Egyptian youth ok with Muslim Brotherhood

All I can say is if this is the sentiment among the people of Egypt, God help us all:



Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

148 thoughts on “Egyptian youth ok with Muslim Brotherhood

  1. In response to Dan, kinda 🙂

    “…reasonable skepticism of magical claims”(Dan)
    Oh? Life crawling out of some primordial slime mixture? (that’s magical). Body parts eveolving because a creature needed them? (magical) Fish morphing into philosophers, scales becoming feathers (H. Houdini stuff right there sir, only impossible to replicate). A small rodent evolving into a Clydesdale? (weeeeeee!) Everything coming from nothing, all of the mass in the universe, both known and unknown came from a singularity of infinite density, BUT, no intelligence or director or creator of any kind. (Hot damn! Wowee scoweee sir!) The explosion of life in the precambrian layer all fully formed and fully functional, as of course they must be to thrive. If Darwin were even remotely on to something, imagine the freaks of nature. Every fossil would be a missing link of some sort wouldn’t it? Could mutations have been the morphmeisting, shapeshifting creator? I believe it was in Chicago at a large meeting of evolutionists, mid-80’s where, regarding whether or not mutations could be the magician. The answer was a simple but resounding, NO.

    I suggest were it not for Christianity, there would be very little science today Dan and not nearly the worldwide desire to be kind to one another and help others with that science that Christians practically invented. Science is basically reading God’s thoughts after him. That’s how the most prolific of the scientists felt. Christians are the fathers of nearly every scientific field there is.

    I have many personal experiences with God and many reasons to believe Dan AND the world fits the creation model to a “T”. We’ve already been through your diatribe there where you pretend the Bible is in error on some things. Stripes painted on a cow? Those were painted on little posts were they not? Selective breeding directed with God’s advice. Without looking it up, I thing you are talking about Jacob and Esau. This stars before light biz of yours is just silly. I’ve nailed you to that already yet you’re still kicking with it. The passage reads and, and, and, remember, NOT then, then, then? You misinterpret many things there and “my book says x=3″(my keyboard won’t make the pi mark) I don’t know what your trying to say there but my book, The Holy Bible, doesn’t say that as far as I know. Maybe you could show me. I think it’s a sarcastic remark of some sort.

    Regarding your discussion aout folks dying for a lie etc. It appears that all of the disciples had the same “hallucination” regarding Jesus. They were all equally deluded. Jesus chose the 12 and they all stayed till the end, the only one survivivng to a ripe old natural death, John (the beloved).

    1. By the way, I am not a Catholic. I am a Bible believing (Protestant) Christian.
      I was raised a Southern Baptist but am in no way in agreement on every one of their particulars.

    2. 1. There are currently 6 dominant theories to Abiogenesis, and none of which have sufficient evidential support at the moment to win over a consensus. Because of this, I don’t accept any of them or argue for any of them yet, so trying to satirize the ridiculous parody “primordial soup” deal is a waste of your time, it does not address me. As I said, I make no claims about it beyond the simple observation that throughout all of human history we have mistaken natural processes for magic and miracle, and as mankind has learned more by successively climbing atop the shoulders of each generation’s giants it is revealed that the wondrously magical was in fact the mundane and natural. The same is also likely for the origins of life, do I know how? No, and I don’t claim to, nor do I assert this with any degree of certainty outside of induction.

      2. You mischaracterize the current cosmological model, which you likely are borrowing from some apologetics website. The Big Bang Theory does not say, and never has said, “from nothing.” All that it states is that the universe is expanding (observed fact) at an increasing rate, and if that has been the case then if you march that back you would ultimately arrive at a singularity. Within the theory contains just about everything humanity understands about Physics, and the unspeakably vast majority of it has holds true in it. The best thing about valid scientific theories is that they make predictions much more accurately than any Biblical prophecy, and both Evolution and Big Bang Cosmology have done exactly that, countless times. Singularity does not mean “nothing,” and it makes no claims on “before,” because it is a senseless question. But if you want to deny that the universe is expanding, you’ll also be denying the science that put man on the Moon.

      3. Science was around before Christianity. The Greeks practiced it, as did the Chinese. Even the Egyptians and Persians did to an extent. It’s a simple historical fact that after the collapse the Roman Empire, it was the Arabs that kept some degree of scientific literacy in the western world. After all, the numbers on your keyboard are Hindu-Arabic, not Roman Numerals like were used more dominantly in areas dominated by Christianity at the time of the fall.

      4. You’re quite simply wrong about the orders in Genesis and to deny this on your part is either dishonesty or a form of self-delusion without peer.
      Genesis 1:3 “And God said, let there be light: and there was light.”
      Genesis 1:11 “And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.”
      Genesis 1:13 “And the evening and the morning were the third day.”
      Genesis 1:14-16 “And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.”

      For the slow readers out there, thats Light, Earth, and Fruit trees before the third day, stars and the sun after or on the third day. In other words, Light and Fruit trees before the Sun and other stars.

      Display of striped patterns to pregnant animal = striped offspring – Genesis 30:37-43 “Jacob, however, took fresh-cut branches from poplar, almond and plane trees and made white stripes on them by peeling the bark and exposing the white inner wood of the branches. Then he placed the peeled branches in all the watering troughs, so that they would be directly in front of the flocks when they came to drink. When the flocks were in heat and came to drink, they mated in front of the branches. And they bore young that were streaked or speckled or spotted. Jacob set apart the young of the flock by themselves, but made the rest face the streaked and dark-colored animals that belonged to Laban. Thus he made separate flocks for himself and did not put them with Laban’s animals. Whenever the stronger females were in heat, Jacob would place the branches in the troughs in front of the animals so they would mate near the branches, but if the animals were weak, he would not place them there. So the weak animals went to Laban and the strong ones to Jacob. In this way the man grew exceedingly prosperous and came to own large flocks, and female and male servants, and camels and donkeys.”

      Pi – 1 Kings 7:23-26 “He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits[o] to measure around it. Below the rim, gourds encircled it—ten to a cubit. The gourds were cast in two rows in one piece with the Sea. The Sea stood on twelve bulls, three facing north, three facing west, three facing south and three facing east. The Sea rested on top of them, and their hindquarters were toward the center. It was a handbreadth[p] in thickness, and its rim was like the rim of a cup, like a lily blossom. It held two thousand baths”

      2nd Chronicles 4:2 Then he made the sea of cast metal. It was round, ten cubits from brim to brim, and five cubits high, and a line of thirty cubits measured its circumference.

      Kill birds to cure Leprosy – Leviticus 14:1-32 too long to copy+paste, but go ahead and look yourself.

      5. More anecdotal evidence and trying to use OTHER people’s experiences as evidence to other people? Sigh. Just to be clear, are you talking about the very DIFFERENT experiences they had after his supposed resurrection? Or are you talking about the resurrection itself, which has multiple conflicting accounts? Or are you talking about the miracles, because if you are I have a few videos of David Blaine for you to see.

      Hindus, Sikhs, Baha’is, Greeks, the Phoenicians, and new age hippie dopers all claim to have had the same visions too. When will you be converting to all of those faiths?

      1. 1 John 1:5: This is the message which we have heard from him and announce to you, that God IS light, and in him is no darkness at all.

        What is your problem with the sea of molten metal? It isn’t a sea like The Red Sea sir. He was building an altar right(?)…a place of worship.

        1. Remember when Jesus spat in some earth and made a muddy concoction and rubbed the blind guys eyes with it? Then he told him to go wash 7 times in the Jordan? Was that needed to make Jesus’ miracle work? That was a faith thing sir. An obedience thing…much like the ritual washings and bird sacrifices to cure skin diseases. It looks to me like they understood the germ theory, or at least God was telling them about it in a way they could understand.

          1. When Pi is really 3.14 right? Ya’ reckon they had measuring devices that would’ve allowed them to get that pi more accurate and thus out to those extra significant digits?

