with a supreme being of some type that made the earth ( ooooppp that is what happened)

The real issue to me is the teaching of evolution, not slight changes, but the man comming from fish, fish comming out of the water and learning to breath sillyness.

They should teach it as an idea, a "theory" not a fact since it is not proven and never can be since that is not how it happened.

And the case that Jones decided was wrong, in that they took creation text books and merely changed the words to ID.

ID has it place and needs to be taught as another theory, and if there are other theorys that bear teaching they could be taught also. But science has decided that there non proven ideas are facts which they are not.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 12/24/05 - JUST WONDERING ...

... if God came to Earth as a boy who grew up to be Jesus.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/24/05:

Start with Luke 1, gives you good idea

God came to earth as God in creation, came to earth and walked with men thoughout the old testement. God in the person of Jesus was born from a women and became man also.
Did not come to earth as a boy, was born an infant and grew to a man.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 12/24/05 - JUST WONDERING ...

... when and exactly how Jesus received his magical powers.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/24/05:

No magic powers, only all power

Since he always was, and is and will be,

He was at creation. So he never was never not God. .

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/22/05 - A little known by many secret to share with those who don’t know.

When they say Happy Holiday they are really saying, “Happy Holy Days”
My dictionary of word origins says this about the word “holiday”
It is an Old English word that means “holy day”, a day set aside as a religious festival. The first sign of the word being used as a day when no work was done originally because of religious significance (like it being Sunday, a Sabbath Day) appeared in the 14th century.
Then again maybe we should not tell them that information. Instead just smile when the say “Happy Holiday” and answer with “Happy Holy Days” to you also.
They might get the drift and maybe not.
Happy Holy Days,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/23/05:

That is correct, holiday really means Holy Day, and yes it is forgotten by most.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/22/05 - This is for BeelzeBUSH George and anyone who wants to comment.

You said, "The New International Version of the Bible is a horrific translation".
So what do you think is the best translation?
It certainly can't be the King James Version. Even the English Church admits that it is riddled with hundreds of errors.
What's your choice?
Inquisitive minds want to know.
Happy Holy Days,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/23/05:

Jerusalem Bible is the best

And I would challenge that the KJB is riddled with hundreds of errors and if you are talking about the Anglican church ( no such thing as an english church) they are allowing gays to be preists and bishops now, so of course they want errors so they can follow thier sinful route

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/22/05 - Why is it????..................................

Why is it OK if a person had faith in the theory of evolution but not OK if a person has faith in the theory of Intelligent Design?
If studied properly both use physical observation, mathematics, biology, generics, chemistry, cosmology, and other sciences to substantiate the theories.
One has as much physical proofs as the other.
So why is it OK if a person had faith in the theory of evolution but not OK if a person has faith in the theory of Intelligent Design?
It would seem to me that a student should be exposed to both theories since there are renowned scientists who do study both.
Peace and kindness,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/22/05:

Because one says there is a God of some sort, another says there is no God.

And science today does not want to talk about evolution being a theory any longer, they want it to be considered fact.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 12/22/05 - Is this a cult, or some fad, or is it a sickness?

Hello Everyone,

We all have knowledge of some who inflict injury on themself. Som of this may include, cutting or self mutilation There are many throughtout the world with this problem. Some even use razors, and are hospitalized or taken to emergency rooms due to the severe cuts and abuses. One persons, even said, she knew God didn't like her to do this, but she just can't stop it." It's the only way I can cope with my stress." After I cut myself, it feels like a big weight has been lifted off of me."

1- What is this behavior?
2- How do your feel God views it?
3- Why are the highest persons who do this, young teenageers?
4_ Can you offer some better ways of copeing with the distressing feeling these ones get?

Take care,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/22/05:

The people who do this have a mental disorder and need professonal help.

Anyone doing this must be reported so that they can recieve proper help and perhaps medication to help them deal with the issues in thier life.

1. It is a mental health issue

2. God wants them to be well and free from this ilnes

3. It is the highest known group, since they have parents, teachers and more to report them. Adults can do it without much fear of being caught, not sure this is a true fact

4. Get professional mental health counseling and help

sissypants rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 12/22/05 - Recent News:

Hello Everyone,

Two days ago a Chauk aircraft blew up and crashed, killing twenty people. Among them three infants.

What could you say to the family of these people that would comfort them? Please be serious and think about what you would say to them, because I am collecting a number of encouraging thoughts to send to the local news people here in North Miami Beach Florida. This is where the Crash took place. The local news media will be sure they receive these words of comfort, so please be discerning as to your encouragement.

My heart goes out to the family of these twenty people and I wanted to do something that will help them to deal with their greif, so I will be sending all the encouraging words from you guys as well as other groups I belong to. The media will either print the words of encouragment or report it on the television.

Thanks for you time and efforts.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/22/05:

There is nothing that can truly be said that will amny anyone feel better or be of comfort at a time like this.

It is a time for grief for the families, time for them to be held and conforted only by having others near and hopefully other love ones around to share the pain.

Often even the best planned words at times like this are never taken right and often can do harm or often at best not help.

The fact that our prayes will be with them and thier families are all that can be done or really said that will mean anything

cavil rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Tex78 asked on 12/20/05 - Do any of you believe in miracles? I mean real miracles, not a put-on.

Well, I had a miracle happen to me... I was watching TV. Benny Hinn came on. He was praying for people. He turned to the front, and said, there is a man with emphysema, (which I have had for about twenty years,) he has trouble with his lungs, especially the right lung. (I had lung cancer, and they removed a third of my right lung.) Just then I felt something, that I cannot explain.

I never felt anything like that before that I remember. I am sure you do not know how bad off I was, but I will explain. I was on oxygen day and night. I would wake up at night and have to take a puffer to help me breathe. I could not walk across the house without getting out of breath, even with my oxygen on. My oxygen level would drop down into the 80's. Once it dropped to the 70's for a few seconds.

I haven't been on oxygen for about a week now, and haven't needed it. I went to a Super- K-Mart, I walked around the store for a long time. I went over the entire store, some of it two or three times. I checked my oxygen level, and it was 98. I have never seen it that high before. That is since I started having it checked. Never 98, and it stays on 97 and 98 now all the time.

I sleep at night and never need oxygen. I just have to work out some and build my strength back up. As I haven't been able to do anything for so long. I just can't get over it. I have been healed by the Grace of God. Amen. In Jesus’ name. M.L.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/20/05:

God can and does heal people inspite of Benny Hinn, I will have to agree with the others, why God has not struck him down I will never know.

But God does healing, I have seen many over the years. But it was all God.

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sapphire630 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 12/20/05 - A Free Country Needs a Free Press.

Should the press leave Bush to run his empire from the secret dark place of his own mind, assisted only by his intimate inner circle, but outside the law, freed from reponsbibility to the Legislature, the Judiciary, and the American People?

Bush has ridden rough shod over American freedoms and liberties, and has managed to do so bevcause of the Bush Mantra of Fear that turns strong men to Jell-O and othewise sound intellects into mashed potatoes.

The Bush Mantra of Fear is:

9-11 - Osama bin Laden - Al Qaeda - Afganistan - Iraq - & Watch this space, because only me can save you from total annihalation.!"

The Mantra is repeated continuously on every occasion without regard to its truthfulness.

The press (a free press is essential in a democracy) is criticised for pointing out that Bush is snooping on his own citizens in their own country countrary to the Law and Constitution which he has sworn to uphold.

I am opined that the press do the American public a great service by revealing what they have uncovered when it involves his criminality.

Others would like to make everyone keep quiet about his treason, but there is ample precedent for letting the people know what is going on and what is contrary to law, and why Bush is failing in his promise to re-introduce morality into the White House.

The effect of news coverage on presidential administrations is subtle and hard to measure. Mostly because government investigators are reluctant to acknowledge that they were responding to publicity, because to admit they are influenced by journalism suggests that they aren't doing their jobs properly.

Publicity can and should be used to push authorities to take action if only to avoid being embarrassed by media disclosures.

"In Watergate," writes historian David Greenberg, author of the new book "Nixon's Shadow," "it was unclear at first whether the FBI would pursue crimes beyond the break-in itself. If the Post hadn't kept Watergate alive, it's not certain that the bureau, or the Senate, would have kept digging. Woodward and Bernstein's work shaped the way Watergate unfolded."

According to Woodward, the late Sam Ervin, chairman of the Senate Watergate Committee, "called me and asked questions, and his work grew out of the stories that we did."

Woodward says that after Nixon's resignation, the presiding federal judge, the late John Sirica, told him "flat out" that the Post's stories influenced him to crack down on the Watergate conspirators.

"Judges don't decide to get tough in a vacuum," Woodward says. "Senators don't decide to investigate in a vacuum."

Both were influenced by the press, Woodward says, because "the normal legal process wasn't uncovering the abuses. It's that simple."

Other journalists who covered Watergate agree. "The record clearly shows that the cover-up would have worked if the press hadn't done its job," says CBS News anchorman Dan Rather, whose aggressive Watergate reporting led the Nixon White House to try to get him fired.

Rather maintains that Congress and the courts "didn't have a clue, frankly" about Watergate crimes and that federal investigators wised up "only after repeated and constant coverage" by journalists.

Besides, the battle was political as well as legal, says Jack Nelson, who covered Watergate for the Los Angeles Times: "Nixon was fighting not just prosecutors and Congress but also in the court of public opinion. For all of their controlling Congress, the Democrats were not in any sense going to go after Nixon unless the public was behind it. And the public got behind it because of the press holding Nixon's feet to the fire."

Keep the press free, or make it a puppet of the White House, like Stalin and Hitler did?

Are you free or frightened?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/20/05:

What we need is a real free press, one that will not be so one sided on political issues, one that would report the truth about the war, not try to make it the type of war they want.

They need to report both sides of all issues not just they way they want the story to be.

We have long not had good news papers reporting the truth. We have political hot sheets mostly liberal, but some not, that only want the spin they want on the news.

As for as releasing and printing clasified material, they can do it as long as they are willing to face legal action for treason.

If a news paper during the civil war had printed such material they would have just shot the owner an the writer for treason.
Lincoln would have taken any body like that and merely tossed them out of the country.

Kennedy oked the wire tap on MLK. This is nothing new except those that are the real criminals, those that expose classified information are not sent to jail where they belong

The only people really to be scared of in this nation (after the ACLU) is the press, they make people beleive what they want you to beleive, not real facts

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Itsdb asked on 12/19/05 - Common sense on racism

Freeman criticizes black history month

NEW YORK (AP) — Morgan Freeman says the concept of a month dedicated to black history is "ridiculous." "You're going to relegate my history to a month?" the 68-year-old actor says in an interview on CBS' 60 Minutes to air Sunday (7 p.m. ET). "I don't want a black history month. Black history is American history."

Black History Month has roots in historian Carter G. Woodson's Negro History Week, which he designated in 1926 as the second week in February to mark the birthdays of Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln.

Woodson said he hoped the week could one day be eliminated — when black history would become fundamental to American history.

Freeman notes there is no "white history month," and says the only way to get rid of racism is to "stop talking about it."

The actor says he believes the labels "black" and "white" are an obstacle to beating racism.

"I am going to stop calling you a white man and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man," Freeman says.

Freeman received Oscar nominations for his roles in 1987's Street Smart, 1989's Driving Miss Daisy and 1994's The Shawshank Redemption. He finally won earlier this year for Million Dollar Baby.


Amen. This is what I've been trying to say for a long time, I'm glad to see someone like Morgan Freeman say it, too. Do you agree with Freeman's remarks? Why or why not?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/19/05:

so true,

my wife is a singer, you don't know how often we hear "you are such a good singer for a black person" I guess all whites just automaticly sing better since they are white.

But sadly race is a big issue still, on a almost daily basis we see it. The lady at Walmart pharmacy yesterday, waited on two white people ahead of my wife who had to say something before she got waited on

And the list goes on and on.

But then there is a Church in Atlanta calling itself an African Orthodox but it teaches that all white people are satan and that the black Jesus will be comming back to save all black people to save them from the white man

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/18/05 - Is this fair OR unfair or WHAT?......................

College Students Sue California Over Preferences for Illegal Aliens
Jim Kouri, CPP

Attorneys representing college students from 19 states filed a class-action lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions of dollars from officials for charging them significantly more than illegal aliens pay to attend state-run colleges in California.
The state allows illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition, while making out-of-state American citizens pay higher tuition fees.

The 42 plaintiffs allege that California lawmakers and members of the board of regents for the University of California "knowingly violated a federal law enacted in 1996 that says any state that offers discounted in-state tuition to its illegal aliens must provide the same lower rates to all US citizens."

Some of students in the University of California system could be eligible for as much as $300,000 in total damages, according to plaintiffs' attorneys.

The students state that the lawsuit was filed in a state court in Yolo County on behalf of over 50,000 US citizens who have paid out-of-state tuition to attend public colleges and universities in California since 2002.

They also claim that out-of-state students are paying $20,000 more than illegal aliens per year to attend schools in the University of California system. That's $11,000 more than illegal aliens pay for the same education.

"And in the community college system in California, which has a total of 1.5 million students, the tuition differential is $6,000 a year," said attorney and legal scholar Kris Kokach..

California is among the eight states that have laws charging lower in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens who qualify as in-state residents.

Opponents of illegal alien preferences say that those state laws violate a federal statute, which took effect in 1998, that says any state that offers discounted in-state tuition rates at public colleges to illegals living in the state must provide the same lower rates to all US citizens who attend. The legislation was sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, and Sen. Alan K. Simpson, Wyoming Republican.

One angry student said, "These illegal aliens may live in California, but they broke the law to do it. Why should they get preferential treatment over citizens?"

Allegedly, the administrators of the University of California system also recognized that the state law was invalid, and they refused to implement it unless they were "given immunity." As a result, he said, California lawmakers enacted an "immunity statute," which says that if the state tuition law is declared illegal or unconstitutional, schools in the University of California system would not be held liable for retroactive tuition differences.

The bill which gave lower tuition to illegal aliens was signed into law by Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat who was ousted from office by a state recall vote.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/19/05:

and they know they are illegal, where is the INS, where is the state police, if they are illegal, then they are criminials and need to be in JAIL.

They should charge the school with allowing them to stay, harboring criminals, and if they put them on a work study program charge them with hiring illegal workers.

Jail not college,

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Liz22 asked on 12/18/05 - Afraid to ask this question

Bush’s secret action is a violation of federal wiretapping law, the Privacy Act and a violation of the Fourth Amendment. What remedy exists when the President violates federal law and trashes the Bill of Rights? The remedy provided by the Constitution is impeachment.
What are your thought's on this President, whom has broke the Law?
As for myself I was watching it live on CNN, and my mouth just drop, when I heard what he said, as to What are you going to do about it? I'm George I love myself, I'm un-touchable, this frightens me, for history can repeat itself.
America has a President, not a King.
I'm even afraid to ask this question, for we have lost our Privacy

Thank you.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/19/05:

It is correct this is very bad, who ever would leak such secret information, no matter that Congress who is crying so loud all new about it in thier breifings,

What does truth have to do with politics.

And this was listenng to foriegn phone calls that are made.

Guess whay wake up, what do you think those big dishes were used for for years, why do you think they were built.

The interent viewing was told years ago, I remember when someone told about thier big computer that was checking out all internet usage looking for key words. HUN,,, guess who it was that worked to develop the interent yep the Government,

As for as foriegn calls, many were always tracked, and this is not something new, it has been used for years.

What is bad, is that some creep who must really want Amercia to lose the war told this public. They should be found and shoot for treason personally.

And impeach Bush, right like anyone wants Chaney to be President.

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Liz22 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 12/17/05 - JUST WONDERING ...

... if we could ALL get together and come up with some kind of a DOCTRINE that would benefit all of mankind, including the Muslims, starting in January, 2006. I feel that we need a CHALLENGE and that we need to do something CONSTRUCTIVE, like build a DOCTRINE of FREE-WILL and/or design a WORLD GOVERNMENT or BOTH that everyone everywhere could live with! WHY? Many people need our help! (I know this to be true) More people than you may think read what we write on this Christianity Board. If we tried one or two of these projects, I'm quite sure it wouldn't be boring. I would also like to have some Experts who are 'missing' come back to our Board and give us some input. I KNOW THAT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN!


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/17/05:

That everyone will live with the is issue,

The Muslims have a doctrine that they beleive should be worldwide and all others either forced to accept or be killed.

The Christian has no problem with others having all the other faiths they want, since we know that most of the world will never accept Christ and only the minority chooses his path

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 12/16/05 - A Bug Too Far? Can He Avoid Impeachment? A Blow for Right Wing Christians.

Bush stands firm over spying row
George W Bush

President George W Bush insists he has not compromised civil liberties, after it was alleged he authorised people in the US to be bugged without a warrant.

A storm of protest erupted after the New York Times said the National Security Agency (NSA)** was allowed to eavesdrop on hundreds of people.

Senators from both sides called for an explanation and investigation.

Mr Bush refused to confirm or deny the claims, but said he always upheld the law and protected civil liberties.

The president said he would not discuss ongoing intelligence operations.

But he added: "I will make this point. That whatever I do to protect the American people, and I have an obligation to do so, that we will uphold the law, and decisions made are made understanding we have an obligation to protect the civil liberties of the American people."

The New York Times said Mr Bush signed a secret presidential order following the attacks on 11 September 2001, allowing the NSA, based at Fort Meade, Maryland, to track the international telephone calls and e-mails of hundreds of people without referral to the courts.

Previously, surveillance on American soil was generally limited to foreign embassies.

Critics have questioned whether wider surveillance in the US crosses constitutional limits on legal searches.

American law usually requires a secret court, known as a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, to give permission before intelligence officers can conduct surveillance on US soil.

'Big brother'

Republican Senator John McCain called for an explanation.

Senator Arlen Specter, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman and another Republican, said "there is no doubt that this is inappropriate", adding that Senate hearings would be held early next year as "a very, very high priority".

Senator John McCain, Republican (left) and Senator Joe Lieberman, Democrat
Senators from both sides have expressed disquiet

"This is Big Brother run amok," was the reaction of Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy, while his colleague Russell Feingold called it a "shocking revelation" that "ought to send a chill down the spine of every senator and every American".

The allegations coincided with a setback for the Bush administration, as the Senate rejected extensions to spying provisions in the Patriot Act.

BBC Washington correspondent Justin Webb said it is a sign of intense concern about infringements of civil liberties in the name of security.

The White House is having a tough time convincing even its Republican supporters that the things it does in the name of the war on terrorism are always justified, he adds.

Echoes of Vietnam

Administration officials issued a robust defence of anti-terrorist operations, saying they had prevented several attacks - including one on targets in Britain.

But the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said eavesdropping in the US without a court order and without complying with the procedures of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was "both illegal and unconstitutional".

"The administration is claiming extraordinary presidential powers at the expense of civil liberties and is putting the president above the law," director Caroline Fredrickson said.

To opponents of the Bush administration, the alleged bugging programme is reminiscent of the widespread abuse of power by the security services during the Vietnam War when anti-war activists were monitored illegally, our correspondent says.

That activity prompted tougher regulation of bugging.

Formed in 1952
Biggest US security agency, with 38,000 employees
Nicknamed "No Such Agency"
Has a dozen listening posts around the world, tracking phone calls, diplomatic traffic, emails, faxes
May record up to 500 million hours of traffic every day
On US soil, can only listen to "agents of a foreign power"
NSA is America's most powerful spy agency


Has Bush infringed the civil liberties of American citizens and acted illegally?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/17/05:

Let me see, a person makes a phone call,

almost all, if not all calls use microwave towers for transmission. In it most likely that between business spying, international spying that someone has recorded most transmission. International calls have always been allowed to be listened to.
And actuallly they don't listen, they merely record all of them. Then the computers pick up certain ones that use key words and phrases it has been programed to pick up and

And why now report this, this is not a NEW news article, just like that one Iraq leader being caught and let go.

There is GOOD NEWS comming from Iraq but the news people can't report it, so they go to one or two year old news and bring it back up again.

It is obvoius what the news people are doing, how can anyone fall for thier tricks.

As for the allowance, the law to do this was already in place, Bush merely made it easier to do. Sad people can't support the war on terrow, I guess they would prefer to convert to Islam and just give up.

ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
JesseJamesDupree rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
MaggieB rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 12/16/05 - It's All About Money

For the longest time, I wondered, why does the religious right stir-up terrible fears in the average folks where there is no real reason for fear. For example, stores say Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas!!!!

It is all about raising money.

It is easy to raise money if simple people think there is an attack of horrific proportions on their religions. There is no attack on any religions **RIGHTS**.

But, if you think so, you'll send money.

I'm right, aren't I????

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/16/05:

Nope, it is all about making sure that Christmas stays Christmas, not winter holiday.

christmas trees are just that not holiday trees.

But all of this sadly costs money to file law suits, to organise boycotts of stores to advertise about the problems.

To fund the educational talk shows about Christian values.

I wish the world would furnish this free but since it has to be paid for, Christians join in to fight the evil trying to take all of Christianity out of our nation.

It was founded on Christianity, and needs to stay that way.

Choux rated this answer Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 12/16/05 - Let's move Christmas out of the holiday season!!!!

Go ahead, move his day

December 16, 2005
by Andrew Greeley

A long time ago a very wise teen told me that she thought it was a shame that Christmas came during the holidays. She had a point. I've often thought that the ancient church made a mistake when it tried to convert the Roman feast of the Saturnalia (or Lupercalia as it was also called) into the celebration of the birthday of Jesus. It didn't quite work. In Britain, for example, from Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol to Dylan Thomas's "A Child's Christmas in Wales," there is not the slightest mention of Jesus.

When I watch folks pummel one another as they fight their way toward Wal-Mart's bargains, I'm not sure there's all that much left of Bethlehem and the holy family and the angels and the shepherds and the magi -- nor of the love for one another that Christmas should sustain. Neither do the frantic and frenetic efforts to accomplish the required shopping and the ill tempers and sensitive egos of the feast day itself render much honor to the Light of the World. So maybe we should move the birthday of Jesus out of the holidays and celebrate it with the Festival of the Magi on Jan. 6, as did the Greeks in the church of long ago.

Then we solve the problem of what to say this time of the year. Having given the holidays back to the pagans, we could wish one another a "Festive Lupercalia" or even a "Fertile Saturnalia." The tree could revert to its pagan title of the Tannenbaum, the sacred fir tree of the Teutonic tribes, the passionate tree that unites heaven and earth in love and brings down the warm spring rains necessary for life to continue on earth.

Crypto Christians could content themselves with the secret that the birth of Jesus did unite earth and heaven and that the lights represent the Light of the World and the fruits (ornaments) represent ourselves, the spiritual offspring of the love between earth and heaven. As long as we keep that a secret, neither secularists (who don't like religion at this time of the year) or the "Christians" (who think fertility symbols to be obscene idolatry) will mind at all.

The president, a Christian to whom God gives instructions about wars, could hardly mind. A born-again Christian he might be, yet his holiday card is totally irreligious.

The Madonna Christmas stamp would have to go, however. It almost disappeared during the Clinton administration when a bureaucrat at the Postal Service decided it was not politically correct. The (Jewish) mother of Jesus and her (Jewish) child survived on a stamp only because of direct presidential intervention. If my reform of the festival is to succeed, the Jan Gosseart Madonna and Child -- from Chicago's Art Institute, be it noted -- will be her last appearance on a stamp. Besides, real "Christians" should consider honoring her on a government stamp an act of federally sponsored idolatry.

I can't be serious, you say? Well, no. Nonetheless, I find the controversy about Christmas and the holidays unedifying and creepy. The sneaky tricks of the politically correct to remove Christ from the holidays are doomed to failure. There are many more evangelical Christmas shoppers and voters than there are secularists. Logically, Christmas is a politically incorrect festival that causes embarrassment to those Americans who are not Christians (though not to Islamic shoppers, since for them Jesus is the greatest of the prophets before Mohammed and his birthday deserves to be celebrated). However, Christmas is an intricate element in American culture and cannot be extirpated.

The last such attempt was made by the New England Puritans -- ancestors, one suspects, of many of the contemporary secularists -- who forbade it by law. School attendance on Dec. 25 was required in Massachusetts until the 1880s, and Thanksgiving was designated the late autumn festival to replace the Popish idolatry of Christmas. The Papists responded by enthusiastically celebrating both feasts.

The gift exchange at Christmas -- however often blighted by human weakness -- represents the intense love that should flourish this time of the year. The darkness-turning-into-light spirit of the season would be best reflected by respect for the traditions of others, majority and minority. Those of us who know what all the symbols mean will keep our secrets to ourselves.

And to paraphrase slightly Tiny Tim: "Bon Noel everyone!"

[end of column]

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/16/05:

I will be April 15 from this time forth.
That way Americans would really be confused, be happy for Christmas, or sad for tax day.

It was actually never to replace the Roman Holiday, it was done by one of the early Bishops of Rome on Dec 15 so that Christians
(at the time an outlaw religion) could celebrate it and not be caught. With all of the other celebration, they would just fit in and not be noticed.

It has went from there.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 12/15/05 - I just wnat to clarify something

I will not qualify my every remark just because you politically correct americans think that every remark must carry the qualification (of, course not all") what is wrong with you, you live in a sick society and think every one has to be appeased. I make no apologies for my veiws, and for the Record you can't be a practising gay and be a practising Christian, you can't be a terrorist and be a practising Muslim, etc.

It goes with out saying that not all Christians are crusaders, not all Muslims are terrorists, not all americans are idiots.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/16/05:

Well said, it is those who wish to force the minority belief on the majority in America by name calling and by legal action outside and by changing the teachings of the constitution though liberal teachings.

The clause about not adopting a state religion is spouted all the time, but then the rest of the clause about not passing any laws restricting the practice of religion is thrown out the window.

The Sodomites in our nation already have degraded the morals of our nation by getting their perverted sexual practices allowed and permitted within our society.

Now they wish to force others not to even be able to tell the truth about Gods view on it. And when you do, they want Americans to consider you the wrong person by name calling.

Well honestly perverts and those that support them thinking or calling me names make me laugh since what value is thier opinion anyway.

Next of course the decline of Christian values is a world wide problem that many nations are dealing with. But here in the US though threat of legal action the Anti Christian legal union(ACLU) have worked for many years, taking away one christian right after another. Finally and sadly the Christians now are using the same method, filing law suit after law suit or threating to across the nation to keep what little rights we have left.

Politically active, never politically correct

ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 12/16/05 - Keystone Kops? so much for US training

Official: Al-Zarqawi caught, released
Authorities didn't realize prisoner was terrorist mastermind

Thursday, December 15, 2005 Posted: 2244 GMT (0644 HKT)

An Iraqi official says Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was caught and released last year.

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.

Hussain Kamal confirmed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- the al Qaeda in Iraq leader who has a $25 million bounty on his head -- was in custody at some point last year, but he wouldn't provide further details.

A U.S. official couldn't confirm the report, but said he wouldn't dismiss it.

"It is plausible," he said.

Thursday's news tops a list of reports of missed opportunities to capture the 39-year-old terrorist mastermind. An official said the military receives frequent reports of al-Zarqawi sightings, all of which are investigated. (View profile on al-Zarqawi)

In April, U.S. troops stormed a hospital in Ramadi based on credible intelligence that terrorists were hiding there, but no suspects were found, military officials said in early May.

A high-ranking Iraqi Army officer said there were rumors that al-Zarqawi was at the Ramadi medical center, and several groups affiliated with the al Qaeda operative issued statements saying the same.

Iraqi Lt. Gen. Nasser Abadi said Thursday that al-Zarqawi was taken to the hospital. He added that he didn't believe Kamal's report was correct.

"When we got the news, we rushed there, but he was out of there," the general said.

The Jordanian-born al-Zarqawi was almost captured in February, too, after troops received a tip that he was heading to a meeting in Ramadi, said Pentagon officials speaking on condition of anonymity.

With his vehicle under surveillance by an unmanned Predator spy plane, troops set up checkpoints along his route. As al-Zarqawi's truck approached one of the checkpoints, the vehicle abruptly turned around, the officials said.

He was chased for several miles, but when troops finally ran his vehicle down, the terrorist had escaped. His driver and security guard were arrested, and troops found a computer with a "treasure trove of information" that offered a clear indication that al-Zarqawi corresponded regularly with al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the officials said.

Colin Powell first linked al-Zarqawi with al Qaeda in a February 2003 speech to the U.N. Security Council, in which he said, "Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda lieutenants."

Before taking the moniker al Qaeda in Iraq, his organization was known as Unification and Jihad, which the U.S. State Department labeled a "foreign terrorist organization" in October 2004.

His group has taken responsibility for or been accused by the U.S. of perpetrating or aiding in numerous suicide bombings, car bombings, beheadings and other acts of violence.

Included are a February 2005 suicide bombing in Hilla that left 127 Iraqis dead, an October 2004 execution-like massacre of 44 Iraqi soldiers east of Baghdad and an August 2003 car bombing in Najaf that killed more than 85 people. Ayatollah Mohammad Baqr al-Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, was killed in the Najaf bombing.

Al-Zarqawi also is suspected to be the masked man who beheaded Nick Berg, an American civilian in Iraq, on May 11, 2004.

In April, two Web sites posted an audio message, purportedly from al-Zarqawi, in which he urges his followers to continue their attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and warns President Bush he will never relent.

Now the question remains, with blunders like this, who is responsible for the lives this man has taken since?
I suggest that such negligence lies right at the top.

I wonder, at some point in time, did they catch Bin Laden and let him go too? Incrediable incompetance? or are we just expected to believe the Iraqi'a are stupid.

I think this proves you can't trust you know who!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/16/05:

Let me see, no fingerprinting ID data to use, out dated pictures and now they are operating with many of the "rights" adopted from the US.

In the US, police stop, detain and release wanted criminals on a almost daily basis because they have restrictions on how long they may hold, how they may even stop.

This was merely the news people attempt not to report on how well the election went.
They just can't tell good news from IRAQ.

They did not want to show the police doing an excellent job of controling the voting.

They did not want to show the millions voting, they only wanted to find some bad news.

But after this time, every concerned person should know that. We never see schools being open, water plants starting up, kids playing in the parks and on the streets.

Compared to the wars of past years, the death toll is very verylow, but that is not told either.

Main line news ( more like main line we will tell you how we want it to be) has long ago stoped reporting but trying to tell you they way it should be.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 12/15/05 - Here is a situation:

Hello Everyone.

What would you do and say to someone who is trying to change their life to live according to God’s standards and principles, but, this someone has a drinking problem they are working on and yet has a father who drinks to the point of getting drunk, and is always hanging out at there house. An Uncle who wants to commit suicide, and wants this person to join them and make a pack to do it together? What would you do or say to help the person trying to change to doing God’s will but must cope with these other two who are discouraging and who this person must see each day.

What would you say or do to keep them going forward in their desire to serve God? What spiritual encouragement would you give to help this person?

All suggestions are welcomed.

Take care,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/15/05:

They need to move and get somewhere else to live and have little to do with the current family members. Get thier life straight and be an example to the other members of the family.

To start, they need to get couseling for thier problem plus for the children of alcholic parents.

The person wanting to commit sucicide, if they always talk, almost never do it, but he needs to be reported for the persons own good.

hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 12/12/05 - Pray for the soul of tookie

Stanly tookie williams will go to meet his maker in a few hours and I feel he could use a few prayers right now if he is truly reformed then God will know,if not no prayer can help can it?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/12/05:

I wish reforming behavior was all it takes, but all the good works in the world does not save anyone, it will have to be acceptance of Christ and while he may have, I have never heard of him accepting Christ

I will pray that he either has or will

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ROLCAM asked on 12/10/05 - TO SERVE :-

How can I be a messenger of God's reign ?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/10/05:

Let me see, we are doing advent right now, and had the story of John the Baptist.

Perhaps you could try going into the wilderness, animal skins, eating locust and honey and calling everyone to repentence.

Of course you could see what talents God has given you and find a way to use them for God's glory.

ROLCAM rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/10/05 - Is the Bush administration dismantling the VA?

Please take a look at this and answer the quetion form your experience and opionion.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/10/05:

No, this is a basicly political article with little news value and more political opinion.

It was based basily on a supposed side comment of a aide. ( of course the name of the aide and senator is not told)

The VA while it does a good job also has alot of fat and waste and is not purely paid for by tax money.

And example is VA nursing homes, WWII Veterans were promised free VA homes when they grew old. But both Democrats and Republicans have not increased their spending to cover these costs.

I currently pay 1800 a month to have my dad stay in a VA home. Not free or even cheap by any means

The VA has been forgotten by all parties.

It is a wrong of all, they use it for putting blame, but you don't see any of them actually giving them enough money.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 12/10/05 - latest news

Jhust heard on tv Richard Prior has died !

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/10/05:

Our prayers for his family and love ones.

I did not care for his choice in "humor" but I am sure many did enjoy his work.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 12/10/05 - If a licensed (Christian) pharmacist has the right to

"say no whenever he/she chooses -- in some cases, denying patients the ability to fill the prescriptions elsewhere," do public (degreed) librarians have the right to select and order only those books they approve of and want to appear on the library shelves?

(Isn't that censorship - abridging the rights of patrons, those people whose tax dollars fund that library? - and actually abridging the rights of anyone who comes in to use the library?)

And btw, there are throughout the world many atheist, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim and, gosh darn, liberal librarians. Do you want the aforementioned filling your library shelves only with material that is aligned with their belief systems and worldviews?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/10/05:

You hit the nail, tax dollars, tax dollars don't keep the pharmacy open, it is "free" enterprise.

Not all pharmacy carry all drugs, I take one specific drug that I can not get everywhere. I guess by this thinking I should sue the drug store that does not carry my drugs.

If our tax dollars paid for the drug store to remain open then the government may have more say, but they don't get tax dollars payment of medicaid or medicare drugs, but that is not "given" money it is merley payment for services.

Should we make walmart sell every item we want, perhaps we should make this web site have other certain chat groups.

In private business, the government has no right or business telling a business what they can or can't do.

If the store wishes to fire the pharmacist if they will not follow company policy then they can do that. but if that pharmacist owns his own shop, ( like most small stores are) it should be up to the stores to either fire the emploees that will not follow company rules, or the person can merely go to another store.

My local store does not carry RC soda, so should the government make them sell it, since I don't want to drive further to buy it??

Private business should have the right to sell or not sell what they want.

( remember the old signs we reserve the right to refuse anyone service????)

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 12/09/05 - Do You Believe

in the concept of entities from other galaxies coming to earth(UFO's).

Do you think that they have a relationship to your religious beliefs?

Just wondering.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/10/05:

If they did come, don't see earth being a real inter galaxy vacation spot.

But it has no effect at all on religious beliefs. The bible tells of mans relationship with God. heaven is not in space somewhere. The discovery of new continents Asia, America did not effect mans faith and beleif in God. That whole round earth idea did not stop belief in God.

A few UFO would have no effect, they neither add or take away from the bible or religious faith

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 12/09/05 - Mormon Governor Romney Ruiles on Morning-After Pill for Rape Victims

The Boston Globe
Romney says no hospitals are exempt from pill law
He reverses stand on Plan B

By Scott Helman, Globe Staff | December 9, 2005

Governor Mitt Romney reversed course
on the state's new emergency contraception law yesterday, saying that all hospitals in the state will be obligated to provide the morning-after pill to rape victims.

The decision overturns a ruling made public this week by the state Department of Public Health that privately run hospitals could opt out of the requirement if they objected on moral or religious grounds.

Romney had initially supported that interpretation, but he said yesterday that he had changed direction after his legal counsel, Mark D. Nielsen, concluded Wednesday that the new law supersedes a preexisting statute that says private hospitals cannot be forced to provide abortions or contraception.

''And on that basis, I have instructed the Department of Public Health to follow the conclusion of my own legal counsel and to adopt that sounder view," Romney said at the State House after signing a bill on capital gains taxes.

The unexpected decision revived an awkward political situation for Romney, who has staked out more conservative positions on social issues as he gears up for a possible presidential run in 2008. After vetoing the emergency contraception bill this summer, he declared himself firmly ''prolife" and faulted the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

Yesterday, abortion opponents, who see the morning-after pill as a form of abortion, predicted a court battle over the issue, while reproductive rights advocates expressed surprise at the change of heart. Democrats accused the governor of a ''flip-flop."

Romney made his announcement a week before the controversial law takes effect. His decision resolves, for now, a debate that has raged since the Department of Public Health disclosed its position Monday. The department had said that the existing statute allowed private hospitals to sidestep the new requirement if they wished. Massachusetts is one of eight states that require all hospitals to offer emergency contraception to rape victims.

A dozen Bay State hospitals that treat rape victims do not provide the morning-after pill, according to a 2004 survey by NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. The interpretation that all hospitals must offer the pill could have the greatest impact on Catholic hospitals that do not provide emergency contraception because it violates their religious tenets.

Catholic hospitals are extremely reluctant to discuss the issue. Christine A. Baratta -- a spokeswoman for the Caritas Christi Health Care System, which operates six Catholic hospitals in Massachusetts -- would only answer questions via e-mail. She said Caritas will continue to provide emergency contraception to sexual assault victims as long as they're not pregnant and that the hospitals use a serum blood test to determine pregnancy. It's unclear how that policy will conform with the law.

Caritas caregivers, Baratta said, ''are committed to providing sexual assault victims the appropriate, comprehensive, and compassionate psychological, spiritual, and medical care they require."

Representatives of other Catholic hospitals -- Mercy Medical Center in Springfield, Saint Vincent Hospital in Worcester, and Saints Memorial Medical Center in Lowell -- did not return phone calls yesterday. Mercy and Saints Memorial officials have not returned repeated phone messages this week.

The emergency contraception pill, also called Plan B, is a high dose of hormones that women can take up to five days after sex to prevent pregnancy. Supporters of the new law say rape victims should have broad access to what they consider to be a safe, effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancies. But some conservatives and Catholic groups oppose the morning-after pill because they believe it amounts to abortion in some cases.

The fight over the law is unlikely to end with Romney's pronouncement.

Daniel Avila -- associate director for policy and research for the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the Boston Archdiocese -- said yesterday that despite the new administration position, Catholic hospitals will continue to have a basis for not handing out the morning-after pill.

''It's far from over," Avila said, arguing that Catholic hospitals can still rely on prior statute because the Legislature did not expressly repeal it in passing the new bill. ''As long as that statute was left standing, I think those who want to rely on that statute for protection for what they're doing have legal grounds."

Avila said it was premature to be ''disappointed with any permutation in the debate," because a legal challenge was certain.

''It will be determined in the courtroom," he said.

Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly was asked yesterday if he expected to have to take any enforcement action against hospitals that don't comply. ''I certainly hope that it won't come to that," he said.

State Public Health Commissioner Paul Cote Jr. said in an interview Monday that his department felt strongly that the new emergency contraception law did not compel all hospitals to provide the morning-after pill.

Romney said earlier through communications director,Eric Fehrnstrom that he supported the department's ruling because it respected ''the views of healthcare facilities that are guided by moral principles on this issue."

Asked yesterday to elaborate on that position, Romney said simply that the law was the law and that the state had to follow it. The governor characterized his own beliefs about emergency contraception this way: ''My personal view, in my heart of hearts, is that people who are subject to rape should have the option of having emergency contraception or emergency contraception information."

''We're certainly happy to see that the administration decided that clear state laws, even those that this administration might not agree with, really need to be enforced and followed by everyone," said Mary Lauby, executive director of Jane Doe Inc., a Massachusetts coalition against sexual assault and domestic violence.

The chief legislative sponsors of the new law also praised the decision. ''I think his lawyers are right," said state Senator Pamela Resor, an Acton Democrat. ''I am pleased to be able to say it."

Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, who would seek the GOP gubernatorial nomination if Romney does not run for reelection next year, has been a supporter of emergency contraception and said this week she believes rape victims should be able to get it at any hospital.

Reilly, seeking the Democratic nomination in the governor's race, took credit yesterday, as did other Democrats and reproductive rights organizations, for pressuring Romney to abandon a policy they said would have only burdened victims.

''I think we're all very happy that the administration has backed off on this," Reilly told reporters yesterday at a press conference with representatives of Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. ''This administration was on a road that would have made it worse for women in that position."

Gubernatorial hopeful Deval Patrick was one of several Democrats yesterday to attack Romney for what they said was a ''flip-flop."

''The governor got to the right decision. But, he took a long way to get there," Patrick said in a statement.

Raphael Lewis of the Globe staff contributed to this report.

Scott Helman can be reached at

© Copyright 2005 Globe Newspaper Company.



Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/10/05:

It is sad that the ACLU and other civil right people will not stand up for such a blow agaisnt constititional rights.

Where is the out rage on passing laws that regulate religion.

Where is the out rage on control of private business.

You laught when they take away someone elses rights, but who laughts when they take away your rights

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 12/09/05 - Interesting Legal Case in Illinois

""An "Association of Rightwing Christian Pharmacists" makes as much sense as a Zoroastrian Firefighters Association, or the Bill Maher School of Marriage Counseling -- at least if you believe the activists who say they shouldn't have to provide the basic services required of the profession. Christian Conservatives say they are defending the "rights" of Christian pharmacists, but they are actually using a civil-rights argument to **impose their values** and their wills on the bodies of others.

Couching their legal battle as one of "civil liberties" and using code phrases like "the forced dispensing of abortion drugs," right-wing Fundamentalist groups are underwriting legal battles in Illinois and elsewhere. Their representatives are adamant:

"Karen Brauer, president of Pharmacists for Life International, said pharmacists should not be forced to prescribe medication they find morally objectionable nor should they be required to refer patients to pharmacists who would willingly dispense those medications."

Does someone's brand of faith prevent them from dispensing contraceptives, or other forms of medication, in good conscience? Fine -- then it would be reasonable to expect them to refer a patient to someone who will. If it's late in the evening in an unfamiliar town, a pharmacist saying "no" can wield a great deal of power. That's especially when someone is seeking emergency contraception, or is in urgent need of a medication.

Organized groups of "Christian pharmacists" reject that position, and want the "right" to say no whenever they choose -- in some cases, denying patients the ability to fill the prescriptions elsewhere. Now Walgreen's has become the latest battleground in the Christian pharmacy war, after it "effectively fired" four Illinois pharmacists (their attorneys' language) for "refusing to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception in violation of a state rule."

It's paid for "public interest group" funded by Pat Robertson, who has apparently been able to take a break from wishing devastation on the citizens of Dover, PA. Although Robertson's group says it is pursuing the matter with the state's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, you can bet the goal is not to fight discrimination -- although they'll claim that it is. (Nothing seems to amuse a conservative more than to try using institutions that were created for progressive purposes, like the EEOC, for repressive purposes.)

The issue at hand is the "plan B" or "morning after" pill. But it's a short walk from there to other contraceptives -- then to Viagra, condoms ... use your imagination. The "Christian pharmacist" groups and their backers say that not only should they be able to refuse to dispense medications they find immoral, but that they should have the right to refuse to help patients find other pharmacists who will help them. In fact, some claim they have the right to sieze the customer's prescription, and say that returning it to the patient would be tantamount to collaborating in a murder.

That's a very severe belief, but it's one they have every right to have. Being true to that belief, however, should demand something of them -- that they choose not to be pharmacists in a civil society that practices freedom of religion. After all, Thoreau and Gandhi went to prison for their beliefs. All that these fundamentalist pharmacists' consciences ask of them is that they quit their jobs at Rite-Aid or CVS.

Buddhists in traditional Japan couldn't be butchers without violating their religious beliefs -- so they didn't enter that profession........""


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/09/05:

Seems you have it reversed, What about the freedom to sell what you beleive is right, does this mean the government should force all stores to sell condoms if they don't want to sell them.

They have a right to sell or not sell what they wish.

Next they are being "forced" to give a prescription they do not believe in. Where is thier rights???

Next this is also expanding to hospitals where it is law that a rape victim be given an (morning after pill) ** why don't they call it kill the baby if you are pregnet pill)

The Catholic Hospitals have ( and I assume will continue to) refuse to do so.

This will end up in either the Catholic Hospitals perhaps just closing, or refusing to treat rape victims.

And on quiting thier jobs, they had these jobs long before these death hate groups decided to force thier values on others. So why should they have to quit because someone.

I like Pespi, not Coke, so if a store does not sell Pespi, I don't sue them to sell it, I go to the store that does.

This is the free enterprise system. Not a communist state where the government tells us what we can or can't sell.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

revdauphinee asked on 12/09/05 - looking for comments

I am interested in comments from the baord on the The fate of Stanley Tookie Williams and also the Debra le Favre cases I have my own oppinions but am interested in those of other members!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/09/05:

I am opposed to the death penalty in general.

On the one in California, it appears he has changed from his gang life style, this does not mean he should ever get out of prison, but I think this is good support for life in prison instead of death

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Pete_Hanysz asked on 12/09/05 - ACLU

Forgive my ignorance, I am from the UK.

Recently there has been a lot of comment on the American Civil Liberties Union.
Not having heard of them, I checked out their website & read their mission statement below:

Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.

Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.

Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.

Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.

What is the problem?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/09/05:

If they actually tried to do that, it would not be a problem, but they don't do that.

They don't want equal, they want no Christian speach what so ever in public places but Ok for other religions is thier real basic principle.

Next there is no constitutional seperation of Church and State, that is a false teaching not in the Constitution. The government is just not allowed to have a state religion or pass any laws restricting religion.

They are now basicly ANTI Christian, no speaking of Christ in schools, no speaking of Christ at the work place, no Chrsitian displays in government buildings or property.

They normally represent a very few off the wall or athiests who are "offended" by some mention of Christianity and sue.

They are the most Un Americian and most dangerous group in America. They have and will do more damage to actual freedom of religion than any group in the history of America

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Pete_Hanysz rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/08/05 - ACLU encouraging neighbors to become spys? Yup!


The website of the Ohio chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is asking citizens to be on the lookout for nativity scenes in their towns. The exact wording of their message is “Contact the ACLU: E-Mail us and send a detailed message regarding the contents and location of the display as well as a phone number where you can be reached. While the ACLU may not be able to assist everyone who contacts us, we will provide assistance when we can.”

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/09/05:

They also want anyone to tell them if they see the 10 commandments posted, if anyone says Christ or Bibile in school.

As I have said they are far more dangerous to america than any foriegn terrorist ever will be.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 12/07/05 - Where is your disgust for kidnapping and torture by Americans under born-again-Bush's control?

"The United States does not use torture at home or abroad."

What does men dresssed in black like Ninjas with full face masks grabbed a German in Macedonia on 'suspicion' of having a name similar to a wanted man, and on 'suspicion' of having a fake passport.

He was stripped, given an enema, drugged, and intimidated and put on an airplane to Afghanistan where he was kept incommunicado for four months before they found out they had grabbed and abused the wrong man.

No one had been informed that he had been endungoned and abused and tortured. He had just 'disappeared.'

Now they had an innocent man on their hands and had to decide what to do. Should they just drop him off in Macedonia and run away, knowing that no one would believe a word he said but think of him as insane?

His passport proved genuine. He was not the 'target' of the kidnap ghost squad.

They decided against dropping him off in Macedonia when the Macedonians said they couldn't. They already had enough egg on their faces.

They were forced through Hobson's Choice to have one of the top CIA men speak with one of the top German Secret Service men. It was too risky for Bush to raise it with the Reichskancellor, so it was kept hushed."

Now what? Why didn't CNN and other American networks carry this story?

Are kidnapping, the tryarannical practice of disaparados, and torture great American values?

Time for a change!


'They beat me from all sides'

A German car salesman
says that a year ago he was kidnapped in Europe, beaten and flown to a US-controlled jail in Afghanistan.

Now the German government is collecting evidence to back up his story.

James Meek hears Khaled el-Masri's account of life in America's secret offshore prison network

Friday January 14, 2005
The Guardian

A man is walking alone along a mountain path in the darkness. He is carrying a suitcase. He seems frightened, tired and confused.

He has long hair and a long beard, but they are untidy, as if he did not grow them voluntarily.

He turns a bend and meets three men carrying Kalashnikovs.

The man shows them his passport. It indicates that he is a German citizen, born in Lebanon, called Khaled el-Masri.

Using poor English, he tells them that he does not know where he is.

They tell him that he is on the Albanian border, close to Serbia and Macedonia, and that he is there illegally since he doesn't have an Albanian stamp in his passport.

The story that el-Masri tells them by way of explanation, on this evening in late May 2004, is extraordinary: a story of how an unemployed German car salesman from the town of Ulm went on a New Year's holiday to Macedonia, was seized by Macedonian police at the border, held incommunicado for weeks without charge, then beaten, stripped, shackled and blindfolded and flown to a jail in Afghanistan, run by Afghans but controlled by Americans.

Five months after first being seized, he says, still with no explanation or charge, he was flown back to Europe and dumped in an unknown country which turned out to be Albania.

What really happened? With no way to prove his story, el-Masri's account remains in the balance, a terrifying snapshot of America's "war on terror".

It is certain that he returned home to Ulm from Albania in May 2004, and that he was taken off a bus from Germany at the Macedonian border on New Year's Eve 2003.

The only person who has offered a clear explanation for what happened in the five months in between is el-Masri himself.

Yet that may change.

The German authorities are now taking his allegations very seriously.

They are subjecting a sample from el-Masri's hair to radioisotope analysis, which can reveal, down to a particular country, the source of a person's food and drink over a period of time.

Discussions are also under way about bringing to Germany two men whom el-Masri has identified as being with him in the Afghan prison, and who were also subsequently released.

The fact that the German authorities do regard Ulm as an area of potentially dangerous radical Islamic activity - a number of premises were raided and alleged Islamic activists were arrested on Wednesday - only emphasises the concern that Germany has over the el-Masri case.

So far the US authorities have neither confirmed nor denied el-Masri's story, although German investigators first requested information about the case in autumn.

The FBI office in the US embassy in Berlin did not return calls yesterday.

On Tuesday The Guardian (England) was the first European news organisation to interview el-Masri, at the Ulm offices of his lawyer, Manfred Gnjidic.

In a conversation lasting more than four hours, el-Masri conveyed a powerful impression of sincerity: if his story is not true, he must be an actor of genius.

He broke down in sobs as he described the moment he was abducted by masked men and put on a plane, excused himself to vomit as he recalled the filthy water he was given to drink in jail, and brightened as he described the hours before his return to Germany.

Often he would pick up a pen and sketch the layout of a room or building.

If true, the abduction would add to our understanding of a pattern of US behaviour frightening in its implications both for America and for the rest of the world.

The former director of the CIA, George Tenet, told the US 9/11 Commission last year that even before September 11 the US had abducted more than 70 foreigners it considered terrorists - a process Washington has declared legal under the label "extraordinary rendition".

An investigation by the Washington Post last year suggested that the US held 9,000 people overseas in an archipelago of known prisons (such as Abu Ghraib in Iraq) and unknown ones run by the Pentagon, the CIA or other organisations.

But this figure does not include others "rendered" to third-party governments who then act as subcontractors for Washington, enabling the US to effectively torture detainees while technically denying that it carries out torture.

El-Masri's ordeal began, he says, when he decided to escape, for one week over New Year, the stress of living in a single room in Ulm as the unemployed father of a family of six.

On a friend's recommendation he bought a cheap bus ticket to Skopje, capital of Macedonia, intending to find a hotel when he got there.

The bus left the borders of the EU and crossed Serbia without incident.

Then, at the Macedonian border, at 3pm, el-Masri was called off the bus.

Now 41, he has lived in Germany for 20 years, the last 10 as a citizen.

"I didn't feel bad," he says. "I just thought it was a mistake."

He was taken to a room with a table and chairs where four men whom he took to be Slavic searched his luggage and questioned him in poor English, asking him about links to Islamic organisations.

Several hours later, flanked by armed police, he was driven to a city he assumes was Skopje and escorted to the hotel room where he was to spend the next few weeks.

"I asked if I was arrested," says el-Masri. "They said: 'Can you see handcuffs?'"

El-Masri was kept prisoner in the room for 23 days; Macedonian civilian police were constantly present, and he was subject to repeated interrogations about his links to Islamic organisations - he says he has none - and about the mosque in Ulm where he worships.

After about 10 days, a Macedonian Mr Nice appeared. "He said it was taking a long time, too much time - let's make an end to it, and let's make a deal.

'We have to say you are a member of al-Qaida ... then we'll put you on a plane and take you back to Germany.'

I refused, naturally. It would have been suicide to sign."

But el-Masri was accused of having been to a terror training camp in Jalalabad, of having a fake passport, and being in reality a citizen of Egypt.

On the evening of January 23, he was handcuffed, blindfolded, put in a car and told he was going to Germany.

He was driven to a place where he heard the sound of a plane, then heard the voice of one of the Macedonians saying he would have a medical examination.

"I heard the door being closed," says el-Masri. "And then they beat me from all sides, from everywhere, with hands and feet.

With knives or scissors they took away my clothes. In silence.

The beating, I think, was just to humiliate me, to hurt me, to make me afraid, to make me silent.

They stripped me naked. I was terrified. They tried to take off my pants. I tried to stop them so they beat me again.

And when I was naked I heard a camera."

El-Masri breaks down as he recalls the moment when the men carried out an intrusive anal search.

He was dressed in a nappy, a short-sleeved, short-legged suit and a belt.

His feet were shackled and his hands were chained to the belt.

His ears were plugged and ear defenders placed over them and a clip put on his nose.

A hood was put over his blindfold.

With his arms raised painfully high behind his back, he was driven to an aircraft where he was thrown down on to a bare metal floor, chained and bound, and given an injection.

He was dimly aware of a landing and takeoff and a second injection before the plane landed again and he was put into the boot of a car.

El-Masri arrived in what he later found to be his cell by being pushed violently against the wall, thrown to the floor, having feet placed on his head and his back and having his chains removed.

The cell was to be his home for the next four months.

From the graffiti on the wall - in Arabic script, but not Arabic - and the Afghan dress of the guards, he deduced that he was in Afghanistan.

There was nothing in the cell except a blanket, a filthy plastic mat and a bottle of tainted water so vile that the memory of it makes him literally gag.

El-Masri soon discovered that the prison, though technically Afghan, was run from behind the scenes by the US.

His first encounter with an American was with a masked individual who spoke English with what el-Masri believes was an American accent.

He had a Palestinian translator.

The American took a blood sample and photographed el-Masri naked again.

