Wow, Fox News never ceases to amaze me and here is another example why. Host Julie Banderas gets into a preaching battle with the one and only Shirely Phelps-Roper of the now infamous Westboro Baptist Church. What ensues is a magnificent cat fight over God’s word.
Seeing people argue over God and the Bible just amuses me to no end. It’s like watching kids fight over Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. Absolutely ridiculous, yet strangely entertaining.
Related posts:
- Atheist Storm Troopers Assault Easter
- Happy Easter
- Confused Jews For Jesus Annoy Thousands
- Rep Douglas Bruce “Lee” Kick Starts His Term
- Fight Islamic Pressure To Censor Wikipedia
June 12th, 2006 at 2:30 pm
Oh holy shit, this is brilliant. ALthough I feel dirty that if I had to pick someone I agreed with in this it’d be someone from Fox News.
People like the Westboro crazies scare the hell out of my. I love when that crazy lady calls the host “Bimbo!” hehehehe
June 12th, 2006 at 3:00 pm
And millions consider this a valid debate with valid points, some of them even capable of signing their own name. Not like monkeys at all.
June 12th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
Wow. This is what people call ‘news’? They are both pathetic. Every sane American knows that those protestors are opportunists. Why give them more opportunity by interviewing them?
By the way, if I ‘go’ anywhere after I die, hell would be wherever that interviewee is!
June 13th, 2006 at 3:26 am
LOL Im 100% on interwiever side, i hate those god believer people, they are so freaking fool :P
June 13th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
“Seeing people argue over God and the Bible just amuses me to no end. It’s like watching kids fight over Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. Absolutely ridiculous, yet strangely entertaining.”
Almost as much fun as watching atheists try and explain the “Big Bang”.
June 13th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
Dear Cap what seems to be more prooved and logically
God or Big Bang theory?
June 13th, 2006 at 7:35 pm
As evidence that the big bang occured, I offer the fact that the universe is expanding. See Google for further detail.
No, just as I thought, it definitely wasn’t as funny.
June 14th, 2006 at 3:19 pm
Anonymous, neither has been proven and both could be logical depending on your mindset. And as for that, the two concepts are far from being mutually exclusive.
eyp - Prove that the universe is expanding (I agree that it is, just asking for your prrof). Pawning someone off on Google is weak sauce. A bit like me saying the same thing about proving God’s existence.
And watching two individuals who are as deeply passionate about any subject as these two ladies are can be funny, especially when the subject at hand boils down to a matter of faith as it does in this case.
In closing, the idea that man has come up with any reasonably accurate answers as regards the beginnings of the universe in the last twenty years is laughable. What we know about the present universe is miniscule and what we can be sure of regarding its origins less so.
June 14th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
Cap,
The big bang is a theory, just like the theory of gravity is a theory. Theory’s aren’t something you just make up without any facts to back them up, if there were any evidence in contrast to the theory of the big bang it would no longer continue to be a theory.
Creationism is not a theory, it is something that someone long ago pulled out of his ass and every time there is evidence to disprove it creationism is either modified or the evidence is rejected by the believers.
Unlike the big bang theory, creationism does not have facts that support it.
June 16th, 2006 at 8:57 am
I’m aware of how scientific theory works and I’m also aware that we can be reasonably sure that the universe is expanding given the evidence we have. What that means precisely, what came before the big bang, and how the big bang got started is all hypothetical at this point. I’m not sure how science could prove any of that given our current level of technology and understanding of the mechanics of the universe. I’m just saying that stating anything about the universe’s origins with any degree of certainty is dangerous at best.
I agree completely that creationism isn’t a scientific theory. At this point it really boils down to a religious/philosophical idea and if taught should not be taught in a science class. And just so you know scientific theories are also constantly being modified (by their very nature) and scientists have done their fair share of rejecting evidence that was latter accepted. I know a good many scientists that approach their scientifc theories with a zeal that would shame most religious people.
June 16th, 2006 at 9:34 am
Hello Cap, I couldn’t agree with you more. I have no problem with creationism being taught in a philosophy and/or world religions class, but it has absolutely no place in a science class.