            Good grief.

            1. Oh, ok, so we shouldn’t take EVERYTHING the Bible says literally? How do you tell? Which parts are rough approximations, which are metaphor, which are allegory, and which are true? What standard do you use to decide? Is that standard found on the back cover or is it just whichever “feels” true? Or maybe, “metaphor” is reserved for whichever parts are demonstrably false, that’s probably it.

              1. How far is a cubit Dan? What instrument did they use to measure one? Isn’t it the approximate distance from the elbow to the tip of the hand?

      2. “5. More anecdotal evidence and trying to use OTHER people’s experiences as evidence to other people?” (Dan)

        You do this all the time Dan! What have you EVER said that was not found in some book or out of someone elses mouth? I haven’t heard an original thought come out of your mouth sir, that I can think of. If you applied the same doubt to other books that you do to the Bible you wouldn’t believe one damn thing about one damn thing would you?

        1. The non-religious books I have read don’t make the claims of being ABSOLUTE UNIVERSAL TRUTH that must be believed in pain of ETERNAL TORMENT.

          Anyone who’s even taken an introductory class in Philosophy can tell you off the top of their head that the only knowledge one can be certain of is “I exist.” All else is tentative and I understand that in the things I read. While claims are made in the other books and pamphlets, none of which are the absurd magnitude of scripture and often times they are at least supported by some evidence which makes an attempt at minimizing subjectivity and being repeatable, or are arrived at through Reason.

          Your book in fact flies directly in the face of evidence and Reason, just like all scripture. I was raised Episcopalian and approached the Bible the first time assuming it was true, but it’s just so obviously not, belief is not a priori, the stories are absurd, the histories are wrong, the mathematics and science couldn’t be more false if they tried, and it’s packed to the gills with cynical psychological tricks.

          Not to mention you missed the point, again. The experiences of Group X (the disciples) cannot legitimately count as evidence to anyone other than Group X, and I gave you reasons for this above. If “they said it and all said the same thing so it must be true,” is your standard for proof, then I have 5 friends who will all swear with me that I have a dragon in my garage.

          1. “The experiences of Group X (the disciples) cannot legitimately count as evidence to anyone other than Group X, and I gave you reasons for this above. If “they said it and all said the same thing so it must be true,” is your standard for proof, then I have 5 friends who will all swear with me that I have a dragon in my garage.” (Dan)

            And if you are ever tried in a court of law, you can use the same defense 🙂

            1. You obviously aren’t reading much, I already said that eyewitness testimony is regarded by courts today as the least reliable form of evidence. And that’s with people who personally witnessed events within a few years.

              You on the other hand are accepting whole-cloth the anecdotes attributed to other people, by authors who were not there, were not even alive then, and were not alive at the same time as the purported witnesses.

              You also seem to be comparing things as common as a property theft, car crash or assault to thinks as (by definition) unlikely or even impossible as claims of miraculously healing the blind, raising the dead, exorcising demons, healing the sick, magically conjuring loaves and fishes, and raising from the dead himself.

              Do no you not see the false comparison here.

              Just to recap:
              1. Anecdotal evidence is already considered the weakest in court, your snark is a waste.
              2. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but you only have the weakest kind of the weakest brand of “evidence.”
              3. You still ignore the many possibilities that even if they sincerely believed, they could still be wrong, which is more likely than being correct since countless others have similar experiences with their own gods.

          2. A big problem you have is discounting the miraculous, and as you say, you can be certain of basically nothing. If that is the case, you should not be so adamantly predisposed against the miraculous.

            God can do anything he wants to do. He is not limited by his very nature. He set the laws of physics into place and can suspend them any time he chooses. If you were God, you could too.

            1. My predisposition against the miraculous is that they by definition violate the laws of nature, which are descriptive laws not proscriptive. All knowledge is tentative and to at least some degree subjective, you know, philosophy of science and “Cogito Ergo Sum,” and all that.

              The difference is that, just like opinions are not all equal, neither are attempts at understanding the universe. Some opinions are uninformed and worthless, others are informed and should thus be given more weight. Likewise, some means and ideas for understanding the universe are less subjective than others, the goal is the minimize subjectivity. Logic/mathematics are probably the two least subjective processes we have for gaining knowledge, followed by science. The “evidence” you present is as subjective as it gets and unsupported by anything else. Science and Logic are convergent, religions are divergent. Science and Logic have predictive potential and have been verified that way countless times (as much as they can be). Religion at beast has Nostradamus-grade predictive capabilities.

              Science (methodological naturalism), based entirely on the reliability of the laws of physics has itself proven just about the most reliable means we have to learn anything. Science works, as evidence by the planes in the sky, the car in your garage, the computer you are sitting at, the shuttles I’ve watched launch dozens of times, and the footprint on the moon. Science, across multiple fields routinely finds itself pointing to the same explanation for a given inquiry. Religion doesn’t work, billions of people looking for truth in religion fracture millions of times over into the major religions, then denominations, then small fractions within denominations, and ALL of them are mutually exclusive in doctrine.

              When faith healers are working in hospitals or the bible puts a man on the moon, then maybe I’ll consider religion more reliable than Science. Could Evolution (by extension modern medicine) and Cosmology (by extension the space programs and radios) be wrong? Possibly, but it’s such an extreme unlikeliness it’s almost an afterthought. Could your religion or one of the millions of others be right? Possibly, but it’s such an extreme unlikeliness it’s almost an afterthought. Could all religions we know of be wrong but some OTHER god be true? Just as possible as your god being real.

              1. Any God that could NOT do everything written in the Bible, would not be God.
                I choose one side of Pascal’s wager and you choose the other. Good luck with that.

                1. Pascal’s Wager is a hack’s attempt at reasoned persuasion. It makes the false dichotomy of “Christianity or nothing” without considering the possibility of the literally millions of other gods thought up by mankind. The Wager at best is a way to pull back theists who find themselves on the fence, because it also begs the question, assuming you consider heaven/hell as real possibilities to have any weight.

                2. I think it a perfectly valid wager your darts notwithstanding. No downside, unlimited upside. Your upside and your downside wouldn’t give me any comfort whatsoever.

                  Christians have THE empty tomb. Nobody else has that. (my final post here tonight)

                3. Yes, I can go bury my cat that just died in a cave, remove him at night, and point to the cave 3 days later saying he raised from the dead. Or just point to an empty cave, period, and say “See? There’s no body.”

                  Whether something comforts or appeals has no bearing on it’s truth value. Though I can fully sympathize with wanting to believe. I would love to spend time with the grandfathers I never got to know, that sadly doesn’t make it any more likely, though.

                4. Yes, then get crucified upside swearing by that scam because…
                  “that’s your story and you’re sticking to it!” Weeeeeee!
                  Have a nice evenig sir (-:

                5. If I remember correctly the resurrection of Jesus was in front of women or roman soldiers, not the disciples themselves. That is, before making his appearances before the Pentecost. If you want me to list every possible explanation I’ll be hear all night, and I have coursework to attend.

                  Possibility 1: Lies
                  2. Trick by roman soldiers, not exactly known for being nice guys.
                  3. Done by the women.
                  4. Done by one or two of the disciples
                  5. Delusion

                  But let’s put that all aside for a minute and just focus on whether or not the sincerity of someones belief in something can be counted as legitimate evidence to the truth of that belief.

                  19 a**holes flew planes into the world trade center with sincere total belief that they would be rewarded for it in paradise. Buddhist monks set themselves on fire unflinchingly with a belief in reincarnation. Peter was crucified upside down supposedly for his beliefs and because he felt himself unworthy to die in the same manner as Jesus.

                  All three instances involve people with sincere absolute beliefs in almost completely mutually exclusive ideas of the metaphysical. How is the Muslim’s or Buddhist’s commitment any less evidence of their religion’s truth than the Disciples’?

