Recent Comments

1. 4 days ago on Doonesbury

   Republicans keep alleging election fraud.

   But in the rare instances that it occurs, it is almost always Republicans committing the fraud.

   Pot, meet kettle.

2. 15 days ago on Clay Bennett

   Morality is doing what is right regardless of what you are told.

   Religion is doing what you are told regardless of what is right.

   (Quote is commonly attributed to H.L. Mencken, but a specific source has not been verified and some sites have debunked the claim of Mencken as a source.)

   “Morality” based on religion is not morality at all.

   To say that morality only exists if it is imposed externally by a powerful cosmic bully is to say that “might makes right.” Cowering in fearful obeisance is compliance, not morality.

   If the only thing that stops someone from killing people, raping people, stealing from people or anything else is fear of hell or their superstition about an imaginary friend (more like “fiend”), then they are not moral, they are a psychopath.

   The only true morality is that which springs from internalized compassion expressed actively through deeds. It is morality we adhere to even when no one, including imaginary sky gods, is watching. If one would not be moral without the fear of god looking over their shoulder, they are not moral; they are merely compliant.

3. 30 days ago on Mike Luckovich

   Appreciate your supportive comment, but it is not really necessary to try to “refute” someone who has not actually made a point.

4. about 1 month ago on Mike Luckovich

   One can be Catholic and believe that abortion is wrong and choose not to have an abortion while also keeping your personal religious beliefs separate from public policy that you impose on others.

   Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi are devout Catholics and Joe Biden in particular is personally opposed to abortion, but both understand that it is their personal religious belief and not to be imposed on others any more than they would pass a law requiring people to attend mass or observe any other Catholic ritual.

   No one who supports women’s rights to control their own bodies is opposed to women choosing not to abort for themselves, whether for religious or any other reason. We do, however, strongly oppose anyone imposing their religious opinions on anyone else.

5. about 1 month ago on Clay Jones

   Yes, this is an important point. Paul, née Saul, was a persecutor of the early followers of Jesus. By destroying them from within, he was able to undermine the radical social justice message of Jesus and return to the conservative, legalistic Old Testament establishment Jewish established hierarchy.

   Before Jesus, there was a conservative religious establishment.

   After Paul, there was a conservative religious establishment.

   For one brief, shining moment in between, there was this flash of brilliant radicalism, but it threatened the established order and had to be quickly snuffed out, if not by eradication then by being coopted and undermined from within.

   This is a point I expand on in my commentary as a basis of explaining what happened.

   http://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/paul-vs-jesus-and-james/

6. about 1 month ago on Clay Jones

   Thank you for sharing your view, and while we appear to mostly agree on the bottom line, I must assert that I have not misinterpreted Paul’s letters. In my commentary, to which I provided a link above, I examine them at length, in detail and in both historical and linguistic context. Paul directly and repeatedly contradicts Jesus on almost every major point of law, morality, ethics, theology and doctrine and I show the receipts.

   I am far from the only person and equally far from being the first who has come to that conclusion. Many independent-minded analyses of how Paul deals with Jesus’ teachings are much more ready to find fault with Paul.

   One of the most famous criticisms comes from Thomas Jefferson, who wrote in a letter to William Short dated April 13, 1820, and repeated in a letter to James Smith dated December 8, 1822, that “Paul was … the first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus.”

   George Bernard Shaw, the English playwright, is widely quoted as having said: “…it would have been a better world if Paul had never been born.”

7. about 1 month ago on Clay Jones

   It would be fine to have a Supreme Court justice, or anyone else in government, who actually followed the simple teachings of Jesus. But there is a huge difference between CLAIMING to follow the teachings of Jesus and actually doing so. And the reality is that every aspect of modern conservative “Christianity” is the polar opposite of what Jesus reportedly taught, and “People of Praise” is a prime example.

   Help the poor? Feed the hungry?

   Heal the sick? Welcome the foreigner?

   The love of money is the root of all evil? The love of money is the core of their “prosperity gospel.”

   Jesus drove out the money changers. Today’s conservative “Christians” ARE the money changers.

   Separation of church and state (render under Cæsar and all that [Matt 22:21; Luke 20:25]) and prohibiting public prayer even in the synagogues [Matt 6:5-6] vs tax exemptions for churches and prayers at public meetings.

   The conservative wing of “Christianity” does not follow Jesus, they follow the renegade “apostle” Paul, who completely contradicted Jesus on every key point of doctrine, theology, law, morality and ethics.

   Conservative “Christians” follow Paul, who opposed almost everything Jesus ever taught.

   Liberal Christians try to follow Jesus.

   For specific examples, including chapter-and-verse references to how Paul contradicts Jesus:

   http://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/paul-vs-jesus-and-james/

8. about 1 month ago on Clay Jones

   Got the concept mostly right on what “People of Praise” is, but a few corrections are needed.

   It is a conservative religious cult, and it did begin as a “Charismatic Catholic” group, but now it is open to any conservative Christian who accepts the Nicene, Apostolic and Athanasian creeds (primarily the Nicene). They actively recruit Pentecostal and evangelical conservatives.

   And calling it a female counterpart to Opus Dei would also be incorrect because they accept both male and female members.

   But yes, classifying it as a cult would be appropriate and a member serving on the Supreme Court would be, indeed, very troubling.

9. about 1 month ago on Mike Luckovich

   Herman Cain? For Republican racists, he was worse than a nobody.

   Sure, they needed their token and let him float in the polls for a while but, like sleepy Ben Carson who would come later, there was no chance Cain would ever actually get nominated no matter how successful he had been in business.

   Awww, shucky-ducky, turns out Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan was just a Republican upside-down 6-6-6 and now Herman Cain is 6-6-6 feet under — just another casualty of the Trump virus

10. about 1 month ago on Clay Jones

    It’s the tapes! Turns out Trump has even more in common with Richard Nixon than we thought: both were or will be taken down by a combination of audio tapes and Bob Woodward.