"I asked him if I could have fresh water," said el-Masri. "

And he said: 'It's not our problem, it's a problem of the Afghan people.'

I said: 'Afghanistan doesn't have planes to kidnap people in Europe and bring them here, so it's not the problem of the Afghan people.'"

By whispering through the door, and exchanging messages on pieces of toilet paper, el-Masri found out a few details about his fellow prisoners: two Saudi brothers of Pakistani origin who had been imprisoned for two years, two Tanzanians, a Pakistani, a Yemeni, and several Afghans. (Mr Gnjidic says two of the prisoners have been traced but he didn't want to identify them for fear of putting their lives at risk.)

El-Masri says the first of many interrogations was carried out by a masked man with a south Lebanese accent, with seven or eight silent observers in black masks listening in.

"He said: 'Do you know where you are?' And I answered: 'Yes, I know, I'm in Kabul.'

So he said: 'It's a country without laws. And nobody knows that you are here. Do you know what this means?'"

Repeatedly, he would be asked the same questions, challenging his identity, accusing him of attending terrorist training camps.

Some of the interrogators, el-Masri believes, were American.

After about a month, el-Masri met two unmasked Americans who other prisoners referred to as "the Doctor" and "the Boss".

The Doctor was a tall, pale man in his 60s with grey collar-length hair. The Boss was younger, with red hair and blue eyes, about 5ft 10in, and wore glasses.

Then, in March, el-Masri and the other prisoners began a hunger strike.

After 27 days of starvation, he was taken in chains one night to meet the Americans and a senior Afghan.

Near to hysteria, el-Masri said they had to let him go, put him before a US court, let him speak to somebody from the German government, or watch him starve to death.

The Boss told him he had to get Washington's permission to help him, but was clearly angry, saying:

"He shouldn't be here. He's in the wrong place."

"I had the impression that the Doctor thought I wasn't guilty, and had sent a report saying so even after the second interrogation," says el-Masri.

Yet he was taken back to his cell, where he continued his hunger strike.

Conditions in the cell improved, with a bed and a new carpet, but he was barely able to move.

On the 37th day he was force fed chocolate-flavoured nutrients through a tube stuffed up his nose.

El-Masri began to eat again and the Americans brought him fresh water and promised that he would be released within three weeks.

They brought a native German speaker to the prison.

"I asked him: 'Are you from the German authorities?'

He said: 'I do not want to answer that question.'

When I asked him if the German authorities knew that I was there, he answered: 'I can't answer this question.'" (Hofmann, the prosecutor, says the German security services do not admit to any knowledge of an agent visiting el-Masri in prison.)

It was to be more than a week before el-Masri finally got out of the prison; the German told him one of the obstacles to his speedy release was the Americans' determination not to leave any evidence that he had ever been there.

He was flown to Albania in what he thinks was a small passenger jet, blindfolded and in plastic handcuffs.

When el-Masri got back to Ulm, he found his wife and four children had disappeared.

They had returned to Lebanon. He traced them, brought them back, and told his wife his story.

"It was a crime, it was humiliating, and it was inhuman, although I think that in Afghanistan I was treated better than the other prisoners.

Somebody in the prison told me that before I came somebody died under torture.

Those responsible have to take responsibility, and should be held to account."

Hofmann and his investigative team now have two tasks: to find evidence supporting or disproving el-Masri's story and, if they can show it is true, to work out who to charge with kidnapping.

But how do you charge a government?

"For the moment," says Hofmann, "I have to believe the story, because there is no evidence that it is not true."


Merry Christmas Mr Bush - you liar!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/07/05:

Of course it is very possible that the CIA does not tell anyone what they do, The President is not on the highest level of information in the spy game.

But next sorry taking in terrorist and getting them to talk in war to save lives is a serious situation and it is about the only level of questioning that the other side understands.

Walking up with a search warrant does not work with certain levels of international criminals.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 12/06/05 - Infallability

What are the three times Popes spoke "ex cathedra"?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/07/05:

The main one I remember was the lengthy Bull of Pius IX defining the Immaculate Conception

Of course the first was the one making certain things the Pope declared to be infallable

There are very specific rules on to how it works, they can be found very easy, on a Yahoo search

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ATON2 asked on 12/06/05 - The fallability of Papal infallability ??????

All the posting re: AIDS and the Pope's ban on contraceptives got me thinking, again, about the question of Papal infallability. My question: If the Pope is infallable today, why was he not ALWAYS infallable???????

You don't have to be Catholic to answer; any opinion is welcome :) :) :)

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/06/05:

Infallibility does not effect or is it in effect on every statement or Papal policy or rule that is in place.

For example celebrate clergy is merley a church rule not a solid rule. There are very few official statements made using the act of infallibility.

The idea that every thing the pope does is ifallible is merely a falsehood taught by anti cathoics and often merely jsut misunderstood by those not familair with Christian and Catholic teachings on the matter.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sapphire630 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer

Ccl471 asked on 12/05/05 - Giving an Offering by Check

My dad says that if you are giving an offering at church by check, you have to put it in an envelope. He makes it sound like if you just put the check into the offering basket without putting it in an envelope first, it is a serious breach of etiquette.

Well, during the collection of tithes and offerings at my church, the pastor says if you want to receive a record of your offering for the purpose of getting a tax deduction, to raise your hand and an usher will hand you an offering envelope.

Well, I don't file taxes because I am on disability and like the income of seniors on Social Security, that income is not taxable.

So if I just drop my check into the offering basket, is that all right, or should I raise my hand in order to get an offering envelope?

Many thanks,


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/05/05:

If you put the money in without an envolpe they will most likely just give it back to you and not take it.

People can see how much it is for and talk about you. In an envolope then only the people that count the money can talk about you.

Personal opinion, give it any way you want, if you give a check, you have proof for taxesx anyway, ) the cancelled check)

Ccl471 rated this answer Above Average Answer
Liz22 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
purplewings rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 12/04/05 - Is It Evil

to remain intentionally ignorant?? One example, the RCC stand on using condoms and its outreach in Africa.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/04/05:

Yes it is,

The world needs to know that these people are not following the teachings of the church in the first place, since it would normally be sex outside of the marriage that brings the disease to the people.

Not having sex outside of a marriage is the only, way to stop the spread.

The RCC church and the teachings of how to really stop the problem needs to be taught more and more. Once the people there know perhaps then it will slow the spread.

They must be taught that following thier sexual desires can be deadly. Education to abstain should be taught more and more.

Ignorant of those in Africa of the problem and how to stop it really, needs to be solved.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 12/04/05 - STDs, Lord May, the Pope, Facts and conlcusions ...

This what May said (abbreviated to the salient references to the Vatican):

Lord May said that the Vatican's opposition to the use of condoms was an example of "dogma" leading to the deliberate misrepresentation of facts, at great human cost.
Speaking in London, Lord May described AIDS as a pandemic, with more than 40 million people infected across the world.

He quoted a UN report from June that said effective and essential prevention strategies "reach only a fraction of those who need them".

"The dissemination and adoption of successful prevention strategies is being seriously hindered by arguments over the role that contraception in the form of condoms should play.

This controversy has nothing to do with a scientific assessment of the effectiveness of condoms in preventing the transmission of HIV, but rather derives from religious beliefs against the use of contraception," Lord May said.

"The Vatican promotes abstinence outside marriage, and condemns condom use.

This disapproval … is not an effective strategy for preventing dissemination of HIV, not least because unprotected sex with an infected individual is high risk regardless of whether the act is intended for procreation or recreation. "

He also mentions Fundamentalist US Christians:

With added support from fundamentalist groups, these arguments have the effect that aid from the US for tackling HIV/AIDS seems usually to be tied to promoting abstinence and condemning condom use."

With which 'facts' in his statements do you disagree, and what is his 'wrong conclusion'?

This is a question that is worth getting right.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/04/05:

Those that attempt to claim that religious belief is spreading it seem to forget that with the excpetion of that which comes from blood transfusions, the AIDS comes from sexual contact. At least one of the persons in a marriage would have to be getting it from un protected sex with someone outside of that marriage.

Which is to the church a worst sin than using a condom. So they are not following the rules of the church normally to get the illness.

If the people would merely follow absinence, it would end the AIDS problem worldwide. The trouble is that people wish to follow thier desires of the flesh and not being concerned with the effects.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 12/04/05 - Teaching ID as a Challenge to Evolution is Failing

"""TO read the headlines, intelligent design as a challenge to evolution seems to be building momentum.

In Kansas last month, the board of education voted that students should be exposed to critiques of evolution like intelligent design. At a trial of the Dover, Pa., school board that ended last month, two of the movement's leading academics presented their ideas to a courtroom filled with spectators and reporters from around the world. President Bush endorsed teaching "both sides" of the debate - a position that polls show is popular. And Pope Benedict XVI weighed in recently, declaring the universe an "intelligent project."

Intelligent design posits that the complexity of biological life is itself evidence of a higher being at work. As a political cause, the idea has gained currency, and for good reason. The movement was intended to be a "big tent" that would attract everyone from biblical creationists who regard the Book of Genesis as literal truth to academics who believe that secular universities are hostile to faith. The slogan, "Teach the controversy," has simple appeal in a democracy.

Behind the headlines, however, intelligent design as a field of inquiry is failing to gain the traction its supporters had hoped for. It has gained little support among the academics who should have been its natural allies. And if the intelligent design proponents lose the case in Dover, there could be serious consequences for the movement's credibility.

On college campuses, the movement's theorists are academic pariahs, publicly denounced by their own colleagues. Design proponents have published few papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The Templeton Foundation, a major supporter of projects seeking to reconcile science and religion, says that after providing a few grants for conferences and courses to debate intelligent design, they asked proponents to submit proposals for actual research.

"They never came in," said Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, who said that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned.

"From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review," he said.

While intelligent design has hit obstacles among scientists, it has ****also failed to find a warm embrace at many evangelical Christian colleges***. Even at conservative schools, scholars and theologians who were initially excited about intelligent design say they have come to find its arguments unconvincing. They, too, have been greatly swayed by the scientists at their own institutions and elsewhere who have examined intelligent design and found it insufficiently substantiated in comparison to evolution.

"It can function as one of those ambiguous signs in the world that point to an intelligent creator and help support the faith of the faithful, but it just doesn't have the compelling or explanatory power to have much of an impact on the academy," said Frank D. Macchia, a professor of Christian theology at Vanguard University, in Costa Mesa, Calif., which is affiliated with the Assemblies of God, the nation's largest Pentecostal denomination.

At Wheaton College, a prominent evangelical university in Illinois, intelligent design surfaces in the curriculum only as part of an interdisciplinary elective on the origins of life, in which students study evolution and competing theories from theological, scientific and historical perspectives, according to a college spokesperson.

The only university where intelligent design has gained a major institutional foothold is a seminary. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., created a Center for Science and Theology for William A. Dembski, a leading proponent of intelligent design, after he left Baylor, a Baptist university in Texas, amid protests by faculty members opposed to teaching it.

Intelligent design and Mr. Dembski, a philosopher and mathematician, should have been a good fit for Baylor, which says its mission is "advancing the frontiers of knowledge while cultivating a Christian world view." But Baylor, like many evangelical universities, has many scholars who see no contradiction in believing in God and evolution.""-Laurie Goodstein

This is indeed good news, as being a God believer does not mean being ignorant in any way whatsoever. :)


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/04/05:

The problem with ID is that for many Christians it taks away too much of the wonder of what God really did.

It upsets Chrsitians to have the true creation of this world deluted with information of evolution that is far from proven.

What the true problem is that facts just don't exist to prove evolution for the creation of our universe. There has been so much assumption that I just can't understand why anyone of scinece could ever accept it as anything but a wild idea.
I guess thier need to disprove the bible is enough to allow acceptance of alot of non related information.

ID still harms true Christian beleif and teachings, since God merely created everything, not allowed some animals to evolve. (now that is a silly beleif if you ever had one)

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 12/04/05 - Christmas is UnChristian say Puritans

This is a fascinating piece on the history of anti-Christian sentiment...most of which in the past came from ***Christian denominations***!!

""Religious conservatives have a cause this holiday season: the ***commercialization*** of Christmas. They're for it.

The American Family Association is leading a boycott of Target for not using the words "Merry Christmas" in its advertising. (Target denies it has an anti-Merry-Christmas policy.) The Catholic League boycotted Wal-Mart in part over the way its Web site treated searches for "Christmas." Bill O'Reilly, the Fox anchor who last year started a "Christmas Under Siege" campaign, has a chart on his Web site of stores that use the phrase "Happy Holidays," along with a poll that asks, "Will you shop at stores that do not say 'Merry Christmas'?"

This campaign - which is being hyped on Fox and conservative talk radio - is an odd one. Christmas remains ubiquitous, and with its celebrators in control of the White House, Congress, the Supreme Court and every state supreme court and legislature, it hardly lacks for powerful supporters. There is also something perverse when Christians are being jailed for discussing the Bible in Saudi Arabia and slaughtered in Sudan about spending so much energy on stores that sell "holiday trees."

What is less obvious, though, is that Christmas's self-proclaimed defenders are rewriting the holiday's history. They claim that the "traditional" American Christmas is under attack by what John Gibson, another Fox anchor, calls "professional atheists" and "Christian haters." But America has a complicated history with Christmas, going back to the Puritans, who despised it. What the boycotters are doing is not defending America's Christmas traditions, but creating a new version of the holiday that fits a political agenda.

The Puritans considered Christmas un-Christian, and hoped to keep it out of America. They could not find Dec. 25 in the Bible, their sole source of religious guidance, and insisted that the date derived from Saturnalia, the Roman heathens' wintertime celebration. On their first Dec. 25 in the New World, in 1620, the Puritans worked on building projects and ostentatiously ignored the holiday. From 1659 to 1681 Massachusetts went further, making celebrating Christmas "by forbearing of labor, feasting or in any other way" a crime.

The concern that Christmas distracted from religious piety continued even after Puritanism waned. In 1827, an Episcopal bishop lamented that the Devil had stolen Christmas "and converted it into a day of worldly festivity, shooting and swearing." Throughout the 1800's, many religious leaders were still trying to hold the line. As late as 1855, New York newspapers reported that Presbyterian, Baptist and Methodist churches were closed on Dec. 25 because "they do not accept the day as a Holy One." On the eve of the Civil War, Christmas was recognized in just 18 states.

Christmas gained popularity when it was transformed into a ***domestic celebration***, after the publication of Clement Clarke Moore's "Visit from St. Nicholas" and Thomas Nast's Harper's Weekly drawings, which created the image of a white-bearded Santa who gave gifts to children. The new emphasis lessened religious leaders' worries that the holiday would be given over to drinking and swearing, but it introduced another concern: commercialism. By the 1920's, the retail industry had adopted Christmas as its own, sponsoring annual ceremonies to kick off the "Christmas shopping season."

Religious leaders objected strongly. The Christmas that emerged had an inherent tension: merchants tried to make it about buying, while clergymen tried to keep commerce out. A 1931 Times roundup of Christmas sermons reported a common theme: "the suggestion that Christmas could not survive if Christ were thrust into the background by materialism." A 1953 Methodist sermon broadcast on NBC - typical of countless such sermons - lamented that Christmas had become a "profit-seeking period." This ethic found popular expression in "A Charlie Brown Christmas." In the 1965 TV special, Charlie Brown ignores Lucy's advice to "get the biggest aluminum tree you can find" and her assertion that Christmas is "a big commercial racket," and finds a more spiritual way to observe the day.

This year's Christmas "defenders" are not just tolerating commercialization - they're insisting on it. They are also rewriting Christmas history on another key point: non-Christians' objection to having the holiday forced on them.

The campaign's leaders insist this is a new phenomenon - a "liberal plot," in Mr. Gibson's words. But as early as 1906, the Committee on Elementary Schools in New York City urged that Christmas hymns be banned from the classroom, after a boycott by more than 20,000 Jewish students. In 1946, the Rabbinical Assembly of America declared that calling on Jewish children to sing Christmas carols was "an infringement on their rights as Americans."article by Roy Cohen asterisks mine, article edited due to lenght.

Christmas holiday celebration sure has had a stormy past.

Today, I find it ironic that it is Fundamentalist Christians who support the materialistic aspect of Christmas instead of decrying the crass commercialism of the gift giving season which is the antithesis of the true meaning of Chrismas, the birth of Jesus.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/04/05:

Christians do not like the destroying of Christmas by those bent to undermine American society.

Of course the commercial waste at Christmas is not good and healthy, but then making incorrect to have or celebrate Christmas.

To make it impossible to post Christmas displays, and to make it seem "incorrect" to celebrate Christmas is what the fight is all about.

Sadly in Amercia those bend on destroying Christmas have done a pretty good job, so as Christians one has to finally draw a line, even if it is one on the enemies side of the fence. Perhaps newer and stronger lines can be drawn and fought once this battle is won.

Today Walmart and Ford, tomorrow the Supreme Court and America.

Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 12/04/05 - I need an answer?

Please tell me, when is the right time to get my Plastic Christmas Tree with lights out of it's box and let it shine in all it's glory. I want to do it right this year, I wouldn't want the mice to miss Christmas, me, well I'll probally spend it with a whole lot of Christians

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/04/05:

Now it depends on where you live.

If you live in a trailer park in the south, you should have just left it out all year.
Just not pluged in during the summer.
Along with the outside lights. ( you do put the plastic reigndeer under the trailer till Oct though.

But if you live anywhere else, it goes up the day after Thanksgiving.
You have another week to get all the outside lights up.

So anything not up at this time, is late.

** any item bought at 1/2 price after Christsmas is allowed to be added and put up as long as it is before New Years

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Tex78 asked on 12/03/05 - What do you think about this..

This is in response to what I have been hearing, and reading about. I hear that there is an attack on the word of Christmas, or anything pertaining to Christmas, being used in any public places. I just want to say this, it has nothing to do with Christmas alone. It is an attack against Christians, that is all Christians, of all denomination.

But mainly, it is against Jesus. The A.C.L.U., and the People for the American way, which are as phony as a three cent coin, and about as worthless to America. Their effort is to bring America into a socialist country. And they want to be in control. They have filled the Supreme Court with their sympathizers, or cronies.

They plan to take over America. They have taken over the Democratic party. These people are atheist, or they belong to some phony religious organization. If they can run the Supreme Court, and the U. S. Senate, they will rule America. Which they are not too far from there now.

Their main goal, is to remove the real God, and Jesus, out of peoples lives, then they will impose some false religion on the American people.

What is sad, is that I see and hear people, who are supposed to be Christians, stand up and support these people. It is time for Christians to gather behind the Christian leaders of their communities, and start supporting them.

I pray you stop and think about what I am saying. Start paying attention to what is going on. Our freedom is being stolen right from under us. The fight is going on right now, and we can win if we start now. But if we wait, until they have taken over, then you can forget it. We can expect persecutions to start anytime after that.

So, please, let us start fighting while we still have a chance to win. Let us make sure that Christian Judges, Christian Senators, and a Christian President are elected to office. And make sure they are Christians, and not fakers. This is easy done by checking their past record. Look it up on the computer, or have someone else do it.

I am sending this to over a hundred people, and they in turn will send it on to others.

Love in Jesus’ name. M.L.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/04/05:

The ACLU, and some of the other groups that wish to push the wishes of a very small minority on to America are in my opinion the biggest threat to American safty and security more than any of the overseas terrorist we have ever fought.

They wish to destroy and corrupt the constitution and the values Americia was founded on.

Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Liz22 asked on 12/03/05 - Are Politics Taking sides with Christianity?

Did Jesus once say’ Pay our tax’s Mt 22:17 Tell us therefore, what thickest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
Mt 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, why make ye trial of me, ye hypocrites
Show me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a denarius’s and he saith unto them, whose is this image and superscription Mt 22:21 they say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesars; and unto God the things that are God’s.
So my question is why doesn't the Church I use to go to never have to pay their Tax’s?
Would not paying unto the Government be against the Law of Jesus?
Thank you,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/03/05:

The governmnet uses "tax emempt" status as a control over churches. It was one of Hitlers most used tatics for control of the Church.

In this way anytime a Church does anything the government does not like ( ie give its opinion on politic issues, not reconise issues the way the government wants it to)
The government will threaten to take away the churches tax exempt status.

It wants to control the churches by controlling the money a church gets. People today do not want to give to a church unless they can take it off thier taxes. ( sad state of peoples desire to help the church)

The government futher controls the churches by making sure that only the ones that have and have filed a 501c will be able to get government or large corporation grants.

But in general also the time frame you are talking about and the tax being discussed was personal tax. A comparison to our income taxes of today. Plus gate taxes which would be alot like our toll roads or perhaps taxes on trucking companies for transport of goods

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Liz22 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 12/02/05 - Christmas

Hello my Christian friends:

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

You can say it to me, and I won't be offended. Wish me a Happy Chanuka, a great life, a good dinner, whatever. I'll appreciate it all.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/02/05:

Merry Christmas,

and is that just Christmas trees growing in your back yard.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 12/01/05 - Homeless People.........................

Our library homeless man (Jerry) tells me that every now and then he will be offered a hot meal or even a night's shelter at the local motel, but invariably the person offering this tells him that he must first attend church with the giver.

Is this how Christians should give to the homeless - with strings attached?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/01/05:

The times Jesus provided food for people, they had been with in for a couple of days and had listened at least all day to him.

I see nothing wrong with any attempt to help people.

I don't see many non Christian (or non religious groups) doing much in helping people.

Many shelters require church service attendendce and other rules ( shower, no drinking, no cursing and the such) to be able to stay with them.

He is offering the help, it is his right to offer it any way he wishes.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
MaggieB rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer

paraclete asked on 12/01/05 - are our jobs safe?

I just received this in an email

Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 23:25:53 +1100
Show Full Headers Back To [INBOX]

>>> These are unbelievable but true. I hope you enjoy them.
>>> ONE.
>>> Recently, when I went to McDonald's I saw on the menu that
>>> you could have an order of 6, 9 or 12 Chicken McNuggets. I asked
>>> for a half dozen nuggets. "We don't have half dozen nuggets," said
>>> the teenager at the counter. "You don't?" I replied. "We
>>> only have six, nine, or twelve," was the reply.
>>> "So I can't order a half dozen nuggets, but I can order
>>> six?"
>>> "That's right." So I shook my head and ordered six
>>> McNuggets.
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> TWO.
>>> I was checking out at the local Target with just a few
>>> items and the lady behind me put her things on the belt close to mine.
>>> I
>>> picked up one of those "dividers" that they keep by the cash
>>> register and placed it between our things so they wouldn't get mixed.
>>> After the girl had scanned all of my items, she picked up the
>>> "divider," looking it all over for the bar code so she could scan
>>> it. Not finding the bar code she said to me, "Do you know how much
>>> this is?" I said to her "I've changed my mind, I don't think I'll
>>> buy that today." She said, "OK," and I paid her for the things
>>> and left.
>>> She had no clue to what had just happened.
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> THREE.
>>> A lady at work was seen putting a credit card into her
>>> floppy drive and pulling it out very quickly. When I inquired as to
>>> what she was doing, she said she was shopping on the Internet and they
>>> kept asking for a credit card number, so she was using the ATM
>>> "thingy."
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> FOUR.
>>> I recently saw a distraught young lady weeping beside her
>>> car "Do you need some help?" I asked. She replied, "I knew I should
>>> have replaced the battery in this remote. Now I can't get into
>>> my car. Do you think they (pointing to a distant
>>> convenience store) would have a battery to fit this?"
>>> "Hmmm, I dunno. Do you have an alarm, too?" I asked.
>>> "No, just this remote thingy," she answered, handing it and
>>> the car keys to me. As I took the key and manually unlocked the
>>> door, I replied, "Why don't you drive over there and check about
>>> the batteries. It's a long walk."
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> FIVE.
>>> Several years ago, we had a junior typist who was none too
>>> swift. One day she was typing and turned to a secretary and said,
>>> "I'm almost out of typing paper. What do I do?"
>>> "Just use copier machine paper," the secretary told her.
>>> With that, the junior took her last remaining blank piece of paper,
>>> put it on the photocopier and proceeded to make five "blank" copies.
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> SIX.
>>> My neighbour works in the I.T. department in the central
>>> office of a large bank. Employees in the field call him when they have
>>> problems with their computers. One night he got a call from a woman
>>> in one of the branches who had this question: "I've got smoke
>>> coming from the back of my terminal. Do you guys have a fire
>>> downtown?"
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> SEVEN.
>>> Police in Dubbo NSW interrogated a suspect by placing a
>>> metal colander on his head and connecting it with wires to a
>>> photocopier machine. The message "He's lying" was placed in the
>>> copier, and police pressed the copy button each time they thought the
>>> suspect wasn't telling the truth. Believing the
>>> "lie detector" was working, the suspect confessed.
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Life is tough.
>>> It's tougher if you're stupid.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/01/05:

Yes, eating at the fast food places get to be a bigger challenge every day.

Our schools seem to have time to teach almsot everything but normal skills to survive.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 12/01/05 - Would I be wrong if I did this????????????????????

I have been thinking that since I am going Christmas shopping soon that when I get help from some store clerk I’ll say, “Thank you the help, Merry Christmas.”
And then when I get my change after making the purchase I’d say, “Thank you, Merry Christmas.”
Since I will not shop in a store that boycotts the Salvation Army Santas or does not decorate for Christmas but does sell Christmas items and sells holiday trees instead of Christmas Trees that my chance of offending someone would be else my saying that.
Do you think my intent is OK?
Merry Christmas,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 12/01/05:

Oh I go into the stores that don't say Merry Christmas and I tell almost everyone I pass in the store Merry Christmas.

Figure someone needs to be telling them that.

At least at my favorite Walmart they were telling me Merry Christmas, have Christmas decorations, Christmas items and the such.

Offend someone, I am sure I do, and it is great. They need to be offended if they don't want me to have my right to wish people a merry Christmas.

Very Politically uncorrect and proud of it

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

paraclete asked on 11/29/05 - Tell me now is this justice or stupidity?

Alimony is something that should be abolished in a modern society but this is rediculous,and just one more reason why you would not want to be a Muslim.

ws Home | Story
Man ordered into 10,000-year divorce payout
From: Agence France-Presse
From correspondents in Tehran, Iran

November 30, 2005

AN Iranian man has been ordered by a divorce court to pay his ex-wife one gold coin a month in alimony for the next 10,000 years.

Under Iran's marriage law, couples sign a pre-marital agreement where the bride must stipulate the level of compensation they can demand during the marriage or in the event of separation and divorce.

In this case the Tehran woman, who was not named, had asked for $US15 million ($20.25 million) worth of gold coins, a state newspaper said.

The court ruled the husband should pay her the coins in single monthly instalments, meaning his debt will stay with him for 10,333 years. .

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/29/05:

I will disagree that it should be done away with, only done correctly.

A person who is married to another person, stays with them for many years. The one person is the main supporter and that person is at fault and leaves the other.

The damaged person needs some security

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/28/05 - No religious studying in private! What's next????

Did you hear about the University of Wisconsin -- Eau Claire (UWEC) banning resident assistants (RAs) from leading Bible studies in their own dormitories
An UWEC official sent RAs a letter forbidding them from leading Bible studies because students might conclude that such RAs were not "approachable." Don't laugh. Violators, warned the letter, would be subject to disciplinary action. Of course, the letter also purported to prohibit Koran and Torah studies.
So much for freedom of religion! Students cannot study their religion even in the privacy of theie dorm rooms.
What’s next?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/29/05:

It is a slope we started down 30 years ago.

Soon no christian worship or symbol will be allowed in public.

We are headed to where Germany was in the late 30's and where China is today, state control of Chrisianity.

As Hilter said, "leave the soul of Germany to me"

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Laura asked on 11/28/05 - Why is Christmas suddenly a dirty word????

Regardless of the ancient and probably pagan origins some of the things that we do at Christmas, I was never told these things and so my memories As long as I can remember was the teaching that Christmas was about Jesus and that gift giving was in honor of the gift of eternal life the Christ gave to us.

However, with more and more stores taking "Christmas" out of thier advertising and thier holiday decorating, insisting on their need to remain neutral and ignore my spiritual heritage and values I see no need to buy from these stores anymore. Why should I give them a penny!! They don't honor what I believe though they strain their necks like crains in order to please the secularists.

Can someone PLEASE tell me a time when they can remember the word Christmas not being mentioned in December in public settings starting shortly after Thanksgiving and ending after the 25th??? I sure can't except in the last couple of years and I'm almost 50.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/28/05:

It is no longer politically correctg. There are more and more law suits of all sorts of government and a few businesses about thier "religion" of stressing Christmas.

Target for example, had problems with the regular bell ringers, since allowing them would then require them to allow other people from various groups asking for money also.

And from govermnet to schools, if they use Christmas, they open thierself up for law suits from someone.

It is merley part of the entire push by the ACLU and other anti christian groups trying to take christianity out of america.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/27/05 - My dictionary says that the word "witch" means wicked woman.

And "Wicca" means wicked man or warlock.
What do you think about this from a Christian point of view?

Wicca's World
Looking Into the Pagan Phenomenon

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, NOV. 26, 2005
Witchcraft is moving into the mainstream in the Netherlands. A Dutch court has ruled that the costs of witchcraft lessons can be tax-deductible, the Associated Press reported Oct. 31.

The previous month, the Leeuwarden District Court confirmed the legal right to write off the costs of schooling -- including in witchcraft -- against tax bills. The costs can be substantial, according to one witch interviewed for the article.

Margarita Rongen runs the "Witches Homestead" in a northern province. Her workshops cost more than $200 a weekend, or more than $2,600 for a full course. Rongen claims she has trained more than 160 disciples over the past four decades.

In England, meanwhile, Portsmouth's Kingston Prison has hired a pagan priest to give spiritual advice to three inmates serving life sentences, the Telegraph reported Nov. 1. The prisoners have converted to paganism and, according to prison rules, are allowed a chaplain in the same way as those with Christian or other religious faiths. Denying them a pagan chaplain would infringe their human rights, said John Robinson, the prison governor.

Earlier, on Oct. 17, the London-based Times newspaper reported that pagan priests in all prisons will now be allowed to use wine and wands in ceremonies held in jails. The Times noted that under instructions sent to prison governors by Michael Spurr, the director of operations of the Prison Service, inmates practicing paganism will be allowed a hoodless robe, incense and a piece of religious jewelry among their personal possessions.

The governors were given a complete guide to paganism, based on information supplied by the Pagan Federation. Prisoners will also be allowed to practice paganism in their cells, including prayer, chanting and the reading of religious texts and rituals. It is not known how many pagan prisoners are in jails in England and Wales, the Times added.

On the rise

The practice of witchcraft is attracting ever-growing numbers, particularly among young women. A recent attempt to understand its appeal is the book "Wicca's Charm," published in September by Shaw Books.

Authored by journalist Catherine Edwards Sanders, the book stemmed from a magazine article she was commissioned to do. Initially dismissive of Wicca, during her subsequent research Sanders came to appreciate that a genuine spiritual hunger was leading people into neo-pagan practices.

Sanders, a self-professed Christian, defines Wicca as a "polytheistic neo-pagan nature religion inspired by various pre-Christian Western European beliefs, which has as its central deity the Mother Goddess and which includes the use of herbal magic."

The book, which is limited to examining the situation in the United States, admits it is difficult to estimate the number of Wicca adherents. Sanders cites an estimate from one group, the Covenant of the Goddess, which claims around 800,000 Wiccans and pagans in America. A sociologist, Helen Berger, in 1999 put the estimate at 150,000 to 200,000 pagans.

Wicca is made up of many diverse elements, yet Sanders identifies some common beliefs among its followers. They are: All living things are of equal value and humans have no special place, and are not made in God's image; Wiccans believe that they possess divine power within themselves and that they are gods or goddesses; their own personal power is unlimited by any deity; and consciousness can and should be altered through the practice of rite and ritual.

What is important to Wiccans, Sanders explains, is the experience of a spiritual reality, and not truth or a body of knowledge. There is no orthodoxy, defined text, or core beliefs. And, while it has ancient roots, Sanders notes it is attractive to modernity since it can be freely molded to fit the spiritual consumer's desires.

Spell-making is another key element of Wicca. But Sanders notes that of all the Wiccans she spoke to, none entered it in order to use spells to harm people. Most choose Wicca because they are dissatisfied with churches and organized religion and are looking for a spiritual experience they are unable to find elsewhere.


Another common trait in Wicca is environmentalism. Modern life has lost its connection to the land, Sanders argues, and Wicca, with its emphasis on nature, seasonal calendars, and the celebrations linked to the changing of the seasons, is both a way to recover this connection and also to spiritualize the relationship with the earth. Many Wiccans also reject the materialistic (but not spiritual) consumer culture.

Pagan and Wiccan groups, in fact, have been present at some of the anti-globalization protests in recent years. Sanders describes some the ceremonies she witnessed in 2002 during the World Economic Forum meeting in New York. They drew attention to such matters as environmental damage, animal welfare and preserving the purity of the water supply.

The ecological aspect of Wicca draws inspiration in part from the so-called Gaia spirituality. Gaia was the earth goddess of the ancient Greeks and in neo-pagan circles she is now transformed into the idea of the earth being one living organism, also called Gaia.

Feminism is another important element attracting people to Wicca. Sanders observes that Wiccan women feel as if Christian churches treat them like second-class citizens, limited to teaching Sunday school.

Sanders estimates that around two-thirds of neo-pagans in the United States are female. Many of them practice a form of goddess worship, commonly in the form of a mother goddess who is a metaphor for the earth. The Wiccan rituals also emphasize the concept of empowerment, and the female biological functions are accorded a respected role.

Added to this is the belief that what today's goddess worshippers are doing is reclaiming the heritage of a primitive world in which a peaceful matriarchal society dominated. This "matriarchal myth" is short on any historical evidence, notes Sanders, but is nonetheless an affirmation that is commonly repeated.

In fact, Sanders devotes a section of the book explaining how the Wiccan rituals and spells have no roots prior to 1900, and are the result of inventions and adaptations by a group of men, notably Aleister Crowley and Gerald Gardner. Far from being a revival of some ancient paganism or matriarchal society, Wicca is a modern, male invention.

Spiritual hunger

The desire to experience spirituality in a more direct and intense way is another factor attracting people to Wicca. Some teen-age girls, Sanders notes, are unsatisfied with the superficial teen culture and are looking for something to give a deeper meaning to their lives.

But, instead of turning to traditional religion to satisfy this need, an increasing number experiment with Wicca. Sanders argues that in part this is the fault of some churches, which have lost sight of the unseen world and the reality of a relationship with Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, reducing their activities to just a social exercise.

Other churches provide little in the way of serious nourishment for inquiring teen-age minds, particularly females ones. Another factor leading adolescents to Wicca instead of Christianity is a desire for rituals and ceremonies. Modern church culture, observes Sanders, has reduced the importance of religious rituals and solemn celebrations, leading people to look for alternatives that offer more tangible supernatural experiences.

In concluding Sanders affirms that her investigations made her more appreciative of the spiritual hunger leading people to experiment with Wicca. At the same time she argues that Christianity offers all of what neo-pagans seek: a message true 2,000 years ago and still valid today.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/27/05:

It is just another pagan religion,

We too often try to rate one non Christian religion better or worst but what we have to do is remember all of them are lost.
Even some that pretend to be Christian are also lost.

Many false religions offer various draws to people, And of course political systems in thier actions often accept many religions as valid for various purposes.

It was so in the time of Christ, so many went to find thier desires in false religions

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

belle33 asked on 11/26/05 - What was the name

of the other site so many of you here used to be on> It was something like "aSKAWAY" though I dont think that was exactly it. I was there also a while back and remember most of you here. I also would like to know if any of you have ever met . Also if anyone ever hears from Ruth and what her nic was on the other site as I've forgotten. Angel something I recall. Im glad to know everyone is well and still going strong.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/26/05:

Of course someone already told you, it was

Many people when to varoius places, this was one.

I don't really remember the other experts too well. Many of the experts there also went to Ask Experts Questions also along with some other sites.

I tired of most of them and merely come here to chat from time with those here.

belle33 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Tex78 asked on 11/26/05 - If we could life over, what would you change?

As for me, I have believed in Jesus all my life. But I never received Him as my personal Savior, until years later.

So, I would accept Him sooner into my life. I would never have smoked, or drank any kind of alcohol. I would have chosen a different career, other than the Army.

I am pretty sure that I would have gone to Bible Collage, and became a full time Minister.

It is just possible, that I could have produced more souls for the Kingdom of God.

You know the kind of fruit we produce, depends on who we work for. In Jesus’ name. M.L.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/26/05:

I think all of the choices makes us who we are, and often for a reason. Often it has to be an ex drinker to help another drinker convert.

How dull would church be if everyone had converted at 12 and all wanted to set all day and chant.

God calls each of us for what he needs us to be. Some are called preachers, some at older ages. But others are called for all sorts of missions in the church

Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Laura asked on 11/23/05 - Just muzing!!

If you had a major life change and you had to choose three differant states from which to choose to live in and your choices were: Fairfax Kansas, Arlington Texas, and Shreveport Louisiana......Which would you choose?? I know alot of you have lived in alot of differant places. Sooo if you wouldn't mind giving me some input on pros and cons of all, I would greatly appreciate it.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/23/05:

Sounds like chosing between hell and purgatory to me.

But if I had to choose one of those, Arlignton Tx

Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/23/05 - Do you think this is a wise ruling?........??

Indiana abortion counseling upheld
State law also requires women to wait 18 hours
INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana (AP) -- The Indiana Supreme Court upheld a law Wednesday that requires women seeking an abortion to get counseling and to wait at least 18 hours after the session before going through with the procedure.
The court ruled 4-1 that opponents of the law could not pursue their lawsuit, which argued that privacy is a core right under the state constitution that extends to women seeking to end their pregnancies.
The court said such a challenge would fail because the law "does not impose a material burden on any right to privacy or abortion that may be provided or protected" under the state constitution.
The court said it was not ruling on whether the state constitution included a right to privacy or to abortion.
The state attorney general's office argued before the court in June that privacy was not a specific right enforceable by Indiana courts and said the General Assembly has broad discretion in passing laws.
Sarah Rittman, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Steve Carter, said the office would have no comment on the ruling.
"We're disappointed," said Fran Quigley, executive director of the Indiana Civil Liberties Union.
He said the law poses a financial burden for some women because it forces them to make two trips to a clinic that in many cases is not in their home county.
Quigley said his group would discuss with the abortion providers that filed the lawsuit about whether to seek another hearing before the state Supreme Court, which has the final say in the matter because it concerns the state constitution.
Federal courts have upheld the 1995 law, which didn't go into effect until 2003 because of court challenges.
The lawsuit was dismissed by a Marion County judge, but the Court of Appeals ruled the abortion providers could continue their challenge.
Abortion counseling is required in 31 states, and 23 states also require a subsequent waiting period -- usually 24 hours, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit group that researches reproductive health issues.
Indiana is one of six states that requires the counseling sessions be conducted in person.
The counseling, which pertains to medical risks and alternatives, can be avoided in the event of a medical emergency.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/23/05:

outlawing it except for medical emergancy would have been alot better.

But a waiting period before someone kills someone to think about thier choice is always a good idea. Now hopefully the information they recieve to think about will be the truth

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 11/23/05 - A BIT ABOUT THANKSGIVING:

This national holiday commemorates the harvest of Plymouth Colony in 1621, following a winter of great hardship. Colonists and neighboring Indians shared the first feast. A national day of thanks was proclaimed by George Washington for Nov. 26, 1789. Lincoln revived the custom in 1863. Since 1941, according to a joint resolution of Congress, the holiday falls on the fourth Thursday in Nov. Customary turkey is a reminder that four wild turkeys were served at the Pilgrims' first Thanksgiving. I like the white meat.



Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/23/05:

Hey Hank, your not a turkey bigot are you, only liking "white" meat.

Happy Thanksgiving

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/23/05 - Who likes really good Mincemeat pie?........??

For the holidays try this one. It is superb!!!
Old Fashioned Mincemeat Pie
A traditional family favorite ... a treasured recipe from Grandma. This pie is present at each family gathering, especially around the holidays. We like it lean and slightly sweet. Plan to take all day preparing it, which is almost as enjoyable as eating it!
Boil or cook in a steamer, a 3-4 pound venison -(preferred)- or beef rib roast in 3 or 4 cups water, until the meat is so tender it falls apart. Cut into bite-sized pieces and return to the broth and continue to simmer on the stove top. Add the following, stirring each in as you go:
3 cups apple cider
a 1# box of raisins
1 cup chopped dried mixed candied fruit peel
about 1/4 cup of sugar
1 teaspoon ground cinnamon * 1 teaspoon cloves
5-6 meduim apples, chopped to bite size
Continue to simmer and stir occasionally as the raisins and apples absorb the liquid.
Grandma's Hint: Keep tasting ... add a little more sugar, spice or apple juice as suits you. The idea is to have a semi-tart but spicy base. But do it gradually until you find it to your liking. The raisins should swell up to take up the meat liquid, and more apples are always good.
This will make enough for 3-4 pies. (It stores well in the freezer.) Use the crust recipe below, or your own. Spoon the cooked and cooled mincemeat filling into the unbaked crust, use a sharp knife to make vents in the top crust, and bake at 425 degrees about 20 minutes, or until your crust is golden brown.

Tasty Tip: For hearty Holiday Pies substitute 1 cup brandy or rum for a cup of the apple juice.

As you can see Grandma cooked more by tasting than by measuring, but it always seemed to pay off! She also sometimes added a handful of walnut meats to the mincemeat just before baking. If you enjoy the recipe, feel free to print and share it!
For hearty Holiday pies substitute 1 cup brandy or rum for a cup of apple juice.

Flaky Pie Crust
1/2 cup oil * 1/4 cup milk
Stir in 2 cups flour and 1 tsp salt. Roll out and you have it!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/23/05:

Thanks for the recipe but I will agree with one of the other posters, good and mincement are not two words I ever use in the same sentence.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/22/05 - Corruption in government. Does this mean that all are corrupt?

Abramoff Partner Pleads Guilty
Scanlon Admits He Conspired to Bribe Lawmaker
By James V. Grimaldi and Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, November 22, 2005; A01
A onetime congressional staffer who became a top partner to lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty yesterday to conspiring to bribe a congressman and other public officials and agreed to pay back more than $19 million he fraudulently charged Indian tribal clients.
The plea agreement between prosecutors and Michael Scanlon, a former press secretary to then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), provided fresh detail about the alleged bribes. The document also indicated the nature of testimony Scanlon is prepared to offer against a congressman it calls "Representative #1" -- who has been identified by attorneys in the case as Rep. Robert W. Ney (R-Ohio).
Scanlon, a 35-year-old former public relations executive, faces a maximum five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, but the penalty could be reduced depending on the level of his cooperation with prosecutors. His help is expected to be crucial to the Justice Department's wide-ranging Abramoff investigation, which began early last year after the revelation that Scanlon and the lobbyist took in tens of millions of dollars from Indian tribes unaware of their secret partnership to jack up fees and split profits.
Investigators are looking at half a dozen members of Congress, current and former senior Hill aides, a former deputy secretary of the interior, and Abramoff's former lobbying colleagues, according to sources familiar with the probe who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Because of his central role in much of Abramoff's business, Scanlon could be a key witness in any trials that arise from the case.
Scanlon had been in discussions with prosecutors for six months before Friday's announcement that he was being charged with one count of conspiracy as part of a plea agreement. He entered his guilty plea before U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle yesterday and agreed to pay restitution of $19.7 million, Scanlon's share of fees from four tribes named in the charging documents.
He admitted that he or Abramoff offered bribes on behalf of clients over a period of four years, and at one point during the proceedings he corrected court filings that mistakenly noted that the illegal acts began in 2001. "My client informs me that some of the overt acts are actually in 2000," said Scanlon attorney Stephen L. Braga.
Ney spokesman Brian Walsh said the congressman was defrauded by Scanlon and Abramoff and his official actions had nothing to do with improper influence. "Any allegation that Representative Ney did anything illegal or improper is false. This plea agreement mentions a number of unsubstantiated allegations, but in fact, many of the things suggested to have occurred did not actually take place," Walsh said.
The plea agreement lists gifts Ney was offered or received, including a golf trip to Scotland in 2002, $4,000 to his campaign committee, $10,000 to the National Republican Campaign Committee made with credit to Ney, regular meals and drinks at Abramoff's Signatures restaurant, sports tickets, and frequent golf and related expenses at courses in the Washington area.
The document states that the gifts were "in exchange for a series of official acts." These included providing legislation, agreeing to put statements into the Congressional Record, contacting federal officials to influence decisions, meeting with Abramoff's clients and endorsing a wireless telecommunications company that wanted to install antennas in House office buildings.
According to the plea agreement, Ney made the Congressional Record statements in support of Abramoff's efforts to buy a fleet of Florida casino ships "calculated to pressure the then-owner to sell on terms favorable to Lobbyist A [Abramoff] and his partners."
The filing also refers to a trip that Ney was offered to attend the Super Bowl in Tampa in 2001 that sources have told The Washington Post the Ohio congressman backed out of at the last minute. That trip was paid for by SunCruz Casinos Inc., which Abramoff acquired in 2001. Abramoff is facing fraud charges in Florida in connection with the acquisition of that company.
Ney also provided help to two Texas tribal clients of Abramoff that wanted permission to open casinos, the plea agreement said. In one case in December 2002, Ney sought help from another unidentified House member for one of the tribes, the prosecutors said. Ney also met with a member of a California tribe doing business with Abramoff and agreed to help pass tax legislation affecting the tribe, the documents said.
Another all-expenses-paid trip mentioned in the documents was a 2000 visit to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, an Abramoff client. A source with knowledge of the trip said that senior members of Ney's and DeLay's staff went along.
At yesterday's hearing, Scanlon folded his hands and answered the judge respectfully and even, at times, enthusiastically. Asked if he was satisfied with his attorneys, he said, "I am indeed!" He also appeared relaxed afterward, joking with Mary Butler, the top prosecutor on the case, that she was letting him leave the courtroom first to "face the gauntlet" of reporters outside.
Scanlon was released after promising to post a $5 million unsecured bond -- essentially a personal guarantee. Scanlon, who purchased a home in St. Bart's with lobbying proceeds, gave his passport to his attorney Plato Cacheris under an agreement with prosecutors. He agreed not to leave the country without giving authorities two weeks' notice.
Standing in the rain next to his attorneys, Braga and Cacheris, Scanlon declined to comment. Cacheris said, "He's obviously regretful for the circumstances that brought him here." At the end of the briefing, Scanlon, who remembers many of the reporters from days handling press for DeLay, said: "Thanks, guys. I'll be in touch."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/22/05:

We have people running for county sheriff jobs that spend more than 5 times the entire salary of the job to get elected.

We have people running for state office that spends millions for 80,000 a year jobs.

In the end, most of the activities are not illegal, just borderline. The law makers thierself, set the rules, so having them restrict the ways they get rich is not soon to happen.

Does not matter what party, the special interest groups of one side or the other, heck some take money from both sides, is part of what makes america what it is today,
(going down hill)

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/22/05 - Have you ever been warmed by a fire you did not build?



SALT LAKE CITY, Utah - Gratitude for God's blessings and the need forsolidarity
with people of other beliefs and ethnic groups was the theme of a multifaith hanksgiving service last Sunday night.

"Who among us does not feel the urging to thank our creator for all his goodness?" asked Scott Parker, director of the Utah Salt Lake City Area Public Affairs Council of
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Parker read from a sermon by King Benjamin in the Book of Mormon and urged the group to be grateful.

He noted, "We've all been warmed by fires we did not build."

Have you ever been warmed by a fire you did not build?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/22/05:

Normally not only warmed but ended up getting burnt.

The only issue with warning with fires ( other faiths) that we do not believe in, is that it can give an appearace that we accept those beleifs to have saving faith and value.

If I pray with the Jew (his version) and do not have Jesus as my mediator, since they don't. We know that there is only one mediator between God and man, so do we give them an impressoin we agree with thier prayer.

If we bow in reverence when the Muslims pray what message does this give.

It is not that (good works) and social issues can not be worked on together jointly.

Most religions can work on homeless shelters, food kitchens and the such in some joint efforts. But one has to be careful of the mixing of beliefs and faiths.

Erewhon rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Pete_Hanysz rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

paraclete asked on 11/21/05 - Weird Religions - even Cheney gets in the act

The dissertation is a little long to c/p

what do you think about this?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/22/05:

The actual scariest part of Bush being president is that Cheney would be become president if Bush dies.

If anything about our goverment ever makes me loose sleep it is that fact

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/21/05 - Information on RCC Priests' sexual abuse and allegations of same ...

Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

In the late 20th century, and especially at the turn of the 21st, the Catholic Church in several countries was confronted with a series of allegations concerning sexual abuse of children under the legal age of consent ¹ by Catholic clergy and religious.

The controversy was at its most famous when it hit the United States in the late 1990s and early 2000s. However, several countries, including Canada, had already faced similar controversies with high-profile cases such as the Mount Cashel Orphanage scandal in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Duplessis Orphans in the province of Quebec.

Well-publicized charges that some members of the Church in certain instances deliberately covered up such crimes have fueled criticism of the institution and its leadership.

While not every allegation stood up to scrutiny, some did, resulting in apologies and restitution by the Church and the criminal prosecution of those who engaged in the acts.

It should be noted that the Roman Catholic Church doctrine has always considered the sexual abuse of children to be mortally sinful.

The allegations concerned:

1. The sexual abuse by some religious and secular clergy of children with whom they had contact in the community;

2. The sexual abuse of children in some religious-run houses, orphanages and schools, by both clergy and laity;

3. The policy of Catholic clergy in dealing with the abuse, namely a failure to report what were criminal acts to the local police, and efforts to pressure the victims, their families and independent witnesses into not reporting the incidents to civil authorities.

Canon law (internal church law) was often given priority over secular criminal law, an action which led some Catholic Church leaders to be accused of "perverting the course of justice", itself a criminal act. (Note: the fight between Church Law and Civil Law's jurisdiction over the clergy is a centuries-old political struggle.)

While not every allegation stood up to scrutiny, some did, resulting in the criminal prosecution of those who engaged in the acts.

Senior church leaders, including the Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Law (USA) and Bishop Brendan Comiskey of Ferns (Ireland) resigned over their mishandling of cases in their dioceses and in particular their failure to report incidents to police.

In the aftermath, some national hierarchies introduced new rules of childcare and in the reporting of sex abuse allegations.

Nonetheless, a few dioceses experienced a drop in numbers of Catholics attending weekly Mass.

Abuse in the community

The largely unrestricted contact clergyman had with children (through teaching in schools and parish links with families) meant that a child molester in the priesthood was a serious danger to children.

In part, this was because priests and religious officials and persons across all religions were viewed as trustworthy individuals, whom families allowed to get close to them.

The clergy were involved in every aspect of their community's and its families' lives; from baptising the young to the weekly celebration of Mass, giving children First Communion to marrying couples and being the celebrant of their funerals.

Apart from direct family connections, many Catholic families sent their children to Catholic schools, where Catholic priests either taught as teachers or visited regularly as the local parish priest or curate.

Participation in the Catholic faith involved a close association with, and proximity to, priests.

While the vast majority of priests never sought to abuse a single child, the small minority who did had easy access to children.

One of the worst examples of a clergyman using his links with families to facilitate the abuse of children occurred in Ireland, where one priest ² systematically raped and sexually abused hundreds of children between 1945 and 1990.

The scandal over the Fr. Brendan Smyth case, and the systematic obstruction of justice in his case by the Norbertine Order caused immense damage to the credibility of the Catholic church in Ireland, as did other cases, such as that of Fr. Jim Grennan, a parish priest, who abused children as they prepared for First Communion, and Fr. Sean Fortune, who committed suicide before his trial for the rape of children.

The abuse by Grennan and others in the Diocese of Ferns in south-east Ireland led to the resignation of the local bishop, Brendan Comiskey while similar scandals in the Archdiocese of Dublin severely damaged the reputation of its archbishop, Cardinal Connell. Although there were other social factors at play, some have argued that the ten-year drop in the percentage of Irish people attending weekly Mass (from 63% to 48%) was related to these events.

Abuse in institutions

Like most religions, Catholicism has a direct involvement in other areas beyond parish work. Its many religious orders operate schools, hospitals, orphanages, and reformatory schools, and are involved in social work.

Some of these institutions have been associated with allegations of sexual abuse of children. While the allegations made apply to only a minority of institutions and a minority of people working in that minority of institutions, enquiries have established the existence of both abuse and of a failure of the leaderships running the institutions, when confronted with evidence of abuse, to act in the best interests of the children or in accordance with the criminal law in their jurisdiction.

Governmental institutions have also been heavily criticised for neglecting to adequately ensure that children placed in those institutions by agents of the state were properly looked after.

Some of the most serious allegations of abuse were made against clergy who either worked in the institutions or who were allowed unlimited visitation rights and access to children.

As with the secular clergy in parishes, the majority of allegations have resulted in criminal convictions.

Perhaps the most serious charges facing the church in the contemporary world relate to Father Marcial Maciel, founder of the Legion of Christ, a Catholic order of priests founded in Mexico in the 1940s. In the 1990s, Maciel was accused by nine former seminarians of his order with molestation.

One subsequently retracted his accusation, saying that it was a plot intended to discredit the Legion. Maciel has always denied the accusations. However, he recently stepped down as head of the order. Whether this is due to the charges is hard to determine.

Flawed policies

Abusers moved from location to location

Some bishops have been especially heavily criticized for moving offending priests from parish to parish rather than seeking to have them stripped of their faculties.

Many dioceses submitted priests guilty of child abuse for intensive psychotherapeutic treatment and assessment, with the priests only resuming parochial duties when the bishop was advised that it was safe for them to be so assigned.

In response to questions, defenders of bishops' actions suggest that in re-assigning priests for duty after treatment they were acting on the basis of the best medical advice then available.

Critics have questioned whether bishops are necessarily able to form accurate judgments on the nature of the recovery of a priest.

