homebild

While the US was embarrassed by revelations that it had been electronically spying on its European Allies for decades, even moreso embarrassing was the fact that European leaders had no idea it was going on. Merkel's plan is less about providing EU citizens security from 'spying' by the US of their cell phones, internet usage, cable tv viewing habits, e-mail messaging and so forth....as it is about how Germany, France and other EU nations can play 'catch up' in the spy-games and start electronically eavesdropping themselves! The genie is out of the bottle. And he is not about to go back in!

Thief on the Cross. Many use the "Thief" on the Cross as 'proof' that Baptism is not necessary for Salvation.... But we know NOTHING about whether or not the "Thief" was ever Baptized or not....Just that he was crucified next to Jesus...admitted his guilt...and that his own crucifixtion was justified. Did this man partake in John's Baptism?...We do not know... Was this man a practicing Jew?...we do not know... Was this man a Gentile Christian?...we do not know... Was he baptized as a believing Christian?....we simply do not know. The FACT is no sound doctrine regarding 'baptism' and it's effect on Salvation can be gleaned from the story of the Thief who was crucified next to Jesus! We do not know if he was or wasn't baptized! What we DO KNOW, however, is that Jesus, Himself, was Baptized...to fulfill the Law and God's command... And that Jesus COMMANDED any who claimed to 'follow' Him to submit to Baptism in the same manner that He submitted to baptism.

"They know who they are giving arms to. They're giving arms to fellow Sunnis." ------------- It's not that simple. First: not all rebels in Syria are Sunni Muslims. Second: Assad is not a Shi'ite Muslim. Assad is an Alawite....a Muslim 'cult' that is about as close to Shi'ite Islam in theology as is Jehovah's Witness or Mormon theology to Orthodox Christianity. Third: Christians in Syria support Assad because Christians have fared best under the secular Assad than they could under any other religious Muslim option. ------------------- That said, are the Saudis simply supply funneling arms from their US and other NATO/EU handlers? It's a safe bet since Saudi Arabia (like Israel) does little to act independently of their mutual puppet masters.

Without understanding 'baptism' as did the Jewish Jesus, the Jewish Apostles, and Jews in Palestine at the time the New (and Old) Testament was written...it is not possible to understand that there are indeed multiple 'baptisms' indicated in Scripture...and that multiple 'baptism' is the 'Norm'...not the exception... for any believer in Christ...Jew or Gentile. See the Jewish Encyclopedia entry for 'Baptism' here: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2456-baptism See also "Ablutions" here: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/338-ablution

So if less than 2% of the US workforce makes less than Federal Minimum wage, then how can raising Federal minimum wage harm the economy? Short answer: It CANNOT! So WHAT ARGUMENT then can be made AGAINST helping these few get out of POVERTY?

The article states that the entire Iranian Naval 'force' sent near US waters was 1 destroyer and 1 Helicopter Carrier. How is that any threat?

"North Korea is godless, as all religious activity is discouraged there." I don't follow your logic. North Korea may be "officially" atheistic, as are all other Communist nations...but that is not to say the society nor its citizens are 'godless'. Far from it. Christianity thrives in North Korea (underground as that may be) and in other communist nations (like China). In fact. some of the fastest growing Churches in the world...the nations producing the most Christian converts every year are in Communist/atheist nations -------------------- "England was still subject to the Church of Rome under Henry the VIII...." Again, I'm not following your logic. The Catholic Church did not instruct or demand of Henry VIII to murder his father's ministers any more than did the Church instruct or authorize him to murder St Thomas Moor.....or execute his wives __________________________ The point here is that England was not made any more 'godly' by the personal evil actions of Henry VIII than is North Korea today made 'ungodly' by the personal actions of Kim. Nor could the righteousness of Christian believers in common English society be the cause of Henry's evil anymore than can Kim's evil be the result of North Korean society or culture alone. Each did their own evil on their own accord. Regardless of their societies, religions, cultures, or political affiliations....Kim, like, Henry and all men...commit assassination and murder simply because they personally want to....and LIKE it.

"This is what happens in Godless societies". That is an interesting statement since many of the Kings of England practiced execution in the same way as Kim to consolidate their own political power. Of particular note is Henry the VIII...founder and religious head of the Church of England. One of his earliest actions as king was to charge 2 of his father's ministers with treason, and have them killed.. I don't think it could be properly argued that England was a 'godless society' simply because some of its monarchs were murderers anymore than can one argue that Kim's actions are the result of Korean society or its people at large.