If you are interested in philosophical explanations of the universe, a few of us have been having a debate about it on religious freaks sister site, psychic freaks. Don’t let the URL fool you. Most of the comments revolve around the existence of a deity http://psychicfreaks.com/2006/06/12/americans-are-cuckoo-for-psychics/
I invite you and any others to share your thoughts with us. It has been fun.
June 17th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
Bing Bang theory is considered a bit rubbish these days, when you reach a certain point back in time all the maths fails and we’re left guessing again.
June 17th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
God is a loving God. I love my lord, and will serve him. I am not a big fan of organized religion either, my relationship with my God is all I need.
However, I hate jackasses like that freak that protests funerals of gays and soldiers. It is dipshits like that who make atheists hate Christianity or any other religion. She does not speak for me.
My religion is a great thing, I turn to it for hope when I am down. If people who ignore the freaks, they may get something positive out of God.
People like Shirley Phelps Roper piss me off.
God Bless,
Mike
June 19th, 2006 at 5:03 am
This cunt should be burned alive and curbed along with the rest of her so-called church. I’ve lost friends in Iraq and to see someone such as herself and her inbread church infuriates me to say the very least. Someone please kill this degenerate.
June 19th, 2006 at 8:36 pm
FOX is not news, it is sensationalism
June 21st, 2006 at 11:56 am
I found this to be quite enlightening and created some points for me to ponder.
First of all, I myself was in the Marine Corp. If it had anything to do with fighting for gay rights wouldn’t gays have been allowed to fight with us?
My husband and children would be shocked if they thought that I was in the Marines to fight for “gays” and I’m sure that every wife/husband of a Marine would be just as shocked.
Certainly if God were killing off soldiers because of gay policies then most of the troops of Britain would be eliminated in random acts. God isn’t inconsistent or bias is he?
If any strikes would have taken place in the US by Gods wrath wouldn’t he have opted for Downtown Chicago? God would likely have his gay/lesbian facts up to date and aim his “hate” on the largest gay population.
Lastly, it is a funeral. Isn’t that self explanatory?
June 21st, 2006 at 3:55 pm
I hope that shirley phelps roper dies, she deserves nothing and is an ignorant bitch. She took all the bible verses out of context to make it seem like God told her to hate these people. I am disgusted and would love to go laugh throughout her funeral when someone kills her..
June 21st, 2006 at 4:03 pm
Settle down everyone and take a nice deep breath. Ahhhh, isn’t that better :)
gasmonso
P.S. Semper Fi Mrs. L :)
June 21st, 2006 at 6:28 pm
The “Big Bang” theory, recently, has been updated due to newer measurements of the universe as a whole. Something like the layout of the galaxies lead the scientific community to believe the Big Bang is only the most recent of many…
Furthermore, when indoctrinated, the theory of the Big Bang, before the later evidence of multiple Bangs, was accepted by the Vatican as proof of the existence of God. Only after it was claimed by a revered science journal did the Catholic community reject it.
…
this is simple rocket surgery people… :-P
June 22nd, 2006 at 9:15 am
Wow. Just wow.
This is the first time I’ve ever seen a newscaster call their interviewee the Devil and claim they’re going to hell. Not to mention the complete lack of speaking manners.
June 25th, 2006 at 10:37 pm
Julie Banderas, as host, should have had the common decency to let Shirley have her say. As it was, this “interview” rapidly becamse a harpyfest. Screech, screech, screech, with neither listening to what the other said, and each consigning the other to eternal Hellfire. Sad.
July 1st, 2006 at 8:56 pm
Go Jules
July 31st, 2006 at 6:20 am
The most surprising thing is that in her madness, the church woman has some “logic”. At times, it looks as if she has arguments to back up her afirmations, but she’s constantly interrupted by the bimbo.
On the other hand, how is this news? How is this objective and informative? What he fuck is wrong with the American journalism? Something like this would never make it to BBC. In my country, if they want someone to insult eachother on TV, they invite two opposing persons. The moderator is supposed to be impartial, not to engage in arguments with the ones invited in the show.