Failure to report criminal acts to police

From a legal perspective, the single worst failure—other than the actual abuse of children—was the unwillingness of certain Church leaders to report the incidents directly to the police. This phenomenon occurred in every country with rare exceptions. This is proving to have extremely negative consequences. The Norbertines, for example, knew not merely of Fr. Brendan Smyth's apparently pedophilic tendencies but also of allegations of sexually interfering with children from as early as 1945, yet it was only in the late 1980s and early 1990s that the two police forces in Ireland, the Garda Síochána and the Royal Ulster Constabulary, were able to gather sufficient information to prosecute Smyth.

In May 2001, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (at that time prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and since made Pope Benedict XVI) sent a letter[1] to all Catholic Bishops declaring that the Church's investigations into claims of child sex abuse claims were subject to the pontifical secret and were not to be reported to law enforcement, on pain of excommunication.

However, the letter did not discourage victims from reporting the abuse itself to the police; the secrecy related only to the internal investigation.

Allegations of systematic plots to conceal evidence

Reviewers of the Smyth case differ as to whether it was a deliberate plot to conceal the nature of his behaviour, or whether much of what happened involved complete incompetence by his superiors, the abbots of Kilnacrott Abbey, or perhaps a mixture of an institution presuming that what happened to its members was its own business, plus the complete incompetence of his superiors, who failed to grasp the human and legal consequences of the actions of a particularly manipulative child molester, who found ways to circumvent whatever restrictions the abbots placed on him. (Cardinal Daly, both as Bishop of Down and Connor (where some of the abuse took place) and later as Cardinal Archbishop of Armagh, is recorded as having been privately scathing at the Norbertine "incompetence".)

Citing a belief in an international Catholic conspiracy, a Louisville, Kentucky lawyer filed suit in June 2004 against the Vatican, alleging Roman participation in a cover-up of sexual abuse problems.

Legal experts predict an unsuccessful outcome to this case, given the sovereignty of the Holy See and the lack of evidence of Vatican complicity. Sovereign immunity however, was recently denied upon appeal in a separate (WW II/ Vatican Bank/Ustazhe Genocide) United States federal lawsuit .

Payments to victims

Some have even gone so far as to allege that Church members paid off victims of child abuse, either in settlement of compensation claims, or in order to prevent them reporting to the police.

In the mid-1990s, Archbishop (later Cardinal) Connell of Dublin lent money to a priest who had abused altar boy Andrew Madden; this money was used to pay compensation to Madden and to prevent him from reporting the abuse to the police.

Connell later claimed never to have paid money to a victim, insisting that he had simply lent money to a priest who just happened to use the money to pay off his victim.

Implications of the scandal

Celibacy and the scandal

Critics have suggested that the discipline of celibacy in the Catholic priesthood offers a means by which priests with sexual urges that are aimed towards children rather than adults can hide those tendencies, their lack of sexual feelings towards adults being unnoticeable in a completely unmarried clergy.

There have been suggestions that child molesters deliberately enter the Catholic clergy due to the "cover" its celibacy provides, and due to the fact that clergy have frequent access to children; these theories, however, remain unproven.

Though child molestation rings have been found, the fact that there is no noticeable difference between the level of child-oriented sexual activity among the unmarried Catholic clergy and the married clergy of other denominations suggests that child molesters as a group have not specially targeted the Catholic clergy for entry, though it seems likely that some child molesters have entered its ordained ministry as they have other ministries elsewhere.

There is no evidence whatsoever that child molestation is in any way related to celibacy itself. Some child abusers were themselves the victims of child abuse, as children, their sexual abuse tendencies being formed long before they reach the age of forming adult relationships.

While some child abusers may prove incapable of forming stable adult relationships (though many do, producing the phenomenon of parents who abuse their children) their celibate status is not a cause of their abuse of children but a symptom of their sexual desires for sexual activity with children, not adults.

Seminary training

Clergy themselves have suggested their seminary training offered little to prepare them for a lifetime of celibate sexuality; a report submitted to the Synod of Bishops in Rome in 1971, called The Role of the Church in the Causation, Treatment and Prevention of the Crisis in the Priesthood by Dr. Conrad Baars, a Dutch-born Catholic psychiatrist from Minnesota, and based on a study of 1500 priests, suggested that some clergy had "psychosexual" problems.

It is a matter of speculation as to how much of the Catholic Church's mishandling of sex abuse cases was influenced by such problems.

In some countries in the aftermath of the crisis caused by the sex abuse allegations, the Church has begun reforming seminary training to provide candidates for the priesthood with training to deal with a life of celibacy and sexual abstention.

Homosexuality within the clergy has also come under scrutiny, in large part due to the disproportionate number of abuse cases involving post-pubescent males.

Other Catholic teachings, practices

The Catholic Church clearly teaches the sexual abuse of children to be gravely sinful. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church's list of moral offences, one finds:

"...any sexual abuse perpetrated by adults on children or adolescents entrusted to their care. The offense is compounded by the scandalous harm done to the physical and moral integrity of the young, who will remain scarred by it, all their lives; and the violation of responsibility for their upbringing." (CCC 2389).

In the New Testament, Jesus says: "[H]e that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6).

Despite these teachings, some critics have charged that specific doctrines or traditional practices in Catholicism contributed to the problem.

Catholic teaching affirms that so long as the officiant has been validly ordained, his personal sins have no effect on the validity of the Masses, absolutions, baptisms, and other sacraments he has administered.

The doctrine of apostolic succession makes valid ordinations and institutional affiliation the chief consideration in clerical status.

In other cases, traditional Catholics have made the charge that the Second Vatican Council fostered a climate that encouraged priests to abuse children.

In the January 27, 2003 edition of Time Magazine, actor and traditional catholic Mel Gibson charged that "...Vatican II corrupted the institution of the church. Look at the main fruits: dwindling numbers and pedophilia."

However abuse by priests was occurring long before the start of Vatican II.

It is also widely understood that Catholic clergy are in short supply, at least in the United States. The doctrines outlined above and this understaffing combine, it has been claimed, to make Catholic clergy extraordinary valuable human capital.

It is alleged that the Catholic hierarchy acted to preserve this human capital and ensure that they were still available to supply priestly services, in the face of serious allegations that these priests were unfit for duty.

Others, however, disagree and believe that the Church's mishandling of the sex abuse cases merely reflected prevailing attitudes of the time towards such activity, in which the tendency was to suppress the information lest it cause scandal and a loss of trust in the institution, an approach reflected in the manner in which the media and secular organisations hid damaging information or ignored it; from the sexual promiscuity of leading politicians to domestic violence.

They see the Church as having made horrendous but genuine mistakes, their leaders being out of touch with society's increasing demand for exposure and retribution.

Yet others—including non-Catholic academics such as Philip Jenkins—have observed that the Catholic Church is being unfairly singled out by a secular media which they say fails to highlight similar sexual scandals in other religious groups, such as the Anglican Communion, various Protestant churches, and the Jewish and Islamic communities.

The term paedophile priests, widely used in the media, implies a distinctly higher rate of child molesters within the Roman Catholic priesthood when in reality its 1.5–2% is no higher than any other segment of society and lower than many.

Episcopal resignations

* Bernard Cardinal Law, the Archbishop of Boston, Massachusetts, United States had come under enormous public pressure to resign after Church documents suggested he had covered up sexual abuse committed by priests in his archdiocese.

There is, for example, the priest John Geoghan, who was shifted from one parish to another despite knowledge of his depredations by Cardinal Law.

The Vatican announced on December 13, 2002 that Pope John Paul II had accepted Law's resignation as Archbishop and reassigned him to an administrative position in the Roman Curia and named him archpriest of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore.

Cardinal Law later presided at one of the Pope's funeral masses.

Bishop Séan P. O'Malley, the Capuchin friar who replaced Law as archbishop, was forced to sell a good deal of valuable real estate and to close a number of churches in order to pay $120,000,000 in claims against the archdiocese.

* Bishop Brendan Comiskey, Bishop of Ferns resigned under similar pressure.
* Cardinal Hans Hermann Groër had to resign from his post as Archbishop of Vienna over allegations of sexual abuse in 1995.
* Two Bishops of Palm Beach, Florida have resigned due child abuse allegations, Joseph Keith Symons, who was replaced by Anthony O'Connell, who also resigned. O'Connell was replaced by O'Malley, who had earlier been appointed Bishop of Fall River following an abuse scandal, and who would later replace Cardinal Law in Boston.


Citing monetary concerns arising from impending trials on sex abuse claims, the Archdiocese of Portland filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on July 6, 2004, hours before two abuse trials were set to begin, becoming the first Catholic diocese to file for bankruptcy.

If granted, bankruptcy would mean pending and future lawsuits would be settled in federal bankruptcy court.

The archdiocese had settled more than one hundred previous claims for a sum of over $53 million.

The filing seeks to protect parish assets, school money and trust funds from abuse victims: the archdiocese's contention is that parish assets are not the archdiocese's assets.

Plaintiffs in the cases against the archdiocese have argued that the Catholic church is a single entity, and that the Vatican should be liable for any damages awarded in judgement of pending sexual abuse cases.

The Diocese of Tucson likewise filed bankruptcy in September, 2004, as has the Diocese of Spokane in December of that year.

The Diocese of Tucson reached an agreement with its victims, which the bankruptcy judge approved June 11, 2005, specifying terms that included allowing the diocese reorganization to continue in return for a $22.2 million settlement.

Ferns Inquiry 2005

On 22 October 2005 a government-commissioned report compiled by a former Irish Supreme Court judge delivered a damning indictment of the handling of clerical sex abuse in the Irish diocese of Ferns.

The report revealed over 100 cases of child sex abuse in the small diocese, involving a number of clergymen, including Monsignor Micheál Ledwidth, the former head of the National Catholic seminary, Maynooth College.

Among the facts revealed were

* the "inexplicable" failure of Bishop Donal Herlihy to exclude clearly unsuitable candidates from the priesthood;
* his failure to report incidents of proven sexual abuse to the legal authorities and his failure to acknowledge that abusers needed to be kept from children;
* the failure of his successor, Brendan Comiskey to report incidents of abuse and remove abusers from positions where they worked with children.

Among the cases revealed were

* the rape of teenage girls on the altar of a church by one priest;
* the use of blackmail by another priest to force children to perform sex acts on him;

The report was also highly critical of the failure of the Garda Siochána to properly investigate incidents reported, and in particular the disappearance of one file detailing serious incidents of clerical sex abuse.

The local health authorities also failed to protect children even when aware of allegations.

There was however praise in subsequent debates and among survivors of abuse of the actions of the new Apostolic Administrator (acting bishop) for instituting wholesale reforms, including the toughest anti-abuse rules in any diocese in the Catholic Church, and also his willingness to hand over all files and all information to the inquiry.

Victims' spokesman and himself one of the victims of one of the abusers, Colm O'Gorman praised the administrator and compared his actions with the inaction and incompetence of his predecessors.

Forth-coming Dublin Inquiry and Irish Parliamentary comment

Following November confirmation concerning a subsquent child sexual abuse Inquiry for the Diocese of Dublin, on November 09, 2005, TD Liz O' Donnell, former Government Minister and member of the liberal Progressive Democrats governing alliance, spoke at length in the Irish Parliament concerning the necessary changes required following the Ferns report.

O' Donnell stated that it was clear to her, and to everyone, that the Ferns report would prove to be entirely typical of any such report carried out in any Irish Diocese, and that therefore the relationship between Church and state in Ireland must now change from that of deference towards complete separation .

O' Donnell characterised the Catholic Church in Ireland and as a whole as a secret, un-accountable, and anti-democratic organisation at variance with the State through its inability to uphold or adhere to civil law.

She called for immediate financial auditing of all Church assets in Ireland .

Liz O' Donnell also called for termination of deference to supposed Church morality in the fields of IV treatment, stem cell research, abortion, homosexuality and Third-world birth-control programs.

Ireland does not possess civil legislation for the protection of children, and the references to separation of Church from State arises in the context of providing such legislatory enaction.

Media programming containing debate upon the child sex-abuse scandals has focused particularly on the fact that Diocesan insurance policies against financial reparation claims by the victims were opened from 1987 throughout Ireland.

The contradiction between this action and the complete inaction and failure at civil reporting, coupled with continuance of ministry by the very numerous offenders, has led to a point in Ireland where even the Church's senior theologian is unable to continue the general hierarchy claim of being within a "learning -curve" at that time.

On state broadcast , it is admitted that indeed this contradiction is as indefensible as the crime and the seeking of insurance against sex abuse settlements overshadows the validity of what O' Donnell referred to as Catholic Church "denial" and "self-preservation" .

The question of "canon law" and its quasi-legality in a modern state has been democratically raised amidst general popular shock that abusive rapist priests were authorised to continue ministry, or treated as if for alcoholism prior to re-instatement, or simply allowed full continuance of their abusive behaviour (as was the case in the seminary).

The leading Irish theologian Father Twomey, on the same evening as the O'Donnell intervention, was unable to publicly affirm, on State broadcast, that any one of the 26 docesan bishops of Ireland would, in 1987, have understood or recognised that child sexual abuse (rape) was a civil crime.

This contrasted weakly against Deputy O' Donnell's assertion as to the necessity for legal accountability of the Catholic Church in Ireland in 2005.


1 The age of consent, that is, the age at which the law presumes a teenager has the physical, emotional and sexual maturity to make an informed adult decision to enter into sexual activity, differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, from a low teenage in Italy and Spain to a mid to high teens age elsewhere, for example 16 in the United Kingdom, 17 in Ireland. (Some states also provide different ages of consent for homosexual boys as against heterosexual boys and girls.) Yet separately the law may specify a different age where a teenager ceases to be a child and becomes an adult. As a result, where a difference exists, it may be perfectly legal to have sex with a child where the individual, though still deemed a child in law, is above the age of consent specified in local legislation.

2 Paedophilia and child sex abuse are not always the same: a paedophile may practice sexual abstinence, and not everyone who sexually abuses a child is a paedophile.

3 Philip Jenkins, Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis (Oxford University Press, 2001). ISBN 0195145976

See also

* Barry Ryan
* Hans Hermann Groër, Kurt Krenn (Austria)
* Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse(for other religions with similar concerns)
* Paul Shanley
* John Geoghan
* Marcial Maciel
* Pontifical Secret

Additional reading

* Philip Jenkins, Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis (Oxford University Press, 2001). ISBN 0195145976

External links

* Sexual Abuse in Social Context - a Catholic League report
* Stop it now A campaign to prevent Child Sexual Abuse by calling on potential abusers to seek help
* Male Survivor - Overcoming sexual victimization of boys and men
* Bishop Brendan Comiskey's

* Cardinal Law's statement on child sex abuse in the Church
* Vatican-U.S. Mixed Commission on Charter and Norms for Protection of Children
* CNN - 22 March 2002 'Pope responds to sex abuse cases'
* National Review Board, John Jay, and Audit Reports
* Experts: Tucson diocese settlement a bankruptcy model
* Los Angeles Files Recount Decades of Priests' Abuse October 12, 2005 New York Times

Is this a subject that should be either ignored or treated lightly?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/22/05:

It has neither been ignored or treated lightly, in fact it has made more news than almost all the current and new abuse cases. There are few national or international news about the abuse of children in China, the child sex issuesin Japan, the current child slaves here in the US. Or even other abuse cases of martial arts teachers, pubic school teachers and Boy Scout leaders.

If one would take every public school teacher case (many sweep under the rug also)
And do one story to show all of those cases the America public would fear to send thier children to school.

The fact is while this is very serious it has gotten extremely more press than any of the other abuse situations.

I believe in general if the news media wants to be fair, thier should treat all abuse cases with the same energy that they have these cases.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/21/05 - First Amendment of the US Constitution

guarantees freedom of speech....guarantees the right to blaspheme. That's interesting.

Also, isn't it interesting that the most unforgiveable sin is something a person says....not anything a person does.

Were blasphemy laws, say in the Dark Ages, used to stifle discussion of religion, esp re: Protestant Reformation??

What are your comments?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/21/05:

No elections in heaven
there is a KING

no freedom to sin in heaven,
there are laws that all will want to follow.

I would say that laws on morality in body and soul are for the good of mankind,

Morality is not a bad word, and it is not being a bigot, it is merley proper human behavior

Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 11/21/05 - Homeless People, Who are they really?

Hello Everyone,

Maony people sterotype homeless individuals thinking they are smelly, grimy wino's. But in reality are the homeless truly these kinds of individuals?

In some countries where there are homeless street children there are gangs that are made up of the meda and police, and society in general feel that street children or homeless children present a threat to what they call a civilised society and so they set up death squads and self proclaimed vigilantes to kill these children, about three every day in places like Rio de Janeriro and other countries.

The United state is suppose to be the richest country in the world and yet we have homeless people. I am thinking about that these days because I and my family are looking for a new home and this issue crossed my mind. How can we live in the richest country ever and have homeless adults and children? Are we headed in the same direction as other countries such as Rio de Janeriro where these homeless ones are killed because of lack of knowledge of how a person can become homeless? What is the real causes of homelessness?

1- Because of the inability of the government to give significant resources towards the right of the homeless to adeuate housing.

2- Very bad regulations and inefficient plans cause confusion and no housing for the homeless.

3- Homelessness is a sign of poor money management on the part of housing programs in the community.

4- Lack of knowledge and training of those in charge of dealing with homeless people. Children and adults should receive respectful and be regarded as potential assets to the comunity rather then a burden or looked down on.

As a caring person either Christian or not, do you feel there is hope for the homeless?

I you were in position to help the homeless, what would be your solution?

What do you think you can do personally to help adults and children who are homeless here in the United States, starting in your own community?

Take care,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/21/05:

Sorry HOpe but it is obvious from your post that you have never worked the homeless shelters or the streets in the major cities.

I spent over 6 years working with the homeless, drug dealers and prostitues in downtown Atlanta.

Now some people are there because of job loss or merely missing that one check that makes them lose thier home.

1- Because of the inability of the government to give significant resources towards the right of the homeless to adeuate housing.

It is not the governments job to provide anyone a house, it is the persons responsiblity to find a place to live and work for it. There is no "right" to houseing. But the government spends billions on making housing available.

2- Very bad regulations and inefficient plans cause confusion and no housing for the homeless. Most of the homeless don't want to do anything for a home, many will not even stay in a shelter because it requires them not to drink, or because it requires them to take a bath.

3- Homelessness is a sign of poor money management on the part of housing programs in the community.
It is a sign of poor money mangement on the part of the homeless. Alot of the street beggers in Atlanta make 100 to 300 dollars a day ( tax free) it is used up on drugs and other life style choices.

4- Lack of knowledge and training of those in charge of dealing with homeless people. Children and adults should receive respectful and be regarded as potential assets to the comunity rather then a burden or looked down on.

The people by in large do not even respect thierself. And the burn out after being lied and lied and lied to by the homeless at times effects the workers.

You see the same people in a revolving door, you get them housing, but they get kicked out for drugs, prostitution, and so on.

And the majority of the homeless are adicts of some sort, and also mental health, several years ago most states turned out thier mental health people to non exsitance local resourses

Prisons turn out inmates with 100 or less and no where to stay, mental health people have no place locally to go

Then you have the "semi" homeless gang members who prefer to live in trashed buildings and the such.

Almost all of the homeless I have dealt with could be living somewhere if they really wanted to. If they would stop using drugs and drinking. They make thier choices by and large.

Also most allhave sad stories, mostly lies to make people feel sorry for them.

I will almost never give money to them, I may offer them work ( cleaning up a local park) but never without doing somehting

It is surprising to see how fast they don't need your money.

Any day of the week in Atlanta you would see 100 homeless within a mile of my church, we offered work for any that would show up, most days no one ever showed up.

As a caring person either Christian or not, do you feel there is hope for the homeless?

Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
sapphire630 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 11/20/05 - weird religions - have you heard of this one?

The Church of the SubGenius

A wild double-bluff religion that arose from the memetically hot swamps of UFO cults, 50's kitsch, Aleister Crowley, Discordianism, Robert Anton Wilson, est and various other self-help groups, designer religions, and living myths. The biggest joke about the church is that it's no joke at all.

The SubGenii are a bunch of true-believers who delight in labeling non-SubGenii as head-in-the-sand "Pinks" or Archie Bunkeresque "Glorps," both groups being unwitting dupes of a grand Conspiracy designed to yoke humankind to ignorance and soul-sucking desk jobs. SubGenii claim that they are not pure humans, but that the blood of superior Yetis flows in their veins. SubGenii seek slack, a hard-to- describe substance/state-of-mind that allows them to escape the grasp of the cold hard pincers of the Conspiracy.

The late (and fictional) J.R. "Bob" Dobbs, founder of the church, was an extremely successful door-to-door salesman who began hearing voices from space aliens. He applied his skills to developing and selling a new religion based on what the voices told him.

The SubGenius mythos is deep and complicated. As predicted in the SubG scripture-zine, "The Stark Fist of Removal," the church would one day be overrun by blank-eyed "Bobbies" who mindlessly spout SubGenius quotes and turn the whole thing into dogma. Has this already happened? Many former high-ranking members of the Church have gotten what they could from it, and have moved on to explore other spiritual paths. "Bob" would probably have wanted it that way.

Founding a religion based on what voices have told him - now where have I heard that before?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/21/05:

Maybe the dog told you about it.

Or was it the space cats from that si-fi movie.

Of course real si-fi buffs know it is the clowns that are the aliens in hiding.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 11/20/05 - a dangerous new cult?

'Breatharian' retreat worries French

November 21, 2005 - 9:29AM

French authorities are monitoring a retreat organised by a Queensland New Age guru, whose controversial philosophy has been linked to the deaths of three people.

Ellen Greve, who calls herself Jasmuheen, promotes what they call Breatharian, spiritual cleansing by living on air and light alone.

The 48-year-old claims to have eaten nothing since 1993.

Greve is holding a seminar in the south-eastern village of Devesset in France but local police are concerned it may be a dangerous cult.

The gathering has been put under high surveillance, the head of the French government's anti-sect unit told Le Parisien newspaper.

Jasmuheen's teachings have been linked with three deaths in recent years, including that of Australian environmentalist Verity Linn, found dead from starvation and dehydration in 1999 near a remote Scottish loch.

A diary near the naked South Australian's body showed she had attempted the 21-day food-free and liquid-free diet advocated by the Breatharian guru.

But Greve defended her teachings in the wake of Linn's death, saying she did not follow her guidelines.

That same year, a Queensland couple were sentenced to six years jail for manslaughter following the death of a woman they had supervised through the fasting process.

The philosophy also has been linked to the 1997 death of German kindergarten teacher Timo Degen.

In 2002, British police dismissed media reports Greve was connected to the death of Cambridge graduate Margaret Davies.

The 39-year-old Essex woman was found by two shepherds as she sheltered in a bothy (hut) at Cape Wrath.

Despite concerns about the seminar in France, police told Le Parisien there was nothing they could do to stop the gathering as all those attending were adults.

© 2005 AAP

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/20/05:

May worry them, but the French don't do anything against anyone, That would not be politically correct.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Johnny_Cash asked on 11/19/05 - Hello Answerway, I'm Johnny_Cash

Why hello there. How are you tonight? I'm doin' fine, warden! Well, when I'm not pushing daisies I like to talk to nice folks like you. My record company says it's bad publicity to make records at prisons, but to hell with them, I'd like to record an album here in front of you folks at Answerway, that is if you don't mind? Now let me remind you that this is being recorded so you can't say hell or shit. Here we go...

"Well I just took some cocaine
and I'm feeling fine
Gonna shoot my woman
and do some time. Yee haw!

Now I'd like to do a spiritual number

"Lord, oh lord, why have you forsaken me
It's not my fault I killed 10 men
in skanky ol' Tenessee
Lord, If you're listenin'
tell me you love me
even though I just killed 10 men in Tenessee"

Okay, thank you. Here's one more for you nice folks

"Well the cows are dry
and the chicken won't lay
oh lord guess I'm busted
Just shot my wife
and hope prison won't make me a gay
Well, I'm busted"

What's that? You want another song? Well, all right then, will June join me? Get out here bitch! Sing this song with me! Everybody, here's June Carter.... "Well, hello everybody, sorry I can't sing tonight, I got the laryngitis"... "oh what the hell..."

We got married in a forest
by a man name Buzz McGillicutty
Then we went to a horse stable
and had ourselves a baby
We're goin' to Jackson
(June) gonna comb your hair
(Johnny) woman don't touch my hair. I said back off bitch don't touch me! I'll send you back to hell where you belong woman! BLAM!!!"

Well, I guess I have time for one more song till the cops come arrest me and put me in here with all you weird folks.

"June, oh June, June all my life
If I hadnt a shot poor June,
I'd a have her for my wife,
June is gone, one more round
June is gone

I went to Answerway
and sang with June there
Took my gun and shot her
'cause she was gonna touch my hair
June is gone, one more round
June is gone."

Well, I work so hard gettin' my hair all greased up... alright one more verse...

"So if your woman's devilish
You can let her run
Or you can do her like June got done
June is gone, one more round
June is gone
June is gone, one more round
June is gone"

Bye Everybody, I'm Johnny Cash

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/20/05:

May wish to worry about trade rights using his name

And personally since I like his music I don't beleive using his name is in good taste.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/19/05 - Good News

Jewish Leader Blasts 'Religious Right'


HOUSTON (AP) - The leader of the largest branch of American Judaism blasted conservative religious activists in a speech Saturday, calling them ``zealots'' who claim a ``monopoly on God'' while promoting anti-gay policies akin to Adolf Hitler's.

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the liberal Union for Reform Judaism, said ``religious right'' leaders believe ``unless you attend my church, accept my God and study my sacred text you cannot be a moral person.''

``What could be more bigoted than to claim that you have a monopoly on God?'' he said during the movement's national assembly in Houston, which runs through Sunday.

The audience of 5,000 responded to the speech with enthusiastic applause.

Yoffie did not mention evangelical Christians directly, using the term ``religious right'' instead. In a separate interview, he said the phrase encompassed conservative activists of all faiths, including within the Jewish community.

He used particularly strong language to condemn conservative attitudes toward homosexuals. He said he understood that traditionalists have concluded gay marriage violates Scripture, but he said that did not justify denying legal protections to same-sex partners and their children.

``We cannot forget that when Hitler came to power in 1933, one of the first things that he did was ban gay organizations,'' Yoffie said. ``Yes, we can disagree about gay marriage. But there is no excuse for hateful rhetoric that fuels the hellfires of anti-gay bigotry.''

The clang of the death knell for right wing religous bigots gets stronger and stronger as decent Americans prepare to endzealots hold on political office.

Clang, Clang...

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/19/05:

First it is doubt ful that it is really the largest American Jewish group, they are a pro gay jewish group.

The article says they claim 900 temples in the us and 1.5 members, that would make say
1300 or so members in each of thier temples, not really believable.

But anyway, as I said they are a pro gay group, that makes them in reality non Jewish since the true Jewish religions does not reconise homosexuality within the church.

And finally no matter how many members they may have, ( a pro gay group will speak out against moral values no matter jew or christian) numbers does not make right, merely too many perverts running around pretending to be religious. Sick isn't it.

Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Yiddishkeit rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
cavil rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

Laura asked on 11/19/05 - Dealing with unforgiveness

I know in my heart that I have harbored unforgiveness for a group of particular people. I have had dreams where I tell them what I think of them and I wake up startled and sweating. I have not found a way to come to terms with all of it. I have thought so many times of calling them and telling them what I really think of them. But in the end I keep my peace for the sake of those who might be affected negatively by my need to "get it off my chest".... This is a big road block for me spiritually and emotionally.. HOW do I come to terms with this?? I've tried writing a diary of my feelings..I've tried just giving it to God and letting it go, but it's still there like a cancer....How does one find peace in such a situation???? Laura

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/19/05:

Laura I don't know you or what it is you can't forgive.

But anger is a normal human reaction, the bible knows we get angry but warns us about not holding on to that anger.

IE to forgive someone. Does this person or persons even know you were upset, or need to be forgiven. I am offended often by merley stupid people who made racist or semi racist remarks. They often never know I am offended by them.

Instead of telling them off, let them know you were hurt, ofended, angered by what ever they did. Tell them it upset you, but you are trying hard to forgive them.
Not in anger, but tell them you want to forgive them. It will ( or may) help in the healing process.

And finally ask God to forgive you for not being able to forgive.

I also personally find when I can't get over something or someone, I have a issue in my own life I need to forgive myself over first.

Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Liz22 asked on 11/18/05 - Why Are Some Still Fooled?

"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." How does that apply in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 act of war against our country?

Can anyone give young men and women any valid reason why they should lay down their lives in a war that we didn't have to fight in the first place?
I was never much into Politics but I can tell when I am being fooled.
Okay we got the bad guys like dictator Saddam Hussein but where is the real bad guy Bin Laden Best Known As: Accused mastermind of the 11 September 2001 attacks
Also known as: Osama bin Laden,
The U.S. government considers Osama bin Laden to be the most dangerous terrorist in the world. Could he be out having tea, or playing golf with the Chief In Command talking about Oil and how many billions they are making?
While so many youths living in Poverty in Flint Michigan, are eager to make a better life for themselves but they don’t want to die doing it!

Bin Laden is the "most wanted" man in the world with a reward for information leading to his capture of US$50 million. While his current whereabouts are unknown, now how could that be?
Bush himself acknowledged there were no ties between the deposed dictator Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. The 9/11 commission concluded that there was no evidence of "a collaborative operational relationship" between Saddam and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network. So where is Mr. Laden? Why are we letting our children mostly living in Flint Michigan die for a War on Oil and greed, why are some being fooled again?
I have warned many children in the State of Michigan as in Flint and in Detroit to stay away from Recruit's at this time, and find some other way for an Education, I also have two Sons whom will not taste War, my youngest sixteen at home on the honor roll and a loving child will not die for someone else to become Richer and for Oil and greed, this is not a just War.

As a follower of Christ I believe "if you live by the sword you will die by the sword."

My question here is, are you being fooled or perhaps your eyes are almost open, and why have you permitted yourselves to be fooled again? And where is Bin Laden?
The Master Mind and a freind and partner of the Bush's family?

Thank you,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/19/05:

We did not have to fight WWI or WWII, or the Korea war, but we chose to fight it, for the good of the world.

Items of freedom are hard to understand,
The item of personally scarifice is almost unknown to moderan Americans. That is why so many people are being UnAmerican today.

Todays people in the Army are there because they want to be, Anyone in there today enlisted while we were at war ( or reinlisted( so every soldier who is there knew they would be and make that choice to fight form something worth having. The freedom of a nation.

What we did wrong was allow lawyers and news people there who will let us blow them away till they gave up.

But now, how many news stories of the new schools, the new wells, how many stories of the new mall, and the kids playing in the school play yards have you seen.

What some real news of what is happening there and you will know why we are there and why this was worth fighting for.

By not supporting the troops YOU are trying to weaken the nation, that is what the enemy wants to happen, they want us to run away. But of course, I guess many americans would rather wait to fight this here in the US>

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Liz22 rated this answer Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/18/05 - Wal Mart get nailed again. When will they learn?

125 Illegal Workers Found at Wal-Mart Site

By MICHAEL RUBINKAM, Associated Press Writer2 hours, 12 minutes ago

An immigration raid at a Wal-Mart distribution center under construction led to the arrests of 125 illegal workers, all of whom will be deported, federal officials said Friday.

The workers from Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico were detained Thursday at the construction site in eastern Pennsylvania, according to Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Some of the 125 used fake documents to obtain employment with subcontractors, officials said.

The arrests came after search warrants were executed for six companies at the site outside Pottsville, about 80 miles northwest of Philadelphia.

"Employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens, and those who utilize false documents to gain employment, face significant criminal and administrative charges," John Kelleghan, acting special agent-in-charge for ICE in Pennsylvania, said in a statement.

Agents obtained the search warrants after learning that 10 workers employed by Destin Drywall & Paint were using Social Security numbers that did not match their names. Another three used Social Security numbers that were never issued by the government, according to an affidavit unsealed Friday at U.S. District Court in Scranton.

Houston-based Destin has worked on Wal-Mart projects around the country, according to office manager Cindy Wyman. She said the company verifies that employees are permitted to work in the United States.

"As far as I know, their Social Security numbers are good," Wyman said of the Pennsylvania workers.

A Wal-Mart spokesman has said the detained workers were not employed by Wal-Mart but by the subcontractors. Wal-Mart's contracts with the companies require that they follow local, state and federal employment laws, the company said.

The Pennsylvania job site remains shut down, Wal-Mart spokesman Marty Heires said Friday. He did not know when construction would resume.

Last month, Wal-Mart shut down work on seven stores under construction in North Dakota to check for illegal aliens after two illegal immigrants working on Wal-Mart projects in Bismarck were charged with molesting two 13-year-old girls. Charges against one of the suspects were dropped after authorities found out he was a juvenile.

In 2003, a raid of 60 Wal-Mart stores in 21 states led to the arrests of 245 illegal workers. An affidavit claimed a pair of senior Wal-Mart executives knew cleaning contractors were hiring illegal immigrants. The retailer agreed to pay $11 million in March to settle the case but denied senior executives knew of the hirings.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/19/05:

Walmart is all about money, they move into an area, and many home town stores have to close.

They work alot of employees less than full time so they don't have to pay benifits, pay them at a very low scale.

And buy alot of stuff from China where they use slave labor.

( and McDonalds is not any better, thier happy meal toys are made by child labor most often)

When they moved into our area, they snubbed thier noses at regulations on land studies before they build, guess it was cheaper to pay a small fine than to do all the legal paperwork.

They are not the friendly corporation that Sam Walton started, ( He really did care about the workers)

I only buy there when I have to, and not happy about it then.

And because they stopped thier people from saying Merry Christmas, I refuse to shop there during christmas season.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/18/05 - The Sin Box

The Sin Box
Why have Catholics stopped lining up at the confessional?
By Andrew Santella
Posted Thursday, Nov. 17, 2005, at 2:13 PM ET

A Catholic friend of mine recently went to confession at her parish church for the first time in years. She had personal reasons for wanting to seek absolution, but there was this, too: She said she'd long felt a little sorry for the priests sitting alone in their confessional boxes, waiting for sinners to arrive.

A generation ago, you'd see a lot of us lined up inside Catholic churches on Saturday afternoons, waiting to take our turn in one of the confessionals. We'd recite the familiar phrases ("Bless me Father, for I have sinned"), list our transgressions and the number of times we'd committed them, maybe endure a priestly lecture, and emerge to recite a few Hail Marys as an act of penance. In some parishes, the machinery of forgiveness was so well-oiled you could see the line move. Confession was essential to Catholic faith and a badge of Catholic identity. It also carried with it the promise of personal renewal. Yet in most parishes, the lines for the confessionals have pretty much disappeared. Confession—or the sacrament of reconciliation, as it's officially known—has become the one sacrament casual Catholics feel free to skip. We'll get married in church, we'll be buried from church, and we'll take Communion at Mass. But regularly confessing one's sins to God and the parish priest seems to be a part of fewer and fewer Catholic lives. Where have all the sinners gone?

On the surface, the drop-off in confessors might seem like no surprise.

To congregations scarred by the recent sex-abuse scandal, the thought of turning to a priest for forgiveness might not hold the attraction that it once did. And regular penance is not the only Catholic sacrament that has declined in practice recently: The scant number of young Catholic men training for the sacrament of holy orders, or ordination, for example, has left the church with a serious shortage of priests.

But it's strange that so many lay Catholics should have abandoned the confessional even while secular culture is increasingly awash in confession, apology, and acts of contrition of every sort. Parents own up to pedophilia on Jerry Springer. Authors reveal their fetishes and infidelities in self-lacerating memoirs. On Web sites like Daily Confession and Not Proud, the anonymous poster can unburden his conscience electronically. The confessions on these sites are displayed in categories borrowed from Sunday school lessons: the Ten Commandments or the seven deadly sins. At least one posting I read was framed in the language of the Catholic confessional. "Bless me, Father, for I have sinned," it began before going on to catalog a series of mostly mundane misdeeds. (Others are simply odd: "I eat ants but only the little red ones. They're sweet as hell and I just can't get enough.")

All this public confessing testifies to the impulse to share our deepest shame. So, why isn't that impulse manifesting itself in Catholics practicing the ritual that was created expressly for that purpose? Of course, Catholic penance—whether it's done in a confessional booth or in a face-to-face meeting with a priest, an innovation introduced in 1973—is supposed to be private and confidential. It may be that in an age of media-fueled exhibitionism, some people want more attention for our misdeeds than can be had from whispering a list of sins in a box in a church. But those Internet confessions won't count toward absolution in the eyes of the church any time soon. "There are no sacraments on the Internet," declared the Pontifical Council for Social Communication unequivocally in 2002.

The Catholic tradition of listing the number and kinds of one's sins in regular, private confessions became standard practice after the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215. Penance took root in Catholic ritual and established itself as, in the words of religion writer Peter Steinfels, "the linchpin of the Catholic sacramental economy." The Eucharist and the other sacraments, Steinfels points out, provided access to God's grace. But expressing contrition in confession could mean the difference between going to heaven or hell: Dying with unconfessed mortal sin on your soul meant eternal torment. Early 20th-century Catholics might have taken Communion only once a year—some referred to it as their Easter duty—but they generally confessed their sins far more regularly. As recently as 40 years ago, many Catholics would not have thought of accepting the Eucharist until after they'd cleansed their souls.

Today the situation is almost exactly the reverse: Entire congregations receive Communion, while the confessionals remain mostly empty. Between 1965 and 1975, according to the National Opinion Research Council, the proportion of Catholics who confessed monthly fell from 38 percent to 17 percent. A University of Notre Dame study in the 1980s showed the decline continuing. In a 1997 poll by the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at the University of Connecticut, only 10 percent of Catholics surveyed said that they confessed at least once a month; another 10 percent said they never went to confession at all.

Like most of the recent changes in the church, the shift occurred in the wake of the Vatican II reforms. The program of renewal for the church that emerged from the Vatican II council said almost nothing about penance and reconciliation. The church's emphasis after Vatican II seemed to be less on guilt and damnation and more on love and forgiveness. The sacrament was given its current kinder, gentler name—reconciliation. Which seemed to reduce the stakes: If priests rarely talked about going to hell anymore, why bother confessing to them? To the extent that confession seemed necessary, the church's post-Vatican II efforts to empower the people in the pews left some Catholics figuring that they could confess their sins directly to God in prayer. At the same time, baby boomers who had been educated in the arcane legalisms of Catholic transgression—is eating meat on Friday a mortal or venial sin?—found themselves as adults thinking less about whether they were breaking the rules and more about their attitudes, intentions, and ideas about how to live a Christian life.

Last but surely not least, there was the growing gap between church teachings and the daily practices of American Catholics, especially when it came to sex and contraception. If you practiced birth control or had sex outside marriage, and you were scrupulous about confession, you might end up spending a lot of time in the confessional sharing every detail of your personal life with the (celibate and male) parish priest. That prospect is particularly bothersome to some Catholic women. I know one who says she'll go back to confession when she can confide in a female priest.

The biggest barrier between Catholics and the confessional, however, may be the real effort it requires. Unloading your transgressions on the Internet takes a few computer clicks—you can do it on your coffee break. But done right, Catholic confession demands a rigorous examination of conscience and real contrition, to say nothing of the prayers you may be assigned for penance and the thinking a priest may ask you to do about the ways you've let yourself and God down. No wonder we are more comfortable with the Eucharist service, which demands only that we line up like consumers and accept something for free. Dorothy Day wrote of having to "rack your brain for even the beginnings of sin." That's work." Cut and Paste from Slate On-line Magazine.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/19/05:

First Confession is not merely a "catholic" thing it is done in the catholic, orthodox and some anglican churches.

But not on a one to one, but almost all protestant churches do a confession. In the old Lutheran service ( done to about 1970 or so) the congegration would reciete a repretion prayer and the minister would say, I as a called and ordained minister of God forgive you of all your sins)

it is called the "Keys of the Kingdom" in the Lutheran study and shows where because of the authority given Peter to bind on earth, that minsiters ( priests) have this right and obligation.

And in other protestant churches from coast to coast the same or simular confession is done, but most today the minister just says that God has forgiven them. But the minister still one could say speaks for God telling them God has done this.

The drop has little to do with the sex scandals and more just a lax of people to follow church policy or to get out an extra day besides merely going to church.

For example, in most of your Baptist churches, the wed night service is normally about 1/10 of the Sunday service, guess they are losing interest because of some church practice there also??

The problem is that America sociey in general is not following any real Christian teaching what you have are some churches changing thier teachings to make people happy. That is the true sin, too many denominations are getting close to not being Christian they are changing so much.

The private confession gives a chance for real advice from someone, that is missed in open confession that the protestants use.

In the Orthodox, they do not use a closet set up, they merley sit next to the priest with a linen or scarf over thier head and give thier confession. These are done often during or before the service.

Our local Anglican church has a minister (preist) there about 30 minutes before service for those wanting to do confession also. ( they sit side by side, no linen)

ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/18/05 - Cheney Endorses Torture

(AFP) - Admiral Stansfield Turner, a former
CIA director, accused US Vice President
Dick Cheney of overseeing policies of torturing terrorist suspects and damaging the nation's reputation, in a television interview.

"We have crossed the line into dangerous territory," Turner, who headed the
Central Intelligence Agency in the 1970s, said on ITV news.

"I am embarrassed that the USA has a vice president for torture. I think it is just reprehensible. He (Mr Cheney) advocates torture, what else is it? I just don't understand how a man in that position can take such a stance."

I agree, even if Cheney is for the Chinese Water Torture, he should never say that in public. What possible positive outcome can come from the Veep endorsing torture????

Why did he do this?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/19/05:

Any person, given the right reasons would torture someone. If your family was being held and would die in 10 hours, but one person knew where they were.

Would you offer that person tea and say well if you don't tell me, I guess there is nothing I can do.

Or what would you do??

If you could save 100,000 people from dying in a nuke, would you??

And then in the end, if torture now not letting them shave, or making them shave, or perhaps no hot water or having to listen to rap music.

Torture is nor almost anything that makes someone unhappy by alot of terms being used.

War is not a pretty thing, we should just fight it, get it over with, and leave the news crews and lawyers at home so we could really fight and get it over with.

Liz22 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

tomder55 asked on 11/18/05 - More thoughts on ID

The Vatican again presented it's opposition to ID being taught in school.

The Vatican's chief astronomer said Friday that "intelligent design" isn't science and doesn't belong in science classrooms, the latest high-ranking Roman Catholic official to enter the evolution debate in the United States.

The Rev. George Coyne, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, said placing intelligent design theory alongside that of evolution in school programs was "wrong" and was akin to mixing apples with oranges.

"Intelligent design isn't science even though it pretends to be," the ANSA news agency quoted Coyne as saying on the sidelines of a conference in Florence. "If you want to teach it in schools, intelligent design should be taught when religion or cultural history is taught, not science."

....In a June article in the British Catholic magazine The Tablet, Coyne reaffirmed God's role in creation, but said science explains the history of the universe.

"If they respect the results of modern science, and indeed the best of modern biblical research, religious believers must move away from the notion of a dictator God or a designer God, a Newtonian God who made the universe as a watch that ticks along regularly."

Conservative Columnist Charles Krauthammer also editorializes today on the subject.

Because every few years this country, in its infinite tolerance, insists on hearing yet another appeal of the Scopes monkey trial, I feel obliged to point out what would otherwise be superfluous -- that the two greatest scientists in the history of our species were Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, and they were both religious.

Newton's religiosity was traditional. He was a staunch believer in Christianity and member of the Church of England. Einstein's was a more diffuse belief in a deity who set the rules for everything that occurs in the universe.

Neither saw science as an enemy of religion. On the contrary. ``He believed he was doing God's work,'' wrote James Gleick in his recent biography of Newton. Einstein saw his entire vocation -- understanding the workings of the universe -- as an attempt to understand the mind of God.

Not a crude and willful God who pushes and pulls and does things according to whim. Newton was trying to supplant the view that first believed the sun's motion around the earth was the work of Apollo and his chariot, and later believed it was a complicated system of cycles and epicycles, one tacked on upon the other every time some wobble in the orbit of a planet was found. Newton's God was not at all so crude. The laws of his universe were so simple, so elegant, so economical, and therefore so beautiful that they could only be divine.

Which brings us to Dover (Pa.), Pat Robertson, the Kansas State Board of Education and a fight over evolution that is so anachronistic and retrograde as to be a national embarrassment.

Dover distinguished itself this Election Day by throwing out all eight members of its school board who tried to impose ``intelligent design'' -- today's tarted-up version of creationism -- on the biology curriculum. Pat Robertson then called down the wrath of God upon the good people of Dover for voting ``God out of your city.'' Meanwhile in Kansas, the school board did a reverse Dover, mandating the teaching of skepticism about evolution and forcing intelligent design into the statewide biology curriculum.

Let's be clear. ``Intelligent design'' may be interesting as theology, but as science it is a fraud. It is a self-enclosed, tautological ``theory'' whose only holding is that when there are gaps in some area of scientific knowledge -- in this case, evolution -- they are to be filled by God. It is a ``theory'' that admits that evolution and natural selection explain such things as the development of drug resistance in bacteria and other such evolutionary changes within species, but that every once in a while God steps into this world of constant and accumulating change and says, ``I think I'll make me a lemur today.'' A ``theory'' that violates the most basic requirement of anything pretending to be science -- that it be empirically disprovable. How does one empirically disprove the proposition that God was behind the lemur, or evolution -- or behind the motion of the tides or the ``strong force'' that holds the atom together?

In order to justify the farce that intelligent design is science, Kansas had to corrupt the very definition of science, dropping the phrase ``natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us,'' thus unmistakably implying -- by fiat of definition, no less -- that the supernatural is an integral part of science. This is an insult both to religion and to science.

The school board thinks it is indicting evolution by branding it an ``unguided process'' with no ``discernable direction or goal.'' This is as ridiculous as indicting Newtonian mechanics for positing an ``unguided process'' by which the Earth is pulled around the sun every year without discernible purpose. What is chemistry if not an ``unguided process'' of molecular interactions without ``purpose''? Or are we to teach children that God is behind every hydrogen atom in electrolysis?

He may be, of course. But that discussion is the province of religion, not science. The relentless attempt to confuse the two by teaching warmed-over creationism as science can only bring ridicule to religion, gratuitously discrediting a great human endeavor and our deepest source of wisdom precisely about those questions -- arguably, the most important questions in life -- that lie beyond the material.

How ridiculous to make evolution the enemy of God. What could be more elegant, more simple, more brilliant, more economical, more creative, indeed more divine than a planet with millions of life forms, distinct and yet interactive, all ultimately derived from accumulated variations in a single double-stranded molecule, pliable and fecund enough to give us mollusks and mice, Newton and Einstein? Even if it did give us the Kansas State Board of Education too.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/19/05:

This is not the vaticans view on the subject, merely a person within the churches view.

The Catholic Church in its official statement came out in agreement with it.

This is merley like others a news group finding those that do not agree with official church statements finding some leader in the group who does not agree.

But in one he is right, it should not be taught side by side, evolution as a beleif on how the world is created is the one that should not be taught as a fact, since it is not a fact, it can not be proven but it is merley a theory. The fact it is a theory means there can be other theories also.

What is truely reidiculous is anyone beleiving that all life, all the differnt types of trees, all the different life forms and the such came from the same one cell.

Now that is silly. If anyone had to have faith, it would have to be alot of faith to beleive that a "fish" decided to come out and be on the land? and that a maple tree could turn inito a pine tree but yet some still stay a maple tree.
Now that is the silly.

tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

ATON2 asked on 11/17/05 - Tit for Tat?????

While Aton is being lectured on civility to Christians, paraclete, that sterling Christian who claims a personal relationship with Christ posts his definition of Muslims as 'desert scum followers of MUDhammud'. Am I to assume that this is the OFFICIAL Christian take on Muslims??????? Or is paraclete simply a clod, a throwback to the Inquisition??????

Jeez, Guys...if THAT is what Christianity is all about, I think I'll pass....Thank you veddy much!!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/17/05:

They are followers of a false religion.
They are sinners as the rest of us, but no saved from thier sins.

They are doomed unless they repent and find savation in Christ

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
MaggieB rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
FormerJesusHelper76 rated this answer Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ATON2 asked on 11/17/05 - Is this mere Bible babble?

Since the board seems, once again, obsessed with homosexuality, and since the "Bible scholars" failed so miserably on the Bible quiz..I'll make this one easier for you.

In response to one of the Bible questions, dr brought up the old myth that Lot offered his daughters to the 'homosexual men' of Sodom and Gomorrah as suitable 'rape' subsitutes for the messengers of Yahweh. This has always confused those of us who are 'too intelligent by the world's standards' to understand the Bible.

l. If all the men of Sodom and environs were homosexual, as the Bible states...where did the children of Sodom come from???

2. If homosexual men are burning with lust for other men, why in the name of all that is unholy would Lot suppose that they had the least interest in raping his daughters.

3. If all the men of Sodom were homosexuals, why would Lot have affianced his daughters to two of those men...and if you suggest that he found TWO men in all of Sodom who were not homosexual why, then, were they also destroyed with all those nasty homosexual men.

4. And if it was the homosexual men of Sodon who were the guilty ones, why were the women and children also destroyed????

5. This leads us into the sillyness of a woman being turned into salt for disobedience. Why salt, that would have been washed away in the first rain, thus offering no object lesson to anyone but Lot and his daughters.

6. Which leads to the ultimate disgrace...this man of GOD, Lot is saved from the destruction of Sodom, gets so falling down drunk, that he has incestuous relations with BOTH his daughters (on separate occassions, thank Heaven) and impregnates them both??? And the excuse good Christian theologians give is that it was the only way they thought they could re-populate thier world!!!!!!!!!

Moral...God will punish an attempt by 'homosexual' men to rape other men...but will allow double incest to go unpunished!!!!!!!

My question: Is this anything more than Bible babble??????? Or is the real explanation that the men of SODOM were NOT homosexual, but heterosexual men who fit the description that Paul gives of "those who turn from their NATURE to committ homosexual acts????

Could one of you 'non-intelligent' inspired-by-god-to- understand-the-Bible experts help me out on this?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/17/05:

Just not trying to get it, Sexual impurity of all kinds, what do you see with todays immoral people, they adopt, they may have group sex activities with male and female,

Many may have sexual attractions to both men and women.

Sexual perversions is just that perversions of all kinds. The men even after being blinded by the angels still tryed to get to Lot and the angels, they were so driven by thier sexual lusts.

1 The majority of men in Sodom were living and doing various immoral sexual acts homosexuality was the major one listed and obvious in the bible.

2. Ask all of the homosexual men today that adopt, and also have sex with women.

3. Sick homosexual behavior is sexual lust gone wrong. Hopeing to save his visitors, offering them another form of sex, but as you can see, they did not wish women in this group, but wanted the "perfect" men.
Thier lust was uncontrolable and unnatural.

4. God decided to, living with men in this type of atmosphere, other sexual sins could easily be quessed at. And God does have a practice often of destoying entire families for sins of the head of the household.

5. Silly, silly is anyone not wanting to learn from this, we are mostly mineral, when we have the water taken out of our body, we are nothing but minerals. Seems very reasonable for someone who was heading back toward a city destroyed by great heat and fire

6. Not excusing them but incest is still at least natural sexual relations not un-natural sexual acts.

7. Moral, God punishes sin, gross sin will get very extreme punishment. He did not kill all the homosexuals ( sadly) but he did destroy a big center for it.

It is that you do not wish to take God at his word. You wish to find problems and question why God does what he does. He does not need our reasons, he punishes each for thier actions, and will punish each of us.

There are many sins, homosexual behavior is the flavor of the day because todays society is filled with immoral non natural sexual acts that is trying to pretend to be acceptable and normal. It is a very, close relationship with Sodom and a sacry one when you see what happened to them.

Of course what America should be even more scared about is the mass killings of the babies not yet born. We kill more than Hitler ever did in his death camps. and experment on more fetus than Hitler did in all his experiments in his labs.
We in America make Germany under Hitler look like choir boys in church.

I am surprised that a Christian nation has not attacked and invaded us to stop the horor we have brought upon these babies.

This is by far a worst horror than the sexual perversions that we are slipping into, since most americans still see these are immorral activities but feel forced to accept them because of court cases. So America has not accepted the sexual perversions to the level of the mass killngs we do.

Gods judgement can not be far off from America. And hoestly it is well deserved if he does destroy America,

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Choux rated this answer Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Tex78 asked on 11/17/05 - Did you ever wonder about this.

Does it seem to you, that the highly educated, by the worlds standards, are less able to understand the Bible. It seems they read it as a worldly book. Is that why they do not understand the true meaning of the word of God?

You see, when somebody in the old Testament, says something that is wrong, people who do not understand the word of God, will say that it is a mistake in the Bible. When really, the writer of the Bible was just recording what was said.

Everything in the Bible is not necessarily spoken, or approved, of God. The world cannot seem to understand that. Can you see false statements in the Bible, and can you point them out to others?

1 Corinthians 1:18,19
18. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
19. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."

Why would God do this? Do you think it is just for those, who reject Him, and His word? I believe that God will reveal His word to anyone, who really desires to understand it..

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit reveals things to us, that He doesn’t reveal to everyone. Is it on a need to know basis? I sometimes wonder why others do not see the things, which I see. I suppose that is why there is a need for teachers.

I know that God gives each of us gifts. Some the gift of preaching, some the gift of teaching, etc. Do you understand that there are deeper meanings, than what we read in some of the passages. There are hidden meanings, which the world cannot see.

There is a big difference between heart knowledge, and head knowledge. Head knowledge feeds pride, while heart knowledge feeds the soul. And in turn, it gives us the ability to help others. And in so doing, we help them feed their own souls...

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/17/05:

It is the desire to listen to the word. Many in todays society say they know all about the bible, they can quote verses but they don't really know what they mean because they don't beleive in it.

They merely know the words, not the meaning.

IF you really understand you will know that we are not as important and it is only God that places a value on us, not because we should have one, but because he wants to.

Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 11/17/05 - We live in a World of Bureaucracies and injuctice>

Hello Everyone,
I am back to say hi and to tell you all how much I miss you guys. My family and I have been sick from the mold in this building we are still stuck in sinces hurricane Wilma. We can not just leave,(at least I think we can't)
because we are bound by our lease. The mold is so bad that we are all sick. Sneezing, coughing, tearing eyes, aches and pains in our joints and I personally have made over 30 phone calls only to be faced with the bureaucracies of the Governments, local and from Washington. They anser the emails I send only with more numbers to call. I called Help me Howard and they are so bombared with reports that they but you on a call with someone from EPA who says they will help but then do nothing. The landlord just laughs and says sue them, but who has that kind of money.