      3. “5. More anecdotal evidence and trying to use OTHER people’s experiences as evidence to other people?” (Dan)

        You do this all the time Dan! What have you EVER said that was not found in some book or out of someone elses mouth? I haven’t heard an original thought come out of your mouth sir, that I can think of. If you applied the same doubt to other books that you do to the Bible you wouldn’t believe one damn thing about one damn thing would you?

      4. The striped branches story does not say it was th branches that made them striped or spotted did it? NO. You should not insinuate that it does Dan.

          1. The writer is simply describing what Jacob did Dan. Does that mean that the sticks caused anything? The writer is a reporter here. I’ll bet you did some unusual things just this morning ;-0

            1. In the King James version more emphasis is put on the branches and colors. And keep writing off the fact that it’s described and repeated that the animals were mating in front of them and were distinguished from the rest of the flock.

              Genesis 30:37-43 KJV
              37 Jacob, however, took fresh-cut branches from poplar, almond and plane trees and made white stripes on them by peeling the bark and exposing the white inner wood of the branches. 38 Then he placed the peeled branches in all the watering troughs, so that they would be directly in front of the flocks when they came to drink. When the flocks were in heat and came to drink, 39 they mated in front of the branches. And they bore young that were streaked or speckled or spotted. 40 Jacob set apart the young of the flock by themselves, but made the rest face the streaked and dark-colored animals that belonged to Laban. Thus he made separate flocks for himself and did not put them with Laban’s animals. 41 Whenever the stronger females were in heat, Jacob would place the branches in the troughs in front of the animals so they would mate near the branches, 42 but if the animals were weak, he would not place them there. So the weak animals went to Laban and the strong ones to Jacob. 43 In this way the man grew exceedingly prosperous and came to own large flocks, and female and male servants, and camels and donkeys.

              Notice 39-40, 41-42. These passage is very clearly illustrating the idea that the branches had some effect in displayed to mating animals.

              As I’ve said before, it’s a very poorly written storybook where either very little is clear and thus it’s open to interpretation or it’s exceedingly tedious and mundane. You would think that he who “is not the author of confusion” would use language a little more clearly, because I can think of no other books that have caused as much confusion as the Bible, except maybe the Communist Manifesto.

                1. Deny the absurd conclusions of the storybook if you like, denial no more alters reality than dreamed up gods and demons.

              1. If the Red Sea were parted, if God created the Heavens and the Earth, I have zero problems with the sticks, causative or not.

                1. Except that Moses didn’t write the Pentateuch, the Egyptian practices of slavery were nothing like in the bible, the monuments attributed to hebrew slave labor were built by paid laborers, Moses likely didn’t exist because the “5 books of Moses” weren’t written until long after the supposed events. Exodus itself has been revised by just about every one of Pentateuchal authors.

                  Was Pharaoh Sneferu a prophet of Yahweh as well? There’s a fable that he parted the Sea too, and before Moses.

                2. You do not and cannot know any of the above to be fact. Conjecture at best. I will say, you are one my best opponents ever (and persistent), but now you are getting way off into the weeds/reeds and we could go on forever.

                  I had a world history professor once say that it was not the Red Sea but the Reed Sea that the Israelites crossed escaping from Egypt. That it was only a few inches deep. My response was, wow(!), if that was the case it’s an even bigger miracle than I thought because Pharoah’s army drowned in it 🙂

                  We’ll never agree, but thanks again for playing sir. We’ll hit some aspect of this again do doubt and perhaps you’ll have your own moment one day that will allow you to believe without incontravertible objective proof.

                3. We probably never will agree, but it’s definitely been fun, if a little vexing lol. What I said above comes from analysis of the text, linguistics, dating, context, themes, and words used in the manuscripts of Genesis – 2 Kings. As well as archeological evidence from ancient Canaan/Phoenicia. It’s called the Documentary Hypothesis, if you have any interest.

                  And who knows, someday maybe I will have some sort of evidence I can consider as proof. If that happens I’ll amend my position and let you know. =P

              2. My GNT and GWT versions did not show it in that sense. Even if..I’m not sure the writer was or was not saying the branches in the water troughs had medicinal properties that would do such a thing. Kind of like we all know why Flamingos are pink. The consuming of the shrimp in the water they eat.

                But like I said..I’m not seeing the story that way. The goats were already striped (verse 35) before any mention of branches (verse 37). Also the story is true in that poplar, almond and plane trees branches are indeed white when peeled back. Also true that animals do frequent watering holes at night and mating almost always occurs there in this way the story tells. So to dismiss the whole thing as sophistry is throwing the baby out with the proverbial bathwater.

                I disagree with your sophomoric jawing about the Bible. No other document in history has been scrutinized to the extent as the Holy Bible. Scores of skeptics and scholars over all the ages have took it apart, parsed it, investigated every great detail and peeked under every stone..every word. It’s held up well! Their conclusions have been greatly mixed overall. If any other book in history (namely pagan religious writings) had been subjected to such critical examination (even a fraction), it would have been demolished by now. The Bible is not perfect because God used MAN to write it. He (God) tells the story. Indeed it is perfect and without flaw. But the men who wrote it (and lived it) are of the same cultures who bastardized the Law in the first place (pharasees, saducess, etc). Having said that, it contains some of the most beautiful prose in all of recorded humanity. Shakespear ain’t got nothin on some of them fishermen, herders, adulterous kings in that respect.

                1. Oh man, William Lane Craig. Is he still dragging out the desiccated corpse of the Cosmological Argument along with the other scripts he recites in debates?

                2. No, a rhetorical question to demonstrate I already know about Craig and hold him with 0 regard, at most. He is not a person who requires external rebuttal, such a proficient purveyor of the Gish Gallop rebuts isn’t worthy this post I’m typing, lol. The Cosmological Argument has been refuted for 300 years by a mind greater than any of us three.

                3. And Christopher Hitchens ever trots out anything new and unpredictable?

                  Stale arguments abound around both extremes.

                4. Very true. I’m no fan of Christopher Hitchens, his schtick is winning points and appealing to audiences. He’s no philosopher or scientist, he’s a polemicist. And in case he was going to come up, I don’t like Dawkins all that much either. I read his book and found it interesting, but he steps outside of his expertise (biology) and tries to do battle in arenas of other people’s expertise (politics and philosophy).

                  I prefer Bertrand Russell, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, occasionally Sam Harris, and Michael Shermer.

                  Granted, the first three are dead so their arguments might be stale, but they to my knowledge have not been successfully been refuted on this topic.

                5. Oh man, William Lane Craig. Is he still dragging out the desiccated corpse of the Cosmological Argument along with the other scripts he recites in debates?

                6. Great stuff 007! The word also noted, quite pointedly that Jacob always took the strong ones. “42 but if the animals were weak, he would not place them there. So the weak animals went to Laban and the strong ones to Jacob.”

                  I am not quite understanding you here with this quote…”The Bible is not perfect because God used MAN to write it. He (God) tells the story. Indeed it is perfect and without flaw.” (007)

                7. Oh I only meant to say that God (who is the author of the story) and His Holy Word ARE/IS perfect. I guess I mean to say that He didn’t use robots to write it. He used imperfect men. So that would explain varying degrees of expression and contrast between the authors etc. I dunno..maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about. I’ve been 90mph today!

                  Rshill, I know you are relatively new here and I’m impressed! Between you, Enoch, and las…you guys just may be elevated up to the high status with CM and Art in my book.

                  I’ve tied up with Dan a couple of other times. The kid has a bright future. And although he is an agnostic and too libertarian (for my taste), I’m happy to have someone like him on the right side of things for the most part. I guess the best thing for you (Rshill) and I to do is to pray for Dan to eventually get to that place where God CAN reveal himself to him. Dan wouldn’t care because to him, our prayers would merely be sending post cards to an unmarked address. But for us, we know better.