It was a pain for me to watch, as it stands again what informing people is.
I’m an atheist and I live in Romania.
August 6th, 2006 at 4:05 am
Hahaha…I agree…I’m athiest but that old woman is out of her mind. Given, i am against media because of its lack of ability to stay out of some people’s lives. At first, i was hesitant to watch this. but as it went on, I was ammused. Just goes to show you how far people will go to spread what they believe. pathetic…truely pathetic
August 22nd, 2006 at 7:26 am
Mrs L - you’re a little weird too…
“Certainly if God were killing off soldiers because of gay policies then most of the troops of Britain would be eliminated in random acts.”
Everybody knows that the biggest risk faced by all of America’s allies is ‘friendly fire’ from you lot.
If you were indeed in the Marine Corp that explains a lot…
September 6th, 2006 at 3:07 pm
I don’t agree with the teachings of the westboro baptist church, and it does anger me see all this interviews of theirs. But, that is were it stops I have read alot of the other comments. It is confusing when some write hatful things about her, but defend homosexuals, abortionist, and love God and the bible. Know I not defending her, but we can’t call ourselves christians and preach love everyone just as God would. Then go off and bad mouth shirley roper even though her and her church are doing this. I pray that God opens their eyes to what they are saying and doing. But, the same to us I pray that we realize would words and actions are coming out of our mouths when we curse the westboro baptist church. And if anyone has a comment about it e-mail me j_bizole_3@hotmail.com I have no problem talking more about it are just hearing your comments.
thank you God Bless
September 20th, 2006 at 11:24 am
If they are ‘thanking god’ for IED’s does this mean Arabs are doing god’s work?
September 25th, 2006 at 8:45 am
This is absolutely mind numbing. I know it’s been said a lot before on this thread but what the @#$%&!!! Where does America find these people?? Were it not for the disgusting way this disgusting person chooses to demonstrate her disgusting views, the two would be as bad as each other!
Both calling on the wrath of some utterly superlative force to strike each other down to prove their own point, constantly referring to the “scripture” as if it really is the fucking word of ‘God’.
Bible 101 for christians - Get this through your blank heads, THE BIBLE IS A WORK OF MAN! NOT ‘God’. The bible was put together by a ROMAN emperor who decided who Jesus was, whether to call him the son of God and exactly which of the (highly reliable, NOT) so called ‘accounts’ of Jesus’ life to include in it! I.E. Which would best serve HIS purpose and which best fitted with HIS decisions about the direction Christianity as a whole would take.
A non-christian wrote the bible, which is in effect the greatest work of propaganda ever written (saving of course perhaps the Qu’ran).
“How dare you this, how dare you that” The real question is how ignorant can they both be in their arguements! They call on two line passages of this book to form the basis of 10 minutes of religious arguement! You must be out of your God-fearing pathetic little minds!
Frankly to those P.C. wankers who will piss and moan about how terrible this is that this is not news, please catch up with the 20th century! Today people actually WANT to hear the opinions of others so that they might gain a better understanding of the immense diversity in the WORLD around them. The sad thing is that these new found desires of the global public are being satisfied with tripe from both ends of the discussion.
What would really be an interesting debate would be if an atheist, dare I even say an EDUCATED atheist get up and argue evolution with this bitch or have a quantum physicist present these ignorant, mentally defective individuals who wont shut up about God and his supposed wrath, with some theories (for example) on the nature of string theory, maybe even present them with some of the mathematics involved and then we can all watch these pathetic, stubborn, brainwashed inbreds wimper in a corner for the rest of their unimaginably sad little lives while they try to grapple with this newfound and TANGIBLE truth to the universe.
One final note: To whoever the prick is behind the alias “Cap”, with regards to your suggestion on the big bang theory; how about we take a look at the religious alternative. God snapped his omnipotent fingers and said “now” hehe and it was good? I dont know about you, but that screams with my understanding of logic and seems to reflect the thinking of a small child suggesting that the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean… equally as pathetic. I can assure you that the rest of the educated world looks on people like you with pity and will be happy to try to talk sense into you time and time again until you breathe your very last blind refusal to look facts in the face.