We are now working with a private lab wh gave us some kits to test the area. We so far have positive tests results for the worst kind of mold that is black and dark green. It is Toxic according to the lab and when we get the reports which should be next week we will send a copy to the landlord. One is a swab test for the mold that is visible and one is for the air in the apartment and the air vents. Both are positive for toxic mold. When we send the copy of the tests from the lab we then can legally move because the mold is throughout the whole building. Children are coughing and some are having asthma attacks. I have tried to get the people in the building to sign a paper stating the health hazards of the building but most do not have the money to move out and so they are afraid. The only way we could afford to move was to get money from the family. But our lease is not up till December 31 and the landlord said if we leave without fulfilling the lease he would take us to court. We have gotten to the point that we don't care, let him sue us and we will take our prove to why we are leaving before the judge. We have pictures of one man's apartment that is so bad the mold is all in his clothes and closets. That is bad, but when a person has mold growing in the air condition systems and we have to breath it that is just plain wrong.

Anyway, just wanted to let you guys know what has been happeing here. Why do people who do such things, get away with it? The governments is suppose to be for the people and yet they don't do anything at all. Sad to say that what is taking place here in Florida after Wilma is outrageous and a crime. Now I can really feel for those who went through Hurrican Katrina. I can take comfort knowing that God sees all things and what comes around, goes around. These landlords and government officails who see these things and do nothing, will have to pay one day for their actions, and when they do, I will not feel sorry for them at all.

I am still around just trying to survive. Should be on the board again soon or at least once we move I should be back regularly again.

Take care,
"Boy I miss you guys!"

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/17/05:

So you have a lease, so what, do you know how many people just pack up and leave.

Hire a home inspector ( about 100 to 200 dollars) get them to inspect you home showing it is not liable and dangerous.

Notify the landlord of this,

What is the worst he can do if you move?

Sue you? so what, fight him in court, what is the worst can happen, you lose and owe him a bunch of money.

Health and safty is much more important than any rental contract.

Move for the health of the kids. You should consider sueing him for health care costs due to the condition of the house.

hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Itsdb asked on 11/16/05 - No slippery slope?

Seems it was just a few days I expressed concern that gay marriage wasn't the end of the push for legalizing other alternatives in family/marital configurations...just a scare tactic I'm told. Check this out...

Bill softens bestiality statute
Massachusetts pols push measure lessening punishment for animal sex

Posted: November 16, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2005

"Four state legislators in Massachusetts have introduced a bill that would soften the crime of bestiality, a move pro-family activists say is a natural progression of the state's legalizing same-sex marriage.

Stated traditional-values organization Article 8: "State Sen. Cynthia Creem, Sen. Robert O'Leary, Rep. Michael Festa and Rep. David Linsky have some interesting things in common.

"They're all strongly endorsed by the state's three major powerful homosexual lobbying groups. … They're all Democrats. They're all vocal supporters of homosexual 'marriage' and whatever else the homosexual lobby bids them to do.

"And now all four have introduced Senate bill 938. Even the left-wing Weekly Dig can't believe that the Massachusetts Legislature is poised to go this far."

A story in Boston's Weekly Dig describes the legislation, entitled "An Act Relative to Archaic Crimes."

"The bill would strike down several sections of the current penal code criminalizing adultery, fornication and the advertisement of abortion," the reported stated. "It also repeals what appears to be a sodomy statute forbidding 'abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast.'

"Archaic, indeed."

While the bill would keep bestiality technically illegal, it gives the option of less severe penalties. Previously, those convicted of "a sexual act on an animal" could receive up to 20 years in prison.

Explains the local weekly: "The new measure would give activist judges the option of slapping perps with a mere two and a half years in plush local jails, or even letting zoophiliacs walk with a $5,000 fine."

The bill was taken up during a public hearing Nov. 1 in the Legislature's Joint Committee on the Judiciary. Reportedly, no one from the public testified against the measure."


The Weekly Dig's take:

Lawmakers move to lower penalty for bestiality … seriously

More than two and a half years ago, the nation laughed as pro-family crusader Rick Santorum predicted the consequences of legalized gay marriage: If man-on-man marriage was sanctified, man-on-child and man-on-dog unions might not be far behind.

Those who jeered Santorum were silenced last Tuesday. Man-on-dog isn’t legal just yet, but if the Massachusetts State Legislature has its way, it might be soon. On November 1, cheerleading for bestiality was just one of a string of stunning pieces of legislation that converged on the legislature’s judiciary committee in a bizarre, post-Halloween orgy. The imminent collapse of the state cannot be far behind.

Sponsored by Senators Cynthia Creem and Robert O’Leary, and Representatives Michael Festa and David Linsky, the bestiality measure was buried in a packaged assault on morality, disguised as “An Act Relative to Archaic Crimes.” The bill would strike down several sections of the current penal code criminalizing adultery, fornication and the advertisement of abortion. It also repeals what appears to be a sodomy statute forbidding “abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast.”

Archaic, indeed.

The new law would continue to forbid “a sexual act on an animal,” but reduce possible penalties for committing such a crime, making it decidedly less illegal. Whereas the old law punished doggie-diddling and the like with hard time (a maximum sentence of 20 years) in state prison, the new measure would give activist judges the option of slapping perps with a mere two and a half years in plush local jails, or even letting zoophiliacs walk with a $5,000 fine.

How badly has Massachusetts’ moral compass suffered since dudes started honeymooning with dudes? Not one legislator, nor a single member of the God-fearing public, appeared before the judiciary committee to denounce the proposed changes. But then again, who has time to worry about bestiality when teenagers are shoplifting and buying NyQuil?

Though presumably more than willing to lower penalties for crimes against nature, Rep. Linsky demanded the judiciary committee get tough on the real criminals—mall thieves. It turns out that if shopping bags are lined with duct tape, any merchandise inside can be snuck past security tag sensors undetected. One shoplifting ring, Linsky testified, had recently been busted in Natick with $47,000 in stolen goods. Linsky’s bill would criminalize the possession of duct-tape bags and other shoplifting tools in malls, punishing offenders with up to two years in the clink and a $1,000 fine.

Cold medicine, it appears, is also a greater threat to society than bestiality, as Falmouth Rep. Matthew Patrick denounced NyQuil and codeine, but remained silent about barnyard romance. Patrick’s bill would criminalize the sale of “cough syrup or a cold remedy containing alcohol or codeine … to any person under the age of 18.” Such medicine “wreaks a lot of havoc on young people,” Patrick argued.

And the shoplifting and NyQuil bills were two of the tamer legislative initiatives before the committee; the rest of the docket amounted to a clearinghouse of insanity.

Up for consideration was a measure, sponsored by Southie’s Jack Hart, to ban the advertisement of fireworks; a bill banning the sale of laser pointers to minors; a push to revamp the way the state punishes graveyard vandals; an examination of how to combat the epidemic of drunken riots; new punishments for drivers who steal gas; and—our personal favorite—a bid to make criminally liable anyone who knowingly allows their telephone to be used “repeatedly, for the sole purpose of harassing, annoying or molesting [another] person … or for the purpose of repeatedly using indecent or obscene language to that person or his family.”

Hopefully, with those problems solved, we’ll all be able to marry our dogs and live in peace."


Well now, what do you say about that?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/16/05:

the Democrats will have a real issue, which supportor to stand behind, the pro sex group or the animal rights group.

I guess if they get a marriage licence that would make it legal.

Or if they consent, one baaaa for no, two baaa for yes. or woof, woof, depending on your animal choice.

All you have to do is look at the material for the "man/boy" groups and you know where this sexual movement is taking us.

It will all start with thier individual "rights" being violated since they can not have sex as they please with who or what now. Was and still preaching this was where it was headed.

ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 11/14/05 - not a christian question!but!

folks I know many of you are getting on in years I would like your honest oppinion of the new medicare prescription plan .I twill affect me and whilst I dont claim to be any genioue i consider myself fairly intelegent but this meaa is beyond my understanding and I at first attempt to understand it am not to much in favour of it .How about the rest of you to whoom it will aply?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/14/05:

If you would like to email me in private I can tell you what ( at least what I believe I have learned about it.

In general there is a page on the Medicare site ( a link can be found off the AARP web site) it will show you all of the approved plans in your state, the general coverages and the premimum for the plan.

Plans will differ greatly ( very greatly) between states even.

In general in MO where I signed my parents up last week.

Unless you already have a private insurance that will continue thier drug plan, if you want any type of coverage you will have to select a plan. The average plan will cost @ 30 dollars a month per person.

Most plans have a 250 dollar dect before they will pay anything, Then they have a list of approved drugs ( each company has its own list and will not cover all drugs)

It then pays according to the rating of the drug on a three or four tier plan. non name brand drugs in MO would cost you 5 dollar,
tier 2 drugs would cost you 25 dollar
tier 3 would cost 55. Those not listed most plans paid about 1/2 of their cost.

Then after @ can not remember exact figure but after @ 2250 dollars paid for drugs, the plan will pay nothing, till you pay about another 1200 out of your pocket, they they kick in paying again for the drugs.

In Mo, I compared all of the plans available, there United Health Care covered the most drugs, and they did not have the 250 deductable. In comparison it was in general the best plan in MO that I could find.

United Health Care is also the prefered provided and the only plan endorsed by the AARP group.

For my parents it was also the only plan endorsed by the Railroad retirement plan.

But in all things, you have to go to one insurance company and get the plan though them, Medicare itself is not selling the program. So talking to your local agent may be helpful.

Be sure to look at the list of approved drugs and to be sure your drugs are on the list.

** I did have a little help, I work with the medicare program and had a medicare supervisor in our office last week to do our inspection. They provided some help also.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Tex78 asked on 11/14/05 - I don't know if it is alright to post this, but I am going to. It is my personal testimony.

My name is M.L., I am an ex-alcoholic. I know you may have heard that, “once and alcoholic, always an alcoholic. Well, that may be true physically, but it is not spiritually.
I was born in 1926. It was in the middle of the depression. Times were very hard, and especially if you had no formal education. My Grandmother was an Indian, and my Grandfather was a Irish hill-billy from Tennessee. Yes, I am a hill-billy, born in Arkansas on the Mississippi river. I got drunk the first time at five years old. It wasn’t meant to happen though. I went with Grandpa to the whisky still back in the woods. Of course I didn’t know then what it was, but it was a big steel barrel, with a wooden keg on top. It was sealed with clay. There was a copper tube from the keg, called a worm. It was curled up and reaching to the ground. That was the first mistake. I had my little cup, which I carried with me everywhere I went. I put it under the end of the worm, and let it fill up. Good thing it was a small cup. I took a big drink, and didn’t breath for a few minutes. Then the world started spinning. There was a big stump close by, so I crawled on top of it and went fast to sleep. The next thing I remembered, was waking up at home in bed. Needless to say, that was the last I got to go to the still for a long time. But that didn’t stop me. My Grandpa always kept a gallon jug of whisky by the side of the bed. Now that was the other mistake. I could not lift the jug, but I could tip it over. So, I pulled the cork, tilted it over, and began to drink. The next thing I remember was waking up, and it was morning. Needless to say, the jug was no longer left on the floor. It was kept in the oven of the wood cook stove . Now they just didn’t remember what it was like being five years old. That was the third mistake. I don’t remember just how long that went on, but I recall other times they made mistakes. But once I made one. We were moving, and on the front porch, there was a big kitchen cabinet, on top was a half pint bottle, and it was full. I managed to make it up there and got the bottle. I don’t remember how old I was, but it was easier to get. I took off the top, and took a big drink. The next thing I remember, was being very, very sick. It was kerosene!

Many years passed and the drinking increased many fold. In nineteen forty four, the draft caught me. I was stationed in Germany. After the war the soldiers in my outfit, got a whisky, and wine ration. That was another mistake. I made it through that by the skin of my teeth. Then I was stationed in Panama. There were times when my drinking would start on Friday evening, and not stop until early Monday morning. It was vodka and coke. Leon, the bar owner said that he started the bar thirty years before, and threw the key away. The only time he closed was when there was an election. He said that in all that time, he had never seen anyone who could drink that long and keep on walking. Well, I had a lot of practice. Being a chain smoker also, was a bad combination. Many times, going to Church drinking. This did not set well with the Pastor. Going to the church, which was in the country, sitting there and drinking and thinking about God. I would stop drinking, but would keep on smoking, then stop smoking and keep on drinking. Going sometimes for three months. Then the urge would get so strong I could not fight it. I was saved in that same church, where I would go to and drink. I was later ordained a minister.
Working hard to make it, working hard to build a church, which had burned down. I preached in a brush arbor, which we all built, while we worked building the church. Then trouble broke out in the church. It seemed that each one wanted to be the boss. One of the deacons, I will not mention his name, since he has gone on to be with the Father, held the title to the church, and if it ever ceased to be a church it would return back to the hairs of the donor. It wound up being a hay barn. It was so sad to see that, while returning for a visit to that region later. Being still troubled with the drinking problem, I had tried many times to quit, but it just would not work. Giving up trying, for it was just too hard for me. One night while praying, I cried out to God. I said, “Father I have tried many times to quit, but I just cannot stop smoking, and I cannot quit drinking. Then His voice was so soft and Gentle. He said, “that is what I have been waiting for you to say”. You may ask, did I hear His voice, and what did it sound like. My answer is this. When you hear His voice, you will know it, and nobody will have to tell you it was Him. No, you do not hear a sound, you hear it in your heart. I cannot explain it, I just know it happened. From that day to this one, I have not wanted a drink, nor a cigarette. I can’t even stand to smell either one. I am telling this so it may help someone else. If you do not believe that God will answer your prayer, get sincere with Him. He will not play games with us. He is honest, and He will not play with our souls. He loves us so much, that it hurts Him not to help us, but He will not force it on us. We have to really need it, and really want it, enough to believe Him for it. And when He answers, do not reject Him. He will be right there every time the going gets rough. He may allow you to be tested, but that is just to make us stronger. Every time we have a victory, it gives us more strength and confidence. Oh yes, that little church, which I helped build, is back in the hands of God. A friend of mine is the Pastor there and he is a good worker for God. I am not able to preach much now, but I have this on line ministry, and I will have it until I am not able to keep it. Then I will witness from my bed. I love God with all my heart, mind, and soul. My Jesus is my Savior, my Friend, and my intercessor. He is with me at all times. It is good to feel Him near me. To know that He is watching over me while I am sleeping, or awake. Also to know that He is waiting for me to finish my time here on earth, so He can welcome me home. Amen.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/14/05:

Yes God can truely be a "one step" plan to stop drinking. But any addition from drinking to sexual issue to anything that controls our thinking, can be very easy to fall back into.

If we stay stong in God it is easier, but even Jesus was tempted and we will also be tempted at times.

God Bless

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/13/05 - A Commentary n Jimmy Carter's political & Christian book

I was a member Jimmy Carter's Presidential Campaign committee in Montana.
What are your thots on this...
Jimmy Carter's Endangered Values
Monday, November 07, 2005

Former president Jimmy Carter has written yet another book -- his twentieth -- and he has hit the media circuit in order to promote his latest project. Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis represents the former president's return to familiar themes, even as it will add new layers of confusion concerning his actual beliefs and values.

Jimmy Carter makes one central argument in this new book, and that is that America (indeed civilization itself) is under attack by a sinister force. In effect, he argues that a new specter now haunts civilization -- the specter of Christian fundamentalism.

After tracing a series of crises faced by the United States and the larger world, Mr. Carter places the blame squarely upon conservative Christians: "The most important factor is that fundamentalists have become increasingly influential in both religion and government, and have managed to change the nuances and subtleties of historic debate into black-and-white rigidities and the personal derogation of those who dare to disagree. At the same time, these religious and political conservatives have melded their efforts, bridging the formerly respected separation of church and state." That's quite an argument, but those familiar with Jimmy Carter's mode of public engagement will understand that this is merely the expansion (and repetition) of what the former president has been saying ever since the American people denied him a second term in the Oval Office.

Those who would wish to take Jimmy Carter and his ideas seriously will find little assistance in this book. More than anything else, it represents a superficial complaint against conservative Christianity. He offers a caricature of conservative evangelicals, even as he redefines basic Christian doctrines in order to conform to his own worldview. He criticizes fundamentalists for simplistic and superficial convictions, while he offers superficial and simplistic assessments of urgent moral questions.

What exactly is Jimmy Carter against? The "fundamentalism" he so vehemently attacks is, according to his own definition, represented by movements that "almost invariably" are "led by authoritarian males who consider themselves to be superior to others and, within religious groups, have an overwhelming commitment to subjugate women and to dominate their fellow believers." Furthermore, Mr. Carter argues that "fundamentalists usually believe that the past is better than the present," even as they wish to retain "certain self-beneficial aspects of both their historic religious beliefs and of the modern world."

Beyond all this, Mr. Carter argues that fundamentalists "are militant in fighting against any challenge to their beliefs." Accordingly, fundamentalists are likely to be angry and abusive against those who oppose their goals.

Most interestingly, Mr. Carter argues that fundamentalists err when they "draw clear distinctions between themselves, as true believers, and others, convinced that they are right and anyone who contradicts them is ignorant and possibly evil." The most amazing aspect of that assertion is Mr. Carter's own moralism, both as president and as America's globe-trotting ex-president. Even in Our Endangered Values, Mr. Carter continues the pattern of arguing that others are wrong when they assert that he is wrong. But, according to his own emphatic assertion and self-analysis, he is right and others are simply wrong. One gains the quick impression that they are mostly wrong because they consider Mr. Carter to be wrong.

As to his own worldview, Mr. Carter reveals: "In the religious realm, I shall depend on the Holy Scriptures, as interpreted by the words and actions of Jesus Christ. On political issues, I shall rely as much as possible on my own personal experiences and observations."

What exactly are the "values" that Mr. Carter believes to be so endangered? For one thing, Mr. Carter argues that fundamentalists are primarily responsible for the raging controversies that now mark America's public life. As he sees it, America is being ripped apart by the fundamentalists who push their concerns about abortion, marriage, homosexuality, and other issues in the public square. Since these conservative Christians are driven by their own Christian convictions, Mr. Carter argues that their favored positions represent a violation of one of his most cherished values -- the separation of church and state.

Once again, readers of Our Endangered Values will be frustrated if they are looking for Mr. Carter's own understanding of how church and state should be related. He offers no serious or coherent theory, but merely affirms "what Thomas Jefferson espoused as 'a wall of separation between church and state.'" As he would surely remind those he criticizes in his newest book, an assertion does not amount to an argument.

In actuality, Mr. Carter offers few examples of exactly what he finds to be an unacceptable mixing of church and state. He offers a glancing blow at President Bush's "faith-based initiatives," (an issue that truly requires serious evaluation), but he centers his most direct criticism on the fact that "right-wing Christians" have been criticizing the federal court system.

How, exactly, should an individual's Christian convictions affect public service and public policy? Mr. Carter does not offer any substantial approach to deciding this matter. Furthermore, he admits: "Despite what I consider to be a constitutional and biblical requirement for the separation of church and state, I must acknowledge that my own religious beliefs have been inextricably entwined with the political principles I have adopted." Readers of Mr. Carter's new book must be forgiven for thinking that religious beliefs are fairly applied to public policy when the beliefs and policies are those favored by Mr. Carter, but not when the beliefs and policies are those favored by conservatives.

Tracing a series of moral controversies, Mr. Carter asserts that a majority of Americans believe that abortions should be legal "in all or most cases." Of course, this is a serious misrepresentation of the data. One could just as easily argue that the vast majority of Americans reject abortion on demand. The polls are complicated and confusing, and the conclusions reached generally have everything to do with how the questions are asked. The former president also argues that Americans have grown increasingly accepting of same-sex behavior, but he offers few hints as to how he would settle the divisive issue of homosexuality. His one positive proposal is to deny homosexuals access to "marriage" while adopting civil unions as a matter of civil rights.

Mr. Carter also comes out swinging when it comes to the death penalty, noting that his years as governor of Georgia fell in the period between 1972 and 1976 when the Supreme Court had temporarily halted executions. "Some devout Christians are among the most fervent advocates of the death penalty, contradicting Jesus Christ and justifying their belief on an erroneous interpretation of Hebrew Scriptures," he argues.

This is a fallacious argument. In the first place, Jesus Christ never condemned the death penalty. In forgiving the woman caught in adultery, Jesus offered no blanket prohibition against capital punishment. Furthermore, the biblical support for capital punishment is based on a multitude of passages in both the Old and New Testaments. The biblical interpretations Mr. Carter offers are facile, simplistic, and intellectually dishonest.

The former president raises one serious and legitimate concern about the death penalty -- the "extreme inequity in its employment" -- and he could have called for a responsible evangelical reevaluation of capital punishment in light of the biblical teaching and contemporary application. Nevertheless, his recklessness with the biblical text undermines his point.

This is all the more problematic when it comes to Mr. Carter's treatment of abortion. He describes this issue as "the most divisive" facing the nation. But, once again, Mr. Carter offers more confusion than clarity when it comes to his own understanding of abortion.

Just last week, The Washington Times reported that President Carter had condemned America's abortion culture. "I have never felt that any abortion should be committed -- I think that each abortion is the result of a series of errors," Mr. Carter told reporters in Washington. "I've never been convinced, if you let me inject my Christianity into it, that Jesus Christ would approve abortion."

Mr. Carter has made this argument before. In his book Living Faith, published in 1996, Mr. Carter stated: "I have never been able to believe that Jesus would have approved the taking of a human life, but the difficult question then remained: When does a fetus become a human being? My duty was to comply with the rulings of the Supreme Court, but I did everything possible to minimize the need for and attractiveness of abortions."

In this new book, Mr. Carter offers a similar argument: "I am convinced that every abortion is an unplanned tragedy, brought on by a combination of human errors, and this has been one of the most difficult moral and political issues I've had to face. As president, I accepted my obligation to enforce the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling, and at the same time attempted in every way possible to minimize the number of abortions-through legal restrictions, prevention of unwanted pregnancies, the encouragement of expectant women to give birth, and the promotion of foster parenthood."

This position would be sufficiently problematic in itself, but it doesn't even represent an accurate analysis of Mr. Carter's own public positions on the issue.

As Peter G. Bourne, a former White House Special Assistant to President Carter, explains in his book Jimmy Carter: "Early in his term as governor, Carter had strongly supported family planning programs including abortion. He had written the foreword to a book, Women in Need, that favored a woman's right to abortion. He had given private encouragement to the plaintiffs in a lawsuit, Doe v. Bolton, filed against the state of Georgia to overturn its archaic abortion laws." Beyond this, he hired Sarah Weddington, the lead attorney who argued for abortion in Roe v.Wade, as a White House staffer. Clearly, this calls into question Mr. Carter's assertion that he has always opposed abortion. Further, if he opposes abortion now, what is he willing to do about it? His new book certainly offers no hope that he would now call for a reversal of Roe v. Wade.

Some of the most vitriolic language in Our Endangered Values concerns Mr. Carter's criticism of the Southern Baptist Convention and its leadership. Understandably, Mr. Carter blames conservative evangelicals in general -- and the leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention in particular -- for his devastating loss to Ronald Reagan in the 1980 presidential election. Indeed, the very evangelicals who had celebrated Mr. Carter's election in 1976 abandoned him in 1980 -- and for what they saw as compelling reasons.

Over the last several years, Mr. Carter has repeatedly declared his departure from the Southern Baptist Convention (a departure made all the more eccentric by the fact that individuals are not members of the Southern Baptist Convention in the first place) and he continues his criticism of the convention's leadership even now.

Most specifically, he condemns the Southern Baptist Convention for adopting a revised version of its confession of faith, arguing that the new version has substituted the authority of convention leaders for the authority of Christ. Clearly, here is a real debate that could have emerged out of his criticism. Nevertheless, Mr. Carter just misrepresents the convention's action.

I was a member of the committee that proposed the revision, and I would be glad to clarify for Mr. Carter what exactly the revisions represent. Nevertheless, Mr. Carter's chief complaint is that the confession of faith was "imposed as a mandatory creed on all convention officers, employees, deans and professors of colleges and seminaries, and even missionaries who were serving in foreign countries." He insists that this was "unprecedented" as the convention sought to fulfill its responsibility to assure the churches of the doctrinal integrity of convention employees.

Of course, this action was anything but "unprecedented." As a matter of fact, the convention had advised its agencies to establish personnel policies in accordance with the confession of faith as far back as 1969. If the moderate convention leaders Mr. Carter prefers had fulfilled the explicit directives of the convention, the conservative resurgence that Mr. Carter so laments would never have happened in the first place.

On the issue of women in the church, Mr. Carter has been a strong proponent of women as pastors. He dismisses the biblical concerns about this by admitting that, while the Apostle Paul clearly precluded this practice, this just indicates "his departure from Jesus' example and a strong bias against women." He insists that he does not mean to claim that biblical texts are in error or contradictory, but that some texts can be understood as dealing only with "local circumstances within a troubled early church congregation." Nevertheless, Paul's clearest instructions were not addressed to a specific congregation in conflict, but to Timothy on behalf of the whole church. "There is one incontrovertible fact concerning the relationship between Jesus Christ and women," he asserts: "he treated them as equal to men." This may sound like a self-evident truth, for Jesus did treat women with equal respect, equal concern, and equal standing before the gospel. Nevertheless, Jesus did not call a woman to serve as an apostle, nor as one of the Twelve. Equality is not contradicted by complementarity.

In an interesting comment, Mr. Carter recently offered a bit of self-analysis, observing: "I can't deny that I'm a better ex-president than I was a president." Without doubt, President Carter and his wife Rosalynn have done much good. The work of The Carter Center in leading the fight against diseases such as Guinea Worm and Trachoma has been exemplary. I will let others debate the former president's post-term adventures in foreign policy, but I have no doubt that he means to do good and to do well. I also have no doubt that he is a thoughtful and intelligent man, and that he means to be a serious Christian.

Nevertheless, in this new book, Mr. Carter delivers a broadside attack on conservative Christians, the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention, and those who believe that abortion, homosexuality, secularism, and a host of other issues represent clear and present challenges to the witness of the church. He is surely right to argue that the Bible would broaden our range of concerns beyond these most controversial issues; but he is surely wrong to dismiss our responsibility to maintain a faithful biblical witness where controversy is inevitable.

Mr. Carter's moderately liberal theology (more liberal than moderate or more moderate than liberal, depending on his various statements) puts him at odds with the conservative direction of the Southern Baptist Convention and with the biblical convictions held by millions of American evangelicals. Mr. Carter has chosen to make this a public issue by writing and releasing this book. This was his decision.

Our Endangered Values is not a call for discussion or dialogue. It is not an exercise in seeking understanding. Instead, this book is a political and theological call to arms. Nevertheless, it does serve to illustrate the chasm that now grows ever larger between conservative Christians and those who would offer a more "moderate" understanding of the Christian faith. President Carter and those he opposes in this book agree on one thing -- our values are endangered. We just disagree about what those values are and how they are endangered. That's no small disagreement.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/13/05:

I have always had to laugh at so many of his speaches, I can only beleive they were written and approved by the party and had little to do with his personal beleifs.

He is by and large a conservative
Christian personally. A very strong southern Baptist ( or was) still teaching in Sunday school( or was a few years ago still)

I have always believed many of his "timely" writtings and public appearances have been for the good of the party and is controled by them in many way. ( I could be wrong but having known him I found him far from a far left liberal.

I can not find anything personally wrong and because I had the please to get to know him, even though we may differ on many issues, he is truely a great man.

he asked me once, what I though of him as President, I told him he was the greatest ex president we have ever had.

Well before I start telling my Jimmy Carter stories, I will end. In person, I will say he treats all people fairly equal, he does what he wants and is a really fun person.

He also really loves his family so much and trys so hard not to let being the ex president interfere with doing family things

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/13/05 - What would you do?

Would you persuade your wife/ to join you in a suicide attack on anyone if you really believed that by doing so you would further the case of Christianity/humanism/atheism?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/13/05:

There is never a reason for suicide, one may perhaps give thier life trying to save another person.

And we can not leave anyone else out,
wife/husband/partner for the homosexual muslims that may be suicide bombers.

Somehow the idea (I am going to blow myself up and kill others to teach them a lesson)
just don't make any sense to me.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 11/13/05 - ANNIVERSAY:

On this date three years ago (Nov. 13, 2002), I joined ANSWERWAY. I have learned alot from all of you! The Bible says God made human beings good. I have found this to be true since joining ANSWERWAY and my favorite Board. This one! My participation has given me a chance to build a great degree of the simple magic of affirmation and appreciation that's required to progress as a God-fearing person with high self-esteem. I have become emotionally involved and I do have a common destiny which goes beyond the personal. Thanks to all of you, I have a greater connectedness with Jesus and the Almighty. To appreciate is to love.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/13/05:

Wish I could send you a cyber cake.

Time does past so fast.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/12/05 - Just got this email. Will you do as it suggests?

RED FRIDAYS ----- Very soon, you will see a great many people wearing Red every Friday. The reason? Americans who support our troops used to be called the "silent majority". We are no longer silent, and are voicing our love for God, country and home in record breaking numbers.. We are not organized, boisterous or over-bearing. We get no liberal media coverage on TV, to reflect our message or our opinions.
Many Americans, like you, me and all our friends, simply want to recognize that the vast majority of America supports our troops. Our idea of showing solidarity and support for our troops with dignity and respect starts this Friday -and continues each and every Friday until the troops all come home, sending a deafening message that.. Every red-blooded American who supports our men and women afar, will wear something red.

By word of mouth, press, TV -- let's make the United States on every Friday a sea of red much like a homecoming football game in the bleachers If every one of us who loves this country will share this with acquaintances, co-workers, friends, and family. It will not be long before the USA is covered in RED and it will let our troops know the once "silent" majority is on their side more than ever, certainly more than the media lets on.

The first thing a soldier says when asked "What can we do to make things better for you?" is...We need your support and your prayers. Let's get the word out and lead with class and dignity, by example; and wear something red every Friday.

Please pass it on.
Rick Riggs

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/13/05:

Been doing it for about 6 months, This is a growing movement that has been asking for people to do it for months now.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Tex78 asked on 11/12/05 - Do any of you think that the signs show the end of time is near?

Prophecies Concerning The End Of The Age
While there are many key signs to look out for to recognize the end of the age, several are repeated consistently by Jesus Himself, and writers of the New Testament.
1. An increase in disasters and wars
Matt 24:3-7 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” Jesus answered: '...You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places.
That our generation has seen a marked increase in famines and earthquakes has been thoroughly documented. The word 'nation' in this passage can also be translated 'ethnic group'. Again, even within nations there has been a great increase in the unrest between races. See also Revelation chapter 6.

2. Rise in false religious leaders and those claiming to be Christ.
Matt 24:4-5 Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many.
Again, out generation has seen a flood of guru's and so-called Christ's invade our culture as the west has opened itself up to Hinduism in the form of the New Age.

3. A falling away from the true faith in Jesus Christ.
Matt 24:10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other.
2 Thes 2:3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it (the day of the Lord - God's judgment upon the earth) will not come unless the apostasy (a falling away from the faith) comes first.
It is sad to see, but our generation has seen a great move away from Biblical Christianity, in favor of ecumenicalism and unity with all faiths. This is setting the scene for the one world religion which will occur in the last days.

4. Knowledge and Travel will be greatly increased.
Daniel 12:4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.
This increase in knowledge is occurring now at an exponential rate. We now play God with the very genes and DNA that make us human. Surely Jesus will have to return soon, for where will this lead if left in the hands of a fallen creation?

5. Increase in wickedness and a decrease in morals.
Matt 24: 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold.
Matt 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
Luke 17:28-30 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot... Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.
The days of Noah were known for their wickedness (Gen 6:5). The days of Lot, living in Sodom and Gomorrah were known for the homosexuality that occurred. (Gen 19) We see both increasing today with parades to openly display and flaunt their wickedness.

6. General condition of the heart of men.
2 Tim 3:1-5 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power.
Men will love themselves, money, and pleasure, but not God! - In our age, self-esteem and loving yourself is in... boasting and pride is promoted! Family life is breaking down as people are becoming more disobedient towards parents, unthankful, unloving, and unforgiving.

7. The emergence of a world leader.
Rev 13:3-8 The whole world was astonished and followed the beast (the Antichrist, who will rule the world)... and they also worshiped the beast and asked, "Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?" And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world.
Listen to the world leaders today as they speak of the 'New World Order'. See the unification that is occurring within Europe and other nations. Even non-Christians can see that we are heading for a one world government. This is what the Bible predicted nearly 2000 years ago. This government will be given into the hands of the most wicked man this world has ever known.

8. The mark of the beast!
Rev 13:16,17 He (the antichrist) also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
What was an absurd impossibility 2000 years ago, is rapidly becoming reality today. Does anyone really doubt that this is where we are going with today's technology? We already place microchips in our cats and dogs to give them a unique identifier. If we are to have a one world government, then what better way to control the people than to control all finance and trade? It is a clear sign of the age in which we live that we now have the technology to control finance in this way.

We started by showing the challenge that the God of the Bible issues for all other 'gods' - that is, to accurately predict the things which will take place in the future. And they can't! No other religion would dare to base it's validity on the basis of repeated and accurate predictions. Yet the Bible is full of prophecy from the first book to the last!

If you are looking for proof of God or the Bible, here it is! All the prophecies that I have mentioned above have either already taken place, or are heading in that direction in our age. It can only be explained by this - that the God of the Bible is the true God and He has given enough evidence for those who truly want to find the truth!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/12/05:

People during the time of Christ, beleived it was almost the time. People during the reformation thought that was the time.

During WWI, or WWII everyone just knew that was the time.

I do know that we are now one day closer, so yep, we are closer today than we ever have been before.

Many things fit the signs, and that is why we will never know the exact time,
More than anything the exact time may well be the time when most think that it could not be the time right then.

No one really knows or will know when the time is untill it comes.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 11/12/05 - What should a parish want in a minister?

My former congregation back home, currently leaderless, is in the process of figuring out what qualities and characteristics they want in a minister.

They want to attract new members from a growing community. Do they want a powerful preacher? Do they want someone very into social ministry? Do they want someone who has great people-skills? Do they want someone who has several degrees (maybe MBA along with theology) and will be a good administrator? Do they want someone who is a good listener and who is empathetic? Will they hope to find someone with all of the above???

What would attract you to a church, if you were in the market for one? Is there anything about the minister(s)/priest(s)/rabbi(s) that you would look for?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/12/05:

The pastor is not the one to bring in new members, the current members are the only ones that can go out and invite people to come.

If you are expecting one person, a pastor to draw in the crowds, you better hire Billy Graham, so that there is a big name to draw in.

What a real and good pastor is, is someone that will preach the true word of God.
Not always real popular to the crowds.

If you want a crowd, hire a professional singng group, hire dancers, a audio video department and put on a "show"
that is what mega churches do.
Not much soul saving or christianity, but alot of people and lots of money comming in.

Look at some of the early church leaders
esp Paul.

You will find honest hard working people, that have a love for others. They may not be the best speakers, but they let the spirit of God lead them. They may not be physically powerful, but they let the power of God flow though them.

They can only do as much social ministry as people in the church will do. In fact in a larger church you should lay people to lead all the social functions of the church.
And even in smaller ones, it is the lay people, not pastor that makes a church grow.

You need to have a old time preacher come in and talk to your board that it is the church that needs to get itself off the pew and into the community if they want to grow.

Administer nope, you should have lay people running the business of the church, that is not a pastors job, he is the spiritual leader not the buisness manager.

Opinion of a old preacher

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 11/12/05 - Priest/ministers/rabbis as celibate?

Which would be better - that a man of the cloth marry and have a family or remain single and celibate?

My mother once told me that, before they were married, my father said to her that once he became a minister, the church would always come first, even before her and any children they had. She agreed, and was our mainstay at home. My father was always the last one out of the church and the one to lock up after Sunday morning service/Sunday School and after weekday evening meetings. He attended every parish meeting, even those for the youth - he was very visible and involved. He spent his days visiting the sick and tending to other ministerial duties. When he was working on a sermon at his home office, we kids had to play quietly. Yet, some of my best memories are the times he spent with us kids playing board games, making popcorn, playing word games during meals, and our family devotions after supper each evening (except for Sunday). Holidays were special because he found ways to make them special for our family. He devoted his life to the church, to God, and was still able to find time and energy for his family. I suspect though, from knowing other ministers' families, that my father was somewhat of a rare man.

Is that spreading a man of the cloth too thin? Maybe ministers and rabbis shouldn't marry. Maybe the Catholic Church is right in not allowing its priests to marry. Yet, being married with a family would give a priest/minister/rabbi a very important point of view about life and would allow him to better understand his parishioners' joys and sorrows in their marriages and with their children.

What do you think?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/12/05:

It is very very hard at times to be married with a family and be a minister.

I have to worry about my family, get to ball games, go to PTA meetings. I have to mow the yard, fix things around the house, and have to worry about how my wife feels about everything we do.

Also I have to worry about what the church will think about my wife, worry about if one of my kids gets into some trouble or misbehaves real bad, the church board may decide that I am not proper for them.

I have to worry about making enough money, about health insurance, car payments, kids college funds and retirmement payments.

I know owe my "livelyhood" to the church paying me. As such now I also have to be concerned about getting fired, so does this effect the way I preach.

The church expects my wife to be a leader in some group or many groups, sunday school teacher, womens groups and often perhaps in the music department.

Alot of churches almost expect the wife to "do" some duties.

When I have to leave right before a special event because a certain church member went into the hospital or perhaps passed away.

So would it be alot easier if I had no other thing to worry about than the church yes. I think Paul was clear about that.

Would I want to change it, no, But a pastors wife has to be a very, very, very special perosn, an angel so to speak, since to the pastor, God and the Church will have to come before the family.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/11/05 - Turkey bans the Hijab ...

Turkey has just passed a ban on young girls wearing the hijab, or head scarf, at school.

1. Do you think they ought to have done so?

2. Do you think it will make Muslims feel any less persecuted?

3. Are you as eager to have this ban overturned as you are to have the ban on Bibles, crosses, Christian prayer, and the Ten Commandments in public schools overturned?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/11/05:

You foolwed me I was expecting this to be a silly Thanksgiving question when you listed the word "Turkey"

but signs of religoius expression should not be banned. If they wish to wear it, they should be able to.

Rules banning thier practice should normally make them feel more persecuted, how would we feel if we could not place our christian displays in public ( guess we can't)

Yes, rights of religoius expression is just that.

I started preaching the rights being taken away, way back there when the IRS used its pressure on the Mormons (LDS) to push thier including Blacks in thier church.

Now I know you say, well that is a race issue not religion, but it was thier teachings for good or bad.

If they can force ( ok, I know the church decided or was inspired to change prior to going to court, but one has to beleive the threat of the IRS started them praying over the situation.

Well if they can force them, how soon down the road will it be women ministers ( for those that don't accept women ministers)
or gay and lesibian members or ministers.

We have to stand up for all religons to have rights of expression, if one goes today, someone elses tommorrow, when will mine go.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/11/05 - Answer me this, please.

Does anyone think that participation on the Christianity Board is about "Winning and losing?"

I thought it was about "Question and answer."

Where have I gone wrong?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/11/05:

I wondered why I had never got that payoff for being in the top ten back when I was.

But I think some fellowship ( even if some of it is alittle strange) always makes us a winner no matter what type of score we have.

I do miss the "good ole days" from the when you could actually get money and/or prizes from having high scores.
But in many ways it did take away from the enjoyment.

I don't think any of us would stay here if we did not enjoy it in some way.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 11/10/05 - John Shelby Spong and a Second Reformation

[During the first Reformation,] the time had not arrived in which Christians would be required to rethink the basic and identifying marks of Christianity itself.

It is my conviction that such a moment is facing the Christian world today. The very heart and soul of Christianity will be the content of this reformation. The debate which has been building for centuries has now erupted into public view. All the past ecclesiastical efforts to keep it at bay or deny its reality have surely failed and will continue to do so. The need for a new theological reformation began when Copernicus and Galileo removed this planet from its previous supposed location at the center of the universe, where human life was thought to bask under the constant attention of a humanly defined parental deity. That revolution in thought produced an angle of vision radically different from the one in which the Bible was written and through which the primary theological tenets of the Christian faith were formed."

In this new millennium, should the Christian church rethink and and then reinvent itself? Why would it need to?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/10/05:

While a group will indeed do that, we see it already with mega churches that entertain instead of preach the word of God.

And it is nothing new that religion will always find some that will preach the desires of the people, not the truth of the word of God.

It needs to restore itself to its history, and not with the ideas of science, popular culture and social events.

The only differnece the actual reformation did was to provide the actual word of God in print to the people.

Man still provided them with his opinions on it for them to follow and of course for them to give thier money too.

The churches only problem was it should have not cared where the earth was and let Gallieo say and do what he would. That part of science has no bearing on Christianity.

Those issues of science that deny God, are normally not proven in itself but merley concieved ideas that are trying to be proved.

We merly need to return to real Christianity, following new teachings will only lead to less real Christianity.

The first reformatoin lead to people having thier own bibles, but it also lead to each person having thier own opionion of what it should or does mean and started the division of God's people into 1000's of denominations.

There needed to be a correction of mans influence in the church, but never the division.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/10/05 - And now this. Is it anti Christian???????????

Fake trees turn Christmas on its head
By Craig Wilson, USA TODAY Tue Nov 8, 7:18 AM ET

Has your holiday imbibing gotten out of control so soon?

Maybe that Christmas tree you saw really is upside down. Upside-down trees are, well, turning the upcoming holiday on its head.

Hammacher Schlemmer can't even keep its $599.95 pre-lit model in stock. It's already sold out.

"We increased the amount we ordered from last year, but ended up selling all of them already," says Joe Jamrosz of Hammacher Schlemmer.

Not to be left behind, Target has three such upside-down trees ($299.99-$499.99) on its website, touting their best attribute: "Leaves more room on the floor for gifts!"

Similar trees are also available at in the 5-to-7½-foot range ($280-$504).

The artificial trees are hung from the wall or ceiling, or come with a weighted base to provide extra stability to prevent tipping and leaning.

Sheryl Karas, author of The Solstice Evergreen: The History, Folklore and Origins of the Christmas Tree, isn't quite sure what's going on with the resurgence of upside-down trees, a 12th-century tradition in Central Europe.

"But it's the question I get more often than any other on my website," says the Santa Cruz, Calif., author (

Karas believes it's purely a decorative thing this time around, a way to better display ornaments so they don't get lost in the foliage. She doesn't want to put a damper on the holidays, but she suspects "there's something sinister, almost bad, about it."

"It's a pagan thing. If they thought about it, they wouldn't turn it upside down." But enough playing Scrooge. It's the holiday season.

"Many of the people have been using them as their second tree. A novelty," Jamrosz says. "They also find the bigger gifts don't fit under a traditional tree."

Hanging a tree from the ceiling also ensures a smaller footprint for less-spacious areas. You can put it between two closely placed chairs, for instance.

But not everyone is head over heels about the trend. Tree Classics Inc. of Lake Barrington, Ill., claims to be the top seller of artificial Christmas trees on the Internet - up 30% this year alone - but not a one of them is upside down.

"That tree makes no sense to me whatsoever," says Tree Classics president Leon Gamze, who sells 59 styles of upright trees. "I just look at them and laugh." But would he ever join the upside-down trend?

"Never. Wouldn't even consider it."

Probably a good thing. He'll never have to ponder whether to put a star at the top, or bottom, of such a thing.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/10/05:

tried the upside down Chrsitmas tree, just could not get that base to nail to the celing

But the only unchristian thing is a 600 dollar christmas tree. That is more like robbery. I am glad someone has money to throw away on silliness.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 11/10/05 - My Favorite Lightbulb Jokes


A: Three. One to change the lightbulb, one NOT to change the lightbulb, and one to neither change nor not change the lightbulb.


A: Eight. One to call the electrician, and seven to say how much they liked the old one better.


A: The Unitarians wish to issue the following statement:
"We choose not to make a statement either in favor of or against the need for a lightbulb; however, if in your own journey you have found that lightbulbs work for you, that is fine. You are invited to write a poem or compose a modern dance about your personal relationship with your lightbulb, and present it next month at our annual lightbulb Sunday service, in which we will explore a number of lightbulb traditions, including incandescent, fluorescent, three-way, long-life and tinted, all of which are equally valid paths to luminescence."


A: Ten. One to change the bulb and nine to pray against the spirit of darkness.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/10/05:

Sounds like you have been to some of our Church business meetings.

Loved them will pass them along

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 11/09/05 - Muslim terrorist info

someone just told me they had a revelation from Allah he made a mistake the terrorists wont get 400 virgins in paradise they will get a 400 year old "ONe"
recon this info might change a few minds???one can but hope!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/09/05:

or they are all male virgins and they look like Bush and Chaney

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Itsdb asked on 11/09/05 - Texas election

The voters in Texas overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between one man and one woman, roughly 76% to 24%. The residents of White Settlement voted 9 to 1 against changing the name of the town to West Settlement.

What does that say about Texans? Are we just a bunch of racist homophobes?

One local resident addressed the marriage amendment results this way, "My concern is that it will legitimize hate," said Bekki McQuay, president of Outstanding Amarillo, a gay and lesbian advocacy group. "And for the people who already hate, now they're backed up by the government and supposedly by the people. It's pretty disturbing."

Is Bekki right, or do the results say something entirely different?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/09/05:

In almost all states it is the same, the majority of American people do not want homosexual marriage. It was the courts, not the vote or even congress that has forced the idea of some level of rights of homosexuals upon society.

They beleive they should have special rights to practice thier sexual preversions.

who will be next, the child molestors or the goat lovers wanting thier rights protected next.

Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/09/05 - How the Geneva Convention applies to 'enemy combatants' that Bush do not hold to be 'So

If insurgents are not regular military fores, then they are civilians, and the following portions of the zGeneva Convention are to be applied to them under the terms of the Convention:

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

The undersigned Plenipotentiaries of the Governments represented at the Diplomatic Conference held at Geneva from April 21 to August 12, 1949, for the purpose of establishing a Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, have agreed as follows:

Part I. General Provisions

Article 1. The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.

Art. 2. In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace-time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations.

They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

Art. 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. [Not shot like dogs]

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

Art. 4. Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.

Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.

The provisions of Part II are, however, wider in application, as defined in Article 13.

Persons protected by the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of 12 August 1949, or by the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea of 12 August 1949, or by the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949, shall not be considered as protected persons within the meaning of the present Convention.

Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.

Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention.

They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.

[ ... ]



Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/09/05:

IF they are not uniformed military, then they would be spies, not civilians, since they are doing combat.

They should be treated and tried as spies and then shot ( not as dogs but stil shot)

They refuse to wear uniforms but prefer to act undercover and "blend" in with civilians

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/08/05 - Can Bush supersede established civilian and military judicial systems and get away with it?

Military tribunals to get a test in Supreme Court
The justices opt to take case of a Guantánamo detainee.

By Warren Richey
Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON – A year and a half ago, the US Supreme Court delivered a blunt message to the White House: War is not a blank check entitling the president to violate the constitutional liberties of American citizens.

The decision resulted in the release of Yasser Hamdi, a dual US and Saudi citizen, who had been held indefinitely in a military prison without charge or access to a lawyer.

On Monday (7 November 2005), the nation's (USA) highest court set the stage for the next major constitutional showdown over President Bush's ongoing war on terror.

The issue is whether the president has the authority to put Al Qaeda suspects on trial before military commissions at the US naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

In agreeing to take up the appeal of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the high court will examine government efforts to empanel a military-run war-crimes tribunal to weigh charges against Mr. Hamdan and three other terror suspects.

Such tribunals mark the first time in a half-century that the US government is relying on ad hoc military commissions to mete out justice rather than civil federal courts or the military justice system.

Lawyers and constitutional scholars who had urged the high court to take up the matter, praised the justices for their decision to tackle the Hamdan case.

"There are people who have been kept in Guantánamo so long that the situation just cries out for review,"
says Stephen Saltzburg, a law professor at George Washington University and general counsel for the National Institute of Military Justice.

"The world wants to know whether our judiciary thinks these things matter, and taking this case says it matters."

David Remes, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who filed a friend-of-the-court brief, says the case is important because it could set the stage for similar abuses against American soldiers taken captive overseas.

"This case is huge because one issue presented is whether the president can simply decide on his own initiative to suspend the Geneva Conventions as to a particular individual or group," Mr. Remes says.

Some 500 law professors urged the Supreme Court to take the Hamdan case.

"The central hope I have for this case in terms of separation of powers is that the Supreme Court will restore the constitutional directive that no one branch of government has the power to accuse, appoint the prosecutor, designate the judges, and render judgment," says Yale Law School Prof. Judith Resnik, who helped organize the letter campaign.

Hamdan, a Yemeni citizen, served as Osama bin Laden's driver in Afghanistan and is charged with being a member of Al Qaeda. He is one of nearly 500 detainees being held at the US terrorism prison camp at Guantánamo Bay.

Hamdan's trial was set to begin last fall. But a federal judge ruled in November that Hamdan could not be tried before a military commission without violating the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

In July, a three-judge federal appeals court panel reversed the federal judge. The panel, including now Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (who has recused himself), ruled that the president has the authority to order such commissions regardless of any conflicting provisions of the Geneva Conventions.

Lawyers for Hamdan asked the Supreme Court to reverse that ruling and examine the constitutionality of the use of military commissions.

By agreeing to take up the case, the high court action is likely to further delay the military commission process.

The Supreme Court has been willing to play a strong role in monitoring the government's war on terror, ruling in one major case that the government could not indefinitely detain a US citizen, and ruling in a second major case that federal court jurisdiction extends to detainees being held at the US base in Cuba.

At the same time, a majority of justices left the president significant leeway to confront perceived threats to the nation's security.

The Hamdan case raises fundamental issues, including the scope of the president's power to detain and place on trial any foreign national deemed to be an enemy combatant.

In urging the high court to take up the Hamdan case immediately, Hamdan's lawyer, Neal Katyal, drew upon a lesson from American history.

He compared the Hamdan dispute to landmark Supreme Court case upholding the supremacy of civilian courts over an effort by President Abraham Lincoln to rely on military tribunals to quickly and efficiently prosecute suspected supporters of the Confederacy.

"At issue is whether the president can supersede established civilian and military judicial systems," Mr. Katyal says in his brief. "No graver question was ever considered by this court, nor one which more nearly concerns the rights of the whole people," he writes, quoting Ex Parte Milligan, an 1866 Supreme Court decision.

Lawyers for the government said that the high court should put off examining Hamdan's case until after his trial.

Katyal countered that the stakes for the nation are too high for any delay.

"The court of appeals created a legal black hole where no law applies," he says. "In this setting, individuals will not merely be detained, but tried and sentenced to life imprisonment and even death."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/08/05:

Once he is a terrorist, in my book he has not rights any longer.

If they are fighting against the US they are our enemy. Outside of the US boarders they have no more rights than the citizens of other nations.

Citizens of other nations not on american soil should not expect rights, and those fighting at war with us, should have no rights what so every anyway.

ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 11/08/05 - Christian Values

Hello Christians:

Gade, one of the loudest Christians on this board, doesn’t know what torture is. I believe he’s a medical doctor, for crying out loud, and HE doesn’t know what torture is????

As a person who holds family values in high esteem, he doesn’t quite know how to treat his fellow captives. He doesn’t know if pulling out fingernails is ok or not. How could a person, who knows that two men shouldn’t sleep together, not know that two men shouldn’t be pulling fingernails out?

This is a guy who quotes scriptures all the time, here. So, is he right? Is it Christian to torture your enemy? Is he really as dumb as he claims, or does he claim stupidity so he can torture and then pretend he’s a great Christian?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/08/05:

There is no clear line between what everyone would view as acceptable as a system to use to force or try to force another to give up information.

Of course one could just not try, but then that would cause other harms.

For example, having no hot water, is that torture, having to sleep in a room with no clothes and no beding ( we do that to inmates who have caused trouble at times in our US prisons)

Making them watch or do some activities that are against thier norms or moral values. ( perhaps having to listen to Rush Linbaugh or Jerry Springer)

Is using lack of sleep, or having them preform heavy labor.

What about making them watch things of thier worst fears.

Things that can cause mental harm but no physical. How about using drugs on them

Your idea of what is ok, may not be the same as mine.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/07/05 - Australian anti-Muslim activists pose as Christians ...

Christian Pastors Found Guilty of Vilifying Islam
By Patrick Goodenough International Editor
December 17, 2004

Pacific Rim Bureau ( - Christians in Australia are pondering the implications of an explosive ruling handed down Friday by a legal tribunal, which found that two Christian pastors had vilified Islam.

Immediate reactions ranged from an evangelical commentator's view that the decision spelled "the beginning of the end of freedom of speech in Australia" to that of a liberal church denomination which said it sent a welcome message to "Christian extremist groups."

One of the pastors at the center of the dispute said he was saddened by the outcome, but he predicted it would galvanize Christians and other Australians who cared about free speech.

Pastors Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot were found to have breached a section of the state of Victoria's controversial hate law, which says a person must not incite "hatred against, serious contempt for or revulsion or severe ridicule of" another person or group on the basis of religious belief or activity.

The complaint arose from a seminar on Islam run for Christians by Nalliah's evangelical Catch the Fire Ministries in Melbourne in 2002.

Three Muslims attended on behalf of the Islamic Council of Victoria and subsequently submitted a complaint under the state's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, which had come into effect just two months earlier.

A lengthy legal process, weeks of public hearings before a tribunal set up under the law and months of delays finally reached a conclusion on Friday, when tribunal judge Michael Higgins handed down a summary of his judgment. A full 100-page report will be produced next week.

Higgins said the three respondents -- Catch the Fire, Nalliah and Scot -- had violated the section of the law covering hatred, contempt and revulsion.

The law provides for exemptions in cases where the offending action was taken "reasonably and in good faith ... for any genuine academic, artistic, religious or scientific purpose" or in the public interest.

But Higgins found that the exemptions did not apply in the case before him.

"I find that Pastor Scot's conduct was not engaged in reasonably and in good faith for any genuine religious purpose or any purpose that is in the public interest."