                  For those who worship at the alter of Science, I can only repeat something I have always said. Only a fool believes in what he only sees!

                  Lastly, that’s a wrap for me. I’m moving on to the Paul Ryan thread..maybe cause some trouble there :). For you two? Your checks are in the mail. Job well done! I’m a smarter man for participating.

                8. Well, closing out of this thread myself I’d like to apologize for any snippiness to you on my part, you’ve always been civil to me and I feel pretty bad about being a jerk in return in a post or two.

                  I would just like to clarify my stance in regards to prayers. I don’t expect them to have an effect on events, but the sentiment behind it is something I can appreciate, and I do, so I thank you for it like I have MCLBLOG (MLC?) before. I hope things continue to go well for you in the future.

                  I also don’t necessarily believe what I see either, we do after all live in something of a Cartesian Theater. 😉 Though Dennett, Berkeley, and Kant would sharply disagree on what the source of the Ideas are.

                  Have a good one.

  2. The word democracy speaks to the will of the people. If they choose a radical direction like the Muslim Brotherhood they can pretty much kiss any free-will or freedom they may have though they wanted to subscribe to.

    It may be their only moment to avoid a dictatorship which will be more harsh then the Mubarak regime eventually. Say good by to freedom again for another 30 years or don’t make the terrible mistake the Iranians made in 1979.

    Is it any wonder that 96 percent of all Islamic countries are run by despots and dictators and offer little if any freedom. It is the ideology of Islam that is the consummate breeding ground for heavy handed regimes

  3. Freedom is not necessarily the same as Democracy

    The people of Egypt that want freedom don’t understand that installing the brotherhood will be 100 times worse than the dictator they just dethroned.

  4. In the end, the government and country that Egypt becomes will be the choice of the people either by active or passive action.

    The idea that American democracy can fill the world’s needs or that it can even work elsewhere is a pipe-dream – look at France in 1789 and its experience.

    Further, the United States cannot force “democracy” upon others. It can serve as a symbol and be an influence, but we must never force it on others.

    That said, if you want peace, prepare for war. Oh, and re-institute the draft to “democratize” the sacrifice of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, coasties, boy scouts, girl scouts, etc, etc, etc…..

  5. Look, when you look at the Pew polling results that 80% of the Egyptian Muslims favor death for anyone who leaves the Muslim faith for another one, cutting off the left hand for theft and best of all, stoning to death anyone who commits adultery (well, maybe only the women)
    When are people in the US going to realize that Islam does not stand for secular government… it only accepts that Islam rules the government… wake up Americans or your country will be just like Britain…
    http://tinyurl.com/6dg3eu6

  6. they are just repeating what they have been taught. Just as we have been taught the Muslim Brotherhood is bad. I bet they (brotherhood) have done a heck of alot of good, but just like code pink, unless someone says ” maybe you should look into this…” they wont

  7. “Life was filled with guns and War and everyone got trampled on the floor….I Wish we’d all been ready…..”

    1. “Two men walking up a hill,
      One disappears and one’s left standing still,
      I wish we’d all been ready,

      There’s no time to change your mind,
      The Son has come and you’ve been left behind.”

      (used to sing this song in church) Good one.

  8. God help them is more like it. Once these people get a taste of what the Muslim Brotherhood’s real intentions are they’ll be begging us to intervene and it will be to late. God help the indoctrinated youth of the world.

  9. Sorry ladies. The Muslim Brotherhood is smiling right now as they think how well you are helping fool the American public and planning your stoning at the same time.

  10. No woman in her right mind would choose to be a Muslim. The fact that there are millions of them is only proof that most people are just plain stupid and incapable of acting in their own best interests.

    Human nature at its worst.

    1. Yes. It seems like a choice like that would be evidence of a mental deficiency at a minimum and mental illness as the better prognosis.

      The lives of Women have gotten progressively better since Jesus and the advent of Christianity. One of the best books I’ve ever read about the world transformative facts of Christianity, is in a book entitled WHAT IF JESUS HAD NEVER BEEN BORN? by the late Dr. D. James Kennedy

      1. If it weren’t for the story of Jesus Christ Mohamed never would have gotten the idea for Islam. Remember, Mohamed lived during those first few hundred years of Christianity. He may have been a cold hearted bastard who raped and pillaged his way across the Arab world but he wasn’t stupid. He understood human nature very well and he saw how gullible people could be and how easy it would be to make himself the object of worship.

        If people were stupid enough to believe some ludicrous story about God’s son being crucified to wipe out all of mankind’s sins, Mohamed knew all he had to do was say God had a better plan. One that let he and his followers do whatever they wanted.

        1. Palin believes that “ludicrous story about God’s son being crucified to wipe out all of mankind’s sins”. Why would your hero believe such a ludicrous thing? If it’s really ludicrous that is.

          Do you also believe that everything came from nothing by random processes? That sounds very ludicrous to me ma’am. Perhaps you have too much faith in things even more ludicrous than I or Palin or billions of others throughout history. By golly, you might have more faith in nothing than the disciples, eyewitnesses of Jesus’ majesty, had in Christ. Their transformation, part of a diabolical plan? The plan that made Jesus either a liar or a lunatic?

          Islam started in the 600’s, Christianity in the zeros. Muhammed was a thief, as in accustomed to stealing. Also accustomed to ravaging women. When someone perverts something, is it the fault of the something or the pervert?

          Let me stand you up to Jesus and history for a split-second….hmmm, you lose.

          1. I don’t want to get bogged down in an anti-religion fight, but I can’t help but point out that people have sacrificed themselves for a lie all throughout history. As well as sincerely believing that lie enough to sacrifice themselves for it.

            The Iraq War somehow protecting the US is but one example. Islamic suicide bombers are a perfect example. Buddhists immolating themselves without fear because of a belief in reincarnation. People happily going to war with each other and dying due to some foolish notion of a “divine right of kings.” The Jim Jones cult. The Cult that all wore nikes and killed themselves to go meet the Hale-Bopp comet. I don’t know if you’re a Catholic, but if you arent, Thomas More sent himself to the axe for Catholicism.

            Person or group X’s sacrifice from sincere belief in an idea is evidence only of their belief and/or commitment to an idea. It is not evidence of the truth of the idea.

            1. Here’s the thing sir. They were eyewitnesses who lived with him. They were with him all freakin’ day every day. They lived the “lie” atheists suppose. They saw the evidence and the miracles and willingly, layed down their own lives, in gruesome, most painful fashion, knowing He, which was dead and rose again becoming the firstfruits of such, is also perfectly capable to keep his promises to those who believe, to do likewise.

              1. They laid down their lives willingly believing he could do all that. People had similar experiences with Zarathustra and similar claims are made with people supposedly who dealt with Krishna. The shaman of animistic and polytheistic cults all claim to believe and have supernatural experiences as well. People in China and other asian countries, through belief, do things that are unimaginable and shrug off pain like it’s nothing all the time.

                I don’t know if you are a pentecostal, but I have a friend who is/was, and he will swear to his deathbed that he has seen and experienced supernatural working of miracles like Jesus did. It’s pretty amazing how much control our subconscious has on us.

                1. I am aware of multiple ‘me too’ religions (Islam started off as one) who make similar claims..nothing new there.

                  And you can count me as another pentecostal who has seen and indeed experienced the supernatural working of miracles.

                  There are perks…

                2. Well, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, and Animism in general all predate Christianity and Yahwism (also known as Judaism). So if anything, those latter two are the “me too” religions. I think my Pentecostal friend is more of skeptic these days with a belief in a vague concept of supernatural occurrences than any specific theism.

                  I can find you some new age-y people who claim to have experienced astral projection on multiple occasions if you like.

                3. Really? Will they reject it if threatened with upside down crucifixion? Did they dedicate the remainder of their lives to spreading it? The disciples saw folks raised form the dead. That’ll make a believer out of a guy. When the raiser also raises and spends time with ya’, then is taken up into the clouds before your eyes, that might be point, set and match right there.