October 5th, 2006 at 8:09 pm
I am utterly disgusted with Shirley Phelps-Roper and her whole dog-and-pony show. She and her so-called “church” are a disgrace to the entire nation, not to mention Christianity!!!
These nuts spew nothing but hate and venom. And they figure they’re going to heaven???
I think they’re in for a HUGE surprise when the lights go out!!!
October 5th, 2006 at 9:02 pm
Where do you guys get these women from? Are you sure this thing wasn’t staged? If i wanted to make a comedy show about how stupid God’s followers are i couldn’t come up with anything better!
I’m siding 100% with the host though! I hate it when a host just asks a few questions without giving any of her personal opinoion(although sometimes you can mentally hear them screaming “get me away from this $#$#%$%^&*&^($%”) Some speaking manners would have helped a lot though.
Was this thing really brodcasted?:D i’m gonna watch Fox news more often from now on.
October 6th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
A-
“Bible 101 for christians - Get this through your blank heads, THE BIBLE IS A WORK OF MAN! NOT ‘God’. The bible was put together by a ROMAN emperor who decided who Jesus was, whether to call him the son of God and exactly which of the (highly reliable, NOT) so called ‘accounts’ of Jesus’ life to include in it! I.E. Which would best serve HIS purpose and which best fitted with HIS decisions about the direction Christianity as a whole would take.
A non-christian wrote the bible, which is in effect the greatest work of propaganda ever written (saving of course perhaps the Qu’ran).
“How dare you this, how dare you that†The real question is how ignorant can they both be in their arguements! They call on two line passages of this book to form the basis of 10 minutes of religious arguement! You must be out of your God-fearing pathetic little minds!
-This is probably the most unintelligent thing I have ever heard. You probably just heard some guy or some measly website say that the Bible was written by that Roman emperor whose name you don’t even know and put this on here. If you actually looked into the history of the Bible you would see that it is written by the people it says it is written by. Just look at the original manuscripts. There is so much more evidence for the validity of scripture than you think.
Also, you are basing your assumption about the Bible on your own belief that there is no possiblity that a God can exist. If you looked at the evidence objectively you would see that there is more evidence for the existence of God than you think and thus the Bible could be, in fact, inspired by him, through the human authors who have indeed put the words on paper.
October 7th, 2006 at 7:32 pm
To “J”,
Unintelligent? “You probably just heard that on some measly webiste” Have you conducted any investigation into the history of the bible? Seriously? Because if you had, you would NOT be trying to argue with me. The individual books in the bible were indeed written by who they say they were, conceded. However this was a small selection of MANY MANY more books that were reviewed for inclusion in the end piece. And who decided which of the many and may I stress, VARYING reports of the events of ‘Jesus’ life would be included? The Roman emperor Constantine. Who jumped on the back of the “Christian” bandwagon of the time rather than trying to crush it.
I would like to draw all attention to the utterly predictable turn in Mr/Ms “J”s post where they discard all reasoning and logical thought and simply hide behind the “you’re going to hell, so there” flag.
‘you are basing your assumption about the Bible on your own belief that there is no possiblity that a God can exist’
I can put forth no arguement for or against the existance of God my friend. And as a CHRISTIAN, neither should you! The whole idea of God and indeed religion (for the most part) as a whole is this fabulous idea of faith. A terribly clever idea which builds around itself an enourmous amount of redundant fear and thereby wins over just about anyone at a young age, an affliction that feeds the whole religious machine through the inability of people to question these, the most deep seeded elements of their basic education.
Therefore, I invite you, if you wish to disregard your faith and pursue a “religious” existance on the basis of EVIDENCE for God of which you so confidently profess you are well stocked. But before you do, be ready to question your faith, take a look at the outside world and prepare to consider the POSSIBILITY that God may not exist.
Finally, the ‘inspired writing’ theory. The strongest and most widely accepted account for the validity of the Bible, once again a great big massive redundancy i.e. you cant argue either against it or for it on any logical basis. You can however see how messed up God must be if this is what he forced the writers of the bible to write about.