Scot, a Pakistan-born scholar of Islam, was the main speaker at the seminar. He and Nalliah argued throughout the case that they had merely informed Christians attending the seminar about Islam and its teachings, based on the religion's own texts.

The judge disagreed.

"Pastor Scot, throughout the seminar, made fun of Muslim beliefs and conduct," he said in the summary.

"It was done, not in the context of a serious discussion of Muslims' religious beliefs; it was presented in a way which is essentially hostile, demeaning and derogatory of all Muslim people, their god Allah, the prophet Mohammed and in general Muslim religious beliefs and practices."

Higgins referred to some of Scot's statements, including the view that the Koran "promotes violence, killing and looting" that Muslims are liars; that Allah is not merciful and a thief's hand is cut off for stealing; and that Muslims intend to take over Australia and declare it an Islamic nation.

He said Scot "preached a literal translation of the Koran and of Muslims' religious practices which was not mainstream but was more representative of a small group in the Gulf states."

Higgins also said he had found Scot evasive and lacking in credibility.

Apart from the seminar, the judge also dealt with two other issues: a newsletter article written by Nalliah and an article posted on the Catch the Fire website shortly after 9/11.

In the newsletter article, Nalliah claimed that Muslim refugees were being granted visas to Australia while Christians who suffer persecution in Islamic nations were refused refugee visas. He also referred to the high birth rate among Muslims in Australia at a time the birth rate in general was dropping.

Higgins said Nalliah suggested that Muslims were "seeking to take over Australia."

"Viewed objectively and in their totality, these statements are likely to incite a feeling of hatred towards Muslims."

Regarding the article posted on the website 15 days after 9/11, Higgins said it suggested that Islam was "an inherently violent religion." The author, whose full name was not given, "implies that Muslims endorse the killing of people based upon their religion," the judge said.

Under the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, the tribunal is empowered to order public apologies, the payment of compensation or other steps. Higgins will announce penalties in late January.

'Truth is no defense'

Speaking by phone from Melbourne after the judgment was delivered, Nalliah said the verdict had not referred at all to the issue of freedom of speech -- the grounds on which the pastors fought their case.

"I'm saddened because we've lived under [Islamic] shari'a law, and I thought those were the countries where you could not speak [freely]. And we come to Australia and make Australia our home, and we find ... freedom of speech is completely bound."

Sri Lanka-born Nalliah worked with the underground church in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, while Scot fled persecution in his native land in 1987 after being condemned to death under Pakistan's blasphemy laws.

"It's very evident that all we have said is the truth, but that has not been taken into consideration," Nalliah said, noting that lawyers for the complainant had stressed to the judge throughout the case that "truth is no defense."

While one could vilify someone according to race, religion was clearly subjective, the pastor said.

"Religion makes claims of truth. Each religion says 'we are the right one.' How can you vilify?"

Nalliah also lamented that a judge "who possibly does not know head or tail" of either Christianity or Islam was giving a verdict in a case of this type.

A similar view came from Bill Muehlenberg, vice-president of the Australian Family Association, who attended Friday's hearing.

"How does a secular judge with no expertise in religion make such decisions when Islamic scholars themselves are divided on such crucial questions of theology, interpretation and exegesis?" he asked afterwards.

"Much of what the judge considered offensive was simply quotations from the Koran," he added. "To argue that quoting a religious book makes one guilty of vilification would put 98 percent of religious discussions out of bounds."

Muehlenberg called on Christians to protest, lobby and pray about the decision, which he said "marks the beginning of the end of freedom of speech in Australia and the official restriction of proclaiming the Christian gospel."


In sharp contrast to Muehlenberg's view, the state's Uniting Church welcomed the verdict.

"Today's ruling will send a clear message to extremist groups in Victoria that their activities are not welcome here," said the church's social justice and international mission head, Mark Zirnsak

"These groups now have been given a clear warning that they will not have an unfettered ability to promote hatred and hostility in the community."

Zirnsak also commended the state's Labor government for passing the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act.

"In our view, the beliefs and actions of groups like Catch the Fire Ministries do not represent the broad view of Christian belief in this state, where respect, tolerance and acceptance are the hallmarks of daily religious life."

The Uniting Church is a unique Australian denomination established from an amalgamation of the Methodist, Congregational and some Presbyterian churches.

Last July, it became the first church in Australia to openly allow practicing homosexuals to become ministers. It has a strong social focus and opposed the war in Iraq.

'Wake up'

Nalliah said Friday that he, Scot and their advisors would study the tribunal's full judgment when it became available and would then decide on a future strategy.

"It seems bad, but ... when Christ died on the cross, everyone thought it was defeat. But time proved that he rose from the dead and brought victory. Time will prove that this is not the end of this case [either]."

He said he believed the whole episode was part of a broader divine plan.

"I think this will really stir the church up, to wake up and take a stand. And not just Christians -- every Aussie who loves freedom and freedom of speech is going to be affected by this decision."


Now we know who keeps what company and why, don't we?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/07/05:

Freedome of speech is being taken away little by little.

In Canada it is illegal to talk against homosexual activity. many Christian radio shows can not be broadcast there for that reason.

When our ability to speak out against issues, we have lost everything ( and will over time)

For a Christian, even if you work on social programs with Muslims, we have to admit if we are really a Christian, that the non christian is not saved and will not go to heaven. Thier soul is lost.

Should we make fun of them, at no time, do we need to be free to speak out against religions that lead to doom? do we need freedom to speak out against sinful life styles and conduct?

Yes we have to have those freedoms, and those freedoms also give rights to stupid people also to abuse those right

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Tex78 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 11/07/05 - The Healing Power of Holy Water?

The Healing Power of Holy Water?

One morning a man came into the church on crutches. He stopped in front of the holy water, put some on both legs, and then threw away his crutches.An altar boy witnessed the scene and then ran into the rectory to tell the priest what he'd just seen.

"Son, you've just witnessed a miracle!" the priest said. "Tell me where is this man now?"

"Flat on his butt over by the holy water!" the boy informed him.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/07/05:

Yes, we have joked about putting some in water guns and doing drive by blessings.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/07/05 - Americans are at heart honest, fair, and decent, but The Bush Admin is totalitarian, authoritarian,

Cheney Fights for Detainee Policy
As Pressure Mounts to Limit Handling Of Terror Suspects, He Holds Hard Line

By Dana Priest and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, November 7, 2005; Page A01

Over the past year, Vice President Cheney has waged an intense and largely unpublicized campaign to stop Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department from imposing more restrictive rules on the handling of terrorist suspects, according to defense, state, intelligence and congressional officials.

Last winter, when Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, began pushing to have the full committee briefed on the CIA's interrogation practices, Cheney called him to the White House to urge that he drop the matter, said three U.S. officials.

Vice President Cheney has fought restrictions on handling of terrorism suspects, rules favored by other administration officials and senators. (By Stephen Morton

In recent months, Cheney has been the force against adding safeguards to the Defense Department's rules on treatment of military prisoners, putting him at odds with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and acting Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon R. England. On a trip to Canada last month, Rice interrupted a packed itinerary to hold a secure video-teleconference with Cheney on detainee policy to make sure no decisions were made without her input.

Just last week, Cheney showed up at a Republican senatorial luncheon to lobby lawmakers for a CIA exemption to an amendment by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that would ban torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners.

The exemption would cover the CIA's covert "black sites" in several Eastern European democracies and other countries where key al Qaeda captives are being kept.

Cheney spokesman Steve Schmidt declined to comment on the vice president's interventions or to elaborate on his positions. "The vice president's views are certainly reflected in the administration's policy," he said.

Increasingly, however, Cheney's positions are being opposed by other administration officials, including Cabinet members, political appointees and Republican lawmakers who once stood firmly behind the administration on all matters concerning terrorism.

Personnel changes in President Bush's second term have added to the isolation of Cheney, who previously had been able to prevail in part because other key parties to the debate -- including Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and White House counsel Harriet Miers -- continued to sit on the fence.

But in a reflection of how many within the administration now favor changing the rules, Elliot Abrams, traditionally one of the most hawkish voices in internal debates, is among the most persistent advocates of changing detainee policy in his role as the deputy national security adviser for democracy, according to officials familiar with his role.

At the same time Rice has emerged as an advocate for changing the rules to "get out of the detainee mess," said one senior U.S. official familiar with discussions. Her top advisers, along with their Pentagon counterparts, are working on a package of proposals designed to address all controversial detainee issues at once, instead of dealing with them on a piecemeal basis.

Cheney's camp is a "shrinking island," said one State Department official who, like other administration officials quoted in this article, asked not to be identified because public dissent is strongly discouraged by the White House.

A fundamental question lies at the heart of these disagreements: Four years into the fight, what is the most effective way to wage the campaign against terrorism?

Cheney's camp says the United States does not torture captives, but believes the president needs nearly unfettered power to deal with terrorists to protect Americans.

To preserve the president's flexibility, any measure that might impose constraints should be resisted. That is why the administration has recoiled from embracing the language of treaties such as the U.N. Convention Against Torture, which Cheney's aides find vague and open-ended.

On the other side of the debate are those who believe that unconventional measures -- harsh interrogation tactics, prisoner abuse and the "ghosting" and covert detention of CIA-held prisoners -- have so damaged world support for the U.S.-led counterterrorism campaign that they have hurt the U.S. cause.

Also, they argue, these measures have tainted core American values such as human rights and the rule of law.

"The debate in the world has become about whether the U.S. complies with its legal obligations. We need to regain the moral high ground,"
said one senior administration official familiar with internal deliberations on the issue, adding that Rice believes current policy is "hurting the president's agenda and her agenda."

Vice President Cheney has fought restrictions on handling of terrorism suspects, rules favored by other administration officials and senators.

Vice President Cheney has fought restrictions on handling of terrorism suspects, rules favored by other administration officials and senators.

McCain's amendment would limit the military's interrogation and detention tactics to those described in the Army Field Manual, and it would prohibit all U.S. government employees from using cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Cheney pushed hard to have the entire amendment defeated.

He twice held meetings with key lawmakers to lobby against the measure, once traveling to Capitol Hill in July, to button-hole Sens. John W. Warner (R-Va.), McCain and Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.).

When that tack did not work -- 90 senators supported the measure -- Cheney handed McCain language that would exempt the CIA. Despite Cheney's concerns, Graham said he has not heard any concerns from the CIA suggesting it needs an exemption from the McCain amendment. The CIA declined to comment.

"It shows that we have a philosophical difference here," said Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "The vice president believes in certain circumstances the government can't be bound by the language McCain is pushing. I believe that out of bounds of that language, we do harm to the U.S. image. It doesn't mean he's bad or I'm good; it just means we see it differently."

Cheney and the White House also oppose the language of a separate Defense Department directive, first reported by the New York Times, limiting detainee interrogations. The ongoing internal debate has stalled publication of the directive.

"This is the first issue we've gone to the trenches on," said a senior State Department official.

On the issue of the CIA's interrogation and detention practices, this spring Cheney requested the CIA brief him on the matter.

"Cheney's strategy seems to be to stop the broader movement to get an independent commission on interrogation practices and the McCain amendment," said one intelligence official.

Beside personal pressure from the vice president, Cheney's staff is also engaged in resisting a policy change.

Tactics included "trying to have meetings canceled ... to at least slow things down or gum up the works" or trying to conduct meetings on the subject without other key Cabinet members, one administration official said. The official said some internal memos and e-mail from the National Security Council staff to the national security adviser were automatically forwarded to the vice president's office -- in some cases without the knowledge of the authors.

For that reason, Rice "wanted to be in all meetings," said a senior State Department official.

Cheney's chief aide in this bureaucratic war of wills is David S. Addington, who was his chief counsel until last week when he replaced I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby as the vice president's chief of staff.

Addington exerted influence on many of the most significant policy decisions after Sept. 11, 2001. He helped write the position on torture taken by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, a stance rescinded after it became public, and he helped pick Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as the location beyond the reach of U.S. law for holding suspected terrorists.

When Addington learned that the draft Pentagon directive included language from Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits torture and cruel treatment, including "humiliating and degrading treatment," he summoned the Pentagon official in charge of the detainee issue to brief him.

During a tense meeting at his office in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Addington was strident, said officials with knowledge of the encounter, and chastised Deputy Assistant Secretary Matthew C. Waxman for including what he regarded as vague and unhelpful language from Article 3 in the directive.

On Tuesday, Cheney, who often attends the GOP senators' weekly luncheons without addressing the lawmakers, made "an impassioned plea" to reject McCain's amendment, said a senatorial aide who was briefed on the meeting and spoke on the condition of anonymity because of its closed nature.

After Senate aides were ordered out of the Mansfield Room, just steps from the Senate chamber, Cheney said that aggressive interrogations of detainees such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed had yielded useful information, and that the option to treat prisoners harshly must not be taken from interrogators.

McCain then rebutted Cheney's comments, the aide said, telling his colleagues that the image of the United States using torture "is killing us around the world."


If you become the meanest kid on the block, should you be surprised if some folks out there don't like you?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/07/05:

Americans are at heart honest, fair, and decent, but The Bush Admin is totalitarian, authoritarian,

Drop your wallet in any city street and lets see how honest and fair the average person is??

Ok, most are ok people

Government, no matter which party was in power government by its nature is authoritarian. And both parties are trying to make it worst by bigger government

States rights have been a thing of the past.

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/07/05 - Most Popular Names

The Most Popular Names for Pets Are...

...human names. Buddy, Max and Jake topped the list for male dogs, while Daisy, Molly and Sadie were most popular for females, the New York Post reports of a new survey of 9,000 animal shelters nationwide conducted by

Among cats, Smokey and Max were the most used names for males, and Molly, Angel and Lucy were favorites for females. "For real pet lovers, a pet is just another member of the family, so a human name seems totally appropriate,"'s president, Betsy Saul, told Post reporter Heidi Singer.

Our favorite names for pets haven't changed much in the past three years. In May 2002, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) surveyed veterinarians to find out the most popular pet names. According to the Learning Network, the top 10 names were: Max, Sam, Lady, Bear, Smokey, Shadow, Kitty, Molly, Buddy and Brandy. Rounding out the top 30 list were: Ginger, Baby, Misty, Missy, Pepper, Jake, Bandit, Tiger, Samantha, Lucky, Muffin, Princess, Maggie, Charlie, Sheba, Rocky, Patches, Tigger, Rusty and Buster.

I had an Irish Setter named Rusty.

Did you have a pet with any of these names?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/07/05:

My cat is waterfall, my dog is freeway.

Guess where I found them at?

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 11/07/05 - A NEW DISCOVERY:

MEGIDDO PRISON, Israel - Israeli prisoner Ramil Razilo was removing rubble from the planned site of a new prison ward when his shovel uncovered the edge of an elaborate mosaic, unveiling what Israeli archaeologists said Sunday may be the Holy Land’s oldest church.

The discovery of the church in the northern Israeli town of Megiddo, near the biblical Armageddon, was hailed by experts as an important discovery that could reveal details about the development of the early church in the region. Archaeologists said the church dated from the third century, decades before Constantine legalized Christianity across the Byzantine Empire.

“What’s clear today is that it’s the oldest archaeological remains of a church in Israel, maybe even in the entire region. Whether in the entire world, it’s still too early to say,” said Yotam Tepper, the excavation’s head archaeologist.

Source: MSNBC


Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/07/05:

It is just amazing how they could have buiilt the prison on that site and not have know it.

But it is amzaing, wish I could see the mozaic.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 11/06/05 - Now that pontificating Priest wants to tell us how to read the Bible

Evolution in the bible, says Vatican
By Martin Penner

November 07, 2005

THE Vatican has issued a stout defence of Charles Darwin, voicing strong criticism of Christian fundamentalists who reject his theory of evolution and interpret the biblical account of creation literally.
Cardinal Paul Poupard, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said the Genesis description of how God created the universe and Darwin's theory of evolution were "perfectly compatible" if the Bible were read correctly.

His statement was a clear attack on creationist campaigners in the US, who see evolution and the Genesis account as mutually exclusive.

"The fundamentalists want to give a scientific meaning to words that had no scientific aim," he said at a Vatican press conference. He said the real message in Genesis was that "the universe didn't make itself and had a creator".

This idea was part of theology, Cardinal Poupard emphasised, while the precise details of how creation and the development of the species came about belonged to a different realm - science. Cardinal Poupard said that it was important for Catholic believers to know how science saw things so as to "understand things better".

His statements were interpreted in Italy as a rejection of the "intelligent design" view, which says the universe is so complex that some higher being must have designed every detail.

So here we have it, you can either believe it or not. "The RCC has become a 'clayton's' religion". I wonder what other parts of the Bible the Catholic Church would like to dispense with while we are at it? Certainly the verse which says that Jesus had brothers and sisters, and the verse where Jesus says no one comes to the father but through him. Will they go back to selling indulgences, or did they ever stop? I have read the Bible and it is very specific about certain things including creation. I wonder what anti Christ they will embrace next?"

You know I'm prepared to Poo Poo what ever Poupard says

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/07/05:

Actually the statement that the vactican made was not that "strong" evolution, but was a middle ground on the support of intellegent design.

Alot of what was not said in the article posted was that this was done in a meeting where they admitted wrong in the attack of Gallileo about the earth being round.

They said basicly that we have to honor science when it is true but that science also has to honor religion.

The author of the article misquoted the actual statement and did not include the majority of what is was about.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/05/05 - Shocking!! Unrelated to Religion!!

Cruise Ship Escapes Pirate Hijack Attempt

NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) - Pirates armed with grenade launchers and machine guns tried to hijack a luxury cruise liner off the east African coast Saturday, but the ship outran them, officials said.

Two boats full of pirates approached the Seabourn Spirit about 100 miles off the Somali coast and opened fire while the heavily armed bandits tried to get onboard, said Bruce Good, spokesman for the Miami-based Seabourn Cruise Line, a subsidiary of Carnival Corp.

The ship escaped by shifting to high speed and changing course.

``These are very well-organized pirates,'' said Andrew Mwangura, head of the Kenyan chapter of the Seafarers Assistance Program. ``Somalia's coastline is the most dangerous place in the region in terms of maritime security."

HUH? Pirates????

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/05/05:

Of course most posts as of late are more political than Christian anyway.

Yep, pirates, I have checked the story out on several news sourses.
It appears that it is actually commom for armed men to rob smaller pleaure boats often in some areas. This was an unusual attack of a much larger ship.

Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 11/05/05 - You got that right

Bush has been called a terrorist and human trash in Argentina.

Does it get any worse than that. When will america learn that there are some who don't want their system of economic and political development. I wonder if Bush will tell these people he loves free speech.

Argentinians label Bush a terrorist as protest erupts

By Dan Molinski
November 6, 2005

Several hundred rioters clashed with police, setting bonfires in the streets and destroying shopfronts early yesterday as an anti-American rally turned violent at the start of the Summit of the Americas in this Argentinian seaside resort.

The riot followed a massive but peaceful march on Friday by about 10,000 demonstrators who heard Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez urge them to fight the US policies of President George Bush.

Chanting "Bush, fascist, you are a terrorist" the masked demonstrators fought with riot police, who responded by firing tear gas.

Demonstrators set American flags on fire, while others used slingshots to fire rocks at police and threw petrol bombs.

The clashes took place 600 metres from the Hermitage hotel in Mar del Plata where the summit opened on Friday with leaders of 34 countries from the Americas.

About 300 demonstrators were involved in the clashes. Some 8000 security guards were deployed to the resort in anticipation of protests.

Earlier, Mr Chavez addressed the crowd, urging protesters to help him "bury" the Bush Administration's stalled Free Trade Area of the Americas.

The planet "is being destroyed under our own noses by the capitalist model, the destructive engine of development", Mr Chavez said, adding: "Every day there is more hunger, more misery, thanks to the neo-liberal, capitalist model."

Mr Chavez also pledged a 蔴-year" war if the US invaded Venezuela - something he has repeatedly accused the American Government of planning, although US officials deny any such plans.

The protest also featured Argentine soccer great Diego Maradona, who travelled to Mar del Plata on a train packed with protesters

Smoking cigars given to him by Cuban President Fidel Castro, Maradona said: "We are going to stand against the human trash known as Bush."

Maradona has been angry at the US since it denied him a visa to visit a drug treatment centre in Miami in the 1990s.

Mr Bush arrived at the meeting with his popularity at home sinking further. For the first time in his presidency, a majority of Americans questioned his integrity as his approval ratings on key issues fell to new lows, in an ABC News/ Washington Post poll.

However, Mr Bush refused to answer questions on the role of his Administration in the CIA leak case which has led to the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who was chief of staff for Vice-President Dick Cheney, and the investigation of Mr Bush's top political adviser Karl Rove.
Source: The Sun-Herald

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/05/05:

Let me see Bush was at a peaceful business and political meetng.

This mob of stupid people attacked police and caused violence.

And Bush caused this how???

If a mob of people wish to destroy things and break the law, we should be looking at thier behavior and why they are wrong for what they are doing.

If anyone looks wrong in this, it most certainly is not Bush.

paraclete rated this answer Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/05/05 - RCC supports Science, not Fundametalism

Vatican cardinal said Thursday the faithful should listen to what secular modern science has to offer, warning that religion risks turning into "fundamentalism" if it ignores scientific reason.

Cardinal Paul Poupard, who heads the Pontifical Council for Culture, made the comments at a news conference on a Vatican project to help end the "mutual prejudice" between religion and science that has long bedeviled the Roman Catholic Church and is part of the evolution debate in the United States.

The Vatican project was inspired by
Pope John Paul II's 1992 declaration that the church's 17th-century denunciation of Galileo was an error resulting from "tragic mutual incomprehension." Galileo was condemned for supporting Nicolaus Copernicus' discovery that the Earth revolved around the sun; church teaching at the time placed Earth at the center of the universe.

"The permanent lesson that the Galileo case represents pushes us to keep alive the dialogue between the various disciplines, and in particular between theology and the natural sciences, if we want to prevent similar episodes from repeating themselves in the future," Poupard said." - Cut and Paste from Yahoo News.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/05/05:

Yes the vactican did restate ( not a new statement by any means) that catholics should not ignore science.
We can not and do not live in a caccum.

And they agreed that eveloution does exist.
Don't think that anyone even the hardest funalmentist can argue that it does happen.

Now what was not said was that creation did not happen, sicnece can not prove that evelution caused people and animals, only that we do evolve within our speicis and can cross breed with the help of man)

This is for a church basicly a middle of the road statement for church politics that does not disagree and does not fully agree with either side.

Respect science, but they aslso said that science should also listen to religion, it does not of course.

Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/05/05 - Bush Admins wants to Torture

The Bush admnin wants the USA to be the only country in the world to legalise torture.

Can you provide Biblical approval and recommendation for Torturing enemies?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/05/05:

Sorry no that is not what the admin wants,

But honestly alot of the torture, making them stand, do without sleep and other things I have heard is not torture it is merley working to get them to weaken to a state of being controled.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 11/04/05 - why shouldn't you blame those who are doing it

I have become a little fed up with this "let's not blame the Muslims nonsence" coming from various people yet the perpetrators of the current wave of violence in France are Muslim. We now have a new style of terrorism, urban terrorism, and guess which group have added this to their repriotre, No prize by the way for the right answer. By the way, before all this started, what where terrorists doing before, confining their activities to the countryside?

Arson gangs strike around Paris

November 5, 2005 - 4:16PM

Firefighters battled blazes set by gangs of youths around Paris into the early hours of today, as the worst violence the capital has seen in decades dragged on into its ninth straight night.

Some 220 vehicles were set alight around the city, especially in the restive northern suburbs at the epicentre of the troubles which have left authorities powerless despite the deployment of hundreds of riot police since last week.

A hundred people were evacuated overnight from two apartment blocks in that region when one arson attack set dozens of cars in an underground garage on fire.

Two textile warehouses and a car showroom were also set on fire to the northeast of the city.

Police said more than 50 people were arrested, some of them minors caught with fire-bombs.

Copycat incidents on a smaller scale were also reported in the southern cities of Toulouse and Nice, and in the northern cities of Lille and Rennes.

The intensity of violence was lower than in previous nights, however, as the youths behind the unrest, many of whom are Muslims of North African and black African origin, generally avoided clashes with police, preferring to run away after setting the fires.

Only in a few cases were bottles, stones and Molotov cocktails thrown at police officers and firefighters responding to the blazes, in contrast with previous nights.

The new round of rampages came just hours after the Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin, held a crisis meeting late yesterday with the Interior Minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, on the riots, which were the worst since a 1968 student revolt.

Sarkozy later made a surprise visit to a police command centre west of Paris, telling officers: "Arrests - that's the key."

He urged them to get more information on those causing the trouble "so we can better understand how they're organised, because they are organised".

Much of the blame for the prolonged fury in the streets has been aimed at Sarkozy and his hardline policies designed to clean up the crime-ridden suburbs. He has referred to the trouble-makers as "rabble" and vowed to clean their neighbourhoods "with a power-hose".

The Muslim youths waging the violence have responded in interviews by demanding Sarkozy's resignation - a position echoed by the opposition Communist and Greens parties - and solutions to the economic misery, racial discrimination and provocative policing they suffer.

A few shots have been fired at police, without causing injury, and at least two people - a handicapped woman and a fireman - have been severely burnt by Molotov cocktails in past nights.

The riots were sparked October 27, when two teenagers were electrocuted in a tough, low-income suburb north of Paris as they hid in an electrical sub-station to flee a police identity check.

Since then, overwhelmed police have found themselves powerless to stop the conflagration, which has seen a total of over 1,200 vehicles torched and more than 250 people arrested.

The leader of one police union, Bruno Beschizza, has described the riots as "urban terrorism", but Paris Mayor Bertrand Delanoe of the opposition Socialist Party warned against hastily lumping together "one religion, Islam, and a few extremists" in apportioning blame.


please don't tell me the Muslim community couldn't stop this if they wanted to, many of the "urban terrorists" are children

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/05/05:

sorry, while of courwse I know his soul is doomed to hell since he has not accepted Christ, I just can't hate the guy taking my money at the gas station.

Or the family with children playing with my son at the park.

We have Christian extremeist from the KKK to those in compounds in MN. You can't blame all Christians for these folks.

When the blacks were doing riots in LA this year, did we blame all the blacks or just the ones seeing a chance to get new TV sets?
( or Bush if you so desired)

Remember it is Muslims we are assisting in several counties, they are the good guy and the bad guy.

ATON2 rated this answer Above Average Answer
Buck2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/04/05 - What kind of politics is this about?

And what kind of politics causes one to write about it?
Jim Kouri wrote the following:
This is not known generally because the mainstream news media decided to stay mum about it: the Democrats don't want their statements to be included in the final senate report on pre-Iraq intelligence. According to senate staffers, the final report will contain statements made by Senators John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Teddy Kennedy, Jay Rockefeller and many others who claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. It will contain statements made by former President Bill Clinton, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and foreign intelligence leaders all of whom claimed they had evidence that Saddam had -- or was working on -- weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons. The final report will also contain material that refutes allegations leveled at President Bush by the left's pride and joy, Joe Wilson. The Democrats do not want this information disseminated to Americans.
In other words, the Democrats would appear complicit in moving the United States towards war in Iraq if a final senate reports contains their quotes. Their rhetoric would appear hypocritical if they continued their rants against the Bush Administration.
The Democrats invoked Rule 21 in order to claim the Republicans were dragging their feet on finishing their investigation and report. But indeed it was the Democrats who were blocking the completion of the senate report. They do not want the American people to know the truth. They do not want the American people reminded that in the run-up to the Iraq war, most of the Democrat senators were on board for the preemptive attack on Saddam.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/05/05:

Politics are politics, don't really matter what side you are on, they are basicly on thier own side to get re-elected.

They tell different special interest groups what they want to hear and then vote normally by party choice.

The democrats are having trouble since they have lost most of thier power base and have little left except to attack Bush. But heck the Rep would do the same thing if they were in such a terrible political situation with having to cater to so many fringe groups but needed the average voter for elections.

The Reb have been called on promises made and have fell short ( way short)

As far as the war, it is an American tradegy, not that we went to war but that snce Viet Nam Americans will not do what it takes to actually win a war.

Buck2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Buck2 asked on 11/04/05 - Christmas.

Will you obey and call it something else besides Christmas? I will not, but I just wonder how many here will call it what the Government tell us...

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/04/05:

I wear my cross while at work at times.
It will be a Blessed Christmas, as it is God Bless you and have a blessed day all the other time.

Buck2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/04/05 - SHAME!

"Let me see, the religious "left" which in most of the conservative church teach that the Pope and the church of Rome are the same as the anti Christ. If anyone should not like another Catholic on the bench it should be them. But guess what they love him and glad to see him because of his views, not his denomination."

"Father" Chuck's response to the question about Catholics on the Supreme Court earlier today.

I am totally outraged at this blatant lie and attempt to smear those who he doesn't like. I can't believe my eye. Some Fundamentalist Christian churches teach that Catholicism isn't a Christian religion!!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/04/05:

Now I will not say it is all people, and all churches.

We have friends who belong to varoius churches, Last year I spoke on a regular basis with the Methodist.

But then the if you go past alot of superficial relationships to do social programs. ( heck christians do activities in interfaith with Musliams and Jewish, but that does not mean they believed they are saved.

One of my best friends is a Francisian Priest, he goes all around town in his brown robes. Often standing on the corner blessing people that go by. He and I ( in my clergy colar) went into one of the small local greasy spoons for breakfeast one morning,

Normally people are merley taught to dislike our church from what they are taught or by groups like Chick who twists the truth about the Catholic Church.
Alot are will ing to listen, others don't listen they just come back with the same discussion.

But I travel the entire central TN area and there is not a single Christian radio station that doesnot broadcast at least some anti catholic preaching at times.

Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

Choux asked on 11/04/05 - SHAME!

"Let me see, the religious "left" which in most of the conservative church teach that the Pope and the church of Rome are the same as the anti Christ. If anyone should not like another Catholic on the bench it should be them. But guess what they love him and glad to see him because of his views, not his denomination."

"Father" Chuck's response to the question about Catholics on the Supreme Court earlier today.

I am totally outraged at this blatant lie and attempt to smear those who he doesn't like. I can't believe my eye. Some Fundamentalist Christian churches teach that Catholicism isn't a Christian religion!!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/04/05:

No they don't,


The majority of fundamentalist teach that the catholic church are not chirstian and that they are a cult.

They even pass out tracts to "save" catholics, just like they do the JW and the Mormons. ie Chick publication is the most used

I am catholic, they have tried to save my soul many many times.

Calvinist/Reformed/Presbyterian see Chapter 25, Article 6, Westminster Confession (1646) and Chapter 26, Article 4, Savoy Declaration (1658)

"There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof, but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God." Westminster Confession, Chap. 25, Art. 6 (emphasis mine) See this version with citations to 2 Thess. 2:3,4,8,9; Rev. 13:6

Lutheran Smalcald Articles, Article IV: Of the Papacy.

"This teaching shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God. This is, properly speaking to exalt himself above all that is called God as Paul says, 2 Thess. 2, 4." Martin Luther (emphasis mine.)
Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope: "And all the marks [all the vices] of Antichrist plainly agree with the kingdom of the Pope and his adherents." See Treatise

try links!2517&keyword=robert+lockwood&OVRAW=anti%20catholic&OVKEY=robert%20lockwood&OVMTC=advanced

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/04/05 - Roman Catholic majority on Supreme Court if Alito is appointed

If confirmed, Judge Samuel Alito would become the fifth Catholic on the US Supreme Court, the first Catholic majority in American history.

Should senators ask Alito about the role of his faith?
If confirmed, he would become the fifth Catholic among the nine justices on the Supreme Court.

By Warren Richey | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON – One of the defining characteristics of American liberty is that a person's religious faith - or lack of religious faith - is generally a private matter outside the realm of government concern.

Indeed, Article VI of the Constitution bars any religious test for prospective government officials.

But now, President Bush's nomination of Samuel Alito to a seat on the US Supreme Court is raising a sensitive question: To what extent should a nominee's religious faith be a legitimate area of inquiry during Senate confirmation hearings?

The issue arises as Judge Alito stands at the threshold of making Supreme Court history. Should he win confirmation, he will become the fifth Roman Catholic among the roster of nine justices, marking the first time a majority on the high court would be Catholic.

It is a remarkable development, considering he would be only the 12th Catholic justice on a court that has seen the service of more than 100 justices.

But in a country with a tradition of separation between church and state, any focus on Catholicism seems to some analysts more a relic of anti-Catholic prejudice than a well-intentioned effort to examine Alito's temperament, intellect, or judicial philosophy.

"The question is fidelity to the law," says Douglas Kmiec, a constitutional law professor at Pepperdine University School of Law. "So it is entirely appropriate for the Senate to make that inquiry. What is inappropriate is for the Senate to only make that inquiry of Catholics."

He also says, "The history of those Senate inquiries is that [Catholics] are the only people who have been asked." The late Justice William Brennan, Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy, and, most recently, Chief Justice John Roberts, were all asked if their Catholic faith would interfere with their ability to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States, Professor Kmiec says.

Now the question is emerging anew as supporters and opponents gear up for what analysts say could become judicial-confirmation Armageddon. Some see such questions as a form of anti-Catholic bigotry. Others see complaints about religious questioning as being part of a campaign to head off aggressive interrogation.

"It is a tactic aimed at shutting down discussion on a crucial area of legal philosophy," says the Rev. C. Welton Gaddy, president of the Interfaith Alliance. "It is very difficult to get into the process without being labeled anti-Catholic. And that is by design by people on the religious right."

Mr. Gaddy adds, "In reality, it is not about religion. It is about politics."

Many older Americans are aware of the so-called Catholic question from the way presidential candidate John F. Kennedy responded in 1960 to a group of ministers who expressed their concerns that a Catholic president might have dual loyalties to both the US and the Vatican.

Mr. Kennedy answered: "I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me." The response went a long way in opening doors for American Catholics seeking positions of leadership in a country once dominated by Protestants. But many are asking why the question is still arising in 2005.

Supreme Court justices must swear two oaths: to protect and defend the Constitution and to faithfully and impartially uphold the Constitution and US laws. Legal analysts say that while it is sometimes easy to distinguish between the rulings of liberal and conservative judges, it is impossible to identify any meaningful characteristics of a Catholic judge, or Jewish judge, or Protestant judge. Rather, they are judges who happen to be Catholic, or Jewish, or Protestant.

During his confirmation hearings in September, Mr. Roberts was asked at least three times a version of the JFK question. He answered: "My faith and my religious beliefs do not play a role in judging. When it comes to judging, I look to the lawbooks and always have. I don't look to the Bible or any other religious source."

Manuel Miranda, founder of the Third Branch Conference, a coalition of grass-roots organizations monitoring judicial issues, says both the question to Roberts and his answer were inappropriate.

"How insulting. How offensive," Mr. Miranda wrote for OpinionJournal, the online edition of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. "The JFK question is not just the camel's nose of religious intolerance; it is the whole smelly camel."

In a telephone interview, Miranda said he wishes Roberts had been more forceful in his response: "What he could have said is, 'You really have crossed the line in asking me that question, and I take offense at it. And I would like to remind you that the Constitution of the United States, to which you have sworn an oath, senator, requires that you not ask me a question like that.' "

Miranda is a former staff aide to Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch and Senate majority leader Bill Frist. While working in the Senate, he pioneered the Catholic bias issue as a counter to Democratic filibusters of Bush judicial nominees.

Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance says the stakes for the nation in the direction of the Supreme Court are high. The confirmation process must be free and open enough to foster a wide-ranging examination of a prospective life-tenured justice, he says.

"The issue is not just about abortion. It is larger than that," Gaddy says. "What is at stake is the advancement of a view that the government of the United States has a responsibility to shape and monitor the personal, moral values of the citizens of this nation."

Gaddy says he hopes senators won't be intimidated by false accusations. "I think they have to ask those questions," he says. "You can be sure when they ask them, anti-Catholic charges will be raised."

Among the eight Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, four are Jewish and four Catholic. The Catholics include Sens. Patrick Leahy, Edward Kennedy, Joseph Biden, and Richard Durbin.

"Some of the people who will be asking hard questions of Judge Alito are Catholics," says James Hitchcock, a history professor at St. Louis University and author of "The Supreme Court and Religion in American Life."

Professor Hitchcock says the divide over the so-called Catholic question has less to do with religious doctrine than with the increasingly contentious liberal- conservative political divide in the US.

"The kind of people back in 1960 who were questioning [John] Kennedy were Baptist ministers," he says. "I think that insofar as Baptists belong in the category of religious conservatives, they are not likely to object to a man just because he is Catholic if they feel he has a view of the world somewhat similar to their own."


Non-tendentious thoughts?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/04/05:

Let me see, the religious "left" which in most of the conservative church teach that the Pope and the church of Rome are the same as the anti Christ. If anyone should not like another Catholic on the bench it should be them. But guess what they love him and glad to see him because of his views, not his denomination.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

tomder55 asked on 11/04/05 - Rioting in Denmark too .

Successive nights of riots have rocked parts of Aarhus, the second largest city in Denmark. Little to nothing has appeared in the English language press about the second front in the Eurabian intifada. Fortunately the Canadian Free Press has translated the writing of Hendrik, The Viking Observer .Otherwise it is doubtful that the press would be covering it . It took them until yesterday to realize that Paris was on fire . Now ,maybe they will report that something's rotten in Denmark .Can the Islamic Republic of "al-Andalus" Spain be far behind ?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/04/05:

Wondering more when the US is going to start seeing it.

Unless it is happening and the news is not telling us.

Buck2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/02/05 - "God and Caesar in America"

"The revelation that a senior White House official “cleared” the since-failed nomination of Harriet Meyers to the Supreme Court with Focus on the Family founder James Dobson reminded me of the huge controversy caused by John Kennedy’s campaign for president in 1960. Then it was the religious conservatives who were up in arms about the separation of church and state and about preventing “the Pope from taking over the White House.”

Can you imagine their reaction if, in 1961 when President Kennedy nominated Byron White to the Supreme Court, Ted Sorenson had placed a call to the Pope to seek his approval of the White nomination?

Reflections such as this in the context of today’s political rhetoric of “faith” and “values”, and the high-jacking of the Republican party by the religious right, together with my own evangelical background and divinity school studies of theology, caused me to write God and Caesar in America: and essay on religion and politics."--Gary Hart on Huffington Post

Kinda puts the takeover of the Republican Party by right wing religious zealots into perspective. The White House calling the Pope for ANYTHING????

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/03/05:

Political people then, before then, and now, cousult many within thier support base to see if many choices they are making are ok.

That is what politics are all about,

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Average Answer
Goospatty rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 11/02/05 - Help please!

Hello Everyone,
Please if there is anyone who knows the law, what are my rights.

We pay $950.00 Rent and because of the huricane Wilma we has significant roof damage and now last night it rained and water came into the third floor hallway. The carpet is wet. Now our landlord wants his rent and our building has not been inspected for safety. Many of the buildings in the area have been condemed and rated unsafe and tenate have a few hours to move. We as renters do not feel comfortable paying our rent if we are going to be asked to leave due to danger and unsafe building. What can my family and others renters due legally to protect ourselves?

I know this is not spiritual or religious matter but it is important and I really would appreciate anyone who can help us know what to do.

Thanks ahead of time,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/02/05:

Laws vary, and if this is LA they have some somewhat strange laws in thier state.

But in general rent is controled by your rental contract and if no contract is in place by the state laws on rent and housing.

Often in these cases the problems with a place not being livable has to be notified to the owner or agent( not just a phone call but a registered letter)

And not being wrong, his carpet is wet, since it owns it.

If you are still living in the house, then you most likely will be liable for the rent, since you have chosen to deside it is livable.

If you move you need to docoment the problems, pictures of damage, list of all the problems.

Depending on your contract most have clauses for breaking the contract if the home is not livable.

But in almost all cases you will not be able to live there and not pay rent.

** I am not an attorney, this is not legal advice only opinion. For the best reference check with an attorney in your home state.

hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 11/01/05 - Newest Kind of Marital Infidelity

The Newest Kind of Marital Infidelity

"Hold the sex! With emotional infidelity, all it takes to cheat is a close friendship. If you're married and you share secrets with a close friend of the opposite sex or go out for drinks after work, you are guilty of emotional infidelity. That's the controversial verdict from M. Gary Neuman, a Miami Beach, Fla., therapist and author of the new book, "Emotional Infidelity: How to Affair-Proof Your Marriage and 10 Other Secrets to a Great Relationship."

His words are blunt: You can't have an intimate relationship at work and still have a great relationship at home. Even if there is no sex, he claims that any sort of male-female friendship outside of marriage is adultery. Period. Those are frightening words. With the long and intense work hours so many regularly endure, close friendships at work with people of both genders are typically the norm. Neuman's advice is simple and direct: Back off. He told The Baltimore Sun, "My message is that if you want to infuse passion and have a buddy for the rest of your life, you have to keep that emotional content in your marriage. Otherwise, it's not going to happen."

His views may be extreme, but even his critics--and there are many--acknowledge that his central premise that friendships between members of the opposite sex can harm marriages is probably valid. Author and infidelity researcher Shirley Glass, told the Sun that office friendships are a big concern. "Many love affairs begin just that way."

What do you think of Neuman's assessment of different sex friendships?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/02/05:

Your wife or husband should and must be also your closest friend.

A person who "goes out for drinks after work" with someone of the opposite sex ( of perhaps the same sex now adays) needs to be going home to his family.

There has to be friendship in marriage, his views are not extreme, old fashion perhaps but todays disposable family mentality, I guess it is extreme

Choux rated this answer Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 11/01/05 - Bush Unveils Bird Flu Strategy ...

The Bush administration, battered by criticism over its hurricane response, its nominees to the SC, its Iraq Attack, and numerous other fudgements, is attempting to divert the nation's attention away from White House failures by getting the nation prepared for a pandemic of bird influenza.

A 'senior White House official' today revealed that Bush's personal favourite was the building of a ten foot high wall around the whole of the USA, because, the President is reported as having said,

"That will keep out the birds and the illegals."

Do you think ten feet is high enough, or should it be even higher?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/01/05:

But honestly the bird flu could possibly be a big issue. If we did nothing and it happened, what would people say then.

It is a no win situation for the Pesident.
How many need to die before we say, woops, maybe we should have tried to do some.

I don't think there is a real "right" answer as to what to do about the problem.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 11/01/05 - Bill O'Reilly's thinking on the ACLU is below......

Fox News
By Bill O’Reilly

The ACLU exposed: that is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo".
Last night, we reported that the Supreme Court of Oregon had ruled 5 to 1 that live sex shows are permitted in that state under the freedom of expression banner. The ACLU and The Oregonian newspaper both filed briefs in favor of that ruling. But why would the ACLU do that? What's in it for them?
The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that states and local communities have the right to limit expression. This is the U.S. Supreme court, in a time, place, and manner, application of standards. That is, you can't have sex on your front lawn, even if it's a personal expression on private property. The Supreme Court realizes the Constitution requires boundaries for what Americans do. If you don't have boundaries, you have chaos. Thus, community standards and public safety trump personal expression.
But the ACLU doesn't believe that. The organization has moved so far left, that now anything goes.
• Item: The ACLU is defending the North American Man Boy Love Association, saying that although the organization champions the criminal rape of children, it has a right to do that under free expression.
• Item: The ACLU endorses virtual child pornography and has defended the right of people to obtain real child porn.
• Item: the ACLU opposed the Minutemen protests at the border, obviously, a legitimate form of expression.
So it seems the ACLU cherry picks its cases. The Minutemen certainly have a right to protest the porous border situation, but the ACLU opposes that expression. — Off the chart hypocritical.
So let's apply the no spin concept to this. The ACLU simply wants a different country, a nation where conduct it approves of, public sexual displays, child molestation literature is allowed. But the ACLU wants to inhibit conduct it disagrees with, like protesting the border and celebrating the birth of Jesus. That's what's going on.
Now my next comments are directed at our liberal viewers. How can you support a group as nakedly, pardon the pun, radical as the ACLU? This isn't about freedom. This is about imposing a radical secular progressive agenda on a country that has traditionally voted on public policy issues. If the live sex act initiative was put on the Oregon ballot, it'd be voted down big. Remember, Oregonians voted against gay marriage.
So once again, the ACLU is using an activist court to undermine what the folks want. This isn't democracy. This is judicial fascism.
It's also a joke. The founding fathers didn't write the First Amendment with live sex shows in mind, OK? Everybody understand that? You can easily pervert the Constitution by saying every kind of expression is protected, but again, that would lead to chaos and conflict.
"Talking Points" believes the 400,000 members of the ACLU should wake up and smell the totalitarianism. This organization is bent on undermining freedom, not fighting for it. And everybody should understand that.
And that's "The Memo."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 11/01/05:

One can "believe" in alot of things when they get large fees often from the courts for defending these people. Esp if they win and they get some money settlements latter.

It long ago stoped being any cause, except cause it makes them money.

They get donations from people, they get paid by the courts.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 10/31/05 - Christians will do it whether others do or not

Do you agree with the teaching of intelligent design which the moral and intellectual pigmees attempt to ban

Christian schools hit back over origin of life
By Linda Doherty Education Editor
November 1, 2005

Christian schools have defended their right to teach intelligent design in science classes to explain the origin of life, accusing sceptical scientists and teachers of "ideological conservatism".

In the latest salvo over the theory emanating from the United States, Christian educators said no approach to science was "value-neutral" and that both Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and intelligent design "have their own strong ideological foundations". Intelligent design says that some forms of life are so complex they can be explained only by the actions of an "intelligent designer".

Carolyn Kelshaw, chief executive officer of Christian parent-controlled schools, and Richard Edlin, principal of the National Institute for Christian Education, said "intolerant" opponents of intelligent design were holding back "the genuine exploration of alternative approaches within science teaching in Australian schools". "We are dismayed that some science educators appear to be committed to their own ideological conservatism," they said in a statement.

There are 24 parent-controlled Christian schools in NSW and another 56 schools represented by Christian Schools Australia.

More than 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers this month criticised the infiltration into schools of intelligent design, saying that it was a belief, not a scientific theory.

Nobel prize-winning scientist Peter Doherty said it was "a ridiculous idea and has no place in science teaching".

The Dean of Sciences at the University of NSW, Mike Archer, told ABC Radio that equating intelligent design with science could lead to teaching "astrology instead of astronomy" and "flat earth [theory] and fork bending".

But the chief executive of Christian Schools Australia, Stephen O'Doherty, said he was happy to "take on" the scientists and teachers, who were "dogmatic and close-minded".

He said intelligent design was "a debate among scientists" using the scientific record and complexity of biological systems "as evidence of an intelligent designer".

"But there is no such thing in Australia as an intelligent design curriculum that takes Darwin off the shelf," he said.

In the past two months, Australian schools have snapped up a US-funded intelligent design DVD called Unlocking the Mystery of Life after the federal Minister for Education, Brendan Nelson, said he supported intelligent design being taught in religion or philosophy classes.

Mr O'Doherty said it was appropriate that students questioned scientific processes and theories but "there is a point where science stops and faith begins".

Both Christian Schools Australia and the parent-controlled Christian schools say they teach the NSW Board of Studies science curriculum, which includes evolution but not intelligent design.

The president of the board, Gordon Stanley, said intelligent design was not in the curriculum "because it is not scientific and not evidence based".

"Schools teaching intelligent design should make it clear to students that this material is not part of the board's syllabus and that it will not be tested in any public examination," he said.

The president-elect of the Australian Science Teachers Association, Paul Carnemolla, said the Christian educators were confusing the scientific meaning of "theory", which was something that had to be measured and tested.

"There is not a single research paper on intelligent design - no empirical evidence," he said.

"This is a belief system and it's based on faith. It can't stand up to scientific scrutiny."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/31/05:

Intelligent design is ok,

Gen 1 and creation would be the best.

AT least it is alot better than the silly idea that evolution just happened by itself.
Talk about an idea that calls for faith

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 10/31/05 - an olde but a goode

it's doing the rounds again. does your church need a little help?

> A minister concluded that his church was getting into
> serious financial troubles.
> Coincidentally, by chance, while checking the church
> storeroom, he discovered several cartons of new bibles that had never
> been opened and distributed. So at his Sunday sermon, he asked for
> three volunteers from the congregation who would be willing to sell the
> bibles door-to-door for $10 each to raise the desperately needed money
> for the church.
> Peter, Paul and Louie all raised their hands to
> volunteer for the task. The reverend knew that Peter and Paul earned
> their living as salesmen and were likely capable of selling some bibles
> but he had serious doubts about Louie. Louie was just a little local
> farmer, who had always tended to keep to himself because he was
> embarrassed by his speech impediment. Poor little Louis stuttered very
> badly. But, not wanting to discourage poor Louis, the reverend decided
> to let him try anyway.
> He sent the three of them away with the back seat of
> their cars stacked with bibles and asked them to meet with him and
> report the results of their door-to- door selling efforts the following
> Sunday.
> Anxious to find out how successful they were, the
> reverend immediately asked Peter, "Well, Peter, how did you make out
> selling our bibles last week?"
> Proudly handing the reverend an envelope, Peter
> replied, "Father, using my sales prowess, I was able to sell 20 bibles,
> and here's the $200 I collected on behalf of the church."
> "Fine job, Peter!" The reverend said, vigorously
> shaking his hand. "You are indeed a fine salesman and the Church is
> indebted to you."
> Turning to Paul, he asked "And Paul, how many bibles
> did you manage to sell for the church last week?"
> Paul, smiling and sticking out his chest, confidently
> replied,"Reverend, I am a professional salesman and was happy to give
> the church the benefit of my sales expertise. Last week I sold 28
> bibles on behalf of the church, and here's $280 I collected."
> The reverend responded, "That's absolutely splendid,
> Paul. You are truly a professional salesman and the church is also
> indebted to you."
> Apprehensively, the reverend turned to little Louie
> and said, "And Louie, did you manage to sell any bibles last week?"
> Louie silently offered the reverend a large envelope.
> The reverend opened it and counted the contents. "What is this?" the
> reverend exclaimed. "Louie, there's $3200 in here! Are you suggesting
> that you sold 320 bibles for the church, door to door, in just one week?
> Louie just nodded.
> That's impossible!" both Peter and Paul said in
> unison. "We are professional salesmen, yet you claim to have sold 10
> times as many bibles as we could."
> "Yes, this does seem unlikely," the reverend agreed.
> "I think you'd better explain how you managed to do accomplish this,
> Louie."
> Louie shrugged. "I-I-I- re-re-really do-do-don't
> kn-kn-know f-f-f-for sh-sh-sh-sure," he stammered.
> Impatiently, Peter interrupted. "For crying out loud,
> Louie, just tell us what you said to them when they answered the door!"
> "A-a-a-all I-I-I s-s-said wa-wa-was," Louis replied,
> "W-w-w-w-would y-y-y-you l-l-l-l-l-like t-t-to b-b-b-buy th-th-th-this
> b-b-b-b-bible f-f-for t-t-ten b-b-b-bucks ---o-o-o-or--- wo-wo-would
> yo-you j-j-j-just l-like m-m-me t-t-to st-st-stand h-h-here and
> r-r-r-r-r-read it t-to y-y-you?"

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/31/05:

Had not heard that before, it was worth the read

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 10/30/05 - Should Christians still be concerned about Columine? Or is it just old news?

By Larry Pratt
June 12, 2003

Brian Rohrbough is the father of one of the victims at Columbine. In an interview I conducted with him for my talk show Live Fire, my listeners were informed of the continuing lawsuits pursued by Rohrbough to pry the information from the authorities who have engaged in a massive cover-up.

The killers were well-known to the school and the police as very dangerous characters. After stealing equipment from a van, they were reported to have made death threats against a student. The Sheriff denied that any such report had been made, but unhappily for the Sheriff, the father had kept a copy of the report on the official form used for that purpose.

Rohrbough said that other death threats had been made, as well. The police had recovered from the killers pipe bombs which had been reported to them.

A year before Columbine, a search warrant was drawn up to search the house of the killers but was never executed. For two years the Sheriff's department denied that there had been a warrant. It has now been revealed in court that the cops were lying. Rohrbough suspects that one of the killers' parents was close to someone in the Sheriff's department.

One of the killers was being medicated on a psychotropic drug. There is a line at many of the county schools in the cafeteria where the drugs are handed out. The schools get $1000 per year from the federal government for handing out the drugs that the parents pay for.

The Sheriff's department covered up the records of the juvenile diversion program that the killers had attended. The parents had described in documents for the program that the kids were angry. One of the killers answered questions on a form saying that he wanted to kill someone, wanted to kill himself and hurt as many people as possible. They wrote essays in a creative writing class where they described the joys of murdering innocent people. The only negative comment by the teacher who graded the paper was that you should not swear at people before murdering them.

In a class they produced a video depicting the blowing up of the school. The killers had been on the internet bragging about the bombs they built. They even put their names on the bombs.

Other video tapes were made by the killers bragging that they wanted to kill as many people as possible. They had a hit list, but that has not been released yet -- although Rohrbough is trying to get it in produced in court.

The school authorities reported concerns about the killers to the Sheriff department's school resource officer. The officer denied that he was ever told that information. This is one of the many lies that Rohrbough has uncovered in the over 30,000 pages of documents he has gotten out of the clutches of the authorities.

Rohrbough accuses the police of having been cowards. Most of the officers he hastens to add wanted to go in, but the first officers on the scene became cowards. They had a gun fight with the killers and ran to hide behind their cars instead of running into the school. Their cowardice soon became the orders from above, ultimately from the Sheriff himself.

There was about seven minutes before the killers killed anyone inside the school (two had been killed outside, including Rohrbough's son). Obviously, if the officers had gone into the building immediately, there is a great likelihood that many lives could have been saved.

It is now known that the police waited for three hours after they knew the killers were dead before they finally entered the building. This was the time during which a teacher bled to death in plain sight of the world.

Rohrbough has alleged that the county lied about 28 material facts. When he presented this in a case against the county, the judge said that the government is immune from criminal penalties when it lies. The county's defense, when they were caught lying, was to hide behind the doctrine of sovereign immunity which protects bureaucrats from liability for their misdeeds. As a result, they actually argued in court that they were not responsible for protecting the victims or the dying teacher.

As a result, Rohrbough's litigation has focused on freedom of information suits to obtain the documents which have exposed the government's lies.