                4. Really? Will they reject it if threatened with upside down crucifixion? Did they dedicate the remainder of their lives to spreading it? The disciples saw folks raised form the dead. That’ll make a believer out of a guy. When the raiser also raises and spends time with ya’, then is taken up into the clouds before your eyes, that might be point, set and match right there.

                5. Really? Will they reject it if threatened with upside down crucifixion? Did they dedicate the remainder of their lives to spreading it? The disciples saw folks raised form the dead. That’ll make a believer out of a guy. When the raiser also raises and spends time with ya’, then is taken up into the clouds before your eyes, that might be point, set and match right there.

                6. 1. Anecdotal evidence is not evidence.
                  2. Yes, every religion has believers who claim to have “seen” the miraculous happenings and believers who have gone to their deaths willingly for them. If someone believes in something enough, or wants to, it’s easy enough for them to psych the senses into believing they’ve seen/experienced anything.

                  So no, not set and match.

                  If raising from the grave was such a common occurrence back then, why is Jesus’ ascent after 3 days such a big deal? Yes, that’s a facetious question, I’ve read the Bible and know why.

                7. In that case, you’ve rebutted yourself and have little need of me here. Did I say it (being raised from the dead) was a common occurrence? It was not. How many raised from the deads have you ever heard of?

                  I have seen less than zero eveidence from your side sir. My side has reams of evidence that is observable. You know, all of that stuff that your side ignores.

                  By the way, I am being friendly, calm, and happy. Not snippy.

                8. In the gospels being raised from the dead was a common occurrence. You didn’t need to say it, because I’ve read the story too. All the graves of Jerusalem opened up and conversed with their friends and family, remember? Jerusalem was a pretty large city for that time, and who’s to say that something similar wasn’t also happening elsewhere in a more illiterate society? I don’t believe either happened, but for argument’s sake.
                  ————————————–
                  My side does not need evidence, the burden of proof is on you. The person who makes the positive claim is the one who bears the burden, not the skeptic or possessor of a the negative. Your “evidence” is not observable, it is anecdotal, and definitely not repeatable. Even worse, it is anecdotal evidence transcribed by people who were not there, centuries after the claimed events. Thus it is not evidence at all.

                  Even worse than that, even if the gospels were written by the apostles, and just a day or two after the events supposedly happened, how do we know they were in their right mind? How do we know they are not mistaken? How do we know they didn’t have a trick played on them? How do we know they weren’t lying? How do we know that what they saw was in fact not what they thought and has since been explained without the need of the supernatural? The story of Lazerus for example has been explained already with an answer more likely than the supernatural (by definition the least likely of any explanation).

                  My side does not ignore what you present, we just see why the “evidence” is not evidence at all. It is a story that over the years has had a great deal of trial and error evolved psychological chicanery implemented to appeal to both the best and the worst of us at the same time. It just so happens that despite the skeptics lack of a burden of proof, Logic is also in direct opposition to any theistic claims with any specificity.

                  The courts today regard eye-witness testimony as the LEAST reliable evidence presented in trial, and that’s with the eye witnesses themselves within a few years since the events supposedly happened.

                  So I’ll say it again. Even if the Apostles really did “see” all that and really did “believe” all of that, you still have no evidence that what they believed was correct or even remotely approaching correct.

                  “The Varieties of Religious Experience” by William James, the Pragmatist philosopher and Christian believer.
                  http://etext.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/JamVari.html
                  If you want the short and easy version, it can be summarized as this, “religious experiences can not be regarded as evidence to anyone beyond the individual who experienced them.”

                  ^ That’s the point I’ve been trying to get across. I could sincerely have visions of and experiences of Vishnu coming to earth before me and a full week of conversations with the Hindu god but that, at best, would only be evidence to ME. That would not be evidence to you, and likely not even evidence to me, because it’s far more likely that I have simply lost my mind than have had conversations with a physical manifestation of Vishnu. In 2000 years there might be a storybook recounting my claims of having talking about how awesome the Xbox 360 is with him, but the readers would be even less justified in believing me than you would be. Considering that the visions were of an idea which was already extant and prevalent in my time, it’s even more likely that my psychosis was influenced by ideas already in my head.

                  The number of potential “gods” is infinite, and you’ve likely chosen yours because you inherited the belief from your parents, and which one it is is largely determined by where you were born. No evidence exists for any of them, which is why Philosophers who believe in god have LONG SINCE gone through Non-Evidentialism and into Fideism. The Lord of the Rings is evidence of the Dark Lord Sauron as much as the Bible is evidence for Yahweh, but we probably won’t see a religion about him for a few millennia.

                9. Oh I personally know several ‘newagers’ who often experience some ‘out there’ experiences. Most of the time ‘facilitated’, shall we say, by certain ‘substances’ widely used in the 1960’s ;).
                  I’m also familiar with other global religions (some new some old) who’s followers had made supernatural claims. And so that’s supposed to make me feel my relationship with Jesus is marginalized in anyway? Keep seeking your signs dude… I finished that leg of the journey a good while back.

                10. Oh I personally know several ‘newagers’ who often experience some ‘out there’ experiences. Most of the time ‘facilitated’, shall we say, by certain ‘substances’ widely used in the 1960’s ;).
                  I’m also familiar with other global religions (some new some old) who’s followers had made supernatural claims. And so that’s supposed to make me feel my relationship with Jesus is marginalized in anyway? Keep seeking your signs dude… I finished that leg of the journey a good while back.

              2. I never will forget a ‘B’ Christian film I saw years ago. First let me say, you have never seen a true ‘B’ film until you’ve seen a Christian one..there is a comical (yet small) history of capital B Christian films. The only part I remember was when Jesus was being tempted by Satan (desert, mountain top etc). The following is the best I can remember it. I will add some liberal paraphrasing since it has been so long…so you can get the gist.

                The actor who played Satan was dressed in a gangster suit with his hair greased back. He may have had a fedora on..I think. Funny aint it? I’m not making this up!

                But here is what I remember was so powerful. In the scene he would walk along side Jesus. Getting in Jesus face. Pleading with Him. Talking, reasoning, debating, and quoting scripture to Jesus. Finally, after all of what was said between the two was said, Satan incredulously asked Jesus, “are you really going to base it all on ‘faith’? I just cannot believe you are going to hinge everything on THAT! Every man, woman and child…all of those who live years and years from now will have to ‘believe’ in you without seeing?! Your name won’t make it that long. Your miracles, good deads and teachings will all die with you.”

                Satan begin to get angry, raised his voice and said “your plan is weak! It won’t last. It will not endure. They are not strong enough!! They haven’t the will. They are too flawed! Too much time will pass by. And I will be measured and steady with my plans. I WILL convince them it’s all a lie! I will make them forget you! You WILL be marginalized! You will be diminished! I will cause them to not believe! Faith alone won’t be enough!! Your name will not mean anything!!”

                As Jesus continued walking, Satan stopped and stood there. Then Jesus turned to Satan and said, “the choice will be theirs to make. Every person will decide if it’s true. To believe that I became one of them, if I was who I said I was. And if I did what I said I did. Now you go to Hell”.

                1. Yes, it’s frustratingly simple and seemingly easy for some to discount. So they believe the most inane things instead. Like Darwinian evolution which in my opinion is the biggest lie ever foisted on a people. That which makes atheism “respectable”. Most people still look at evolutionary theory in the same way a 1970’s National geographic did. The truth of the matter is this. Evolutionary theory, the house that darwin built, is an earthquake rattled shack which has been shot, shaken, and shod in Bozo boots. Evolutionists cannot even describe how a single cell could possibly evolve from non-living matter much less anything more complicated than that, like the trillion or so succinct connections of the human brain. Random processes? OK…run with that 🙂

                  There is a Christmas story that I heard on a Christian radio station one evening during the holidays a few years ago. It was about a diehard atheist who depsised all things Christian. He had a big group of birds trying to keep warm in his barn and he tried and tried to show them where to go and how to keep warm etc. he could not get them to do what was in their own best interest to do, that which would keep them from freezing to death. He thought and thought about it and said to himself. The only way I could properly communicate with these is to become one of them. The truth of Christ hit him that day. If anyone knows where that story is, I would like to get a copy of it. It is extremely good and I have butchered it pretty well here.

