Re#81:
What’s wrong with the History Channel? They interview historians and clergy representing appropriate religious history who offer various points of view on pertinent subjects.

They had some good ones on this morning about King David, and his son King Solomon.

It may have been the Biography Channel, I can’t remember, but it was informative.

the country was so outraged that the stations who showed in 50 times a day got the best ratings.

i’d write more but those 2 sluts on channel 4 selling beer has made me thirsty.

at least we have values, tho.

i know homosexuality and school prayer and f;ag burning are important values to discuss, and have been discussed.

poverty is a ‘moral value’, isn’t it? pretty much that discussion has concerned geting those bums off the couch and off the pipe and getting a damn job!

that’s a convenient way to dispose of those ‘other’ pesky values that are not so sexy as the ones previously mentioned.

the fact that poverty among adults and children has risen dramatically over the past 4 years is what – becuase of Clinton or 9/11?

i forgot, they’re just bums, anyway. lousy bums.

How did I cross a line?

1st, I said the Romans killed Christ, not the jews.

2nd, as far as the argument between James and Peter/Paul, there were clear disagreements and it wasn’t until after Christ had risen and visited James did he “believe”.

3rd, the point I am trying to make is that nations that rely on religion, (be it jew, christian, muslim, budist, shinto, hindu, or other) to jusitfy its political ambitions is headed for disaster.

In the case of America, by declaring America a “Christian” nation, not only is it in direct conflict with the constitution, it is anti-Christian.

Manifest Destiny made it alright to slaughter Native Americans because the land was ours — “allotted by Providence”.

All the above religions should be allowed to call America “home”. Wouldn’t Christ welcome them all?

Hastert Launches A Partisan Policy

In scuttling major intelligence legislation that he, the president and most lawmakers supported, Speaker J. Dennis Hastert last week enunciated a policy in which Congress will pass bills only if most House Republicans back them, regardless of how many Democrats favor them.

Hastert’s position, which is drawing fire from Democrats and some outside groups, is the latest step in a decade-long process of limiting Democrats’ influence and running the House virtually as a one-party institution. Republicans earlier barred House Democrats from helping to draft major bills such as the 2003 Medicare revision and this year’s intelligence package. Hastert (R-Ill.) now says such bills will reach the House floor, after negotiations with the Senate, only if “the majority of the majority” supports them.

the healing continues

how is this country, the posters on this website, supposed to treat each other as neighbors – the loyal opposition – when the divides are being created for the sake of naked power and agendas that half the country obviously will not support.

so much for ‘reaching out’ & ‘earning trust’.

this is not how it’s supposed to be. i’m a bit frightened.