The Governor's commission to investigate Columbine was on the verge of issuing a report saying that everyone in authority had done all they could when Rohrbough dug up the non-executed search warrant. The commission never did hammer the police for allowing two killers to roam the halls while the cops cowered outside.

The commission recommended two improvements. One was to improve communication technology between police departments and the Sheriff's office in the county. But Rohrbough has learned that the difficulty was solved almost instantly. The other recommendation was that troubled students not go to their diversion programs in the same car. That was all the commission could come up with!

Rohrbough lamented that there were no teachers or other adults with a concealed firearm in the school. He pointed to the case of Israel where teachers have been encouraged to arm themselves. Certainly, if the police are going to insist that they have no responsibility to protect victims from criminals, then it is unconscionable for the police and politicians to oppose people protecting themselves, including legalizing firearms for self defense in schools.

Rohrbough is of the opinion that the killers' accomplice who legally bought the guns for the killers had advance knowledge of the crime. According to her, she told the killers when she gave them the guns, "You're not going to do anything stupid, are you?" She was not prosecuted for transferring firearms to persons ineligible to own them. Rohrbough suspects that she was not prosecuted because she played the politically correct game of testifying that if there had been a gun show background check she never would have bought the guns.

One good thing that has resulted from the revelations of official misconduct was the defeat of the Sheriff in the next election.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/30/05:

we all should be concerned with law enforcement does not do its job.

But this is not really uncommom.

Even here, I called the police about someone trying to poison my dog twice and then they finally shot him.

One officer came out and wrote a few things down, the investigator never ever came out to see us. They refused to even list it as a racially inspired crime ( because it caused more paper work and had to be reported specifcially to the state)

We had seven buildings in town burnt this year ( in one night) they found a mentally handicaped black man ( who would have confessed to killing Kennedy) and got him to confess. Ya, one man startng two or three fires per building in 7 seperate buildings all in about 15 or 20 minutes or less.
Not sure how he hid his super powers to travel that fast.

But poor law enforcement or coverup in todays legal liablity and sue crazy world is more the norm than the practice.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

curious98 asked on 10/30/05 - Ciagate?

Are we going ahead to a new Watergate?

Please check the following webs:


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/30/05:

What do you think, time for Bush just to fire all of his staff and hire new ones.

In the time he has left, most likely they would not be able to dig us too much dirt on the new hires

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
curious98 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 10/30/05 - JUST WONDERING ...

What's your favorite thing about yourself? Your smile? Your sense of humor? Your approach to your religion? What is it?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/30/05:

my modesty, so I can't tell you how good looking I am, how wonderful my personality is, or even what a forceful presence I make.

It is a good thing I am so modest or I may go on and on for hours on just how great I am

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/29/05 - "All Hallo''s Eve" comes with nary a shiver

Does anything about "All Hallows' Eve" make you shiver?

( © 1995-2002 by Jerry Wilson)

Halloween is an annual celebration, but just what is it actually a celebration of? And how did this peculiar custom originate? Is it, as some claim, a kind of demon worship? Or is it just a harmless vestige of some ancient pagan ritual?

The word itself, "Halloween," actually has its origins in the Catholic Church. It comes from a contracted corruption of All Hallows Eve. November 1, "All Hollows Day" (or "All Saints Day"), is a Catholic day of observance in honor of saints. But, in the 5th century BC, in Celtic Ireland, summer officially ended on October 31. The holiday was called Samhain (sow-en), the Celtic New year.

One story says that, on that day, the disembodied spirits of all those who had died throughout the preceding year would come back in search of living bodies to possess for the next year. It was believed to be their only hope for the afterlife. The Celts believed all laws of space and time were suspended during this time, allowing the spirit world to intermingle with the living.

Naturally, the still-living did not want to be possessed. So on the night of October 31, villagers would extinguish the fires in their homes, to make them cold and undesirable. They would then dress up in all manner of ghoulish costumes and noisily paraded around the neighborhood, being as destructive as possible in order to frighten away spirits looking for bodies to possess.

Probably a better explanation of why the Celts extinguished their fires was not to discourage spirit possession, but so that all the Celtic tribes could relight their fires from a common source, the Druidic fire that was kept burning in the Middle of Ireland, at Usinach.

Some accounts tell of how the Celts would burn someone at the stake who was thought to have already been possessed, as sort of a lesson to the spirits. Other accounts of Celtic history debunk these stories as myth.

The Romans adopted the Celtic practices as their own. But in the first century AD, Samhain was assimilated into celebrations of some of the other Roman traditions that took place in October, such as their day to honor Pomona, the Roman goddess of fruit and trees. The symbol of Pomona is the apple, which might explain the origin of our modern tradition of bobbing for apples on Halloween.

The thrust of the practices also changed over time to become more ritualized. As belief in spirit possession waned, the practice of dressing up like hobgoblins, ghosts, and witches took on a more ceremonial role.

The custom of Halloween was brought to America in the 1840's by Irish immigrants fleeing their country's potato famine. At that time, the favorite pranks in New England included tipping over outhouses and unhinging fence gates.

The custom of trick-or-treating is thought to have originated not with the Irish Celts, but with a ninth-century European custom called souling. On November 2, All Souls Day, early Christians would walk from village to village begging for "soul cakes," made out of square pieces of bread with currants. The more soul cakes the beggars would receive, the more prayers they would promise to say on behalf of the dead relatives of the donors. At the time, it was believed that the dead remained in limbo for a time after death, and that prayer, even by strangers, could expedite a soul's passage to heaven.

The Jack-o-lantern custom probably comes from Irish folklore. As the tale is told, a man named Jack, who was notorious as a drunkard and trickster, tricked Satan into climbing a tree. Jack then carved an image of a cross in the tree's trunk, trapping the devil up the tree. Jack made a deal with the devil that, if he would never tempt him again, he would promise to let him down the tree.

According to the folk tale, after Jack died, he was denied entrance to Heaven because of his evil ways, but he was also denied access to Hell because he had tricked the devil. Instead, the devil gave him a single ember to light his way through the frigid darkness. The ember was placed inside a hollowed-out turnip to keep it glowing longer.

The Irish used turnips as their "Jack's lanterns" originally. But when the immigrants came to America, they found that pumpkins were far more plentiful than turnips. So the Jack-O-Lantern in America was a hollowed-out pumpkin, lit with an ember.

So, although some cults may have adopted Halloween as their favorite "holiday," the day itself did not grow out of evil practices. It grew out of the rituals of Celts celebrating a new year, and out of Medieval prayer rituals of Europeans. And today, even many churches have Halloween parties or pumpkin carving events for the kids. After all, the day itself is only as evil as one cares to make it.

© 1995-2002 by Jerry Wilson; Get Permission to Reprint this article.

References: Charles Panati, Extraordinary Origins of Everyday Things, 1987; and Dr. Joseph Gahagan, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Personal letter, 1997

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/29/05:

It is a holiday where we bow honor to the holy retail store ( normally walmart) and the staints of the cash register.

We buy costumes for our kids that normally only get used once or twice before they are torn up.

We buy tons of candy and eat ourself sick latter.

The only purpose the holiday has any longer is the honor of retail.

But it is also a time where families actually do things togehter, Dads will actually come home early to be with the family and tells them all sorts of stories about how it used to be.

The only religion this holiday is based on is the dollar.

Personal opinion anyway

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Pete_Hanysz rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 10/29/05 - Iranians - I don't like 'em

Hello Christians:

I'm a Jew. I think Iran ought to be wiped out. It's a blot on the map. This time, Israel should drop the big one. Screw those Arabs, or Persians or whatever the fk they call themselves.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/29/05:

I don't really trust cat lovers myself, what do you think we can do to them?

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Pete_Hanysz rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/28/05 - Are we in safe hands?

An ultra-nationalistic leader who believes god is telling him to make war ... does that remind you of various tyrants from around the world throughout history?

President George W. Bush told Palestinian ministers that God had told him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq - and create a Palestinian State, a new BBC series reveals.

In Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, a major three-part series on BBC TWO, Abu Mazen, Palestinian Prime Minister, and Nabil Shaath, his Foreign Minister, describe their first meeting with President Bush in June 2003.

Nabil Shaath says:

"President Bush said to all of us:

'I'm driven with a mission from God.

God would tell me,

"George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan."

And I did, and then God would tell me,

"George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq and I did.

And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me,

"Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East."

And by God I'm gonna do it.'"


Are we in safe hands?

(BTW, God told me to ask this question)

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/28/05:

I don't know any politician I would trust in that position.

Just the ability to get to that office means that there are too many promises and too many deals that have to be taken care of.

If you are not already rich and powerful you can't even run.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 10/28/05 - jUST RECIEVED THIS AND IT DISGUSTED ME!

A poem which praises the murder of Jews by the Nazis has been included in a book of children’s poetry to be distributed amongst schools in the UK.

The publication, entitled Great Minds, features the work of school children aged 11 to 18 who won a nationwide literary competition.

But one poem has generated outrage amongst Jewish groups, politicians and Holocaust charities for its anti-Semitic content.

The entry by the 14-year-old Gideon Taylor is apparently written from the viewpoint of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler.

It includes the lines “Jews are here, Jews are there, Jews are almost everywhere, filling up the darkest places, evil looks upon their faces.”

Another part reads: “Make them take many paces for being one of the worst races, on their way to a gas chamber, where they will sleep in their manger… I’ll be happy Jews have died.”

Publisher defends poem

The book was produced by Forward Press who ran the Great Minds competition through its website.

Wining entries were rewarded with cash prizes of up to 20ukp for pupils and 1,000ukp for schools.

According to the Jewish Telegraph newspaper, the poem was the only entry in the entire book not to include the writer’s school or location.

Young Writers editor Steve Twelvetree, who also edited the book, said the poem was included as it illustrated how the writer was able to empathise with the infamous Nazi Fuehrer.

Make them take many paces for being one of the worst races, on their way to a gas chamber, where they will sleep in their manger… I’ll be happy Jews have died
The poem reads
Twelvetree told the Telegraph: “From Gideon’s poem and my knowledge of the National Curriculum Key Stage 3 his poem shows a good use of technical writing and he has written his poem from the perspective of Adolf Hitler.”

The editor continued: “Key Stage 3 history requires pupils to show knowledge and understanding of events and places - to show historical interpretation and to explain significance of events, people and places, all of which World War II and the Holocaust is part of.

“The poem clearly states ‘I am Adolf Hitler’ and it recounts a historical fact, something Young Writers and Forward Press are not willing to censor.”

Widespread outrage

However, communal leaders were less than impressed with the poem’s inclusion in a book which they said could be influential on youngsters’ views of Jewish people.

It is totally insensitive and inappropriate for this kind of hatred to appear

spokesman for the Holocaust Educational Trust
Chief executive of the Board of Deputies of British Jews Jon Benjamin said: “It is the duty of the publisher to consider the consequences of the poem.”

Jewish Labour MP, Louise Ellman, who represents the constituency of Liverpool Riverside, spoke of her concern.

She said: “It’s an incitement to racial hatred. The words are absolutely outrageous and appalling.”

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/28/05:

Welcome to the world of personal freedom and freedom of speach.

Groups like the KKK and the Arian nation push those rights to the limit here in the US.

Liberal groups use it to put homosexual agenda in children books that are put into our school system.(US)

But where and who gets to decide what is allowed and what is not???

Personally I wish it was me, then life would be easy.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
JesseJamesDupree rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 10/28/05 - Joke of the day

Rabbi in the Catholic Hospital

Rabbi Levy had to spend time in a Catholic hospital. He became friends with the Sister who was a nurse there. One day, she came into his room and noticed that the crucifix on the wall was missing.She asked him good-naturedly, "Rabbi, what have you done with the crucifix?"

"Oh, sister," chuckled Rabbi Levy, "I just figured one suffering Jew in this room was enough."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/28/05:

still laughing

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 10/27/05 - Should Christians and other law abiding citizens be disarmed?

Be sure to read abour Australia....
Gun History Lesson

Gun Control = Food for Thought............................ Whether you agree or not, it's an interesting lesson in history. Something to think about... In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. >From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938. From 1939 to
1945, 13 million Jews and others, who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to
1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to
1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to
1977, one million "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australian taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent. Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent. Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent. (yes, 44 percent!)

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that, while the law-abiding citizens turned their guns in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!)

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY.

Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns."

The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear our president, governors or other politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans.....before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are citizens. Without them, we are subjects.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/28/05:

Yes, I have used Germany for an example of liberism gone bad many times.

They put in many,many social programs, took away the guns, and made everyone safe and secure

That is safe from everyone but the government. We know what happened next.

Also if you ever noticed, if someone is shot, the news will say, GUN kills .....

The wild random guns running around the streets all by thierself are to blame I guess.

You don't hear, ..... shot by unknown person, but the gun is blamed.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
JesseJamesDupree rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 10/27/05 - All Hollow's Eve - The eve before All Saints Day -is it the night of Mars?

Taka a look see at this NASA site.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/28/05:

I still think that the Bush mask at the store is still the scarist

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ATON2 asked on 10/27/05 - Back to basics!

Time for a change...not a joke, not an anti-Muslim diatribe, not a political provocation, but an HONEST TO GOD Biblical question!!!!!

Matthew is the only one of the four Evangelists who mentions the horrific fable of Herod ordering the massacre of all male children under the age of two, in order to insure the death of Jesus. The fact that this is not mentioned by any of the other Gospel writers nor, indeed, any other contemporary source is troubling enough. It's certainly not as though a massacre of male children was an everyday occurance.
But my question has to do with a popular "escapee". How did John the Baptist, who was also under two years of age at the time of the supposed massacre, escape the massacre???? We have no record of any angel warning HIS parents to flee into Egypt. And there is no account of ANYONE escaping Herods massacre, for we are told that 'there was heard, in Ramah, sobbing and loud lamentation..Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled because they were no more.' That bespeaks a very wide-spred massacre. And it also seems illogical to assume that since Jesus was the target, any of his relatives would NOT have been at the head of the 'hit' list.
So I repeat: How could John have escaped..and why would such a 'miracle' fail to be recorded...IF it actually happened. Is it not more probable that the story was a fable, concocted by the author of Matthew to make Jesus the NEW Moses, who also escaped death at the hands of a tyrannical ruler....Is it not the exact same scenario....a despotic tyrant fears that a male child will grow to supplant him, and thus orders the death of all male children??? I await your responses with baited breath (whatever THAT means).

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

He was not in Bethlehem. It was not all of the Hewbrew nation that had the children killed but only the area of Bethlehem.
The event is also listed in Pagan writings along with Christian.

Matthew listed it since he was writting to show that Christ did follow the prophecy of Christ. It would have really been no need for it.

So how did it hapapen? same way as my house was not hurt in the hurricane, I was not in New Orleans at the time

The Massacre of the Innocents is the name given to the infanticide in Bethlehem, according to the Gospel of Matthew 2:16–18:

"When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: “A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.” — New International Version.
On hearing the Magi ask for "He that is born King of the Jews", Herod, the Roman client-king in Judea, felt his throne was in jeopardy. He ordered the murder of all male children in Bethlehem under the age of two, to be secure. However, Joseph, Mary and Jesus had fled to Egypt after they had been warned by an angel, the theme of the "Flight into Egypt."

Though many readers follow the author of Matthew in identifying a prophetic allusion from Jeremiah 31:15, others see this episode as expressly crafted for the purpose of recording apparently fulfilled prophecy. The Massacre of the Innocents is not mentioned in the other gospels nor in the early apocrypha. Nor is the episode mentioned by Josephus, who among other atrocities, records Herod's execution of two of his sons by his wife Marianme because he believed they posed a threat. (The Jewish War (I.535–7) and Jewish Antiquities (16.121–7, 356). The episode was notorious and displeased Herod's patrons in Rome.

The execution of the two sons, who Josephus describes as the “young men,” has been represented by Robert Eisenman as the original that inspired the account in Matthew: "Here Herod really did kill all the Jewish children who sought to replace him, as Matthew 2:17 would have it, but these were rather his own children with Maccabean blood." (Eisenman 1997 p. 49). Other scholars, however, note that Herod’s murder of the “young men” reveals the deep-seated suspicion and jealousy that Matthew portrays as Herod’s motivation for the Massacre of the Innocents and therefore renders the account “historically plausible.” (Witherington 2001 p. 71). Josephus records several examples of Herod’s willingness to commit such acts to protect his power against perceived threats, but suggests that not all such acts were recorded, as he summarizes that Herod “never stopped avenging and punishing everyday those who had chosen to be of the party of his enemies.” Antiquities 15.2.

The earliest pagan reference to the Massacre of the Innocents is by Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius, a pagan philosopher of the 4th century. The reference is found in Macrobius’ The Sacturnalia:

When [Augustus] heard that Herod king of the Jews had ordered all the boys in Syria under the age of two years to be put to death and that the king's son was among those killed, he said, "I'd rather be Herod's pig than Herod’s son."
Macrobius, The Sacturnalia, trans. Percival Davies (New York 1969), page 171.

Unlike Matthew, Macrobius places the massacre in Syria and combines it with the separate killing of one of Herod's sons. Because of Macrobius’ conflation of two different accounts and the fact that he shows no other signs of dependence on Matthew, New Testament scholar Paul Barnet has posited that Macrobius was relying on an independent source. (Barnett 1993 p. 103). However, given the popularity of Matthew among Christians, the spread of Christianity by that time, and the late date in which Macrobius wrote, Raymond E. Brown and other scholars conclude that Macrobius' reference is derivative of the Matthean account, though not directly dependent on it. [1]

If the event is historical, given the small size of "Bethlehem and its vicinity," it did not involve a large number of boys age two and under. Albright estimates the area had about 300 people at the time. Brown estimates that the population was no more than a thousand. Given the birth rate and high infant mortality rate of the time, either of these figures would mean at most only a few dozen children killed.[2] This would not have been a particularly large atrocity for the period in general and Herod in particular and thus might have escaped mention by Josephus and others.

The early churches had much higher estimates for the number killed. The Byzantine liturgy had 14,000 Holy Innocents and an early Syrian list of saints states that there were 64,000. Modern scholars consider these numbers implausible.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

curious98 asked on 10/26/05 - Rosa Parks

Nearly 50 years ago, Rosa Parks, an African-American, made a simple decision that inspired a revolution. While riding in the front of a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama, a white man demanded she give up her seat.

Rosa Parks
Rosa Parks said no. "I didn't want to. I didn't think I should have to. I didn't feel that it was the right thing for us to be enduring."

Parks was arrested, tried and found guilty of violating local segregation laws.

Her arrest triggered a 381day boycott of the city bus system by the black community, who were the largest users, after all.

That boycott ended after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the city's segregated busing policy was illegal and set off a chain of events that led to the end of legalized segregation in the United States.

Rosa Parks became known as the mother of the civil rights movement and continued her fight for equality on the national stage.

After all this time, would you claim the problem does NO LONGER exist?

Honest comments, only, please


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

I too had the honor of knowing her ( well at least meeting her, I did body guard for many people when they visited Atlanta some time ago)

She was a wonderful lady who merley though the way she carried herself was a lady in every way.

I beleive she was truely loved by many white or black in those early days which caused alot or sparked that final straw that was needed to begin the movement.

Dr King was also a person who really loved people and truely beleived in what he was doing. He wanted just equal rights, and the chance for blacks to better thierself.

I had many chances to meet Mrs King and one could get the feel how important his work was.

curious98 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 10/26/05 - why????

I have been comming here since the failure of ask me and have thoroughly enjoyed my every visit ,sure there are folks on here who dissagree with me on many subject s thats part of what i like its the diversity that keeps the sight interesting! however I have been noticing of late thAT newer members seem to do nothing other than desire to change everything from the rating system to the way questions can be answered,what I ask is why???this site has given me and I know others some degree of pleasure or we wouldnt keep logging in I have made many friends, and a few not so friendly ( I live alone and its the closest to company that i get many days)so my question is and always was if it aint broke so why do folks keep wanting to fix it???
I dont for sure know how long answerway has been up and running but I myself have been coming here a while why cant we just leave well enough alone!Its just fine the waY IT IS!it was this way when they came here if they dont like it no one has a gun to the head for them to return,
Loving answerway just as it is

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

It has been a long time since hasn't it.

How the years and time go by.

What I miss is the 100's and sometimes 1000's of people that used to read my answwers each month. Not that our small group that hangs out here are not ok, but we get so view visitors and new people.

But if you remember, people never liked and tried to cheat the askme site all the time also. I would say some of them most likley here also,

In general who really cares about ratings,

At askme, at least for a while, I would get a T-shirt and even some money if my ratings were hight enough, but beyond that, ratings had little value.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

curious98 asked on 10/26/05 - How many more?

How many more, yet?

"Oct. 26, 2005 — Staff Sgt. George T. Alexander Jr. had promised his 8-year-old son and 6-year-old daughter that he would be coming home to Killeen, Texas, just after Christmas.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon announced that Alexander died Saturday in San Antonio of wounds suffered Oct. 17 in a blast in Samarra, 60 miles north of the Iraqi capital. The American death toll in the Iraq war has reached 2,000"

Courtesy of ABC News.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

Any death is too many, but then at times we have to fight for freedom. What is not listed is the death toll of the innocent civilians in Iraq that were killed before by a evil government. And how many died for this freedom.

We still have troops in Germany, how long has that been

We still have troops in Korea, how long has that been

I wish everyone that stood so hard against the war would do so against all the other deaths, abortion, drugs and abuse of the elderly.

The war number is almost nothing compared to these numbers but why are voices not crying for these to end. Yes some voices, but not many

curious98 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 10/26/05 - Wisdom

Just thought I would share this

25 Phrases Of Wisdom

1. If you're too open minded, your brains will fall out.

2. Age is a very high price to pay for maturity.

3. Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than going to a garage makes you a mechanic.

4. Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

5. If you must choose between two evils, pick the one you've never tried before.

6. My idea of housework is to sweep the room with a glance.

7. Not one shred of evidence supports the notion that life is serious.

8. It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.

9. For every action, there is an equal and opposite government program.

10. If you look like your passport picture, you probably need the trip.

11. Bills travel through the mail at twice the speed of checks.

12. A conscience is what hurts when all your other parts feel so good.

13. Eat well, stay fit, die anyway.

14. Men are from earth. Women are from earth. Deal with it.

15. No husband has ever been shot while doing the dishes.

16. A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand.

17. Middle age is when broadness of the mind and narrowness of the waist change places.

18. Opportunities always look bigger going than coming.

19. Junk is something you've kept for years and throw away three weeks before you need it.

20. There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.

21. Experience is a wonderful thing. It enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again.

22. By the time you can make ends meet, they move the ends.

23. Thou shalt not weigh more than thy refrigerator.

24. Someone who thinks logically provides a nice contrast to the real world.

AND . . . (drum roll please?)

25. Blessed are they who can laugh at themselves for they shall never cease to be amused.

now I think I can relate to everyone of these, how about you?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

5. If you must choose between two evils, pick the one you've never tried before.

Reminds me of most of the elections I have voted in lately.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/27/05 - What is the measure of Christianity? Is it Thinking, Saying, or Doing.

1 John 3:16-18

"Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

But whose hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth."

Your thoughts on the question are welcome.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

None of the above,

The measure of Christianity is in belief, thus it is really not able to be measured by others.

I guess one would say beleif is thinking, but many think about it, but never beleive

Far too many talk about it, but do not understand or beleive. And there are the majority that do, pretend, act or do the actions with little or no beleif.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 10/27/05 - Europeans Not Fans of Halloween

Cut and Paste from Yahoo News

By WILLIAM J. KOLE, Associated Press Writer Wed Oct 26, 4:20 PM ET

VIENNA, Austria - "It's almost Halloween — and all those ghosts, goblins, tricks and treats are giving Hans Kohler the creeps. So the mayor of Rankweil, a town near the border with Switzerland, has launched a one-man campaign disparaging Halloween as a "bad American habit" and urging families to skip it this year.

"It's an American custom that's got nothing to do with our culture," Kohler wrote in letters sent out to households. By midweek, the mayors of eight neighboring villages had thrown their support behind the boycott. So had local police, annoyed with the annual Oct. 31 uptick in vandalism and mischief.

Although Halloween has become increasingly popular across Europe — complete with carved pumpkins, witches on broomsticks, makeshift houses of horror and costumed children rushing door to door for candy — it's begun to breed a backlash.

Critics see it as the epitome of crass, U.S.-style commercialism. Clerics and conservatives contend it clashes with the spirit of traditional Nov. 1 All Saints' Day remembrances.

And it's got purists in countries struggling to retain a sense of uniqueness in Europe's ever-enlarging melting pot grimacing like Jack o' Lanterns.

Halloween "undermines our cultural identity," complained the Rev. Giordano Frosini, a Roman Catholic theologian who serves as vicar-general in the Diocese of Pistoia near Florence, Italy.

Frosini denounced the holiday as a "manifestation of neo-paganism" and an expression of American cultural supremacy. "Pumpkins show their emptiness," he said.

To be sure, Halloween is big business in Europe.

Germans alone spend nearly $170 million, on Halloween costumes, sweets, decorations and parties. The holiday has become increasingly popular in Romania, home to the Dracula myth, where discotheques throw parties with bat and vampire themes.

In Britain, where Halloween celebrations rival those in the United States, it's the most lucrative day of the year for costume and party retailers.

"Without Halloween, I don't think we could exist, to be honest," said Pendra Maisuria, owner of Escapade, a London costume shop that rakes in 30 percent of its annual sales in the run-up to Oct. 31. Metropolitan Police, meanwhile, haven't logged any significant increase in crime.

But not everyone takes such a carefree approach toward the surge in trick-or-treating — "giving something sweet or getting something sour," as it's called in German.

In Austria, where many families get a government child allowance, "parents who abuse it to buy Halloween plunder for their kids should be forced to pay back the aid," grumbled Othmar Berbig, an Austrian who backs the small but strident boycott movement.

In Sweden, even as Halloween's popularity has increased, so have views of the holiday as an "unnecessary, bad American custom," said Bodil Nildin-Wall, an expert at the Language and Folklore Institute in Uppsala.

Italy's Papaboys, a group of pope devotees who include some of the young Catholics who cheer wildly at
Vatican events, have urged Christians not to take part in what they consider "a party in honor of Satan and hell," and plan to stage prayer vigils nationwide that night.

Don't take it all so seriously, counters Gerald Faschingeder, who heads a Roman Catholic youth alliance in Austria. He sees nothing particularly evil about glow-in-the-dark skeletons, plastic fangs, fake blood, rubber tarantulas or latex scars.

"It's a chance for girls and boys to disguise themselves and have some fun away from loud and demanding adults," Faschingeder said. "For one evening, at least, kids can feel more powerful than grown-ups."


I'm lazy, make up your own question and answer it.
That is, if you wish. :):):)

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

Not a real Halloween expert, but did not we ( that is the USA) get all of the Halloween practice basicly from traditions of other nations. We then formed them into one and then of course perverted them into a celebration.

And of course it is merley commercial now, if candy makers, costume makers, retailers did not make money, the holiday would soon die away.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 10/27/05 - CATCH 22:

Guys and dolls, my brain is trying to combine REALITY with CHRISTIAN thinking. How can I be a REALIST and a CHRISTIAN at the same time? Twenty stars to the person who makes the most sense!


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

One has to view Christianity as the true reality.

If we view the worlds view point as what is true, then it will never work.

If you view the world and most of its teachings as lies and deception, it is easy to see Christ and Chrsitianity as the only real truth.

ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Itsdb asked on 10/27/05 - Funeral protests?

Just heard on the radio this morning that the "God hates fags" church is planning a protest at two funerals of local soldiers killed in Iraq - one here in Amarillo and one in Dimmit just south of here.

The premise is "God Himself has now become America's terrorist, killing Americans in strange lands" because "they turned America over to fags; they're coming home in body bags." Original pdf document here.

This is just vile and despicable, how can any "Christian" protest a funeral in the first place? (I'm sure you'll tell me, Aton :) What should we do, if anything, about the Fred Phelps' of this world, masquerading as Christians, spreading pure hatred, making a mockery of Jesus and the church?



P.S. DK, care to meet me in Dimmit to stand with the bikers that are planning to be security at the funerals?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

While I don't beleive he is doing it yet,

It is very bibical that God uses enemies of a nation to destroy it if and when people turn thier back on him.

And the US has indeed turned its back on God.

Itsdb rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/27/05 - How savage are right wing conservative Christians?

They must be a fierce lot if they can back down the President of the USA, and if he will retreat before them rather than face them and tell them that he is right and they are wrong.

I asked before and I will ask again, just WHO IS running the country?

The ultra-Conservatives were afraid that Miers might go liberal (= fair and just) once she sat on the bench, and not be Bush's poodle on the SC.

What power these faceless men hold in their grasp!

Does the buck stop at the pulpit of some hard liner right wing preacher.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/27/05:

The president went back on his campain promise and was called on it.

The court needs judges that will stand up for what the constitution really says and not re-write it like too many of the liberal judges wish to do.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/25/05 - The threat .....

Do you consider the theat that "some folks" might be getting black stars from now on a terrorist threat, and, if so, what precautions should be taken to keep us all safe?

All answers get ***** because that's the kind of guy I am.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/26/05:

Yes, the act to destroy proper rating on this site will directly influence the stock market, the price of oil.

We all know that world leaders all check this stie daily to see how different experts believe and respond to different issues.

The control of this board by terroist groups can lead to the down fall of the world as we know it.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 10/25/05 - The founder of American Conservatism speaks once more here.

Russlell Kirk (1918 – 1994) is noted as to be the founded of the American of conservative movement.
This was his view way back then in the 1950s.
"Avarice has been the exacting passion of society for more than a century. In every age, for that matter, avarice -- like the other deadly sins -- is incalculably powerful; but societies governed by moral tradition always have endeavored to keep this vice under... Our modern time, however, has seen the relaxation of nearly every curb upon avarice. Avarice, naked or veiled, now is popularly acclaimed a virtue. Established interests honor avarice; and so do aspiring talents... And I am inclined to think that the Age of Gluttony, with its burlesque of Christian morality for sanction, would open the way, after a brief interval, to Amargeddon. One lust is never gratified, and that is the lust for power."
He defines a conservative thus:
"[C]onservatism begins with the premise that we must be obedient to a transcendent order which has given us natural law. And the nature of man being flawed, the evil part of his nature, lusting after power and aggrandizement, envious and violent, must be restrained by custom, authority, and a balanced government which checks power with power. This conversvatism holds that a man finds his happiness in fulfilment of his duties, in purposeful work, and in being part of a community and a great continuity, rather than in the satisfaction of every material desire." -- Russell Kirk, "Beyond Dreams of Avarice

1. Do you think that the Republican Party is as Kirk described?
2. Is G.D. Bush?
PLEASE Just answer the questions as asked.
Peace and kindness,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/26/05:

actually the conservitite party started years and years ago, but it was the Democratic party. They actually represented the commom man, the bible belt Christian. They stood for christian values, the working man and all the things great with America.

That is why so many older people, who really don't keep involved still vote that way.

When they became the liberal party for all sorts of special interet groups exactly I am not sure.

It is merley a part "at least pretending" to beleive in certain values to get votes.
The votes are there, some politic part will say what is needed to get those votes.

I am not sure that as a party any of them actually will stand firm behind any stong beleif.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 10/23/05 - will you oppose the new Nazi threat?

Nazi racoons on the march

From correspondents in Berlin

October 24, 2005

GERMANY is battling a new threat - "Nazi" raccoons that are ruining the country's wine harvest half a century after Hermann Goering introduced them, saying they would "enrich" the local wildlife.
Goering ordered the creatures released into the German countryside in 1934.

Since then, they have spread through central Europe because they have no natural predators there. They are now destroying Germany's grape harvest.

"Raccoons wiped out almost the entire harvest in a matter of days," said Werner Kothe, who operates a vineyard in the Brandenburg region.

The situation has become so serious in Brandenburg that officials have hired bounty hunters to cull raccoons.

Scientists estimate there may be more than a million in Germany, and say they are spreading to neighbouring countries at an alarming rate.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/23/05:

One must first be sure they do not have civil rights so we cannot violate them.

Paid to hunt?? that is a southerns dream come true.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/23/05 - Well, that stopped the clock, but, now for a serious question ...

As a Christian or any kind of believer, "Do you believe that your first duty is to your God or to the President/ruler of your nation, and what do you do if you truly believe that your President/ruler is not doing God's will in something? Who do you choose - God or the President/ruler"

Please - no lists of names!

The witch hunt is temporarily on hold.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/23/05:

Our first duty is to love our God above all.

The ruler of the nation is free to do as he wills, we hope he will follow the Lord in his work. But we are not promised a Christian nation, only that we must follow and beleive in Christ no matter what type of nation we live in.

In our nation we have more of a choice, to vote, lobby and other ways of showing the leader our wishes.

but it is not so in many nations,In out nation we have more rights to show and tell our displeasure.

But in the end, we have to follow God's word no matter what happens to us under the law of the land we live in.

example is all the Christians killed for thier faith.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 10/23/05 - BELIEVERS:

How do believers combat boredom, loneliness and helplessness?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/23/05:

Well at a high level of faith, one does not normally have any of those feelings.

for those having those feelings,
helping others, you are no longer bored, since you have something to do,
You are not alone any longer,

and you are now helping others.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 10/21/05 - Why do people do what they do?

Hello Everyone,
How are you all doing? I am really sad because I saw this on the news about a women named Lashaun Harris, who is 23 years old, in San Francisco, who took off her children’s clothing and tossed their naked bodies in the San Francisco bay. They were three boys, were Taronta 2, Treshaun 6 and Josha 16 monthes old. They were able to recover the bodies of the older two but the 16 month old Joshua was not recovered as of yet. The mother of these children was to protect them and love them. How could a mother do such a terrible thing so as to fling them into a cold, dark waters of the bay and –still live herself? Those poor babies. I am not a person who seeks to find revenge but I certainly am fighting what my heart feels.
What could make anyone do such a horrific thing, especially a mother who gives birth to such a precious gift of life?

Take care,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/22/05:

Sadly our society and culture has little value on life any longer.

Unless it is soldiers trying to protect us.
Then they don't want anyone killed.

But if people actually valued life, abortion would never had started and certainly not become expected as a right of society.

hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

bucker asked on 10/20/05 - I have a question. We, who are Christians, and also Americans.

Why do we as Americans, and also Christians, tolorate people who put down everything America does? They look for everything bad they can find to bash our men and women who are fighting for us. Trying to win a conflict, which has been going on for years. Have you thought about the reason behind this? I say that they are tying to turn the American people against our Government, against our leaders, it would not matter if they were Democrats or Republicans, and against our fighting men and women. This divides a country, and this is what they want. As an American, I know that there are some good things about our country. But I never hear these people say one single good thing about America. We must ask ourselves, why do I listen to these people, when I know that they only want to hurt me. These are not our friends! These are our enemies,
But the worst kind. They are sneaky. They use fine words, enticing words, and confusing words. They will play one of us against the other. They will play up to one, and make them think they are on their side. Then they will use them to bash another. Somewhere down the line, it will be you getting bashed. This whole thing is to divide, and conquer. If they can keep Americans fighting among ourselves, then we become an easy target. Remember what President Lincoln said, United we stand, divided we fall. Let us never for get this.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/22/05:

While I do support the war effort,

What was not considered is they way people over there fight and the way they believe.

You can not in a few years change peoples thinking. It will take several generations, and even then it will not change completely.

Here in the US for example there are still large groups of whites that do not like blacks, and large groups of blacks that do not like whites.

But we normally follow expected laws and don't bomb, shoot and kill the ones we don't like. In thier society, that is not allowed the norm but almost expected to kill those who have done dishonor to you, your religion or your family.

Plus we still have troops in Germany, they never left after WWII, we still have troups in Korea, they never left. We only left Viet Nam because we were not allowed to fight a real war but tried being police.

This is our same issue where we are at now.
We never won the war, only trying to arrest the bad guys.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/20/05 - Pat Robertson says ...

You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing.

Nonsense, I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist.

I can love the people who hold false opinions but I don't have to be nice to them.

-Pat Robertson


Why is he right or wrong?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/20/05:

We don't have to accept thier teachings

We don't have to be politicly correct and accepting thier teachings as truth.

They have in general twisted the word of God and in reality are worst than those religions that don't even teach Chrsit, since they allow believers to think they are doing the word of Christ but are in general teaching the ways of Satan.

at least in other religions there is no Christ and one can teach them about Christ.
With these groups it is hard to make them understand they have accepted the wrong teachings of Christ

They can get saved members, but it is in spite of thier relgion

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 10/19/05 - You have got to be joking?

US House passes 'cheeseburger' bill
October 20, 2005 - 5:44AM

The US House of Representatives has easily passed the so-called "cheeseburger bill" that would block lawsuits blaming the food industry for making people fat.

The Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act passed on a bipartisan 300 to 120 vote.

The House approved a similar bill last year but it died in the Senate and no Senate action is scheduled on companion legislation.

Leading business groups and the White House back the bill.

"Food manufacturers, marketers, distributors, advertisers and sellers should not be held liable for injury because a person's consumption of legal, unadulterated food is associated with the person's weight gain or obesity," The White House said in a statement.

The bill would block in state and federal courts what backers consider "frivolous lawsuits against the manufacturers, distributors or sellers of food or non-alcoholic beverage products" arising from obesity claims

It would not block civil lawsuits stemming from tainted food.

The bill comes amid growing awareness of the public health implications of the US obesity problem.

But supporters of the bill said obesity and overeating should be dealt with by doctors, exercise routines and personal responsibility, not by lawyers and courts.

Democratic critics said the bill was unnecessary, that courts were throwing out such lawsuits and state legislatures were drawing up their own rules to prevent cases.

The best-known case, filed by several teenagers against McDonald's, was thrown out of federal court.

© 2005 AAP

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

Sadly you and I all pay the price of thoe law suits that get thrown out still cost all sorts of attorney and court costs.

The fact the courts even allow people to file these cases are the real problem

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 10/19/05 - Cremating Taliban Story

ANDAHAR, Afghanistan, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- An Australian television station has shown U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan burning bodies of dead Taliban -- an act of desecration in the Islamic tradition.

The SBS network's Dateline show reported Wednesday that the troops then broadcast taunts about the desecration into a nearby village believed to shelter Taliban sympathizers.

Cremation is an act offensive to Muslims and a possible breach of the Geneva Conventions governing the treatment of enemy remains in wartime.

The U.S. military told the program that they burned the bodies for hygiene reasons, an explanation that its reporters doubted.

The Pentagon had no immediate comment.

The Dateline footage showed soldiers burning the bodies and a U.S. Army psychological operations unit broadcasting taunts about the act via loudspeaker into a nearby village believed to be sheltering Taliban and their sympathizers.

The village, Gonbaz in southern Afghanistan, is about 60 miles from the former Taliban stronghold of Kandahar.

According to a translation of the taunts, which were delivered in the local language, provided by U.S. forces at the scene, Taliban fighters thought hiding nearby were callec "cowardly dogs".

"You allowed your fighters to be laid down facing west and burned. You are too scared to retrieve their bodies. This just proves you are the lady boys we always believed you to be," the message said, according to a transcript of the program provided by SBS.

"We know who you are," the message continued, "Your time in Afghanistan is short. You attack and run away like women. You call yourself Talibs but you are a disgrace to the Muslim religion and you bring shame upon your family. Come and fight like men instead of the cowardly dogs you are."

Muslim funeral tradition requires that bodies be washed, prayed over, wrapped in white linen and buried, if possible within 24 hours. According to the Geneva Conventions the disposal of war dead "should be honorable, and, if possible, according to the rites of the religion to which the deceased belonged."

In May this year, inaccurate reports that U.S. jailers at its detention center at Guantanamo bay, Cuba, had desecrated a copy of the Koran by flushing it down the toilet were cited as a cause of rioting in Afghanistan and Pakistan that killed dozens of people.

Yeah, I didn't believe you Clete, but here is the story.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

They are the ones killing our troops, beheading inocent kidnapped people,
killing innocent Iraq people.

I guess my opinion is so what, who really cares, they are already dead.

They need to put down thier arms and follow the laws of thier own nation. They are nothing more than out law terrorist.

And do we really care what Muslim burial traditions are, they did not care about our people in the towers.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
LTgolf rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

JesseJamesDupree asked on 10/19/05 - Am I backslidden or Mature?

When I was first Saved, for the first year or two I ran around telling whoever would listen,(Even those that wouldn't) about how they ought to repent and accept Jesus Christ as their Savior, I still do occasionally but it seems I've tempered my approach the last year or so. I believe that each person needs to feel the need to repent, they don't need any help from me, cause Lord knows i am a sinner ONLY SAVED THROUGH GRACE. So basically I kind of let people alone, if they have a question they ask me, but basically I mind my own business. Every one where I work knows I'm a Christian and frankly I don't feel the need to be "Holier than Thou", so is this the mark of a backslider or a Maturing Christian? Inquiring minds want to know;)

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

Black sliden

The very mature will ask you to pray with them, or at least tell you about thier relationship. May not tell the other person what they should do, but tell them about how great the Lord is in your life.

JesseJamesDupree rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 10/19/05 - Are the Ten Commandments the basis for American Law?

One of the arguments most frequently given for the creation of Ten Commandments plaques, monuments, or displays on government property is that they are the foundation of American (or Western) law. Having the Ten Commandments displayed is thus supposed to be a way of acknowledging the roots of the US legal system. Is this really true?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

Yes, merely read the pre amble of the US and every state constitution.

The US was on its founding a Christian nation that gave the right to all other religions to meet ( although this was not actually completely true) during the war with England for our freedom the Church of England was out since they swore allegence to England.

Then the Mormons were not allowed for years

So in general the freedom of Religion as actually practiced by the founding fahters was either freedom from Chrsitianity or freedom to have any Christian religion.

The church operated all of the first schools, and all of the first colleges
(all Christian)

to this day Congress is still opened in prayer.

Even the Supreme court has the ten commandemnts shown in its halls.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Average Answer

arcura asked on 10/19/05 - 150 years supply of gas and oil awaites in USA the main land ground.

This from Agape Press....
Montana's governor says his state and many others have enough coal to meet the energy needs of the U.S. for the next 150 years or so. Brian Schweitzer is urging the federal government to put more resources into an 82-year-old process to convert coal into gasoline -- and he thinks it is a national security issue. Governor Schweitzer says he has had conversations with officials from the Department of Defense about what they think the next major conflict will be. Their conclusion, says the governor, is that it is going to be war about oil. "Every day, when you fill up your car with gasoline, a portion of that money makes it into the pockets of some of these dictators," Schweitzer says, "and those dictators are giving some of that money to these international terrorists to destroy our way of life." That causes the Montana chief executive to wonder: "Why would we continue to import oil from all of these rascals and crooks from around the world when we could look to our own resources?" Schweitzer claims it was those conversations with the DoD that led him to pursue clean coal technology, which converts coal directly to liquids. "They recognize the war that we're going to fight in the next generation is going to be a war about oil," he shares. "And all over the world we have folks we buy oil from who already are not our friends, who are already contributing to international terrorism to try to destroy our way of life." According to Schweitzer, his state contains about 30 percent of the nation's coal supply. He adds that countries like South Africa and Communist China are already converting coal to oil. [Chad Groening]

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

Not as long as the oil companies have thier way.

We have plenty of oil off shore and in Alaska also, but the enviormental people stop us from getting to it.

If we were to start mass strip mining in MN guess where the new save the owl or save the tree people would be at.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ROLCAM asked on 10/19/05 - A VERY VEXED QUESTION ??

Tony, an 82-year-old expatriate with advanced lung cancer, had an overweening desire to go home there to lay his bones to rest. Unfortunately, he developed secondary cancer in his throat which prevented him taking food by mouth. The question posed to his carers was whether to give this person artificial nutrition and hydration to enable him to achieve his last wish and travel to his native land. Would this procedure be considered as "ordinary and proportionate and as such morally obligatory" or would it be considered to be unnecessary interference with the normal process of dying?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

If he is still metally alert where he can give instructions, then the choice is his.

If not the choice is up to his guardian

He should be asked if that is what he wants.

ROLCAM rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 10/19/05 - how respecting are americans of muslims?

As one who is accused of having a problem with Muslims let me tell you that I don't have the same problems as the US military, who deliberately antagonise Muslims in Afganistan in order to provote them into fighting. I have just watched film of american soldiers deliberately facing a corpse to Mecca and burning it. Don't tell me I'm out of line again when you cannot put a leash on your military, and the analogy is accurate. You can expect riots again when the Muslims learn of this

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

While those in military will get upset with those that are trying to kill them, and perhaps would go past what you and I may consider proper.

Let people be always trying to kill you day and night and perhaps one would have a differnt outlook on things.

I have always wanted alot of those ACLU attorneys to spend time in IRAQ explaining thier rights to the Muslims. I wonder after 10 or 12 of them were killed helping they would be as loving and caring as they act.

But by and large Americans do not dislike Muslims, they dislike the enemy which happen to be Muslim.

The people we are helping, fighting beside is also Muslim.

It is not religon, it is merley a group using hate based on religion that is the problem. They want political and religious power and use violence to get that goal.

Most Muslims are not like that at all.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
drgade rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
kindj rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Lazlow rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

bucker asked on 10/18/05 - Good or bad?

How does and atheist know what is good or bad? On what do they base it..

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

Either by society norms, or by what makes them happy

There is no abosulte right or wrong, it is merley subjective to thier beleifs.

( my opinon of them anywayO

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 10/18/05 - Posting the Ten Commandments.........................

Please help me understand this. Why would the Commandments be posted in a U.S. government building? What is the message? What is the intent?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/19/05:

They are the foundation of what the US legal system is based on.

They are the moral fiber that keeps the nation running in the correct direction

All of our constitution of the US and all the states were written with the understanding it was the faith in God that allowed us to exist.

And in the end, they need to be taught, so that perhaps society will see the error in many of its actions

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ATON2 asked on 10/18/05 - "Not in Florida and Not in my State"!!!

For those of you who are as appalled as I over the new Shoot First Law in Florida, there is something you can do. Log on to www.ShootFirstLaw.Org and sign the petition to Jeb Bush to correct his horrendous mistake. "Tell Governor Bush he made a mistake. The people of Florida deserve better than to be gunned down by the short-tempered and trigger happy. They deserve better than to have the law put into the hands of private citizens."
The danger is that this criminally negligent law will not stop in Florida but will become, in today's climate of 'fear and loathing'...the law of the land.
America will become an armed camp of 'vigilantes' shooting at anything that moves....and that could include YOU!!!!! Stop the cowboys, NOW!!!!!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/18/05:

And to all of those that think this is the best thing Fla has done in years, email the Gov and tell him thanks for making the state safer for law abiding people.

Now perhaps a few criminals will be scared for a change

ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 10/18/05 - Just for Fun

Ananova(UK on line tabloid):

**David Copperfield to 'magic' girl pregnant**

"David Copperfield says he plans to impregnate a girl on stage - without even touching her.

Speaking to German magazine Galore, the illusionist rejected the theory that there were only seven different kinds of magic tricks.

He said: "Bull S/! There is a great deal of new territory to conquer. In my next show I'm going to make a girl pregnant on stage."

He added: "Naturally it will be without sex. Everyone will be happy about it, but I'm not telling you any more."

The magician is currently on tour in Germany with his show, An Intimate Evening of Grand Illusion.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/18/05:

I think a few girls tryed to explain this to thier parents before, they did not beleive it either.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 10/18/05 - New law in Florida!

Hello Everyone,

There is a new gun law here in Florida. One can shoot someone if they feel that they are in danger or threatened. You might have thought that, after the recent hurricanes, Florida would want to reassure tourists arriving in the state that they will be safe and secure. But a new gun law, which came into force yesterday, will do little to promote this cause.
The law allows residents to use deadly force not only to protect their homes, but also if they feel threatened with “death or bodily harm” in their car or in a public place. Some predict that the “shoot first” law will provide a defense for people who resort to guns to settle arguments in car parks, queues, restaurants and bars. Imagine, if someone looks at you in a way that seems threatening they can shoot first and ask questions later.
Florida law already lets residents defend themselves against attackers if they can prove they could not have escaped. The new law would allow them to use deadly force even if they could have fled and says that prosecutors must automatically presume that would-be victims feared for their lives if attacked.

Do not argue unnecessarily with people anywhere in Florida and you better wear sun glasses so if your not feeling well or had a rough day, someone will not feel threatened and shoot you.

I personally feel that this law is terrible and is not for the benefit and safety of the people. What are your thoughts on such a law?

Take care,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/18/05:

Those that would shot you or harm you for any bad or wrong reason would have anyway.

Now finally law abiding citizens have the right the constitution should give all to protect thierself.

Law abiding citiznes have not fear from this law, only the criminals.

God bless Fla for having some commom sense and passing a good law. Hopefully it will be a National law soon.

ATON2 rated this answer Average Answer
hOPE12 rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
JesseJamesDupree rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sissypants asked on 10/17/05 - how do you?

from a christian stand point, how do you personally forgive and forget as instructed by Jesus and not be made a fool of over and over again?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/17/05:

Jesus said to forgive

He also said to be a faithful with what he give us, so you don't be a fool again.

sissypants rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 10/15/05 - Here is something to think about the ACLU

ACLU defends polygamy
Legal group backs 'freedom of choice'
The president of the American Civil Liberties Union says polygamy is among the "fundamental rights" that her organization will continue to defend.
During a question-and-answer session after a speech at Yale University, ACLU president Nadine Strossen stated that her organization has "defended the right of individuals to engage in polygamy," reported AgapePress, noting that the comments cited by the Yale Daily News received little attention.
The student paper said Strossen was responding to a "student's question about gay marriage, bigamy, and polygamy."
The ACLU chief said her organization defends "the freedom of choice for mature, consenting individuals," making it "the guardian of liberty ... defend[ing] the fundamental rights of all people."
Some opponents of same-sex marriage -- including, notably, Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa. -- have argued that its acceptance will create a slipperly slope, leading to the sanctioning of other types of relationships, including polygamy.
Crawford Broadcasting radio talk-show host Paul McGuire says the ACLU "has declared legal war on the traditional family."
"Now the ACLU is defending polygamy," he said, according to AgapePress. "You know, there are male and female lawyers who wake up in the morning and are actually proud of being ACLU lawyers. But I think the majority of Americans view ACLU lawyers as people who hate America and who want to destroy all Judeo-Christian values and beliefs."
McGuire asserts Strossen's organization seems "to only defend things that tear down the fabric of society."

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/16/05:

This is merely another step in the ladder that was started with so much of the sexual freedom movement.

It was listed as part of the gay right agenday several years ago.

The ACLU is most likely the biggest threat to this nation, more than any terrorist group could ever be.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/13/05 - Angels

Most people think angels are females, but the names of angels show that they are either males or neuter. What do you think?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/13/05:

Actually no, I beleive most people think angels are male.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/11/05 - which is better?

To be your own church and spiritual authority, or to join a church, and surrender some of that independence to a religious community- Which is better for you?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/12/05:

First there is only one church.

We are to be a body of believers who fellowship together.

Next you lose no independence when part of a group, but you gain that fellowship that helps each other.

No one person can be "thier own church" and no one is their "spiritual auuthority"

You have beleivers, who can not agree on understanding of the bible, But they should, but don't, all fellowship togehter to share the love of christ

godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/11/05 - A hypothetical question

Eric married Sue after his first wife, Lyn died, and Sue married Paul a few years later after Eric died. They all went to Heaven eventually.
What relationship would they have in Heaven? Would they still be husband and wife? Would it be Eric and Lyn, Eric and Sue or Paul and Sue, assuming that Eric loves both of his wives and Sue loves both of her husbands.

Please ignore this question if you can't answer it :)

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/12/05:

Heaven is past earthly relationships,

we will know each other but the joy of heaven is past earthly lust

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
STONY rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 10/12/05 - Christians & Bush

Hello Christians:

Has GW lost the support of his religious base?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/12/05:

Somewhat, the lobby for a very conserviate Judge was done for years. So we would have had to fight, showed he was not willing to fight to follow though with promises.

Although it was still a better pick than the other side would have done

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 10/12/05 - To whom is allegiance owed???

Hello Christians:

Tell me the truth, as if a Christian would do otherwise. Who does your church look out for, you the member, or itself and its employees? Who is it SUPPOSED to look out for? Why?

Who does/did the Catholic church look out for? Does your government look out for you, or itself? Whatever you answer to any of my questions, is that the way you want it?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/12/05:

In general most churches look out for those in need.

In the Catholic Church there are of course examples of them taking care of thier own priests over that of people.

but that does not take away from all of the social work done by the churches.

It was and is the churches taking care of the hurricane victims. Non religious agencies are not doing the majority of the work.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/12/05 - Halloween

Halloween had a pagan origin and became secularised later. Should Christians participate in Halloween celebration?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/12/05:

Why not?

It has not religious meaning what so ever to those doing it. It is merely a pretend time to force those that normally hate kids to give them candy.

If most churches offered regular activies for kids, perhaps they could chosse to go to a church event instead.

What is your church offering??
( not the writer of the post but everyones church)

godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 10/09/05 - innovative or foolish?

Bible group spreads word by SMS

Thursday, October 6, 2005 Posted: 0840 GMT (1640 HKT)

ADELAIDE, Australia (AP) -- "In da Bginnin God cre8d da heavens & da earth," according to a new version of the Bible translated into the text message language of cell phone users.

The Bible Society in Australia launched on Thursday its translation of all 31,173 verses of the Bible in the modern, abbreviated language of text messages, or SMS.

The verses can be accessed over the Internet for free so that the word of God can be spread by cell phone to family and friends, said society spokesman Michael Chant.

"The old days when the Bible was only available within a somber black cover with a cross on it are long gone," Chant said.

"We want to open it up for people of all ages, backgrounds and interests, and the SMS version is a logical extension of that," he added.

The society used the International Contemporary English Version of the Bible and remained faithful to the grammar, changing just the spelling of words, Chant said.

Sending the entire Bible by SMS would take more than 30,000 messages, he said.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/09/05:

a thumb down in my opinion.

saving a few letters is not worth it.

The bible in every format you can think of is already available on line in every format one could almost want.

It would and is sent as is.