                  God is so much higher than we. He became one of us to communicate with us effectively. He paid our debts and set us free from the sin that clung to our souls. All he asks is that we accept the gift. He is Christmas.

                2. “Evolutionists cannot even describe how a single cell. . .non-living matter. . .”

                  Stop conflating the explanation for the diversity of life with the question of the origin of life. In other words, stop trying to fuse the issue of Evolution and Abiogenesis. They are two separate ideas in Biology, regardless of whether it was a single event in your holy book.

                3. I think you’d agree that in order to have diversity of life you must first have life. The first several billion rungs on your ladder are missing sir, metaphorically speaking, rendering it useless. The only thing micro-evolution can describe is variation within a species. The entire macro-evolutionary theory I would equate with the discovery of the cell by Robert Hooke, stopping at the view of a piece of onion skin or some-such and unable to go further. In reality, the cell is staggeringly complex and evolutionary theory staggeringly lacking.

                  Does that leave both of us staggering? No, but it seems to leave one of us at least a bit tipsy.

                4. Your entire post misses or avoids the point.

                  Evolution is not Abiogenesis, and Abiogenesis is not Evolution. Just because the origin and diversity of life are the same event in the Bible does not mean that they are the same thing in Biology.

                  And for the record, it’s down to about 6 theories or so to explain the origin. More time and better experiments will shed light on which, if any, are accurate.

                5. Does it?

                  Dan, you can play musical chairs with terms all you like sir. Your side cannot explain diversity OR origins. My side explains both beautifully. You cannpt have the later without the former OK? Surely you realize this.

                  Your side cannot disprove anything my side has to say. My side can kick your side’s ass up one side of Interstate #75 and down the other.

                6. Does it?

                  Dan, you can play musical chairs with terms all you like sir. Your side cannot explain diversity OR origins. My side explains both beautifully. You cannpt have the later without the former OK? Surely you realize this.

                  Your side cannot disprove anything my side has to say. My side can kick your side’s ass up one side of Interstate #75 and down the other.

                7. Beautifully? “Goddidit. Okay done, what’s for dinner?” Is no answer at all.

                  “Disprove.” Again with this? Welcome to Reason 101, the person making the claim (you) bears the burden of proof in order to persuade the person who is skeptical of magical claims (me).

                  This post from you amounts to about as much as saying “my dad’s bigger than your dad” in a discussion of microbiology.

                  Say it with me now, “the religious side of the debate bears the burden of proof.”

                8. Does it?

                  Dan, you can play musical chairs with terms all you like sir. Your side cannot explain diversity OR origins. My side explains both beautifully. You cannpt have the later without the former OK? Surely you realize this.

                  Your side cannot disprove anything my side has to say. My side can kick your side’s ass up one side of Interstate #75 and down the other.

                9. Your side has absolutely zero Dan. It is as unimpressive as a thing can possibly be and yet still be gazed upon as if it were up on some award cerremony’s pedestal. Can you not see that? The only pedestal it is on these days is the pedestal of the “politicization of science”. Not much of a pedestal huh? AKA lies.

                  How is that they won you over with such a large pile of zippity? Methinks you have an axe to grind in this arena sir and there is no whetstone or anything similar, available for the task. You want to disbelieve for some reason and I’d like to know what that reason is. If you don’t want to say, that’s fine, but I sense that you despise what you say is nonexistent for some reason.

                  Facts and proofs are not part of the/your reasoning in my opinion sir.

                  None.

                10. My side? My side is nothing more and nothing less than reasonable skepticism of magical claims.

                  Even if science is wrong about 100% of it’s claims, that is not in ANY way a single ounce of proof of YOUR claims. The religious side of this can never seem to wrap it’s head around this.

                  Here, I’ll play along, let’s say Evolution is wrong, all 6 theories of Abiogenesis are dead wrong, and everything else in Science that conflicts with Abrahamic religion is wrong. So what? That doesn’t mean your religion is right by default? And it doesn’t change the fact that your holy book says that the earth looks like a snow globe, there was light before stars, fruit trees before the sun, that outer space is full of water, painting stripes on a pregnant cow makes it bear striped calf, that killing birds cures leprosy, AND THAT PI IS A ROUND NUMBER, and that human sacrifice is a perfectly good substitute for taking responsibility for your own actions.

                  Christianity/Jesus are not the default starting position. That spot is reserved for the Null Hypothesis, and until your religion can overcome that you are in no better a position than Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Shintoism, Taoism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, the Greek gods, the Roman gods, the ancient Egyptian gods, the old Germanic gods, or the African Shamanisms. Deism at least has a logical inference on it’s side, Theism doesn’t even have that.

                  So put Evolution aside for now and present me with some evidence FOR YOUR position, because Science is a non-point. I only side with Science because it actually provides demonstrable results. The computer you use is the result of science, not your book. The same goes for your car, your clothes, your food, your cell phone, your home and everything else in your life.

                  The vaccines and every other kind of medicine which have saved your life MANY times over are the result of the exact same fiend of science and understanding as Evolution. I doubt you would deny the efficacy of modern medicine which makes the United States the hallmark of scientific achievement, but you deny the larger explanatory understandings which result from that EXACT SAME well of knowledge.

                  Science, it works. Your book, says π = 3.

          2. First of all, Palin is not “my hero”. I’m not a liberal anymore so I don’t hero worship a politician. There are a couple of things I don’t like about Palin and her evangelical-Christian-creationist beliefs is one of them. But those beliefs are harmless and they are not enough for me to not support her for president. Her strengths far outweigh that weakness so I’m willing to cut her some slack on that.

            On the whole “mystery of life” angle. I don’t give a crap where everything came from. One of my favorite scenes in one of my favorite movies is in Woody Allen’s Hannah and Her Sisters. It’s a very sweet, touching, story of three sisters and their extended family and friends. Woody Allen plays to type as a neurotic hypochondriac who is searching for the meaning of life. As part of his journey towards that goal he decides to try Catholicism. Needless to say, this does not go over very well with his Jewish parents.

            There is a scene where Mickey (Woody’s character) is trying to explain to his parents, who are off camera in separate rooms of an apartment, why he’s considering becoming a Catholic. He goes back and forth between his mother, who is beside herself, and his father, who is pretty droll about the whole thing. At one point Mickey asks his father why God allows such terrible things to happen in the world. He asks “why were there Nazi’s”?

            His father says “how the hell do I know why there were Nazi’s? I don’t know how the can opener works”.

            That sums up my philosophy of the meaning of life.

            1. Well, happy can opener to you young lady and may the spirit of Woody Allen save your immortal soul 🙂

              I hear ya’. Your philosophy is essentially…”duh”. That doesn’t leave much room for you to call Christianity “ludicrous” now does it?

              Got it.

              1. I find Christianity just as ludicrous as astrology, ESP, Tarot cards, and tea leaf reading. All the same thing to me. Why so many people feel the need to believe in crap like that is the real eternal mystery. Beats me. Stupidity knows no limits. Mohamed, Joseph Smith, and L. Ron Hubbard knew that all too well.

                1. “Stupidity knows no limits.”(Jaynie)

                  You’ve nailed it! The difference between those things you cite and Christianity however, is one little word. Truth. If any of those other things were true I’d believe those. Why so many people believe so many things EXCEPT for the truth “is the real eternal mystery”. It doesn’t beat me though.