Good start in the right direction! Let's see how the lunatics at the NRA try to spin this one!

And by doing so will guarantee another Democratic victory in 2014 and 2016. When will these Republican 'men' (males) get it? If you want to prevent divorce as a Christian, then do not practice adultery: http://zplonk.tripod.com/cheating_republicans.html If you want to prevent abortion as a Christian, then do not practice adultery: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randall_Terry If you want to stop drug abuse, then don't snort coke: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rep-trey-radel-to-return-to-congress-after-cocaine-arrest/ ---------------------------- The bottom line is that the Gospel, as well as the Law, is aimed at each of us personally. We cannot condemn the homosexual if we live in adultery... We cannot condemn the adulterer if we abort our children conceived in marriage... We cannot condemn abortion if we live together without the benefit of marriage... We cannot condemn the jobless if we do nothing to give him a job... We cannot condemn those who use drugs if we are alcoholic... -------------------------- Christ's Gospel is aimed at OURSELVES to conform and to comply and to obey... Not to FORCE others to do so! So to the Republicans and Democrats and Tea-Partiers, and Independents, and everyone else I say: Show us your stuff by showing us Christ in YOUR lives by doing as He said! Otherwise PROVE yourselves the LIARS you ARE!

Looks like AFlameOfFire is the one missing the point about 'chia beards'... http://www.examiner.com/article/duck-dynasty-s-uncle-si-and-willie-chia-pets-a-hot-item-for-2013-holiday-gifts Chia Pet is actually marketing 'chia beards' to make more money for these Duck Dynasty weirdos! And my beard looks just fine all neat and trimmed as it is!...Thank you very much! PS: 4% of the population does NOT represent "Middle America" or its values! 4% of the population following Duck Dynasty realty stars is why the Republican Party is in big trouble when it thinks it represents 'America'...and why Evangelicals are in even bigger trouble when they look to Duck Dynasty stars as examples of role model 'Christians' and protectors of speech freedom.... What did Jesus say about the hypocrites who wanted to be seen of men acting all holy in public on the street corners? Sheesh! PPS: I support the right of anyone to say anything within reason and their Constitutional rights....But NO ONE has the right to say what they want on their EMPLOYERS time and in their EMPLOY without suffering the consequences for it. SI wants to lose his contract with A+E and go on the road at his own expense as a 'preacher' against gays, then he should GO FOR IT!... He just shouldn't expect A+E or anyone else he works for...and DISAGREES...to have to accept his 'free speech' views or be forced to be swallow his misguided 'opinions'. --------------- Sorry.

Look. Anything is possible. The entire Royal Family and lineage could be wiped out by an asteroid.... England can be wiped of the face of the map by Nuclear war.... The Royal Family can repent and finally swear allegiance to Louis the 16th of France as their rightful monarch.... But by all sensible observations, actions and indications, Charles intends to ascend the throne and serve as King...and has never suggested anything to the contrary. To claim otherwise is spurious speculation and more than just common codswollop!