Thier money could have well be spent in so many other ways

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/09/05 - disappointment

Were you disappointed with God when you lost a loved one? Maybe just a little bit?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/09/05:

Sad that it was thier time to go.

But if a person has accepted Christ as thier Savior, we need to morn the personal loss, but rejoice that they now live with thier Savior

We all go though stages of grieving a loss of a love one. They are fairly set stages but the time they last vary.

Some never move on, and it causes them greater greif.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/09/05 - transsexual

Do you consider a transsexual (1)a homosexual, (2) a bisexual or (3)a heterosexual (a)before and (b)after the sex change operation?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/09/05:

First there are a few, very few that do actually have some issues in thier make up.
The sadest of all of this is the ones that are born with both male and female sexual make up. I knew one such person.

But before and after they may be either homosexual or bisexual. You did not say what thier sexual preference was.
Some my enjoy both male and female, enjoy thier same sex more

I still view them as thier same orginal sex even after operation, since that was how God made them, It is not my or thier choice to change thier physcial design.

They are normally homosexual that takes it to the extreme.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/09/05 - microevolution

Darwin and paleontologists made a plausible case for microevolution, ie. change and development within a species, but paleontologists haven't been able to trace the origin of those species. I think they never will.
Christianity and microevolution don't contradict each other.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/09/05:

true, there is and always has been minor and some even slightly major evolutionary changes.

But not to create new species and do away with the old.

I am still trying to figure out fish learning to breath air.

I could even live with guided evolution where God is the creator and one to guide nature.

The real trouble is no one can say with evolution where things came from? the rock, the sun, the elecments to allow all to happen.

godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 10/09/05 - EVE:

Was Eve the originator or SIN?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/09/05:

she was the first human to sin.

God created free choice or will

Satan was the first to sin, than all of his followers.

Satan tempted eve

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/08/05 - traits of homosexuals

What are the likely traits of homosexuals? Do you think effeminate males are likely to have a gay relationship, and masculine females are likely to become lesbians? For instance, Elton John, Boy George, Liberace and Martina Narvatilova, Amelie Mauresmo respectively. Of course their homosexual partners would not be effeminate or masculine respectively.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/08/05:

Boy George is GAY??? My life has been shattered forever.

No there is no "way" to see who is living in an ungodly life style. It is merely a sexual peference.

I can not tell if you like coke or pespi,
IN the majority of people it is a mere choice.

godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 10/08/05 - Evolution - Schmevolution

Hello Christians:

Ok, so you don’t believe in evolution. Plus, I detect anger towards evolutionists. Why is that? You don’t think evolution is science. Rather, I think you think, that evolution is an anti-Christian religious movement. Yes? What do you think is the goal of these people? To debunk creation? Christianity? Why would they do that? Are they run by the devil? (If that’s so, then everything becomes clear.)

I’m gonna make up this part. It seems that most of the people in this country are deeply religious. Yet, most of the people in this country subscribe to evolution. How can that be?

Finally, I’m an evolutionist. I don’t dislike you because you’re not. I don’t consider you a threat because you don’t believe as I. I don’t tell people that there’s no tooth fairy, Santa Clause, or that it’s ok to walk under that ladder. I wouldn’t try to convince you, that you’re wrong. I, frankly, could care less that you’re wrong. I have no agenda. I don’t belong to any group. I don’t have a “leader” telling me what to say. I don’t need anyone backing me up, telling me that I’m right. It wouldn’t bother me at all being a minority of one, who believes something nobody else in the world does.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/08/05:

The real issue is that evolution ( from nothing to something" can't happen, something had to create the something to start with.

Next there is no proof only belief ( can we call it faith???) that somehow it all started, and fish were born out of these atoms. Then they learned to breath air and so on and so on.

Honestly, if you can take and beleive that on faith, you should be the most religious person in the world, since that is the less likely thing that could really happen I have ever heard.

Yes, things do slightly evolve but not to the extent that it would take to create all plants, animals, and fish.

There is the problem, it is taught in school as a fact, no warning that it is only an idea or principle beleived in science. So yes too many accept it blindly since they were forced to learn it in school as a fact.

If schools still taught the world was flat, most people would still beleive that if they were not shown where they are wrong.

I have no problem accepted the intelligent design idea where God started it, guided it and allowed it to follow certain paths.
But it all happened on it on, where did the matter that came alive start with in the first place if a God did not create it,

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 10/07/05 - Thought you might want to see this

To All,

I received this the other day and I thought you might want to read what this man had to say.

This is very interesting to me personaly since i also had many such experiences

Richard L. Johnston, M.D. University of Mississippi Medical Center
3805 Crane Blvd. Jackson, MS 39216
601-981-3896 (home)
601-573-0472 (cell)
601-984-0214 (pager)

We need to stop giving them a free ride, that's all! Whether it sounds racial, or not, this needs to be published in the media :

Thought I might inform the few friends I have on my recent traumatic experience. I am going to tell it straight, blunt, raw, and I don't give a damn. Long read, I know but please do read!!!

I went to volunteer on Saturday at the George R. Brown convention for two reasons:

A: I wanted to help people to get a warm fuzzy.

B: Curiosity.

I've been watching the news lately and have seen scenes that have made me want to vomit. And no it wasn't dead bodies, the city under water, or the sludge everywhere. It was PEOPLE'S BEHAVIOR. The people on T.V., (99% being Black) were DEMANDING help. They were not asking nicely but demanding as if society owed these people something.

Well the honest truth is WE DON'T. Help should be asked for in a kind manner and then appreciated. This is not what the press (FOX in particular) was showing, what I was seeing was a group of people who are yelling, demanding, looting, killing, raping, and SHOOTING back at the demanded help!!!!!

So I'm thinking this can't possibly be true can it???? So I decide to submit to the DEMAND for help out of SHOCK. I couldn't believe this to be true of the majority of the people who are the weakest of society. So I went to volunteer and help folks out and see the truth. So I will tell the following story and you decide:

I arrived at the astrodome only to find out that there were too many volunteers and that volunteers were needed at the George R. Brown Convention Center. As I was walking up to the Convention Center I noticed a line of cars that wrapped around blocks filled with donations. These were ordinary Houstonians coming with truckloads and trunks full of water, diapers, clothes, blankets, food, all types of good stuff.

Lots of it was NEW. I felt that warm fuzzy while helping unload these vehicles of these wonderful human beings. I then went inside the building and noticed approximately 100,000 sq. ft. of clothes, shoes, jackets, toys and all types of goodies all organized and ready for the people in need. I signed up, received a name badge and was on my merry way excited to be useful.

I toured the place to get familiar with my surroundings; the entire place is probably around 2 million sq. ft. I noticed rows as far as the eye can see of mattresses, not cots, BLOW UP MATTRESSES!!! All of which had nice pillows and plenty of blankets. 2 to 3 bottles of water lay on every bed. These full size to queen size beds by the way were comfortable, I laid in one to see for myself. I went to look at the medical area. I couldn't believe what my eyes were seeing!!! A makeshift hospital created in 24 hours!!! It was unbelievable, they even had a pharmacy.

I also noticed that they created showers, which would also have hot water. I went upstairs to the third floor to find a HUGE cafeteria created in under 24 hours! Rows of tables, chairs and food everywhere - enough to feed an army! I'm not talking about crap food either. They had Jason's deli food, apples, oranges, coke, diet coke, lemonade, orange juice, cookies, all types of chips and sandwiches. All the beverages by the way were put on ice and chilled!!!! In a matter of about
24 hours or less an entire mini-city was erected by volunteers for the poor evacuees.

This was not your rundown crap shelter, it was BUM HEAVEN. So that was the layout: great food, comfy beds, clean showers, free medical help, by the way there was a library, and a theatre room that I forgot to mention. Great stuff right????

Well here is what happened on my journey -

I started by handing out COLD water bottles to evacuees as they got off the bus. Many would take them and only 20% or less said thank you. Lots of them would shake their heads and ask for sodas! So this went on for about 20-30 minutes until I was sick of being an unappreciated servant. I figured certainly these folks would appreciate some food!!!

So I went upstairs to serve these beloved evacuees some GOOD food that I wish I could have at the moment!

***The following statements are graphic, truthful, and discuss UNRATIONAL behavior***

Evacuees come slowly to receive this mountain of food that is worth serving to a king! I tell them that we have 2 types of great deli sandwiches to choose from - ham and turkey. Many look at the food in disgust and DEMAND burgers, pizza, and even McDonalds!!!! Jason's deli is better than McDonalds!!!! Only 1 out of ten people who took something would say "thank you" the rest took items as if it was their God give right to be served without a shred of appreciation!!! They would ask for Beer and liquor. They complained that we didn't have good enough food. They refused food and laughed at us. They treated us volunteers as if we where SLAVES. No not all of them of course, but 70% did!!!!!! 20% were appreciative, 10% took the food without any comment and the other 70% had some disgusting comment to say. Some had the nerve to laugh at us. And when I snapped back at them for being mean, they would curse at me!!! Needless to say I was in utter shock. They would eat their food and leave their mess on the table. Some would pick up their stuff, many would leave it for the volunteers to pick up. I left that real quick to go down and help set up some more beds. I saw many young ladies carrying mattresses and I helped for a while. Then I realized something. There were hundreds of able bodied young men who could help!!

I asked a group of young evacuees in their teens and early twenties to help. I got cursed at for asking them to help!!! One said "We just lost our fucking homes and you want us to work!!" The next said "Ya Cracker, you got a home we don't" I looked at them in disbelief. Here are women walking by carrying THEIR BEDS and they can't lift a finger and help themselves!!


I waved them off and turned away and was laughed at and more "white boy jokes" were made at me. I felt no need to waste my breath on a bunch of pitiful losers. I went to a nearby restroom where I noticed a man shaving. I used the restroom, washed my hands and saw this man throw his razor towards the trash can...he missed. He walked out leaving his disgusting razor on the floor for some other "cracker" to pick up.

Even the little kids were demanding. I saw only ONE white family and only TWO Hispanic families. The rest where blacks. Sorry 20% to 30% decent blacks, and 70% LOSERS!!!!!

I would call them N*****S, but the actual definition of a n*****r is one who is ignorant, these people were not ignorant..they were ARROGANT ASSHOLES. The majority of which are thugs and lifetime lazy ass welfare recipients. We are inviting the lowest of the low to Houston, and like idiots we are serving the people who will soon steal our cars, rape, murder, and destroy our city while stealing from our pockets on a daily basis through the welfare checks they take.

We will fund our own destruction. By "US" I don't mean a specific race, I mean the people who work hard, work smart, have values and morals. Only people who want to help themselves should be helped, the others should be allowed to destroy themselves.

I do not want to work hard, give the government close to half the money I earn so they can in turn give it to a bunch of losers. I don't believe in being poor for life. My family immigrated here, we came here poor, and now thank God, and due to HARD WORK we are doing fine.

If immigrants, who come here, don't know the language can work and become successful... WHY CAN'T THE MAJORITY OF THE HOMEGROWN DO IT!!! If we continue to reward these losers then we will soon destroy our great country. I just witnessed selfish, arrogant, unappreciative behavior by the very people who need help the most. Now these same people who cursed me, refused my cities generosity, who refuse to help themselves are DEMANDING handouts on their own terms!!!!!!! They prance around as if they are owed something, and when they do receive a handout, they say it's not good enough! Well you know what..these types of people can go to hell for all I care!

Richard L. Johnston, M.D. University of Mississippi Medical Center
3805 Crane Blvd. Jackson, MS 39216
601-981-3896 (home)
601-573-0472 (cell)
601-984-0214 (pager)

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/07/05:

You know you tell the truth about a situation and people call you racist.

You tell lies about dead bodies everywhere and you are on the news.

Having worked with street people for years, most can care less for the good you do, unless it is what they "want"

The food is not good enough, Try and feed some homless some days and you will see them throw the food away many times. They want the money, not your real help.

Next why were the men or even women who could work, not helping around the shelters.

The shelter we help with here in TN, if you don't work, you don't stay. They should have assigned duties to those comming in, so they did not have to just seat around.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/07/05 - Remedy or effective treatments?

Does anyone have a simple remedy or other treatment for gnat bites?

I keep getting bitten by one of them pesky little critturs!

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/07/05:

Higher levels of garlic in your body can help with many insects, not stop them competely but cut them down

Also lavender sprays ( oil ) will keep them away fair.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/07/05 - I saw in the night, Visions ...

1. Does God sometimes communicate with us through dreams?

2. If something happens to us that we are certain we have been shown in a dream, must we then react as we presume was intended?

3. Would such an experience unduly influence us and tread upon our free agency?


Clarifications posing as answers will be ignored.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/07/05:

I did not read the mile or so of followup

Dreams are often given to us from God as to warn, give us messages and sometimes as a form of help.

And then we also just dream ( I prefer westerns)

But for example, my wife saw in her dream ( and more than just a dream) that I would go to a house with a certain address, the house would look a certain way, and that the person in the house was in a wheel chair and they would have a "knife" under the seat.

Well some weeks later, I turned on a road with a sign with the address she had saw.
I drove up to this house, it looked exactly like she said. The person in it was in a wheelchair.

And yes they had a weapon ( turned out to be a gun not a knife)

Well the person was thinking about killing hisself. His wife had just died recently and he could not cope. I was able to talk with him about it, since I had a wife die before.

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 10/07/05 - Removing children from a classroom..............

Is it a good idea, if you object to a particular lesson that will be taught in school, to insist that your child sit in the library or the principal's office or in a study hall or even keep him/her home that day? It seems like that could cause more upset to the child than allowing him/her to be in class. Is there a better way to do this?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/07/05:

So? the child is upset?

and the problem in that is what?

Children if they are raised properly will be upset by not getting to do alot of things other kids may be doing.

They will be upset when they can't go to a drinking party, an unsuperised sleep over.
They will not like having to wear proper clothing.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

kindj asked on 10/07/05 - What would you do?

My wife and I, along with a few other parents, are distressed at something going on at our kids' elementary school.

It seems that the Spanish teacher has assigned a mandatory project, in which the student must create a Dia de Muertos (Day of the Dead) diarama. It must be realistic, complete with a shrine, a photo of the deceased loved one of their choosing and miniature food "offerings" to the deceased.

As parents, we feel that this is inappropriate as a mandatory assignment, as it conflicts with a tenet of our faith concerning communication and offerings to the dead. We believe that the project crosses the line between learning about something and taking an active part in something.

If you would like to learn more about this holiday, go here:

Even though the site says it is a "mixture" of Christianity and pre-Hispanic beliefs, I believe it to be more of a perversion of Christian beliefs, such as there are in voodoo and the like.

Just curious about your thoughts.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/07/05:

I would discuss it first with the teacher.

If that does not prove effective, the principal,

then the school board.

And they are always scared of law suites, so a letter form a attorney may prove helpful.

In the end your choice is to have the child not do it. Since at times we have to stand on morals.

kindj rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 10/07/05 - How Oregon Assisted Suicide Works

Click Here!

From Slate Magazine Article.

How Does Assisted Suicide Work?
A guide to "Death With Dignity" in Oregon.
By Daniel Engber
Posted Thursday, Oct. 6, 2005, at 3:20 PM PT

The U.S. Supreme Court took up the issue of assisted suicide on Wednesday as it heard arguments in the case of Gonzales v. Oregon. The Bush administration has challenged an Oregon law that lets physicians prescribe lethal medication to terminally ill patients. How does assisted suicide work?

The patient has to ask for it three times. According to Oregon's "Death With Dignity" law, only certain people can ask for lethal medication from their doctors. You must be at least 18 years old, an Oregon resident, and the victim of a terminal disease that will kill you within the next six months. You also have to be able to make and communicate a clearheaded decision to your doctor.

The first step is to make a "formal oral request." Advocacy groups that work with terminal patients suggest something like, "Doctor, will you assist me in using Oregon's Death With Dignity law?" At least 15 days later, you need to make another oral request. The doctor still won't be able to prescribe lethal drugs until you file a written request form signed by two witnesses.

Continue Article

Many people who are considering assisted suicide contact a patient-advocacy group for help with the procedure and paperwork. Such a group can help to screen out people who are ineligible for assisted suicide, but a doctor makes the final decisions. If she thinks the patient may have a psychiatric or psychological disorder, she can refer him for evaluation and treatment. The doctor also must tell him about alternatives like hospice care, advise him to confer with his family or next of kin, and remind him that it's OK to change his mind at any time. By law, a second physician must review the case and sign off on the first doctor's diagnosis.

A doctor can prescribe lethal drugs two days after receiving a written request, but under no circumstances can she administer them herself. That would be euthanasia, which is illegal in Oregon. The state's assisted-suicide laws mandate that the patient take the drugs himself. Almost all assisted suicides take place in the home, with at least one health-care worker present. The patient takes one of two kinds of barbiturates. Seconal costs about $125 for a lethal 10 gram dose, which comes in the form of 100 individual caplets that must be broken apart to produce about three tablespoons of powder. Nembutal comes in a more convenient liquid form. It costs more than $1,000 for a dose, though, and insurance almost never covers lethal drugs.

If the patient is using Seconal, it's either mixed in water to create a bitter drink or stirred into pudding or applesauce to hide the taste. The patient will slip into a coma about five minutes after taking the drug, with death coming within about half an hour. If you're in pretty good shape, or if you're especially fat, death can be delayed for up to 48 hours. In most cases, the time of death is determined by a health-care provider who checks your pulse every few minutes until you pass away."


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/07/05:

38 to the head, lots cheaper, and your estate can sell the gun after your gone if they want.

Dead is still dead no matter how it is done.
If they are going to "assist" they should do it much more controlled but it is not our place to kill ourself

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

curious98 asked on 10/06/05 - Hurricane Stan

How come nobody seems to be paying any attention to Hurricane Stan?

Close to 300 dead between Guatemala and Mexico, and countless damages to property?

We have spent hours on a stretch discussing the problems created by Katrina and, to a lesser extent, by

Stan was no less violent, but it did not hit the USA, fortunately for the Americans.

But those Hispanics are also human beings. And we are sending helping equipment to them too,,,

Any comments?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/07/05:

I did not even know there was one untill someone said we were having rain the next few days because of it.

Guess the news service is getting tired of death unless it is US people that die.

It escapes me why no real mention of it

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
curious98 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 10/06/05 - Supreme Court nominee Miers - what do you think?

Strong Grounding in the Church Could Be a Clue to Miers's Priorities
By Michael Grunwald, Jo Becker and John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 5, 2005;
One evening in the 1980s, several years after Harriet Miers dedicated her life to Jesus Christ, she attended a lecture at her Dallas evangelical church with Nathan Hecht, a colleague at her law firm and her on-again, off-again boyfriend. The speaker was Paul Brand, a surgeon and the author of "Fearfully and Wonderfully Made," a best-selling exploration of God and the human body.
When the lecture was over, Miers said words Hecht had never heard from her before. "I'm convinced that life begins at conception," Hecht recalled her saying. According to Hecht, now a Texas Supreme Court justice, Miers has believed ever since that abortion is "taking a life."
"I know she is pro-life," said Hecht, one of the most conservative judges in Texas. "She thinks that after conception, it's not a balancing act -- or if it is, it's a balancing of two equal lives."
Hecht and other confidants of Miers all pledge that if the Senate confirms her nomination to the Supreme Court, her judicial values will be guided by the law and the Constitution. But they say her personal values have been shaped by her abiding faith in Jesus, and by her membership in the massive red-brick Valley View Christian Church, where she was baptized as an adult, served on the missions committee and taught religious classes. At Valley View, pastors preach that abortion is murder, that the Bible is the literal word of God and that homosexuality is a sin -- although they also preach that God loves everybody.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino declined to comment on Hecht's recollection yesterday but said President Bush did not ask Miers her personal views on abortion or any other issue that may come before the court. "A nominee who shares the president's approach of judicial restraint would not allow personal views to affect his or her rulings based on the law," Perino said.
Some religious conservatives have expressed deep dissatisfaction with the Miers nomination, grumbling that she has never taken public stands on hot-button social issues. But her friends point to Valley View as evidence that she is cut from conservative cloth. They say she's not a "holy roller" who flaunts her religion on her sleeve but she lives her faith as a born-again Christian.
"People in Dallas know she's a conservative," said her friend Ed Kinkeade, a federal district judge. "She's not Elmer Gantry, but she lives what she believes. . . . I'm like, y'all, has George Bush appointed anyone to an appellate court that is a betrayal to conservatives?"
Even in Dallas, home of groups such as the Texas Eagle Forum and the Republican National Coalition for Life, some religious conservatives say Miers, 60, has demonstrated an insufficient commitment to family values. They cited a questionnaire she filled out for a gay rights group in 1989 as a candidate for Dallas City Council, indicating that gay people should have the same civil rights as straight people and that the city should fund AIDS education and services. After her election, she appointed an openly gay lawyer to an influential city board.
"For goodness' sake, why elevate AIDS over cancer? She shouldn't have filled out that questionnaire at all," said Cathie Adams, president of the Texas Eagle Forum. "President Bush is asking us to have faith in things unseen. We only have that kind of faith in God."
But on the same questionnaire, Miers opposed the repeal of a Texas anti-sodomy law and said she was not seeking the endorsement of the gay rights group. In a meeting with the group, she said that her "personal conviction is not consistent" with the "homosexual lifestyle," according to one activist's notes.
Hecht suggested that it would be difficult to attend Valley View regularly and support gay rights. At the same time, he said, Miers's faith made her more sympathetic to the struggles of others, and her duties as an at-large City Council member transcended her personal views.
"She represented those people, and she wanted to represent the whole city," Hecht said. "It doesn't mean that you approve of their lifestyle."
Hecht remembers that when Miers made partner at their law firm, the first woman ever to do so, she began to question what life was all about. He said they would often put their feet up and trade Big Questions: Is there a God? Who is He? What difference does it make? Miers had attended Episcopalian and Presbyterian churches as a girl, and her mother was religious, but Miers told Hecht she wanted a "deeper faith." Hecht believes she may have supported abortion rights at the time, although he said she had not thought about it much.
"Well, let's go to my church," Hecht told her.
That was Valley View, where Hecht played the organ and taught Sunday school. It was a church, pastor Ron Key said, that believed in "the Judeo-Christian perspective on the sanctity of life" and "the Christian perspective on marriage." There are antiabortion pamphlets inside the church and literature opposing premarital sex. Key and his wife, Kaycia, said they never asked Miers what she thought about those issues, because they never thought they had to.
"We've known Harriet for 30 years and we've never had any reason to discuss these hot topics," Kaycia Key said. "But I can say one thing: She's a totally committed Christian."
But some antiabortion activists noted that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was described as a devout Catholic when he was nominated by President Ronald Reagan -- and he still voted to uphold Roe v. Wade . Miers donated $150 at a fundraising dinner for a Texas antiabortion group in 1989, but Colleen Parro, director of the Republican National Coalition for Life, remembers that there were plenty of politicians trolling for votes at the dinner. Parro said she does not care whether Miers is a born-again Christian, or the companion of Hecht.
"It's not about her church, or the fellow she dates. It's about her record," Parro said. "She seems like a fine lady, but this nomination does not advance the culture of life."
In 1993, when Miers was the president of the Texas bar, she led a challenge to the American Bar Association's support for abortion rights. Some of her friends say she just thought it was inappropriate for the group to take a stand on a moral issue, but others point out that an abortion rights supporter probably would not have challenged the status quo.
"She didn't have to do that," Kinkeade said. "She was following her beliefs."
Those beliefs were forged at Valley View, but Miers is breaking away from the church where she embraced Jesus. In recent years, church elders have moved to cut back on missionary work, sparking a split this summer among the parishioners. Key is forming a church that plans to donate half its revenues to mission work, and Miers plans to join him.
"These days so many of the churches have become Christian country clubs," Key said. "They are more about making you feel good about yourself than making you grow. Some of us, including Harriet, were uncomfortable with all this."
But if Miers is leaving her church, the church is not leaving her. Kaycia Key said she expects to see the next Supreme Court justice in the pews, singing enthusiastically, if not skillfully. "Let's just say she makes a joyful noise unto the Lord," Key said. "She doesn't hesitate to sing out."
Pomfret reported from Dallas.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/06/05:

Her written views on accepting homosexual rights puts her on my NO WAY list.

I could think of dozens of real conservitive judges that would have been better choices.

It sounds more like paying off a person who helped him in his elections with a good position more than naming a real Christian judge.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/06/05 - homosexuality

Why is homosexuality so common in human beings and so rare, if any at all, in animals? Does it have something to do with the human mind?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/06/05:

First it is not all that commom, it is talked about alot, makes alot of headlines, but overall it is far less than most want us to beleive.

Man has free will to go against what nature has provided us as proper sexual relationship. ( male and female)

Man with free will can choose between proper and improper,

Men and women also look for instant gratification in all things, and look for what is the thrill for the moment.

It is a behavior mostly learned and it is only going to get worst in the US, as those invovled in the practice attempt to force its acceptance on the majority of people.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/06/05 - Can you shelve your prejudices?

In Katrina I Didn't See Racism, I Saw Brotherhood
By Rabbi Aryeh Spero
Posted Sept 7, 2005

In New Orleans, beginning Tuesday morning, August 30, I saw men in helicopters risking their lives to save stranded flood victims from rooftops. The rescuers were White, the stranded Black. I saw Caucasians navigating their small, private boats in violent, swirling, toxic floodwaters to find fellow citizens trapped in their houses. Those they saved were Black.

I saw Brotherhood. New York Congressman Charlie Rangel saw Racism.

Yes, there are Two Americas. One is the real America, where virtually every White person I know sends money, food or clothes to those in need -- now and in other crises -- regardless of color. This America is colorblind.

The other is the America fantasized and manufactured by Charlie Rangel, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who constantly cry "racism!" even in situations where it does not exist, even when undeniable images illustrate love, compassion and concern. These three men, together with
today's NAACP, want to continue the notion of Racist America. It is their Mantra, their calling card. Their power, money, and continued media appearances depend on it.

Often, people caught up in accusing others of sin neglect to undergo their own personal introspection. They begin to think they alone inhabit the moral high ground. It is high time these men peered into their own
hearts at the dark chamber that causes this unceasing labeling of their fellow Americans as "racist." They may find in that chamber their own racism -- against Whites.

There is only one real America. Beginning Friday morning in Houston, thousands of regular citizens poured into the Astrodome offering water, food, clean clothes, personal items, baby diapers and toys, love and even their homes to the evacuees who had been bused in from New Orleans.

Most of the givers were White, most of those being helped were Black.

But there was Jesse Jackson, busy on TV, accusing the country of not putting Blacks -- i.e., him -- on some type of Commission he is demanding.

Where was he early in the week? Not sweating with others from around the country who had scraped their last dollar to come help. With Jesse, it's always about Jesse.

After decades of hearing accusations from Jesse, Al, Charlie, the NAACP and certain elitists about how racist America is, it would have been refreshing to hear them for once give thanks to those they for years have been maligning. These self-anointed spokesmen for the Black
community lead only when it comes to foisting guilt and condemnation, and not when it comes to acknowledging the good in those they have made a career in castigating.

As a Rabbi I have a message I wish to offer to my fellow members of the cloth, Reverends Jackson and Sharpton:

"It is time to do some soul searching. Your continued efforts to tear this country apart, even in light of the monumental goodness shown by your White brothers, is a

There are no churches in the world like the American churches. And there are no better parishioners and members of churches anywhere in the world. These churches are saving the day. Their members -- infused by
the special and singular teachings of our unique American
Judeo-Christian understanding of the Bible -- are, at this moment, writing an historic chapter in giving, initiative, and selflessness.

They are opening their homes to strangers. They are doing what government is incapable of doing.

America works because of its faith-based institutions. It always has. That is what makes it America.

So next time the ACLU tries to diminish and marginalize the churches, saying there is no role for religion in American public life, that an impenetrable wall must be erected separating the citizens from their faith, cry out "Katrina."

Next time the ACLU goes to court asking that U.S. soldiers not be allowed to say Grace in the Mess Hall and that communities be forbidden from setting up a nativity scene, ask yourself:

Without the motivation of Goodness sourced in Faith, would people offer such sacrifice?

Where else does this Brotherhood come from but the Bible
which teaches "Thou Shall Love Thy Neighbor as Yourself."

I saw brotherhood on Fox News, where 24/7 reporters used their perch as a clearinghouse for search-and-rescue missions and communication between the stranded and those in position to save. In contrast, the Old-line networks continued with their usual foolish, brain-numbing programming.

Those who always preach "compassion" chose profit over

The New York Times has utterly failed America. Its columnists could have used their talents and word skills to inspire and unite a nation. Columnists such as Frank Rich and Paul Krugman, however, revealed their true colors by evading their once-in-a-lifetime chance to help and instead chose to divide, condemn, and fuel the fires and poison the waters of Louisiana.

In them, I saw no Brotherhood. The newspaper always
preaching "compassion" verifies Shakespeare's "They protest too much."

Similar elitists here in the northeast and on the West coast have over the years expressed their view of the South as "unsophisticated" and Texans as "cowboys."

Well, the South has come through, especially Houston and other parts of Texas, whereas, as I write this on Labor Day,
the limousine moralizers are lying on east and west coast beaches thinking they're doing their part by reading Times' editorials and calling George Bush "racist." How sanctimonious life becomes when proving you are not a racist depends not on living in a truly integrated neighborhood, but by simply calling others racist.

Like so often in history, facts trump platitudes. Reality reigns. Those who always preach brotherhood, thus far have acted devoid of it. Those who for decades have been accused by elitists of not having compassion are the ones living it. They are: the churches, the military, and the sons and daughters of the South.

Is the Rabbi correct?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/06/05:

There was no race problem untill some of the minority "leaders" went down there and told everyone there was.

So many of the race hate spreaders are the black leaders who has to find racism to keep in power and keep the dollars comming into thier groups.

They use every photo opp, every twisted truth to spread the idea that black young men are poor because of the wihte man, not because they dropped out of school

They can't hold a job because they are black, not because they use drugs.

They cause the minority not to take responsiblity for thierslef, by being able to blame someone for the problem.

Erewhon rated this answer Average Answer
LTgolf rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

starshine asked on 10/06/05 - If you were

abused by a parent and then by a spouse because s/he thinks that you are evil and that Jesus hates you unless you obey that parent/spouse, and accept the abuse as a form of repentance, what do you do? Do you believe the parent/spouse or do you strengthen your belief in Jesus our Lord and Savior and seek help? Can a person be convinced into believing that they are truly evil when in their heart they know that they're not?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/06/05:

A person though emotional or physical abuse be convinced that they are anything the other person wants them to beleive.

Contolling others though physcial or mental abuse is very commom.

Abused wifes believe thier husband are the only ones who are right, they are always wrong and are always to blame for everything.

A person, has to find thier own self worth in thierself as a person, and a relationship that is build on mutal respect and love.

First the person needs often to get away from the abusive relastionship and then get counseling.

If a person has been abused by parents and spouse over years, it will be a long journey finding yourself, but it starts with one step.

kindj rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
starshine rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Carlita asked on 10/05/05 - Help

Do you feel a gay person can be a true Christian?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/06/05:

While a homosexual can accept Christ, since all of us were sinners when we first accepted Christ.

We can not make ourself good enough to be worthy of Christ.

But Homosexual activity is a sin.
One can ask, can a person who is a Witch become a christian, or a person who is a child abuser, or a person who murdered someone, can a person who is committing adultry become a christian.

Yes all of them can come and learn that Christ is the Son of God, that he died for thier sin, and accept him as thier Savior, they are therefor a Christian.

Next they have to work at stopping the sin in thier life. This is done only though God's help. And at times serous couseling by Christian couselors.

Can a person continue in a openly gay lifestyle and truely be following and serving Christn nope.

curious98 asked on 10/05/05 - New "Christian" Law for Florida citizens

"Shoot First, Proof Later: Florida's New Gun LawShoot First, Proof Later: Florida's New Gun Law"

Those interested to know more can visit this web, please.

Comments welcome,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/05/05:

The only people who should be concerned is those who break the law.

Law abiding citizens all should love the law, now they can finally protect thierself.

Let someone be comming in your door or window in the middle of the night and you will be glad to be able to protect yourself

curious98 rated this answer Average Answer

excon asked on 10/05/05 - The Right to Die

Hello Christians:

If I were terminally ill, headed for a painful death within six months, should I be allowed to end my life? Should a doctor be allowed to prescribe medicines (drugs) that will end my life? If a doctor does that, should he be prosecuted by the DEA as an illegal drug dealer? Should a state decide what medical procedures it allows or should the feds? How will Roberts vote? Will the Oregon "Death with Dignity Act" be affirmed? Is there a Christian position on the matter?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/05/05:

First I will say most Christians are very pro life, ( but still support the death penalty)

But from a true legal view point, the licence of doctors is a state issue. The licence of a Doctor ( as well as lawyers) comes from the state they work in.

The boards that certify them were never even intended to be a controlling factor.

There is no legal standing for the Federal Government to interfere with the state.

** of course everyone expects the Supreme Court to rule in favor of the Federal Goverment. They have almost always been in favor of bigger and more government.

For one, even Hospice was for years viewed even by the medical profession as evil, now it is one of the best things for those that are dying.

If we view this as a legal issue, they should have a right,

If we view it as a moral or Christian issue, only God should pick the time.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/05/05 - modern lifestyle

Did God intend the modern lifestyle which has a fast pace and is a rat race?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/05/05:

God allows all by givning man free will.
Does he like it, most likely not

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 10/05/05 - First Amendment Abuse

'The Free Exercise Clause in the First Amendment, withdraws from legislative power, state and federal, the exertion of any restraint on the free exercise of religion. Its purpose is to secure religious liberty in the individual by prohibiting any invasions there by civil authority.

It bars ''governmental regulation of religious beliefs as such,'' prohibiting misuse of secular governmental programs ''to impede the observance of one or all religions or . . . to discriminate invidiously between religions . . . even though the burden may be characterized as being only indirect.''

Freedom of conscience is the basis of the free exercise clause, and government may not penalize or discriminate against an individual or a group of individuals because of their religious views nor may it compel persons to affirm any particular beliefs.

One wonders what motivated the USA to ignore these principles to pass laws against pural marriage to disadvantage Mormons.

The Belief-Conduct Distinction .

While the Court has consistently affirmed that the Free Exercise Clause protects religious beliefs, protection for religiously motivated conduct has waxed and waned over the years.

The Free Exercise Clause ''embraces two concepts-- freedom to believe and freedom to act. The first is absolute, but in the nature of things, the second cannot be.''

In its first free exercise case, involving the power of government to prohibit polygamy, the Court invoked a hard distinction between the two, saying that although laws ''cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices.''

The rule thus propounded protected only belief, inasmuch as religiously motivated action was to be subjected to the police power of the state to the same extent as would similar action springing from other motives.

The Reynolds no-protection rule was applied in a number of cases, but later cases established that religiously grounded conduct is not always outside the protection of the free exercise clause.

Instead, the Court began to balance the secular interest asserted by the government against the claim of religious liberty asserted by the person affected; only if the governmental interest was ''compelling'' and if no alternative forms of regulation would serve that interest was the claimant required to yield.

Thus, while freedom to engage in religious practices was not absolute, it was entitled to considerable protection.

The Court's first encounter with free exercise claims occurred in a series of cases in which the Federal Government and the territories moved against the Mormons because of their practice of polygamy.

Actual prosecutions and convictions for bigamy presented little problem for the Court, inasmuch as it could distinguish between beliefs and acts.

But the presence of large numbers of Mormons in some of the territories made convictions for bigamy difficult to obtain, and in 1882 Congress enacted a statute which barred ''bigamists,'' ''polygamists,'' and ''any person cohabiting with more than one woman'' from voting or serving on juries.

The Court sustained the law, even as applied to persons entering the state prior to enactment of the original law prohibiting bigamy and to persons as to whom the statute of limitations had run.

Subsequently, an act of a territorial legislature which required a prospective voter not only to swear that he was not a bigamist or polygamist but as well that

''I am not a member of any order, organization or association which teaches, advises, counsels or encourages its members, devotees or any other person to commit the crime of bigamy or polygamy . . . or which practices bigamy, polygamy or plural or celestial marriage as a doctrinal rite of such organization; that I do not and will not, publicly or privately, or in any manner whatever teach, advise, counsel or encourage any person to commit the crime of bigamy or polygamy . . . ,''

was upheld in an opinion that condemned plural marriage and its advocacy as equal evils.

And, finally, the Court sustained the revocation of the charter of the Mormon Church and confiscation of all church property not actually used for religious worship or for burial.

What happened to the :"free exercise of religion"?

Bill of Rights

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/05/05:

In general, marriage has always been a state issue.

Can you give me what Federal law prohibits any forms of marriage?

That is what Christians want a marriage admentment to the Constitution to protect marriage to one man and one women.

At this time, marriage is at the state level as far as I know

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/03/05 - Salvation

The thief who was crucified beside Jesus was promised salvation and paradise in his final moments of life although he committed many sins and was not baptized.
This shows that when a person repents of his/her sins and believes in Christ, the person would receive salvation, and it is never too late for the person to do that.
Do you agree?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/04/05:

Yes I do agree, but also how do you know he was not baptised?

godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/02/05 - Adrenaline worship

Dr. Archibald Hart said:"A well-designed worship service has a time to reflect on sin and repentance, a time for praise and perhaps an uplifting experience. But then there is also to be a time to meditate. It seems to me a lot of modern contemporary worship is nothing more than pure adrenaline worship."


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/02/05:

Far too many of the new worship is made not even to worship but to entertain. They put on a show, hired musicians, dancers and arranged skits. Most have little to do with actual worship.

Comemporary music is fine, in the correct context. You can have a praise and worship time at the start of a service, but it has to return to be a time of thanksgiving and prayer to Christ. There has to be that time for the repentant sinner to turn back to Christ.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

bucker asked on 10/01/05 - How many believe this?

Mr. Harold Hill, President of the Curtis Engine Company in Baltimore Maryland and a consultant in the space Program relates the following development. "I think one of the most amazing things that God has for us today happened recently to our astronauts and space scientists at Greenbelt, Maryland. They were checking the position of the sun, moon, and planets out in space where they would be 100 years and 1000 years from now. We have to know this so we won't send a satellite, up and have it bump into something later on in its orbits. We have to lay out the orbits in terms of the life of the satellite, and where the planets will be so the whole thing will not bog down.

They ran the computer measurement back and forth over the centuries and it came to a halt. The computer stopped and put up a red signal, which meant that there was something wrong either with the information fed into it or with the results as compared to the standards.

They called in the service department to check it out and they said, "What's wrong?"

Well, they found there is a day missing in space in elapsed time. They scratched their heads and tore their hair. There was no answer. Finally, a Christian man on the team said, "You know, one time I was in Sunday School and they talked about the sun standing still." While they didn't believe him, they didn't have an answer either, so they said, "Show us." He got a Bible and went back to the book of Joshua where they found a pretty ridiculous statement for any one with "common sense." There they found the Lord saying to Joshua, "Fear them not, I have delivered them into thy hand; there shall not a man of them stand before Thee." Joshua was concerned because he was surrounded by the enemy and if darkness fell they would overpower them. So Joshua asked the Lord to make the sun stand still! That's right-"The sun stood still and the moon stayed-and hasted not to go down about a whole day!" (Joshua 10:12-13)

The astronauts and scientists said, "There is the missing day!" They checked the computers going back into the time it was written and found it was close but not close enough. The elapsed time that was missing back in Joshua's day was 23 hours and 20 minutes-not a whole day.

They read the Bible and there it was "about (approximately) a day." These little words in the Bible are important, but they were still in trouble because if you cannot account for 40 minutes you'll still be in trouble 1,000 years from now. Forty minutes had to be found because it can be multiplied many times over in orbits.

As the Christian employee thought about it, he remembered somewhere in the Bible where it said the sun went BACKWARDS. The scientists told him he was out of his mind, but they got out the Book and read these words in 2 Kings that told of the following story: Hezekiah, on his deathbed, was visited by the prophet Isaiah who told him that he was not going to die. Hezekiah asked for a sign as proof. Isaiah said "Do you want the sun to go ahead 10 degrees?" Hezekiah said "It is nothing for the sun to go ahead 10 degrees, but let the shadow return backward 10 degrees." Isaiah spoke to the Lord and the Lord brought the shadow ten degrees BACKWARD!

Ten degrees is exactly 40 minutes! Twenty-three hours and 20 minutes in Joshua, plus 40 minutes in Second Kings make the missing day in the universe!" Isn't it amazing?

Author Unknown

References: Joshua 10:8 and 12, 13 and 2 Kings 20:9-11

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/02/05:

Would I like to beleive it yes,

Did God really stop the sun and moon and all movement, yes he did because the bible says it did, but could man show this, not likely.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

godot asked on 10/01/05 - Depression

The WHO has projected that depression will be a major cause of death by 2020. Do you share that view?
Why do some Christians suffer from stress and depression if they believe in Christ?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/01/05:

I would first say that most of the studies I have read showed that belonging to a organized relgion ( did not matter which type) had a positive result in a persons over all health.

Not every person, but as a whole compared to those not in a religion.

The reason was that they had first a fellowship, a sense of belonging and an organised way of life.

Today of course, in America, being a Christian is no longer as accepted, having Christian morals is considered by the media as being out of the norm.
so Society is trying to tell the Christian they no longer are correct.

In that too many Christians have tried to adapt thier teachings and beliefs to follow what society wants. Thus they are in fact no longer truely Christian.
The Episcopical church is one example that in many opinions are no longer Christian since they are accepted such non Christian values in thier church and leaders.

Next of course is society as a whole, Christians are not living in another realm, they are here with eveyone else, so all the issues of money, economy, the war, death and more all give the same stress on Christian, Jew, Muslim and heathen.

Those that work and have been living in a Christian life style truely, both in private and public life, normally have a much easier go,

There are levels of Christian faith, far too many American Christians are Christian by mouth only, not even trying to live a Christian life. Others put up a fine show, but if things got tough rarely would stand by thier faith. True Christians are a much rarer breed, and those really stong in faith ever harder to find.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
godot rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sarnian asked on 10/01/05 - On rebuilding New Orleans : state your position in this CNN debate.

CNN special : Should New Orleans be Rebuild, Re-invented, or Revived?

Follow this link to provide your views


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/01/05:

A new wet land maybe.

At least my tax dollars don't need to be used, unless it is merely loans to help them get going.

Why did all the properly owners not have flood insurance?

If they were to cheap to have it, why should I pay the price in my taxes.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

STONY asked on 10/01/05 - THERE'S A NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN...


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/01/05:

What a great law, I wish it was national.
Perhaps the crime rate can really go down.

The police can not protect us, we always have had to protect ourself. Without the ability to protect ourself we are merley victims waiting to happen.

We must always be on the guard and criminals should know that if they want to live in thier life of crime, they can be hurt if they come after someone else.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
STONY rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 10/01/05 - Bill Bennett

Hello Christians:

What do you think of the man of the right, the guy who wrote a book on virtue - Bill Bennett? He thinks you could lower the crime rate by aborting all the black babies. He gambles his ass off, and he thinks I should be in jail for the rest of my life because I smoke pot.

No wonder the country's gone to hell in a handbasket.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/01/05:

Of course he did not actually say that is what he wanted, too many democrats and other pro abotion groups jumped on what he was saying and only quoted one line of what he said.

He was quoting form a book on economics that was written a few years ago.

The book was saying that ( and it was shown by a relationship of facts) that the crime rate is now lower and started getting lower with the generation when abortion started.

So he was merley saying that if you continued that way of thought,

After that, the part that no one who wants to know what he really said, is not saying,
He said that this type of action was not correct and only a fool would consider it as an option.

So if you are saying he is wrong, then you are saying you want to abort to solve crime, because he was saying this was not a proper action. Best to find out the real facts of what was said, and not listen to the liberal press that only wants thier version told.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 10/01/05 - UNCTION:

Please explain UNCTION to me. Thanks.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 10/01/05:

Here are some good web sites that give you the information

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sarnian asked on 09/30/05 - Biblical errors problem at hand.

The claim of Biblical inerrancy puts the Christian in the position of not just claiming that the original Bible was free of error (and, remember, none of the original autograph manuscripts exist) but that their modern version of the Bible is the end result of an error-free history of copying and translation beginning with the originals.
Such a position is so specific that it allows one to falsify it simply by reference to the Bible itself.
For example, Gen 32:30 states, "...for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
However, John 1:18 states, "No man hath seen God at any time..."
Both statements cannot be true. Either there is an error of fact, or an error of translation.
In either case, there is an error. And if there is an error, then infallibility of the Bible (in this case the King James Version) is falsified.

A typical defense used here is to look up the meaning of the original Hebrew / Greek, read that one of the words can have multiple meanings, and then pick the meaning that seems to break the contradiction.
For example, the Christian might argue that "seen" or "face" means one thing in the first scripture, and something completely different in the second.
The logical flaw in this approach is that it amounts to saying that the translator should have chosen to use a different word in one of the two scriptures in order to avoid the resulting logical contradiction that now appears in English—that is, the translator made an error.
If no translation error occurred, then an error of fact exists in at least one of the two scriptures.
Appeals to "context" are irrelevant in cases like this where simple declarative statements are involved such as "no one has seen God" and "I have seen God."
Simply put, no "context" makes a contradiction or a false statement, like 2 = 3, true.

If one is prepared to allow for the possibility of translator or transcriber errors, then the claim of Biblical inerrancy is completely undermined since no originals exist to serve as a benchmark against which to identify the errors.
Left only with our error-prone copies of the originals, the claim of infallibility becomes completely vacuous.
Pandora's Box would truly be open: You could have the Bible say whatever you want it to say by simply claiming that words to the contrary are the result of copying or translation/interpretation errors, and nothing could prove you wrong.

Of course many of us are aware of these problems. Surely bucker knew this when he posted (and elsewhere demanded from me) a list of mistakes and contradictions in the bible.
And when he got that list it was not good to him, as it was a "cut and paste" that proved my claim correct.

Why ask for supporting evidence for a position, and when you get that evidence reject it, because it does not suit your own purpose? Isn't that rather hypocrite?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/30/05:

The largest problem is the translation.
Our at least todays man idea that he has to view it from his understanding.

The terms, words that were used 200 years ago, 1000 years ago, 2000 years ago and even futher can give us alot of trouble.

If we do not learn and study the history, look up and cross reference the meanings where the english words come from, yes we have the issues you mentioned,

The real truth, that the word of God is true and correct. It is a way of life, the trouble with man he wishes to try to pick out verses out of context and study it to death, instead of merely living a way of life.

sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 09/28/05 - What the Bible states about the gift of healing.

Hello Everyone,
I place this on the board directly to make sure it is seen by those who teach that healings of medical problems can be cured if one “just has faith. That being said, I want to make it very clear that if we believe in the Bible as God’s word, then we definitely can not believe in the stories told that one just needs to have faith and they can be cured. That is Bull! Notice what Paraclete states on a clarification to CeeBee2.
I quote:
“Clarification/Follow-up by paraclete on 09/27/05 10:03 pm:

you want more detail, much disease particularly cancer, chronic fatigue, is caused by bitterness and unforgiveness. God requires us to release these things before healing is effected. Such things can be very deep and suppressed.”

I say to you all, ask yourselves this, if paraclete statement is true, what kind of bitterness and unforgivness does a baby or 6 months or a child have or suppresses deep within themselves? No baby at such a young precious age can suppress such emotions as anger or unforgivness, yet they die of cancer and other horrific diseases. They do not even know what faith is, so how can they lack faith or not have enough. To have faith one must be to the age of understanding.

Now, to get to the false teaching of those who feel they are given the powerful gift of healing such as the apostles and Jesus had. Forget it, YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT POWER! AND IF YOU DO, IT DEFINITELY IS NOT FROM GOD ALMIGHTY.

Here is why I state this as a fact if one believes in God and what the Bible says. I personally believe that if one is sick and someone prays with them and they tend to be a positive person that their positive attitude can heal them. I believe their faith in God can help them to heal themselves because God is positive and can give a person the strength and endurance they need to fight their ailments. We can not though, create faith within ourselves by our own willpower. Faith is part of the fruitage of God’s holy spirit, or active force.

Galatians 5:22-23 On the other hand, the fruitage of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, 23 mildness, self-control. Against such things th
At times our faith can be weak and needs to be strengthened. Jesus said: “If you . . . know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will the Father in heaven give holy spirit to those asking him!” Luke 11:13 Yes, let us pray for holy spirit, for it can produce in us the faith needed to do God’s will even under the most trying circumstances

(Ephesians 3:20) Now to the one who can, according to his power which is operating in us, do more than superabundantly beyond all the things we ask or conceive,
It is proper to pray for more faith. When Jesus was about to cast a demon out of a young boy, the lad’s father pleaded: “I have faith! Help me out where I need faith!”
Luke 17:5 Now the apostles said to the Lord: “Give us more faith.”
Let us pray for faith, confident that God answers such prayers.

In Bible times healing and raising from the dead, at that time, such “powerful works” were provided to show that the fledgling Christian congregation had God’s backing. Hebrews 2:4 But after having served their purpose, they would be “done away with,” said the apostle Paul.

1 Corinthians 13:8 Love never fails. But whether there are [gifts of] prophesying, they will be done away with; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will be done away with.
Not one of us who are Christians and who follow Jesus do not now observe in the true Christian congregation any God-ordained healings, prophetic messages, or the exorcising of demons. And if there are these things happening in your congregation, then run as fast as you can because those healings are not from God. Here is why and these are not my words but come straight from the Bible.

The Illustrated Bible Dictionary correctly notes: “The purpose of the healing miracles was theological, not medical.” What were some of the theological purposes served by those miracles?

1) For one thing, Jesus’ healing miracles served the purpose of identifying him as the Messiah. And after his death, they helped to establish that God’s blessing was upon the new Christian congregation.
Matthew 11:2-6 But John, having heard in jail about the works of the Christ, sent by means of his own disciples 3 and said to him: “Are you the Coming One, or are we to expect a different one?” 4 In reply Jesus said to them: “Go YOUR way and report to John what YOU are hearing and seeing: 5 The blind are seeing again, and the lame are walking about, the lepers are being cleansed and the deaf are hearing, and the dead are being raised up, and the poor are having the good news declared to them; 6 and happy is he that finds no cause for stumbling in me.”

Hebrews 2:3-4 how shall we escape if we have neglected a salvation of such greatness in that it began to be spoken through [our] Lord and was verified for us by those who heard him, 4 while God joined in bearing witness with signs as well as portents and various powerful works and with distributions of holy spirit according to his will?

These accounts are in the Bible so as to demonstrated that God’s promise to heal mankind in the new world will be fulfilled. They confirm our faith that the time really will come when “no resident will say: ‘I am sick.’ The people that are dwelling in the land will be those pardoned for their error.”Isaiah 33:24
Once these first-century purposes were achieved, miracles were no longer needed
Jesus’ first-century disciples themselves suffered infirmities that were not healed miraculously. This is further evidence that Jesus’ miraculous healing activity as well as that of the apostles was designed to teach important truths, not to provide a medical service. When recommending therapy for Timothy’s frequent cases of sickness, Paul advocated the medicinal use of wine, not faith healing. Paul, who performed miracles of healing, got no relief from the “thorn in the flesh” that kept “slapping” him.
When the apostles died, the gift of healing passed away. Paul himself indicated that this would happen. Likening the Christian congregation to an infant, Paul said: “When I was a babe, I used to speak as a babe, to think as a babe, to reason as a babe; but now that I have become a man, I have done away with the traits of a babe.” The point of his illustration was that miraculous gifts of the spirit were part of the infancy of the Christian congregation. They were “the traits of a babe.” Hence, he stated: “They [miraculous gifts] will be done away with.”1 Corinthians 13:8-11

How can a person claim to have the gift of healing when the Bible clearly states those gifts ended when these apostles died? One believes the Bible to be true or not!

Even if a person lives as healthy a life as his situation permits, sickness may still strike. What then? Is there any harm in going to a faith healer in hopes of being healed? Yes, there is harm. Modern faith healers rarely perform free of charge. And spending money on a faith healer when that money could be spent on medical help could cost us dearly. Besides, why give money to individuals who take advantage of people’s credulity?

Some may argue: ‘Surely, faith healing must have some value if even a small percentage of those who go to the “healers” are healed.’ But it is arguable whether faith healers really heal anyone in a permanent way. The Encyclopedia Britannica acknowledges: “Relatively little controlled research has been achieved on the many unknown factors in faith healing.”

Even if a small number seem to be healed, this is not evidence of holy spirit at work. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said: “Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness.” Matthew 7:22, 23
Jesus also said that certain ones, although disapproved by God, would attract attention to themselves by means of signs: “For false Christ’s and false prophets will arise and will give great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones.” Matthew 24:24

Surely, modern faith healers could be included in the application of those words, with their dramatic presentations, constant demands for money, and claimed miraculous healings. Any good writer can give an account of a sad sobbing story that can pull at the strings of it’s readers heart. Yet be careful, that is one of their tricks of their trade. They spend money given to them by those they mislead to pay for those claiming to have a healing.

Such ones are not following in Jesus’ footsteps. Who, then, are they following? The apostle Paul gives us an indication when he says:
“Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness. But their end shall be according to their works.” 2 Corinthians 11:14, 15
If faith healers do not perform the healings they claim, then they are deceivers, following the path of Satan, “who is misleading the entire inhabited earth.” Revelation 12:9

But what if, in a small minority of cases, they do perform healings? Must not their “powerful works” be effected in the power of Satan and his demons? Yes, that must be the case!

In conclusion, there are and will be cases of sickness, pray to God for support. And whether sick or healthy, learn how eternal life without sickness will indeed be possible. Build up your faith in this trustworthy promise of God by studying the many references to it in the Bible. Learn how God’s purpose in this regard is nearing fulfillment according to his own timetable. Have no doubt, for God’s Word assures us: “He will actually swallow up death forever, and the Sovereign Lord Jehovah will certainly wipe the tears from all faces.”—Isaiah 25:8.

Revelations 21:1-5 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the former heaven and the former earth had passed away, and the sea is no more. 2 I saw also the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God and prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 With that I heard a loud voice from the throne say: “Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. 4 And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.”5 And the One seated on the throne said: “Look! I am making all things new.” Also, he says: “Write, because these words are faithful and true.”