                  Ok, I’m done.

                2. Except the people that believe in all of those other things all think those are “the truth.” Can you really not see that? What makes you so wise and insightful as to justify the claim that you definitively know what the eternal truth is, if there even is such truth at all?

                  Even the best scientist in the world when pushed will tell you that all knowledge is tentative, your claim to special indisputable knowledge potentially makes you more arrogant than they are.

                3. How many of those persons have been pushed to the point the disciples were Dan?

                  Have your people call my people on this.
                  I already know the answer.

                  Am I arrogant in the knowledge and truth of Christianity and Jesus Christ? Yes. I am nearly as arrogant as you are in your “beliefs”. Not quite at parity though.

                  Have a good night sir, and thanks for conversing with me. I like it 🙂

                4. Not quite, when it comes to metaphysics I make no positive claim, and certainly no knowledge claim.

                  Atheism does not mean “There is no god.”
                  Atheism means “I do not believe in gods.” In the very real sense you and I are atheists about every single god but 1. It’s an old line, but it’s still true.

                  There is nothing beyond different poorly written stories differentiating the Gods in human history when it comes to evidence.

                5. I don’t have the multiple God problem because there is only one God.

                  For you to equate The Bible to many other books full of fanciful tales is as silly as it can be. The Bible is without peer and you know that. Also those other religions you say predate the one where God spoke with Adam and Eve? No religion of any kind predates that sir. Before it were written it was oral.

                  Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism. That most Jewish people believe the Messiah has yet to come the first time is their mistake. In the beginning God…. It is He that I trust and believe in. There is no former and no equal.

                6. “I don’t have the multiple god problem. . .” That is exactly my point, you don’t believe in Wotan, Shiva, Hadad, Yam-Nahar, Thor, Zeus, or Saturn. I don’t believe in them either, nor do I believe in your god for the EXACT same reasons.

                  The Bible is without peer? Please, it’s a poorly written, edited, rewritten, revised, redacted, and politically altered story book full of bad history and false science. Adam and Eve was a story borrowed by the Hebrews from earlier cultures, it’s a myth, at best a metaphor. Do you also believe people lived for 900 years and that somehow penguins made their way from the poles to the ark without dying from the desert sun, didn’t starve to death, and didn’t suffocate from the altitude of the flood waters?

                  Please, you can chant the mantras about the one and only god all you like, but it won’t change the reality that Abrahamic Monotheism was born from Canaanite Monolatrism. Deny it all you like, you might as well say the sky is neon polka-dotted while you’re at it.

                7. Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel Seth and Noah to name a few, predate these Canaanites. That’s where monotheism began.

                8. “The Bible is without peer? Please, it’s a poorly written, edited, rewritten, revised, redacted, and politically altered story book full of bad history and false science.” (Dan)

                  This is the dumbest thing I’ve heard in months, with all due respect.

                9. Check this out: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001190 Your flood supposedly covered all the peaks of all the mountains. That would include Everest which is well over 8,000 meters above sea level today. Don’t forget the temperatures that high. Which leaves a desert for cold weather and tropical animals to somehow wander through, a lack of eucalyptus for the Koalas from the already separated Australia to eat, and the far below freezing temperatures for Noah’s family and all the other animals to somehow survive.

                  The fable is just plain silly, but I have lakefront property in the Sahara going for a bargain these days…

                  The flood you believe in which only has evidence of a localized occurrence, and lore evidence that it is a barrowed/shared fable amongst Canaanite (including hebrews) and Sumerian cultures. The similarities between Noah and the Epic of Gilgamesh (older) are uncanny.

                10. Was Mount Everest in existence at the time of the flood Dan?

                  Why is it that folks like you think everything in the Bible is borrowed from someone else? I think if it is borrowed from anything, it is borrowed from actual events. Who has dibbs on actual events? 🙂

                11. Well, seeing as biblical literalists tend to believe the earth is 6000 years old, yes, Mount Everest would have been only 365 meters shorter than it is now at the “creation.”

                  Never mind amounts of time for geological events like Everest alone refute the 6000yr idea, without even touching geological time scale or Astronomy.

                12. While you’re at it, explain why there are observed objects in space 13.5 billion light years away in a 6000 year old universe model.

                13. While you’re at it, explain why there are observed objects in space 13.5 billion light years away in a 6000 year old universe model.

                14. While you’re at it, explain why there are observed objects in space 13.5 billion light years away in a 6000 year old universe model.

                15. While you’re at it, explain why there are observed objects in space 13.5 billion light years away in a 6000 year old universe model.

                16. While you’re at it, explain why there are observed objects in space 13.5 billion light years away in a 6000 year old universe model.

                17. “I don’t have the multiple god problem. . .” That is exactly my point, you don’t believe in Wotan, Shiva, Hadad, Yam-Nahar, Thor, Zeus, or Saturn. I don’t believe in them either, nor do I believe in your god for the EXACT same reasons.

                  The Bible is without peer? Please, it’s a poorly written, edited, rewritten, revised, redacted, and politically altered story book full of bad history and false science. Adam and Eve was a story borrowed by the Hebrews from earlier cultures, it’s a myth, at best a metaphor. Do you also believe people lived for 900 years and that somehow penguins made their way from the poles to the ark without dying from the desert sun, didn’t starve to death, and didn’t suffocate from the altitude of the flood waters?

                  Please, you can chant the mantras about the one and only god all you like, but it won’t change the reality that Abrahamic Monotheism was born from Canaanite Monolatrism. Deny it all you like, you might as well say the sky is neon polka-dotted while you’re at it.

    2. Being born in a Muslim family seals the fate of woman from a tender age. Speaking against her religion is blasphemy and could lead to stoning. Does that mean she is plain stupid? No, she is on survival mode. She is a procreating machine that is tossed at her husband will when he utters those dreadful words: “I repudiate you” three times. She then becomes a pariah in her own community. It is never the man’s fault, always the woman’s!
      In America, we know freedom because we are a christian nation whose forefathers understood that a Savior bled and died for us so we could have life. And even closer to home, our men and women in uniform are still giving paying a high price for our freedom!

  11. No woman in her right mind would choose to be a Muslim. The fact that there are millions of them is only proof that most people are just plain stupid and incapable of acting in their own best interests.

    Human nature at its worst.

  12. Can you see the multicultural chickens coming home to roost? Can you also see them coming home to roast? I think France, England, Netherlands etc. are beginning to openly discuss their disillusionment with these durn poultry pieces. It’s time they either melt into a chicken pot-pie concoction or be tossed off the farm/ranch and allowed to free-range (on the other side of the border). At least two leaders from the European Union announced the “failure” of multi-culturalism this past week. It’s a start. The Australian leader delivered a great speech I recently read regarding this.

    Muslims are bringing destruction upon themselves as well as us. They need to be told to shut the hell up and melt, or get the hell out! They are a deadly virus that has “gone viral” if you catch my drift.

    Hell is their product, Hate is their Mantra and Subjugation their goal. No!, NO! HELL NO! These are ideas that need killing. After they are killed, they need to be cremated and the ashes spread to the four winds so as to preclude their reanimation. We are in a war of ideas and the first casualty will be political “correctness”. It’s new name will be something more akin to Political Stupidity… or just plain stupidity…with all due disrepect of course.

  13. The two girls on the right ought to be worried, the Muslim Brotherhood would have them “stoned” for not wearing the hijab head scraf. Their charter states that they must implement Sharia Law. Oh and by the way, under the Muslim Brotherhood, their opinions would no longer matter either, so no point in doing an interview. Naive and ignorant is no way to go through life, but some manage to pull it off…. for awhile.

  14. Unfortunately, this doesn’t surprise me. I have always believed that it is impossible for there to be a democratic-republic system like America anywhere else in the world where Islam is the primary religion. It just can’t work. Simply having elections doesn’t result in freedom. Don’t they have elections in Iran? These people have been brought up with a very different view than Americans. We need to just understand it and accept it and be very wary of what these countries are capable of.