During the VietNam war, private citizen Jane Fonda traveled to North VietNam, to protest US military involvement in SouthEast Asia. As a US citizen, Fonda had a right GUARANTEED and PROTECTED by the US Constitution, to protest against, disagree with, actively challenge, campaign against, and do whatever it took within LEGAL means to expose what she felt were wrongs done by the US in its prosecuting of the war against communism in VietNam, Laos and Cambodia. Did Fonda have the legally protected RIGHT of free speech to go to North VietNam, collaborate with our enemies, and serve as a propaganda tool against US Interests? Few today would think so, and many (if not most) US citizens consider Jane Fonda a TRAITOR to this day because of her wartime actions. ----------------------- While I, too, protested US involvement in VietNam, and was prepared as a teen to renounce my US citizenship and emigrate to Canada rather than serve against my conscience and will in a war I considered 'unjust'...and short of that...was prepared to go to jail rather than be drafted and be forced to serve... Even I considered Fonda's actions then well 'beyond the pale'...'over the top'....and too scandalous to be within the rights of 'normal' objection...and I still do today. WHY? Because there is a LIMIT to our protections under the Constitution...and a limit of what we individuals can say or do no matter how much we believe what we are doing is 'right'. Ultimately, our freedom of speech and dissent ENDS when our right to speak and dissent jeopardizes the lives of our fellow citizens. Free speech CANNOT BE CLAIMED, while aiding and abetting our national enemies in times of war, while giving national secrets to our enemies who use that information to kill our fellows and do harm against our nation. ----------------------------- It is my opinion that Jane Fonda betrayed her country by her actions in North VietNam, and should have been punished as a traitor for them. ----------------------------- It is also my opinion that Edward Snowdon is likewise a traitor to his fellow countrymen and US security and his actions inexcusable. Edward Snowden is the "Hanoi Jane" of his time. And in fact, WORSE. __________________ Did Snowdon have LEGAL means by which he could have PROTESTED against what he saw as NSA 'over-reach'? ABSOLUTELY. Did Snowdon have LEGAL means to STOP his own involvement in programs he felt violated his own conscience? ABSOLUTELY. Did Snowden have the right to take US secrets and divulge them to our enemies? ABSOLUTELY NOT. IS Snowden protecting US citizen's interests by seeking refuge in and collaborating with US enemies? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Do these facts JUSTIFY the US in its surveillance of its own citizens? Surveillance of World leaders? MAYBE YES, MAYBE NO....and whether right or wrong remains to be seen... But Snowdon acted ILLEGALLY as his own JUDGE and JURY...giving the US no CHANCE to defend itself under the same LAWS and RULES he claims!. ---------------------------------- Whether you agree with the actions of Congress during the Bush and Obama Administrations which empowered the NSA to expand surveillance on behalf of US National Security has NOTHING to do with the actions by Edward Snowdon who betrayed his oath to protect you and I. The NSA has been doing its job for longer than Edward Snowdon has been alive...and far greater minds...far more sober minds...have deemed the actions of this agency CRUCIAL to the protection of US citizens worldwide. -------------------------------------- Has the US Government...It's President...It's Congress...It's Courts violated the rights of it's citizens during times of perceived national crisis? Absolutely, and embarrassingly so. Japanese Americans lost Civil Rights in WWII in the name of 'national security' and in violation of their Constitutional rights. Did the loss of THEIR rights permit them or other American citizens to divulge war secrets and aide and abet the enemy as a form of PROTEST? NO, OF COURSE NOT! TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT! ------------------------------------ Edward Snowdon is a Criminal and a Traitor. There is NOTHING within his actions that is even remotely redeemable. There may also be little in the US Government's actions in domestic and foreign surveillance that may also be redeemable....but THAT is one to be conducted within our own LEGAL SYSTEM....one to be determined amongst our own LEGAL CITIZENS...not certainly not by our enemies or even our foreign friends ----------------------------------------- No amnesty for Snowdon.... Find him... Arrest him... Prosecute him... Bring him to the US for US Justice... or let the NSA and US special forces use all their power to find him and take him out...just as they did Bin Laden... for the TRAITOR and SOCIOPATH and ENEMY of the US he has professed himself to be. ------------------------------

Didn't say in absolutes that Charles WOULD reign... Yet in all probability, Charles WILL become King, considering his parents' advanced ages (Queen Elizabeth 87 and Prince Philip 92) and declining health...and the fact he is next in line to the throne. But, you are correct, that Charles without doubt WILL ascend the throne is certainly not a given. (After all, the Queen Mum lived to over 100 if memory serves me...Queen Elizabeth could hypothetically outlive Prince Charles...however unlikely that is...) That said, should Charles reign, chances are he will also not reign as long as his mother. His mother assumed the throne at age 25 in 1953...Prince Charles in now 65 years old... Queen Elizabeth has been on the throne for 60 years....If Charles ascended to the throne today, he would have to live to at least 125 years of age to equal the longevity of his mother's reign. _______________________________________ My guess, however: YES, we WILL see a King Charles somewhere in the near future....if only for a brief reign compared to that of his mother. ______________________________________ In the meantime, Charles remains the heir apparent...and continues to act and speak as the future King.

That Prince Charles would make a statement on Advent about Christianity anywhere in the world should surprise no one. After all, when he ascends to the British Throne, he will be the Head of the Church of England, and as such the Leader of all who hold to the Anglican faith. That said, it SHOULD come as a surprise, that Prince Charles would not admit that military action by the West in recent decades...Britain included....has done MORE to drive Christians from the Middle East than perhaps Muslim extremism. The Iraq war, for example, did more to harm Christian minorities in that country and has led to a mass exodus by Christians to leave. A similar fate could face Christians in Syria should Britain side with the rebels in that civil war...since Syria's Christians back Assad and his Alawite muslim minority. --------------- Prince Charles was likely playing to his domestic Christian audience in making his statements...telling them what they'd like to hear...than promoting any policy positions he might actually take to protect Christians against Muslims when he becomes King.