Until that time may we be careful and instead of putting faith in those who claim they can heal but cant not even heal themselves, because the power they claim comes from God really comes from other sources. God would not give power for something that he has already put an end to because it fulfilled its purpose. May we place our faith in the one who has the power to heal us for an eternity. We can start by trusting and putting our faith in what he tells us in the Bible, not in mans interpretation of what he wants us to believe.

1 Thessalonians 5: 21 Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine. 22 Abstain from every form of wickedness.

Take care,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/29/05:

all real faith healers do so without any fee what so ever. There are dozens of them operating every day someone in America.

The majoriy of course work better in third world nations, since the people there are not smart enough to "think" that healings can't work. We often, like yourself, have doubts and not true faith. True faith is not as easy as it sounds.

But Healing from God happens all the time, it is merley man who refuses to see or accept it

It is not found on TV, but in the small back street churches where true men of God work with the commom people.

hOPE12 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 09/28/05 - JUST WONDERING ... AGAIN:

What do you think about not allowing any copy and paste questions, answers, comments, clarifications and follow-ups for one week on this Board? Would you be 'dead in the water' or would you be able to 'swim?'

Please comment ... if you will!


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/28/05:

There should be no cut and paste, if the people don't wish to take the time and answer and/or ask questions that they really have, not merely take up space with long cut and pastes few read.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

hOPE12 asked on 09/28/05 - For All those who think they can Heal others

Hello Everyone,

I was at the hospital not too long ago and a baby, about 6 mmonthes old was dying of cancer. The small baby had treatment which made them frail and weak and the little girl lost all her hair and ability to eat.

I know that If I had the power to heal this baby, I would because it broke my heart to see this baby suffering.

For those out there who claim to have the ability to heal others, how do you walk away from a tiny baby who is suffering and not heal them? If I had the power to do so, I would. How can you not use your power to help the innocent ones? Please explain.

Take care,

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/28/05:

First no "person" has the ability to heal,

God has and allows people to have and use that gift. And it is not like a switch, they real peole who use that gift can only use it when God allows and tells them to.

Jesus when he walked the earth, did not heal everyone, did not feed everyone, why, can't tell you,

The fact is that sin entered the world, and because of it, man now dies, no matter who we are, at some point, we die. The time appointed is not ours or anyone elses to deside. Only God decides for reasons we do not know or understand.

But God does either by pure faith of the ill person, or though his grace and power channeled thouigh someone else, allow healings to happen.

The most amazing one was in Chandler OK about 20 years ago. I was there with a young boy, the doctor in the ER said he had Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, the red blothes were very obvious. they were going to transfer him to one of the major hospitals.

While we prayed around him, you could see the spots actually clearing. By the time the ER doctor returned, there was no sign of it what so ever.

If a man claims he as the power, he is false, no man has the power, but God does choose some men to do his work.

But it is not a healing of anyone and everyone. God will tell them specificly who, when and where.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
hOPE12 rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
kindj rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
starshine rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 09/27/05 - New Orleans Police Chief "Retires"

Today, the New Orleans police chief "retired". Well, it's about time. Under this man's watch, the police in large numbers deserted their jobs and more disgraceful, he **fed lies** to the media about what happened inside the Super Dome(as did the mayor) during those horrible days.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/27/05:

They need to get the mayor and govenor next.

They actions caused so much of the trouble for not following the plans that were in place. Then they just trying blaming everyone else.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sarnian asked on 09/26/05 - For bucker and others : failing "prophesies" . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dear bucker,

the 7 days of your "prophesy" have passed, and NOTHING has happened.
Not even a couple of angels knocking on my door.
No stars moved suddenly to form a "Hello John" sign.
No trumpet soundings accompanied by a personal visit of Jesus or his daddy.
No visitors from "beyond".
No midnight appearance of ghostly entities.
No lottery winnings or sudden unexpected inheritances.
No letter of the taxman reducing my donations to him.
Nothing, absolutely NOTHING.
This lack of fullfilment deeply baffles me.
You were so sure of your prophesy ......

I just wanted to let you know that.


Main points of consideration when writing self fullfillng prophesies :

Quantity, quantity, quantity!
Produce as many of this type of nonsense , and for sure one or more will fit some natural occurance.

Always remember : vagueness!
There will always be enough people who are eager to believe it and who will find a connection between reality and your phoney prophecies !
So don't be specific. The vaguer the better. Don't get caught on your own words!

Use trademarks!
You also need some trademark : a big beard is good , another good one is being semi-illiterate : let your daughter or your grand daughter write the prophesies down !
That bowl of water from the sink after doing the dishes is a good one , but that has been done by Nostradamus already .
Just find something else that will intrigue people .

Distraction, lot's of distraction. Cover yourself!
When they interview you , never make any clear statement!
Babble on while looking at the horizon , changing the subject regularly .
When you post someone, add other subjects, include lot's of distractions.
NEVER let them catch you on facts!


Any further news on these prophesies?
Or any comments?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/27/05:

you know I bet the people of Sodom did not know those men were angels that went to save Lot. They thought there were just men.

Mary just thought Jesus was the gardener not the risen Savior when she first saw her.

How often we see or may be visited by angles and never know it.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

HANK1 asked on 09/26/05 - HOW'S THIS FOR APPRECIATION:

From a VOLUNTEER who worked at the Convention Center in New Orleans during the Katrina affair:

"I just witnessed selfish, arrogant, unappreciative behavior by the very people who need help the most. Now these same people who cursed me refused my cities generosity, who refuse to help themselves are DEMANDING handouts on their own terms!!!!!!! They prance around as if they are owed something, and when they do receive a handout, they say it's not good enough!"

The e-mail was forwarded to me by a friend. It was quite long. This is just an excerpt. I didn't post the real disgusting part.

Any comments?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/26/05:

Yes, the film of the person who claimed they had not eaten in 3 days, but when they got one of those Army meal packs, threw it away because they claimed they would not "eat" that sort of stuff.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 09/26/05 - Moral Question

Hello Christians:

Can an artist make beautiful art even if he happens to be a pedophile? If you think that a pedophile artist can make good art, would YOU pay to see it?

Would you buy a refrigerator from GE if you found out that the president of GE was a wife beater?

Inquiring minds want to know.


PS> Oh, by the way, I'm talking about Roman Polanski. He has a new movie coming out that is being widely advertised. Lots of people say it's good.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/26/05:

well don't know who Roman Polanski is but in general

Most of Hollywood and movies and TV are made, produced and starred in by all sort of people from pedophiles, wife beaters, rapists and others.

They live and work in a sinful world. And by the values of this world, do great things.

It was like the Villiage People ( I will leave Elton John alone) I was one of those sheltered people, did not realise that they were of a different life style.
I loved thier music, and still do,
Does not mean I endorse thier life style or what they stood for.

We can find evil in almost anything or anyone in one form or another.

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

bucker asked on 09/26/05 - The Plan!

This was sent to me. Thought I would send it on, and see what others thought about it..

You gotta love Robin Williams......
Even if he's nuts! Leave it to Robin
Williams to come up with the perfect plan. What we
need now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and
repeat this message.

Robin Williams' plan...(Hard to arguewith this logic!)
"I see a lot of people yelling for peace
but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So,
here's one plan."

1) "The US will apologize to the world
for our "interference" in their affairs, past &
present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Tojo,
Noriega, Milosevic, Hussein, and the rest of those
'good ole boys', we will never "interfere" again.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all
over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea,
the Middle East, and the Philippines. They don't
want us there. We would station troops at our
borders. No one allowed sneaking through holes in
the fence.

3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to
get their affairs together and leave We'll give
them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder
will be gathered up and deported immediately,
regardless of whom or where they are. They're
illegal!!! France will welcome them.

4) All future visitors will be
tho-roughly checked and limited to 90 days unless
given a special permit!!!! No one from a terrorist
nation will be allowed in. If you don't like it
there, change it yourself and don't hide here.
Asylum w ould never be available to anyone. We
don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5) No foreign "students" over age 21.
The older ones are the bombers. If they don't
attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.

6) The US will make a strong effort to
become self-sufficient energy wise. This will
include developing nonpolluting sources of energy
but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the
Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope
for a while.

7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil
producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If
they don't like it, we go some place else. They can
go somewhere else to sell their production. (About
a week of the wells filling up the storage sites
would be enough.)

8) If there is a famine or other natural
catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere."
They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain,
cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what
we give them are stolen or given to t he army. The
people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an
isolated island some place. We don't need the spies
and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building
would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for
illegal aliens.

10) All Americans must go to charm and
beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly
Americans" any longer. The Language we speak is
ENGLISH...learn it...or LEAVE...Now, isn't that a
winner of a plan?
"The Statue of Liberty is no longer
saying 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled
masses.' She's got a baseball bat and she's
yelling, 'you want a piece of me?' "

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/26/05:

I would also allow Germany to take back France and parts of Europe since we interfered with thier little "misunderstanding" in the 40's

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 09/26/05 - Reporters Exaggerated

Today on Fox News, an official gave some facts about what went on at the Super Dome during the Katrina disaster. It turns out that media stories were **grossly exaggerated**.

Sad day for journalism. Very sad. And, political hatemongers using the lies to further their agendas. :(

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/26/05:

Yes, no hundres dead in the SuperDome

But yet in thier hate speaches, they still say about "bodies" laying all around.

In fact there were less than 10, and 4 died of natural causes, 2 or 3 were found outside and merely stored inside.

They were not laying around, but in a freezer on ice.

But even the government beleived the lies, they showed up with a tractor trailer and a entire med team to clean up the hundreds of bodies.

Somehow, major news crews don't want to retract and show it was not that bad.

In fact the actual number of murders were down for that week from the normal number they have in the city.

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

curious98 asked on 09/25/05 - Love thy neighbor!

Associated Press
Sept. 23, 2005 10:20 AM

“NUEVO LAREDO, Mexico - Mexico, coming to its powerful northern neighbor's aid for the second time this month, promised to set up shelters for Americans left homeless by Hurricane Rita and offered medical care, water and vehicle escorts to Americans already fleeing the storm.

Nuevo Laredo Mayor Daniel Pena ordered police officers to guide the evacuees, most of Americans who avoided shelters in the United States after the chaos that dominated Hurricane Katrina's aftermath.

It was the second time this month Mexico has come to the aid of the United States. After Hurricane Katrina devastated much of the Gulf Coast, Mexico sent an army unit to Texas and a navy ship to Louisiana to bring aid to the storm's victims.”

Is not it somewhat ironic to see how your southerner neighbor – who is rather looked down upon by many Americans (especially Texans who have recently created the Minutemen Vigilantes, who do not remember any more Lincoln’s famous quote: Ballots are the rightful and peaceful successors to bullets) – is quite willing to help.

That reminds me of Matthew 5:38-39, when he says: whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Or “'You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:30)

Also, “The Day After Tomorrow”, a picture that depicts a global weather catastrophe scenario where cyclones, tornadoes, tidal waves and the start of the next ice age take centre stage, as a direct consequence of the Greenhouse Effect, and while paleoclimatologist (someone who studies ancient weather patterns) Prof Adrian Hall, finds himself headed north towards a freezing New York to reach his son and save the world at the same time, while everybody else, including the President of the United States, is heading south to avoid the cold, and settle down in Mexico.

Same director of Independence Day.

Maybe Mexicans carry out better than Americans Christian guidelines and commandments…

Any comments?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/25/05:

Assumeing people look down upon Mexican citizens because they don't like people breaking US laws and comming into the US illegally is a very sad generalization.

Those that come to the US legally add alot to our society, those that don't have no respect for the law, since they come here illegally to start with.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
kindj rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
curious98 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 09/23/05 - This is about the constitutional right to bear arms.

This is from the Sierra Times
“Something happened in New Orleans during the course of dealing with Hurricane Katrina that is being ignored by the mainstream press, and yet is as chilling as anything that has been reported: The police commissioner ordered the door-to-door confiscation of private firearms from law-abiding citizens, stating that only "law enforcement" would be allowed to possess arms.”

There was no national declaration of militarisation of law enforcement and even if there was do you think that an order to confiscate persona legal fire arms is constitutional?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/24/05:

One thing is right, New Orleans proved that citizens do need to bear arms. Since the "bad guys" had guns the only way that normal citizens had to protect thierself was to have thier own guns. Since it was obvoius the police and military could not for days.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
powderpuff rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

excon asked on 09/23/05 - Pat Robertson and me - two peas in a pod

Hello Christians:

I think the wrath of God is going to wipe out the Bible Belt. The message is clear: God wants a gay president.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/23/05:

Will Hilary be close enough?

excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ou812 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 09/22/05 - Do all Christians agree with this statement?

"We desire the good will of all mankind, and we desire the advancement of all mankind, and we pray God to bless every man that is striving for the betterment of humanity in any walks of life; and we say of every man who believes that Jesus is the Christ and who proclaims it: O God, bless that man. But we cannot pray for those who pretend to preach the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and deny the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, and who proclaim that he was only a man. Jesus is the Redeemer of the world, the Savior of mankind, who came to earth with a divinely appointed mission to die for the redemption of mankind. Jesus Christ is literally the Son of God, the Only Begotten in the flesh. He is our Redeemer, and we worship him, and we praise God for every individual upon the face of the earth who worships our Lord and Master as the Redeemer of the world"

-- Heber Jedediah Grant

Do all Christians agree with this statement? Please to make your answer from a Christian perspective.


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/22/05:

"We desire the good will of all mankind, and we desire the advancement of all mankind,

** no we do not desire or expect anything from all of mankind. In fact we expect to be shun or even hated for our beleifs from most of mankind.

and we pray God to bless every man that is striving for the betterment of humanity in any walks of life;

***We pray for all people, but for thier salvation and that God open thier eyes to the truth.

and we say of every man who believes that Jesus is the Christ and who proclaims it: O God, bless that man.

***We should pray for God to bless all who live in his will, have accepted Christ and who do the work of the Lord

But we cannot pray for those who pretend to preach the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and deny the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, and who proclaim that he was only a man.

*** We pray for them, but that God will correct thier teachings and the God will convict their hearts to the truth

Jesus is the Redeemer of the world, the Savior of mankind, who came to earth with a divinely appointed mission to die for the redemption of mankind. Jesus Christ is literally the Son of God, the Only Begotten in the flesh. He is our Redeemer, and we worship him, and we praise God for every individual upon the face of the earth who worships our Lord and Master as the Redeemer of the world"

* Jesus is that and so much more

Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Laura asked on 09/22/05 - What a mess!!

Since the nature of storms like Katrina and Rita as far as direction is concerned, people just can't leave at the first thought that it "might" be headed their way. So usually people wait until three days or so before issuing evacuations and such. But looking at Texas right now the highways are at a virtual standstill. People will run out of gas before they can really get anywhere. One lady talking to a news person by cell phone was turning back toward her home because she had been on the road over 8 hours and only got 10 miles. How can we expect the government to be prepared for something like this unless they issue mandatory evacuations a week or two in advance of a storm that "might" hit a particular area??

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/22/05:

They can "issue" all the evacts you want, but people still don't leave. We have no real way to force people to leave

And really never force them to leave anyway.
So in general there is never really a mandatory exac. Since we don't make them go anyway.

Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Erewhon asked on 09/22/05 - Pope Benedict set to ban homosexuals from entering the RCC ministry.

My question is,

"How is a person's gender preference discovered?"

Is there a fool-proof test that will identify homosexuals from heterosexuals? If so, what is it?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/22/05:

First this ban should have been in place for years. But in the seminary homosexual activity is fairly open and known to others

They are at this time looking into investigations at all the major seminaries

Test, Ask them,

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

HANK1 asked on 09/18/05 - CHRISTIAN UNDERGROUND:

... informs us that "The Minuteman Project, which a group of citizens launched last April in Arizona to protect the border against the infiltration of illegal aliens from Mexico, is expanding on Oct. 1.

Minuteman volunteers will add the rest of the Mexican border and eight states along the Canadian border to their patrolling responsibilities. The group not only hopes to spot and report illegal immigrants trying to sneak into the U.S. It will ratchet up the pressure on politicians to take action against illegal immigration and picket/advertise against businesses who hire illegal immigrants.

Leaders of the Minuteman Project reportedly want to patrol the Canadian border in order to guard against terrorists, drug smugglers, and other criminal elements that they fear might try to slip across."

I really admire these warriors. Allow the citizens of the United States to take over and solve problems. What do you think?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/18/05:

Let me see, they have no power of arrest, they legally can not detain the people comming in.

Pack a pic nic lunch and watch the illegals comming in to the US, get your court and turn it in perhaps with photos to the authorities, who do nothing after they are already into the US.

Guess I used to do that when I was 20, I would drive my motorcycle to the border and what about 100 illegals hit the fence, authorites would get about 10 or so, the rest would get into the US. I enjoyed the show.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
tomder55 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

paraclete asked on 09/18/05 - So now the Pope is saying what others think

Pope's Katrina envoy: 'Shameful' poverty in U.S.

Sunday, September 18, 2005 Posted: 0017 GMT (0817 HKT)

VATICAN CITY (AP) -- Pope Benedict XVI's envoy to the United States to bring aid for Hurricane Katrina's victims said Saturday that many of them have been struck by "shameful" poverty in "rich America."

The German-born Archbishop Paul Cordes, who heads the Vatican's charity organization, traveled to Louisiana and Mississippi last week to express the pontiff's solidarity with the victims as well as bring aid.

He said that Catholic Charities had allocated $6 million (euro4.9 million).

"Many were struck by ... poverty, at times shameful, in rich America," Cordes told Vatican Radio.

"I do not want to hide my personal fear -- that the superpower isolates itself and remains isolated even in dealing with the disaster," Cordes said. "In this dramatic emergency, the United States must not be abandoned."

Cordes spent four days touring Baton Rouge and New Orleans in Louisiana, and Biloxi, Mississippi.

"The weakness experienced by the United States faced with this catastrophe" serves to "destroy all of our beliefs about self-sufficiency," the Vatican official said. "Thus, for me, in the bad part of this event there is also the hope, for many citizens, of seeing that the world is greater than the United States," Cordes said.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/18/05:

Did not Jeusus tell us about the same thing,
we will have poor always.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

bucker asked on 09/17/05 - half full, or half empty?

If two people. each holding up a glass, with water half way to the top, and also half way to the bottom.
Are they half full, or half empty? Now, if one says mine is holf full, and the other says his is half empty, which is right. Does that mean that the one is not half full, just because the man said the word wrong. Would you try to decide if the galsses were half full, or half empth, or would you all jump on the mispronounced word, and miss the real meaning of the question?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/18/05:

The smarter man would would see the lack of schooling in the other and take the water from the other so he would have a full glass.

Unless of course our government taxes the water to give to those that don't have any water, the government would then of course waster most of it, and then no one would have any.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Bradd asked on 09/16/05 - Bush CUTS Spending to "Assist Victims"

I'm not making this up.

Ruling out tax increases (read, repeal of Estate Tax) to help pay for Katrina disaster, Bush has decided to CUT federal spending so that money is available for victims of tragedy.

He did not specify just what cuts will be made but do you think it's his adventure in Iraq, or maybe he'll decide milk for poor children isn't really necessary, maybe even drop any flood control projects.

Welcome to Oz. The man is without a clue.

Typical Republican/right wing strategy. Reduce taxes but don't bother telling the nation that the levees on you-know-where will not be finished.

Are we that stupid? Mr. Bush seems to think so.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/17/05:

First of course the estate tax has not been in efect for several years. It is merely set to come back into effect.

The estate tax is a very unfair tax that causes many people loose thier family business or family farms when the older family memeber dies and they now have to pay more taxes on property, inventory and money that taxes were already paid on.

Since it does not effect corporations but family owned business, it is not the ultra rich that suffers from this but the middle class that work so hard to grow a business but merely loss it for unfair taxes.

Why should one pay taxes to die.

And we see that what they want to do is to stop spending and wasting money.
So what is so wrong with that??

The fact that the US Feds sent tons of money to LA and thier local boards wasted so much of the money is a good example that merely throwing money at that issue is not the cure.

More boards, more oversight only causes more fraud and waste.

The plan to stop other wasteful spending sounded like the only smart plan.

Raising taxes to spend more and more is why we are in the trouble we are now.

Bradd rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Choux rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 09/14/05 - I just got this from a Bush supporter. Is he right about what he says?

The American Spectator
By Ben Stein

Ben Stein is a writer, actor, economist and lawyer living in Beverly Hills and Malibu. He also writes "Ben Stein's Diary" in every issue
of The American Spectator.

Published 9-2-05

A few truths for those who have ears and eyes and care to know the truth:

1.) The hurricane that hit New Orleans and Mississippi and Alabama was an astonishing tragedy. The suffering and loss of life and peace of mind of the residents of those areas is acutely horrifying.

2.) George Bush did not cause the hurricane. Hurricanes have been happening for eons. George Bush did not create them or unleash this one.

3.) George Bush did not make this one worse than others. There have been far worse hurricanes than this before George Bush was born.

4.) There is no overwhelming evidence that global warming exists as a man-made phenomenon. There is no clear-cut evidence that global
warming even exists. There is no clear evidence that if it does exist it makes hurricanes more powerful or makes them aim at cities with
large numbers of poor people. If global warming is a real phenomenon, which it may well be, it started long before George Bush was inaugurated, and would not have been affected at all by the Kyoto treaty, considering that Kyoto does not cover the world's worst polluters - China, India and Brazil. In a word, George Bush had zero to do with causing this hurricane. To speculate otherwise is belief in sorcery.

6.) George Bush had nothing to do with the hurricane contingency plans for New Orleans. Those are drawn up by New Orleans and
Louisiana. In any event, the plans were perfectly good: Mandatory evacuation. It is in no way at all George Bush's fault that about 20
percent of New Orleans neglected to follow the plan. It is not his fault that many persons in New Orleans were too confused to realize
how dangerous the hurricane would be. They were certainly warned. It's not George Bush's fault that there were sick people and old people and people without cars in New Orleans. His job description does not include making sure every adult in America has a car, is in good health, has good sense and is mobile.

7.) George Bush did not cause gangsters to shoot at rescue helicopters taking people from rooftops, did not make gang bangers rape young girls in the Superdome, did not make looters steal hundreds of weapons, in short make New Orleans into a living hell.

8.) George Bush is the least racist President in mind and soul there has ever been and this is shown in his appointments over and over. To say otherwise is scandalously untrue.

9.) George Bush is rushing every bit of help he can to New Orleans and Mississippi and Alabama as soon as he can. He is not a magician. It takes time to organize huge convoys of food and now they are starting to arrive. That they get in at all considering the lawlessness of the city is a miracle of bravery and organization.

10.) There is not the slightest evidence at all that the war in Iraq has diminished the response of the government to the emergency. To say otherwise is pure slander.

11.) If the energy the news media puts into blaming Bush for an Act of God worsened by stupendous incompetence by the New Orleans
city authorities and the malevolence of the criminals of the city were directed to helping the morale of the nation, we would all be a lot
better off.

12.) New Orleans is a great city with many great people. It will recover and be greater than ever. Sticking pins into an effigy of George Bush that does not resemble him in the slightest will not speed the process by one day.

13.) The entire episode is a dramatic lesson in the breathtaking callousness of government officials at the ground level. Imagine if
Hillary Clinton had gotten her way and the government was in charge of your health care.

God bless all of those dear people who are suffering so much, and God bless those helping them, starting with George Bush.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/15/05:

No we all know from the "news" media that Bush caused this by making a deal with the Russians who have a weather machine.

Bush did it for the sole reason to kill off more blacks, so that Republicans can take over the politics in that area.

Bush we all know had the military to use special scopes so they could save all the white people first.

Of course I don't know why the liberals and the CLU really care what happened to anyone there. They don't beleive in God, they beleive in evolution. So they have to beleive in survivial of the fitess.
For the athist this is merley nature destroying the poor, weak, ill and lesser people of society.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 09/14/05 - Separate but Equal

Special to the Wall Street Journal by Daniel Goldman.

"The 372,000 schoolchildren displaced by Hurricane Katrina are stirring an old debate about whether separate education can really be equal.

A number of states, including Utah and Texas, want to teach some of the dispersed Gulf Coast students in shelters instead of in local public schools, a stance supported by the Bush administration and some private education providers. But advocates for homeless families and civil rights oppose that approach.

At the center of the dispute is whether the McKinney-Vento Act, a landmark federal law banning educational segregation of homeless children, should apply to the evacuees. In addition, because many of the stranded students are black, holding classes for them at military bases, convention centers or other emergency housing sites could run afoul of racial desegregation plans still operating in some school districts."

What say you????

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/15/05:

They should be happy to be alive, and glad that school districts have the funds to even provide for thier education, esp since the majority have no ID, no shot records, no school records or anything else your child or my child would HAVE to have to even step foot in a public school

The black race hate leaders need to find real issues to deal with and stop milking and finding racial issues where there is not any. Their entire agenda over this flood merley shows how little respect for truth and how much they want headlines for thierself.

Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

Choux asked on 09/14/05 - Exorcists Comvention

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Orthodontists have national conventions, as do lawyers and computer salespeople. So why not exorcists? At the end of his weekly general audience Wednesday Pope Benedict greeted Italian exorcists who, he disclosed, are currently holding their national convention.

The Pope encouraged them to "carry on their important work in the service of the Church."

Problem was that until the Pope spoke few people outside the inner circle knew that a convention of Beelzebub-busters was going on, presumably in Rome.

And where were they holding it? In a church, a hotel, a graveyard?

"They try to keep these things quiet," said a Catholic professor who has dealings with exorcists.

The Roman Catholic Church has shown growing interest in exorcism in Italy.

In 1999, the Vatican issued its first updated ritual for exorcism since 1614 and warned that the devil is still at work.

The official Roman Catholic exorcism starts with prayers, a blessing and sprinkling of holy water, the laying on of hands on the possessed, and the making of the sign of the cross.

It ends with an "imperative formula" in which the devil is ordered to leave the possessed.

The formula begins: "I order you, Satan..." It goes on to denounce Satan as "prince of the world" and "enemy of human salvation." It ends: "Go back, Satan."

What say you?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/15/05:

Exorcist is a minor order within both the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

Also it is normally a postition within many dioceses across the world. Although not often used other than to investigate possible cases. Almost all are shown to have medical or natural causes and do not fit the churches requirements. The Catholic church has very specific rules of investigation before an exorcism could be performed.

Choux rated this answer Average Answer

divisionbell asked on 09/15/05 - mixed messages

I went to a catholic soup kitchen yesterday. My christian friends tell me something of the sort that if you serve the lowest among you, you are serving Jesus or something like that. I thought it would be a good experience to see gods people in action serving their lord. The man in charge was either having a bad day or serving his lord makes him mean. He was yelling at the poor people there criticizing them and putting them down at every chance. I heard him yelling things like LADY LADY WHAT ARE YOU DOING!!!! and when someone dropped their plastic silver ware on the floor, he yelled GO AHEAD THROW IT ON THE FLOOR YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT ANY OF OUR HELP ANYWAY and gathering up trays he was yelling things like YOU CAN'T MAKE IT EASY ON ME CAN YOU and YOU BETTER BE GRATEFUL TO EAT EVERYTHING WE GIVE YOU DON'T DARE WASTE ANYTHING. There was a man in a wheelchair pushed way to the side but still sticking out in the isle a little bit the man yelled GET OUT OF THE ISLE MOVE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE BUDDY and did nothing to help move him to a better spot. There was a woman talking on a cell phone telling the person on the other end that she would be home soon the mean guy yelled YOU KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT CELL PHONES TURN IT OFF NOW!!!! IF YOU CAN AFFORD A CELL PHONE YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING HERE.
I can't remember specific bible verses from the lesson my christian friend told me but I thought it meant something like taking care of the poor would be the same as taking care of or serving Jesus. IOW if you serve a poor person, do it the same as if that person is god. Did I get it wrong? Handing out food to poor people should be done with the same love and cheerfulness that you would have if you were serving Jesus a meal at your home right? I could be getting confused about it, but if I understand correctly, it seemed this soup kitchen was acting like a bunch of spoiled disrespectful brats doing chores for people they despise.
Still not sure what christianity is but one thing I know for sure its confusing. I can't remember the bible verse but the meaning I got was something like no one is better than anyone else and you should treat each other as well as you would god. When I went to see it in action I saw something totally different then what my friend told me.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/15/05:

I will agree, what is the name of that Catholic Church, I will be happy to inquire about the details.

Also "always" stop people doing stupid things and take them to the side and ask them about it. He could have well just been having a bad day. And merely not realising what he is doing.

Your action should have been to ask to speak to him, if he would not talk privately then merely call it to his attention where he is.

Also remember while it is not right, this is most likely a job for him, and he deals with the same people every day, and we without the full details often only see one view that still may not be correct in the way they did it, but may have more reason.

Example, I have had to on several occassions chase one man out of church that reaches in and takes money "out" of the collection plate.

If you saw me merely telling him I was going to call the police for comming in my church you would not understand why or what had happened.

divisionbell rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 09/15/05 - Predictions-Judge Roberts and Religion

Judge Roberts is in the process of being appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Here are Alan Dershowitz' predictions, based on Robert's answers so far, as to how he will decide on important issues.

"Although several days of questioning of senators have proved primarily that Judge John Roberts is brilliantly adept at not answering questions, I think I have learned a few things from his non-answers. I am even prepared to put them in the form of predictions, on the record, so that people can go back and check them against his actual performance on the Court. So here are my Roberts predictions:

1.He will not overrule Roe v. Wade, though he will not extend it beyond current Supreme Court holdings.

2. He will dramatically lower the wall of separation between church and state, and be a reliable vote with Justices Scalia and Thomas on this critical issue.

3. He will uphold the death penalty against both substantive and procedural challenges and will narrow the opportunity of death row inmates to challenge their convictions.

4. He will recognize the President’s broad power to fight terrorism though he will apply literal restrictions on that power that are explicit in the Bill of Rights. In this respect, he will be more like Justice Scalia than Chief Justice Rehnquist.

5. He will not overrule existing gay rights decisions, but he will probably not expand them. In this respect he may be closer to Justice Kennedy than to Chief Justice Rehnquist.

6. He will defer to precedent more than Justice Scalia does, but will not be reluctant to overrule decisions that have not become settled law or that remain controversial within the Court. This will be most evident in his church-state decisions.

7. He will read civil rights statutes enacted by Congress quite narrowly, but if Congress is clear, he will be reluctant to strike down Congressional enactments.

8. He will not become part of the right-wing trend toward striking down federal statutes under a restrictive reading of the Commerce Clause, though in clear cases he will do so.

9. He would not have joined the Equal Protection opinion in Bush v. Gore, but he would have joined the Article 2 decision. In the unlikely event that another Bush v. Gore were to come to the Court, he would vote for the Republican candidate, but only if there were a plausible legal argument in his favor. He would – whether consciously or unconsciously - find the same argument more plausible if made by a Republican candidate than if made by a Democratic candidate.

10. Finally, he will move away from the imperial chief justiceship established by his mentor Rehnquist and will rule the court with less of an iron hand. I wont’ try to predict whether he will remove those ridiculous Gilbert and Sullivan stripes that Rehnquist sported. I think he will be of two minds on that issue. His personal predilection would be against wearing the stripes, but he will not want to suggest criticism of his former boss by removing them immediately."

What say you??

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/15/05:

That he only has one vote and his vote will be close to the person he is replacing.

His appointment has little effect on the balance of the board what so ever.

Chief Justice has only one vote and no special power except to pick who rights the opinion if his vote is on the winning side.

The next selection will have more importance

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

Choux asked on 09/13/05 - Typical German Man-LOL!!

Ananova:(European News Service?)

***Inventor turns dead cats into diesel fuel****

A German inventor says he's found a way to make cheap diesel fuel out of dead cats.

Dr Christian Koch, 55, from Kleinhartmannsdorf, said his method uses old tyres, weeds and animal cadavers.

They are heated up to 300 Celsius to filter out hydrocarbon which is then turned into diesel by a catalytic converter.

He said the resulting "high quality bio-diesel" costs just 15 pence per litre.

Koch said the cadaver of a fully grown cat can produce 2.5 litres of fuel - meaning around 20 cats are needed for a full tank.

He said: "I tank my car with my own diesel mixture and have driven it for 105,000 miles without any problems."

Annelise Krauss of the Dresden Animal Protection Association blasted Koch's new diesel though, saying: "This is as bad as experimenting on animals."


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/14/05:

Just hand t his image of someone throwing cats ( not dead ) into thier fuel tank of thier car.

When I was in college there was a book, sorta sick book but a book, called
101 uses for a dead cat. This would be 102

sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

ROLCAM asked on 09/14/05 - Here and now.

Are there any Persons Demonically Possessed in the 21st Century?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/14/05:

Yes and many of them find there way to and the Christianity Board.

Merely look at the "list" of questions posted as of late.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
Pete_Hanysz rated this answer Bad/Wrong Answer
ROLCAM rated this answer Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Choux asked on 09/09/05 - Is this Ethical?

The paramedics left about a half hour ago, and while they were here, one of them told me that last night in New Orleans, the police patroling came across a criminal shooting at a medivac vehicle. They took positions and shot the sniper dead.

Then, they left the sniper in the street as a warning to others.

Do you think leaving the sniper in the street was moral/ethical??

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/10/05:

Of course a story heard third or fourth hand most likely has obvious issues with it.

But most of the dead untill just recently have been left to lay, rather dealing with those in need. Also very well, police and or resue was busy witht he person or persons needing care.

Perhaps it was deemed to dangous from possible other gun man to go to where the gun man was

In any case the safety and the well being of the innocent victims have to be looked at first.

Those causing such troubles, shooting at resure people get what they deserve and should not have any pity on them.

Choux rated this answer Average Answer
powderpuff rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Yiddishkeit rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

revdauphinee asked on 09/07/05 - donations

folks if you donate to the red cross during this crisis do not do so on line many scam sites are appearing and the money is being diverted to Brazil somewhere if you can donate do it to your local red cross office and not by credit card on line .Thank you

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/08/05:

As long as you sign on to thier site directly it is very safe.

But with them as with your bank, paypal, credit card companies and more. You can not trust emails you recieved with 'links"
or links off of other web sites. They can go to fake sites. But it is still completely safe if you take the time to type and log in to the site directly.

revdauphinee rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sarnian asked on 09/08/05 - Homosexuality and "fundamental christian" intolerance

From me you may believe whatever you want.
From me you may interpret the bible in anyway you prefer.
From me you may live your life anyway you want.

But according to what I understand from the words of Jesus, Gods word is there for everyone.
You believe and accept that word or you don't : it's your choice.

Jesus stated that it is your Christian task to spread the "word".
Jesus NEVER stated that it is your task to enforce others to live by the "word".

So what gives anybody the right to try to prevent or stop other people to get happy by marrying each other?
Has anyone here perhaps been appointed by God as his earthly representative for Final Judgement?

Homosexuality is neither my cup of tea, but that's beside the point.

Gods word is about what YOU should do, and what YOU should not do.
Not about what someone else should or should not do.

Any well-mannered reaction is welcome.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/08/05:

Yes we are to tell others about Christ

And we are also to tell our brother when they not living according to his will,
Since at that time the "church" was the final authority, we are even to take them to the church if they do not correct that action. And in the end, we are to treat them as Gentiles ( shun them) if they will not correct.

So those not living properly are to be treated as out casts, not merely accepted.

Love them us, accept thier life styles no.

As for as the US, since it is a nation based on the Christian principle, the laws were and still should be following those principles. Christians has a much right as those immoral and deviant people are in trying to have the laws follow thier way of life.

And thier life styles do effect all of us, since nations are judged by God for the behfvior of its people. So we all can and will suffer from this nations immorral behaviors and acceptance of it.

sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

powderpuff asked on 09/08/05 - Homosexuality and Racism


You have repeatedly accused me of being intolerant toward homosexuality and homosexuals and if not, you suggest that, at least, I am probably a racist. I would like you to show me the proof.

Here are some of the comments you have made about me today:

"There are many references.
F.i. Powderpuff in Homosexuality and ....See : Homosexuality and "fundamental christian" intolerance


No, I don't state that. Where did you get that idea?"

>>me here: YES you did, and there is more....<<

"Example ?
Powerderpuf. Homosexuality ...
See it and understand what i'm driving at.

specially if you rteceive hatefull remarks about that.
(powderpuff, Homosexuality ...)

you surely are at the edge of racism in your post on drugsuse in the dome."

>>this is me again: If you think my post is on the 'edge' of racism you are reading something that is not there. I have not 'seen' the news. I don't watch much television. I have not read a lot of the printed news. I don't get the news paper and I've tried to limit the amount of news I read online about this disaster. I have not spoken to my daughter or her husband about the races of the people taking shelter in the Astrodome. My post had nothing to do with race. It had nothing to do with 'poor' people. It had everything to do with junkies screwing the system once again, re-victimizing the victims of Katrina.

I would appreciate it if you would stop accusing me of things you know nothing about. If you can prove I am a racist and intolerant or hateful toward homosexuals, do it. If not, please stop your attacks.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/08/05:

First there is nothing wrong with being morally correct and calling a sin a sin.

Homosexual behavior is immoral and has no place in any progressive society.

It is merely a sign of a disgraceful and declining society.

So there is no reason to be tolerant for something sick and disgraceful. One has to call the act what it is.

We should really feel sorry for those that cannot live in a life style acceptable to God.

Don't ever be sorry for teaching and standing up for the truth. Those living in sin fall back to name calling when they can't justify thier sinful lives.

sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sarnian asked on 09/07/05 - Definition ..............................................................

How about the position of some Christians that their right to freedom OF religion is abridged when they are not allowed to violate the rationalists' right to freedom FROM religion.
Do you agree with that position, or do you have another view?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/07/05:

What "right" to freedom from religion?

don't seem to ever see that in the constitution.

paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
sarnian rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer

Choux asked on 09/06/05 - Fundi-Christian Senator Speaks

From Action 4 News At 11 PM
WTAE-TV CH 4 (ABC) Pittsburgh

[CC] 00:05:40 Senator Rick Santorum is criticizing the government's emergency response to hurricane Katrina victims. But he's also criticizing the ones who chose to ride out the storm. "I mean, you have people who don't heed those warnings and then put people at risk as a result of not heeding those warnings. There may be a need to look at **tougher penalties** on those who decide to ride it out and understand that there are consequences to not leaving."

What are your comments?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/06/05:

Yes, along with the stupid people who will still not leave thier homes, causing more future rescue, more illness possible, and only confusing the resuce operation.

Evacuation that is mandatory, should be mandatory,

Choux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

powderpuff asked on 09/05/05 - News from inside the Astodome

I just got a call from my daughter who has spent most of the last 3 days inside the Astrodome in Houston. Her husband is working there with FEMA in the Social Security section and my daughter is volunteering in the medical department (after the immediate medical crisis with people in need of treatments and medications, she will be switched to helping with young children's needs).

Things are running smoothly, people are getting the medical treatment they need and all are being offered and given prophylactic antibiotics. Tetnus shots are being offered to everyone. A system has been set up for people who have been separated from family members to get them reunited. People who are on Social Security benefits are being identified so that they will continue to receive their benefits and those who have lost their SS cards are being issued replacement cards.

Though some of the other shelters around Houston have nicer amenities, such as air mattresses, comforters, and TVs, the refugees are very much relieved and thankful for the help and comforts they are now receiving.

They need all the help they can get. This is going to be a very long term recovery effort.

My daughter and her husband are home for a few hours to shower and rest before going back for another 3 day shift. President Bush is due to make an appearance at the Astrodome sometime today, and my daughter and her husband were happy to be able to leave for a reprieve during that time.

No question, just wanted to let you know, victims' suffering is now being tended to. Efforts are running smoothly in Texas, so far anyway :)

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/05/05:

Of course the news prefers to show and talk to the unhappy people, complaining of sleeping on the floor, saying they are not being fed properly and how bad it is there.

Sad the news can't show the real story

powderpuff rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

arcura asked on 09/04/05 - Here is an artile on Plan Parenthood everone should read.

Agree or not....
Go here to read it.

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/05/05:

Since the author took toward the end a somewhat negitive opinion of the group, most likley his writting carrer is over at least in the libeal press.

Planned parenthood is the closest thing to the SS death camps we have in the US, and have killed more people than the Germans did.

Why thier pure evil is not seen is beyond me.

arcura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

bucker asked on 09/04/05 - ACTS OF KINDNESS

This young man was driving home one evening, on a two lane country road. Work in this small mid-western community was almost as slow as his beat-up Pontiac, but he never quit looking. Ever since the factory closed, he'd been unemployed, and with winter coming on, the chill had finally hit home.

It was a lonely road. Not very many people had a reason to be on it, unless they were leaving. Most of his friends had already left. They had families to feed and dreams to fulfill, but he stayed on. After all, this was where he buried his mother and father. He was born here and he knew the country. He could go down this road blind, and tell you what was on either side, and with his headlights not working , this came in handy.

It was starting to get dark and light snow flurries were coming down. He'd better get a move on. You know, he almost didn't see the old lady, stranded on the side of the road. But even in the dim light of day, he could see she needed help. So he pulled up in front of her Mercedes and got out. His Pontiac was still sputtering when he approached her.

Even with the smile on his face, she was worried. No one had stopped to help, for the last hour or so. Was he going to hurt her? He didn't look safe. He looked poor and hungry. He could see that she was frightened, standing out there in the cold. He knew how she felt. It was that chill which only fear can put in you. He said, "I'm here to help you Ma'am. Why don't you wait in the car where it's warm? By the way, my name is Bryan."

Well, all she had was a flat tire, but for an old lady, that was bad enough. Bryan crawled under the car looking for a place to put the jack, skinning his knuckles a time or two. Soon he was able to change the tire. But he had to get dirty and his hands hurt. As he was tightening up the lug nuts, she rolled down the window and began to talk to him. She told him that she was from St. Louis and was only just passing through.

She couldn't thank him enough for coming to her aid. Bryan just smiled as he closed her trunk. She asked him how much she owed him. Any amount would have been all right with her. She had already imagined all the awful things that could have happened had he not stopped.

Bryan never thought twice about the money. This was not a job to him. This was helping someone in need, and God knows there were plenty who had given him a hand in the past. He had lived his whole life that way, and it never occurred to him to act any other way. He told her if she really wanted to pay him back, the next time she saw someone who needed help, she could give that person the assistance that they needed, and Bryan added "...and think of me." He waited until she started her car and drove off.

It had been a cold and depressing day, but he felt good as he headed for home, disappearing into the twilight.

A few miles down the road the lady saw a small cafe. She went in to grab a bite to eat, and take the chill off before she made the last leg of her trip home. It was a dingy looking restaurant. Outside were two old gas pumps. The whole scene was unfamiliar to her. The cash register was like the telephone of an out of work actor--it didn't ring much.

Her waitress came over and brought a clean towel to wipe her wet hair. She had a sweet smile, one that even being on her feet for the whole day couldn't erase.

The lady noticed that the waitress was nearly eight months pregnant, but she never let the strain and aches change her attitude. The old lady wondered how someone who had so little could be so giving to a stranger.

Then she remembered Bryan. . .

After the lady finished her meal, and the waitress went to get change for a hundred dollar bill, the lady slipped right out the door. She was gone by the time the waitress came back. She wondered where the lady could be, then she noticed something written on the napkin under which were 4 one-hundred dollar bills. There were tears in her eyes when she read what the lady wrote. It said: "You don't owe me anything, I have been there too. Somebody once helped me out the way I'm helping you. If you really want to pay me back, here is what you do: Do not let this chain of love end with you."

Well, there were tables to clear, sugar bowls to fill, and people to serve, but the waitress made it through another day. That night when she got home from work and climbed into bed, she was thinking about the money and what the lady had written. How could the lady have known how much she and her husband needed it? With the baby due next month, it was going to be hard.

She knew how worried her husband was, and as he lay sleeping next to her, she gave him a soft kiss and whispered soft and low, "Everything's gonna be all right - I love you, Bryan."

-- Author Unknown --

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/05/05:

It is a county western song, has been out several years now.

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
Erewhon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

sarnian asked on 09/05/05 - Doctors denounce abstinence-only education

Teens need access to birth control, pediatrician group says.

A leading group of pediatricians says teenagers need access to birth control and emergency contraception, not the abstinence-only approach to sex education favored by religious groups and President Bush. The recommendations are part of the American Academy of Pediatrics' updated teen pregnancy policy. "Even though there is great enthusiasm in some circles for abstinence-only interventions, the evidence does not support abstinence-only interventions as the best way to keep young people from unintended pregnancy," said Dr. Jonathan Klein, chairman of the academy committee that wrote the new recommendations. Teaching abstinence but not birth control makes it more likely that once teenagers initiate sexual activity they will have unsafe sex and contract sexually transmitted diseases, said Dr. S. Paige Hertweck, a pediatric obstetrician-gynecologist at the University of Louisville who provided advice for the report. The report appeared in July's Pediatrics. It updates a 1998 policy by omitting the statement that "abstinence counseling is an important role for all pediatricians." The new policy says that while doctors should encourage adolescents to postpone sexual activity, they also should help ensure that all teens - not just those who are sexually active - have access to birth control, including emergency contraception.

Related story : How well do condoms work against STDs?

Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said counseling only abstinence, preferably until marriage, is the best approach because it sends a clear, consistent message. Teenagers who are sexually active should have access to contraception, but making birth control available to teens who aren't sends a contradictory message, he said. The academy's recommendations "to some extent confuse prevention and intervention," Horn said.

U.S. teen birth rates higher: Citing 2003 government data, the academy's report says more than 45 percent of high school girls and 48 percent of boys have had sexual intercourse. While teen pregnancy rates have decreased in recent years, about 900,000 U.S. teens get pregnant each year. Moreover, U.S. teen birth rates are higher than in comparable industrialized countries, which may be partly due to greater access to contraception in some countries, the report said. The Medical Institute for Sexual Health, a nonprofit group that has worked on pro-abstinence programs with the Bush administration and faith-based groups, opposes the academy's policy shift. "I don't think it's a smart move at all," said group founder Dr. Joe McIlhaney Jr., an obstetrician-gynecologist.

However, Karen Pearl, interim president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said the academy "is to be applauded ... for having medicine trump ideology." HHS' Horn also said advising pediatricians to ensure that teens have access to emergency contraception is problematic for doctors and parents who morally object to the pills. He faulted the report for lacking guidance on what to do when pediatricians' moral views differ from their patients' parents. Emergency contraception, sometimes called the morning-after pill, blocks ovulation or fertilization and can prevent pregnancy for up to three days after sex. Opponents consider it a form of abortion because it is thought to also help prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the womb, and some pharmacists have refused to sell it. Emergency contraception was not mentioned in the old report because it was new and relatively untested, Klein said. The academy supports making morning-after pills available without a prescription, Klein said.


I know the position on pre-marital sex by the RCC.
And I understand from what I heard that reborn/fundamental christians have similar ideas.
So what do you say?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/05/05:

That society is showing it has little concern over any moral chartacter of its young people.

Groups like Planned Parenthood have little interest in stoping sex amoung the young, since it would slow down thier abortion mills and take dollars out of thier pockets.

They and thier political lobby are a very dangerous enemy of the nation. They kill more innocent vitims each year than any war or diaster known to man.

Choux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
sarnian rated this answer Average Answer

HANK1 asked on 09/04/05 - CHRISTIANITY:

In my opinion, Christianity is a way of life or style of living that reflects the attitudes and values of a person or group. Do you agree?


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/04/05:

yes it is a way of life, you can most certainly tell a Christian from a religoius person proclaming Christian faith by thier life style.

HANK1 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

Laura asked on 09/04/05 - Watching the news this morning

Rescue workers are frustrated at the number of people that they are coming across in the flooded areas of NO that just don't want to leave their homes.. They've gone days without food and fresh water and there are alot of little kids as well.. Yet they just don't understand that it will be a long time before the water recedes and that they are exposing themselves to great harm from the stagnent diseased water all around them.

Can the government FORCE them to leave for their own good?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/04/05:

Yes they can be forced to leave

And should be, since they will merely cause more problems down the road

Laura rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

QueenChoux asked on 09/02/05 - Legislature Passes Gay Marriage Bill

SACRAMENTO, Sept. 1 -- The California Senate voted Thursday to allow gay couples to wed, becoming the first legislative body in the nation to approve same-sex marriage without a court order.

The bill would recast the state's legal definition of marriage as a union between two people rather than one between a man and a woman.

Yet it faces an uncertain future: The California Assembly narrowly rejected similar legislation in June, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) has given mixed or ambiguous responses on whether he would support or veto such a bill.

Still, its passage, on a vote of 21 to 15, was hailed by advocates as a breakthrough for gay rights.

"It will ***totally take away the argument that it is just 'activist judges' who are finding for marriage nondiscrimination***," said Geoff Kors, the head of Equality California. "It's the people's representatives in the largest state in the nation doing this."


Bishop_Chuck answered on 09/02/05:

sounds like man trying to make legal the immoral sexual acts of those who wish to live a life style that should not be acceptable.

QueenChoux rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
paraclete rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
excon rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

QueenChoux asked on 08/28/05 - Vatican to Block Gay Priests

Vatican plan to block gay priests

Jamie Doward, religious affairs correspondent
Sunday August 28, 2005
The Observer

"The new Pope faces his first controversy over the direction of the Catholic church after it was revealed that the Vatican has drawn up a religious instruction preventing gay men from being priests.

The controversial document, produced by the Congregation for Catholic Education and Seminaries, the body overseeing the church's training of the priesthood, is being scrutinised by Benedict XVI.

It been suggested Rome would publish the instruction earlier this month, but it dropped the plan out of concern that such a move might tarnish his visit to his home city of Cologne last week.

The document expresses the church's belief that gay men should no longer be allowed to enter seminaries to study for the priesthood. Currently, as all priests take a vow of celibacy, ***their sexual orientation has not been considered a pressing concern***.""

I think this is good news for the Catholic Church.
Do you have any interesting comments to make?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 08/28/05:

They merely need to inforce the celebrate rules.
Our church has the rule that all priests and bishops must either be married or have no sexual relations.

This would include sexual relations with anyone regarless of sex.

Not more rules, merely inforcement of rules they have

bucker rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
QueenChoux rated this answer Poor or Incomplete Answer
sarnian rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer
ATON2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

CeeBee2 asked on 08/18/05 - The Reformers....................

Do you think they wanted to actually **reform** the Catholic Church or simply *break off* from it in order to do their own thing?

Bishop_Chuck answered on 08/19/05:

Luther never wanted to "break" away, but his dispute was used by those in politial power in Germany as a means of breaking the political control of Rome over thier nations.

Luther merely wanted the church to correct some of its error. And actually since it has one could say that the catholic church today is "reformed"

Many of the others merely wished to do thier own thing, this happens every day in churches all over the US, where groups split over even minor issues now.

CeeBee2 rated this answer Excellent or Above Average Answer

QueenChoux asked on 08/18/05 - Christian Outreach

***Churches seeking marketing-savvy breed of pastor
By G. Jeffrey MacDonald | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor***

A year ago, the Rev. Scott Schlotfelt was weighing job offers from three churches smitten by what he had to offer.

But they weren't talking about his preaching or counseling skills. What they were seeking, like a number of churches across the United States, was some savvy marketing. And like a growing number of pastors, consultants, and volunteers, Mr. Schlotfelt was eager to do some branding for the Lord.

"I've kind of had a heart for marketing, [and] I think a lot of churches are looking for outreach" specialists, says Schlotfelt, outreach pastor at Mountain Christian Church in Joppa, Md. He received his undergraduate degree in marketing, then studied for the ministry and helped congregations build up their images through advertising in Las Vegas and Amarillo, Texas.

"It's the medium of marketing that's used to get a message across [in today's culture], whether it's an election or you're trying to sell a product," he adds. "But in this case, we're just trying to hear the hope of a new life that is eternal."

To succeed, a number of denominations and local congregations alike are seeking marketing know-how, whether among church staff or from from hired experts.

Churches' outreach to potential members as summer winds down. The United Methodist Church, for instance, will make its largest media buy of the year starting Aug. 30 - a four-week, $4 million effort. To get that marketing know-how, they're turning to those who know how to sell cars, houses, and other commercial products.

"The church in more ways than not is mirroring Wall Street and the world and Madison Avenue," says H. B. London, vice president of pastoral ministries at Focus on the Family, a national resource network for evangelical Christians. "We're [lagging] behind them to a certain degree, but we're using all their techniques."

For many in church leadership, corporate-style marketing is nothing new. Among males enrolled in seminary in 2000, the most common educational background was technical science, including business, communications, and computer science, according to a study by the Center for the Study of Theological Education at Auburn Theological Seminary in New York. (For women, it's social science.)

Another factor: almost 2 in 3 seminarians are over 30 years of age, according to 2003 data from the Association of Theological Schools, which means church leaders often have had business experience.

Thinking in terms of customers and markets, however, might not always bring out the best in a church leader, according to Jackson Carroll, a professor emeritus of religion and society and former director of research at the Pulpit & Pew Project at Duke University in Durham, N.C. He cites the example of Southern preachers who took up the cause of civil rights in the 1960s despite vehement local resistance.

"It didn't help marketing at all," Professor Carroll says. "People left churches in droves when pastors or leaders in the congregation took a strong stand in favor of integration, [but] they did it anyway."

Today, he says, pastors who make marketing a top priority run the risk of fostering "a congregation that refuses to deal with issues of individual or social justice because it might offend someone."

"Go therefore ..."

Others, however, see marketing as a necessary part of Christ Jesus' great commission: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:19, New Revised Standard Version).

"Marketing and the church, they go hand in hand [because] we're called to bring our message to a community," says Kristal Dove, operations manager at Church Marketing Solutions. But she says not all church leaders should be involved.

"We basically make it so ministers can focus on people and not have to worry about this stuff," Ms. Dove says.

But in the opinion of Mr. London of Focus on the Family, any church leader's success depends at least in part on bringing the best of corporate-marketing tactics to bear on a righteous cause.

"Nearly every pastor is a salesman or a marketer of one kind or another because ... we have a philosophy to sell," he says. "The best marketers and best salesmen will have more converts, will have more people, will take in more money.... Evangelicals are marketers because they're really passionate about their product."

Have you encountered Christian Marketing in your church experience or anywhere??

Do you think that this approach will help increase church membership in America?