  15. When I see these young people, I just keep remembering back to the Iranian students in 1979. It is such a close parallel that it is nearly unbearable to watch. D*mn, I really, really hope I’m wrong about this.

  16. huh?? the mb is good now? you know, this reminds me of the people who defend sharia law. they say that sharia gives people food, homes, jobs, etc. the radical muslim hannity interviewed recently is one person who made that defense and it sounded like what the first girl was saying. oh sure i bet sharia and the mb DO give people those things. but they also take away freedoms.
    and, that 3nd girl talked so fast it was hard to understand her rambling… she seemed really nervous!
    hey where can i watch a full length vid of this segment?

  17. I think for the moment, it’s what the Egyptian Military will put up with. Leave it to Geraldo though to interview four or five kids and try to pass it off as the majority opinion in Egypt.

    1. I wished I could say you’re wrong! But the map is too obvious! The fact that they have been subdued for over 30 years under a tyrant makes them an easy target. I am afraid they’ve just traded a dictator for a future oppressor! The wolves in sheep’s clothing are out!

      1. umm it has been much longer than 30 years..

        Most of Europe and the middle east has always been ruled by Dictators and Tyrants, calling themselves Kings, Pharaohs, Queens, Emperor, or any other countless names.

        For over 5,000 years the people of that area have traded 1 dictator for another. Some of them less “evil” than others, but dictators all the same……

  18. I’ve been asked alot about what I think regarding this glorious revolution in Egypt, and their move towards so-called democracy. My response is to recall what Benjamin Franklin said, when asked upon the ratification of the constitution what it meant, “a Republic if you can keep it.”

    Revolutions are easy, overthrowing governments can be quite simple given the right time and circumstances. However, true Liberty, true freedom, as any American knows is hard, and protecting those liberties requires all groups to cooperate together for the common good of the nation. This is what has made our great “experiment” so successful for the past 235+ years. We have our differences, we have our problems, we have our prejudices, but at the end of the day WE are AMERICANS!

    So, to all the youth of Egypt, the revolution is the easy part. We’ll see whether you exhange one tyrant for another, or you truly do move towards the principles of Liberty and Justice for all, in the coming months and years ahead. The first measure is religious tolerance for all beliefs, freedom of speech both in support and in opposition to positions, free elections, etc.

    Democracy? Not yet. Would prefer to see a constitutional republic. The founders had serious doubts about direct rule by the people which could lead to tyranny of the majority.

    I’ll reserve my opinion on all this util I see Christian, Muslim, Jews, and the secularist living and governing together in peace. Then I’ll be willing to say this “revolution” was truly a movement towards liberty and freedom.

    1. Living together in peace ain’t gonna happen. Youth are stupid, naive, and clueless, and think they know it all. These kids will have a very rude awakening.

      1. I wouldn’t call the youth “stupid”. Wouldn’t “ignorant” be a more correct term?

        And, IF they are ignorant, whose fault is that?

        What needs to be done to correct such ignorance?

        When should the correction start?

        Where?

        Hmmmmmmmmmm??????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    2. We should never support democracy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing. Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the People, who have… a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean the characters and conduct of their rulers. There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free ‘government’ ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among people. -John Adams
      The last line is the Problem in the Middle East, and is the main reason our liberty continues to be eroded here at home.

  19. Revolutions happen a lot through thousands of years of history. The Left and their media have celebrated this great, ‘historic’ revolution. But this revolution’s greatness can only be judged by what replaces it. A new ‘President’ (dictator) for 30 years, or an Iranian 1979 type revolution, or worse. . . . or maybe better, but I wouldn’t count on it.

    It’s times like this that remind me of how exceptional our founding founders were and what a miracle the United States was to ever happen in the first place. This was truly the exceptional nation, an example for the rest of the world to follow.

    What are the chances that Egypt will have a George Washington that will relinquish power after 4 or 8 years? Historically speaking, chances aren’t very good for that. I hope they beat the odds. I suppose I should aim low, and just hope for a nation that doesn’t want to destroy the west including Israel. But I’ll pray and hope for the best anyway. “Aim high” – I think Anne Oakley advised something like that.

    1. I liked it better when there was a man in the White House willing to fight terror anywhere it showed itself and without reservation of being politically correct.

      Now, we have this fool that the media will spend the next month trying to convince you worked for Democracy in the Middle East and doesn’t know the first thing about it. I’m also sure he is not familiar with the Rice doctrine calling for just that democracy now being witnessed, except it was from 5 years ago back when he was still practicing how to vote present. But, you know, that Cairo speech was epic and all that.

      Your question about will a country in revolt that just came out of a dictatorship choose its new leaders wisely? Not, likely. Any political parties of moderation will quickly be stomped in the short time they have to assemble membership by the ruthless and radicals. Especially with a toothless Obama overseeing things.

      Nope. This is a mess. Thousands of years of Middle East precedent will not be swayed by a Democrat fool who just suffered nearly the worst political losses in American history just 3 months ago. The World was watching.

      1. My question also is: If the people are even choosing wisely, CAN they find someone who will give up power in 4 or 8 years, to the will of the people, through free elections? I understand that our GW was extremely exceptional. I don’t know if every generation, in every nation, even has one like him?

      2. So who would have you handled it, Had American Troops roll in and stomp down the Resistance to a Brutal Dictator?

        That would have worked out really well.

        We need to end the idea of “the enemy of our enemy is our friend” that is non-sense, Any system of governance that does not stand for the Principles of Freedom and Individual Liberty you should be a enemy of the USA, I dont care who their other enemy’s are.

        If end the end Egypt ends up with another bad government, then there will be another revolt at some point, and we should stand by the people to over turn this new bad government, just like we had the opportunity to do in Iran a few short years ago but we stood on the side line and looked on…

        But we should never support an oppressive and brutal dictator purely because he does what we tell him to.

        In the end if the people of Egypt choose to hate and despise the USA, which they do know mainly because of our support of Mubarak in the first place, well it is the choice of free people to hate each other. If they take aggressive action then, and only then, would we respond in kind.

        Freedom at any cost…. Not Peace at any cost is the lesson.

        1. “He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself.” -Thomas Paine

            1. “It truly defies all logical rationalization that those who scream and shout about the principles of liberty in their own country while simultaneously proclaiming that millions of people halfway around the world that they don’t know are undeserving of it as judged by a standard (religion) the use of which is explicitly forbidden in the founding document of the nation they claim to cherish are capable of walking and chewing gum all at once.” – Me

        2. Well, at some point the agitators and organizers will need to be adjusted. You can’t allow temporary mobs to seize portions of power through anarchy in a Democracy. I don’t believe the right to assemble, at least in America, includes the right to block commerce… that is the equivalent of domestic financial terrorism. Of course the latter achieves results faster, but faster and democracy are not that compatible.

          I have no inherent desire to influence foreign countries, but idealism won’t keep the world going. To ignore the fact the US needs worldwide oil and resources and is affected by those foreign countries and their leaders would be ignorant. The obvious is then to be involved and attempt to sway events in your favor, like mankind has been doing since he walked the Earth. That does mean the occasional befriending of ruthless dictators.

  20. Tyranny and fear is not difficult… just look at how Democrats cowered to Pelosi who is a stunning bimbo of profound ignorance.

    Freedom is the hard road to keep open.

    1. What bothers me most sometimes are things I can’t understand. Like: How in over three hundred million people, can these be the best of us we can hire to represent and lead us?

      We need better standards –
      Cowards need not apply.

  21. Shilling. What can you expect from the Muslim society. At least Iranian youth have gone to school in the US and are pro-western and pro-American style democracy. This will be an interesting clash of ideas in the Middle East.

Comments are closed.