Levitcus 19:20 “If a man has sex with a slave girl he is not to be punished. She is a slave.”
Deut. 21:10 “When you go to war against your enemies and you see a beautiful woman and find her desirable, you may take her. If she ceases to please you send her away.”
So not only is the book sexist and class orientated, it openly encourages the rape and exploitation of anyone you are more powerful than. If you wish to come back at me saying “that is just a one-off, and outlier within the greater good of the scriptures” then you are simply proving the point that the bible is a mass of contradictions. Bringing me back to the original point of those two insane women above.
October 8th, 2006 at 3:04 am
I have questioned my belief and have figured out that Christianity is the most logical and reasonable belief. Also, you forget that that is the old testament you are quoting. That is based on the culture back then but the Bible elevates the position of slaves and women after Christ. Also, who gives you the right to say what is right or wrong? You are basing your outlook on these verses on what your own beliefs are but again, you have no standard to base it on but your own feelings.
October 10th, 2006 at 7:11 am
Easy to say it isnt it J. That you really have though long and hard about whats up and whats down in this reality. I’d love to hear any arguement you may have that supports the theory that Christianity holds any more ‘truth’ than Islam, Buddhism, or Atheism. Please, enlighten me. Am I hearing a christian denounce the old testament? The words that were supposedly “inspired” by the Lord your God? You can’t pick and choose my friend.
Its one thing to say that for example the story of genesis might be an analogy for the actual creation of the universe, but to completely disregard whole passages of the bible is not Christian, its not up to you (apparently) to decide what the universe is about and how you should live your life and what you should or shouldnt believe.
Thats up to God.
I’m not saying ANYTHING is right or wrong or somewhere in between, J. I’m simply trying to make you think for yourself. What infuriates me is when people blindly folow their faith, never questioning and never accepting the reality. Theirs a ridiculously sheltered existance. They never give the real world the chance to explain itself to them but rather squabble endlessly with the rest of the world over this excellent point of who is “right and wrong” when it comes to the ultimate questions.
My feelings by the way are in no way related to the arguement for or against people like you and what they believe in. I couldnt care less about your wonderful relationship with “God” or my deliberate lack thereof. I argue simply for the sake of discussion. Too often is it the case where the majority is lead by the nose from infancy onwards on what to believe. Our parents, grandparents, teachers all telling us “Jesus loves you” or “God does not exist” or “Allah is the only God and his prophet was Muhammad and anyone who believes otherwise is wrong and should be converted”.
All of them are simply afraid of being surrounded by what they do not understand, and the result? We are brainwashed and forced into a set of beliefs which frighten us into never questioning, always following and doing the same to our children. Such is the way religion is preserved.
October 10th, 2006 at 10:04 pm
I am not denouncing the old testament by saying God changed the way he dealt with people after christ. It is just as God “inspired.” An example of this changing of dealing would be that man no longer has to kill animals for his sinds because Christ did it once for all. Oh Genesis is definately literal. Also, you forget that the Old Testament was written to Jews. i am a Gentile my friend. There are some cultural Laws that don’t apply to me, such as Circumcision, which Paul expounds on in the New testament in Romans.
How exacly do you have any right to judge me? Do you know all about me or something? i havn’t implied any of my beliefs in those two posts.
For your information i do not follow a “blind fath.” I know some Christian do, and i am emberresed by that. But you assume i am the same way.
I would be glad to share how Christianity has more truth than any other religion as well as Atheism. Where do you want me to start?
October 11th, 2006 at 10:46 pm
You are clearly hearing (or reading) only what you want to, not what I’m saying. I am not judging you. But yes, you make it perfectly clear what your religious background is and the strength of your religious commitment. And like I said, I couldnt give half a flying whatever either way.
What you’re saying then, is that the bible is an account of how Christianity as a religious movement came about rather than any solid dictator on the origins of the universe “Oh Genesis is definately literal.” how do you reconcile these contradictions in your statements? Do you just make up your rules and justifications as you go along?
Start with some tangible proof perhaps? Then work your way up to logical statements based on the evidence. Then build up your arguement from those statements :D it’s really not that hard, you’ll get used to it eventually.
October 12th, 2006 at 12:29 am
Before that, i want to ask what your beliefs are. It sounds like you are probably agnostic or atheist. For the purpose of debate, it is important to clear up what you are. For the purpose of debate, if Atheist, you make claim that there is absolutely no possibility of a God; if agnostic, you make the claim that you are not sure but there is a possibility just not enough evidence to substantiate the claim that there is.
October 12th, 2006 at 12:33 am
FYI, Atheism does not mean that you claim there is absolutely no possibility of a god. There are two types, strong atheism, which is believing there is no god, and weak atheism, which is not believing in god. A subtle, but important difference.
If you were wondering, I’m a “weak” atheist.
October 12th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
The transition from chritian through to atheist is a continuous spectrum of the strength of conviction of people. There are no distinct areas where you could say agnostic ends and atheism begins just like you cannot say exactly where green ends and yellow begins on the electromagnetic spectrum. Thank you, Your Father.
What difference does it make to your arguement what my beliefs are? If you are right, you’re right and your arguement will prove it. So show me what you’ve got, J. Convert me!
October 12th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
” As I said, both belief in the existence of God and disbelief in the existence of God can be rational provided both appeal to evidence and make claims that are meaningful. Evidence isn’t always obviously “conclusive.†Sometimes a piece of evidence will “point†in a certain direction without itself necessitating a particular conclusion….
Obviously there is no universally overwhelmingly indisputably conclusive evidence that God exists. You don’t dispute this. And neither do I. We are in fact NOT overwhelmed with indisputably conclusive proof of God’s existence. So it follows that “if†(note the conditional) God were to exist, he cannot have overwhelmed us with indisputably conclusive evidence of his existence. If he did provided such evidence, we’d be overwhelmingly and indiputably convinced by it. But we’re not overwhelmingly convinced. So it follows: “if” God exists, his existence is compatible with our not being overwhelmingly convinced that he exists.”
-A guy named Tom
A, I am not trying to convert anyone. Would you agree with what has been said there by this guy named Tom?
November 16th, 2006 at 11:18 am
I dare this bitch to get out of the USA if we are so doomed.
January 25th, 2008 at 12:13 am
u are the ones who are the ball lickers u will lick our balls and suck on our asscracks
January 25th, 2008 at 12:20 am
cos baby well be in the drive in in the old mans ford behind them bushes until im screamin for more down the basement and lock the cellar door and baby talk dirrty to me fuck me suck me put it in my ass
January 25th, 2008 at 12:23 am
Sweat baby sweat baby sex is a Texas drought
Me and you do the kind of stuff that only Prince would sing about
So put your hands down my pants and I’ll bet you’ll feel nuts
Yes I’m Siskel, yes I’m Ebert and you’re getting two thumbs up
You’ve had enough of two-hand touch you want it rough you’re out of bounds
I want you smothered want you covered like my Waffle House hashbrowns
Come quicker than FedEx never reach an apex just like Coca-Cola stock you are inclined
To make me rise an hour early just like Daylight Savings Time
Do it now
You and me baby ain’t nothin’ but mammals
So let’s do it like they do on the Discovery Channel
Do it again now
You and me baby ain’t nothin’ but mammals
So let’s do it like they do on the Discovery Channel
Gettin’ horny now
April 15th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
The story of Emperor Constantine putting the Bible together is convenient for helping Dan Brown sell novels; but it is as much a fiction as those novels. Plenty of copies survive of Christian writings which date back well before Constantine was even born, and these writings consistently acknowledge canonical New Testament books as being legitimate Scripture.
April 16th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Clearly, Joseph Ravitts, you don’t know your religion’s history all that well. The did not write the Bible at the First and Second Councils of Nicea. No one, including Dan Brown, is making that claim. But the councils did decide which versions of Christianity were canon and which were apocryphal. They also decided which books made it into the canonized Bible and which were excluded. There are many, many other Christian books that predate Constantine that were considered just as legitimate as the ones found in today’s Bible.