Axxman

Are you for real? 1 out of 1600 is an abuse of power? These survey results DO NOT indicate that "half" of the gov't scientific community feel pressured. If anything it shows that a SMALL group of scientists have a liberal agenda. In regards to Phil Cooney, lets not act as if he is the ONLY guy working at the Council for Environmental Quality. He was the Chief of Staff, and he was in charge of making sure that reports stayed on point. Any editing he did was to that effect. When one of these few liberal scientists tried to interject his personal theories or opinions into studies it was Cooney's job to edit it out. Nothing more, nothing less. Of the thousands of reports generated, only 435 instances of political interference was reported. Keep in mind...this is just the opinion of scientists that were upset that they were not allowed to interject their bias into reports. Cooney also gave his reasons for editing sections whenever it was necessary to edit. It should also be noted that Mr Cooney was not forced to resign, although libs love that angle. Mr Cooney had accumulated 4 weeks of leave, which he took, before accepting a better position with ExxonMobil. I am sure that it would sit well with you to let these scientists do and say whatever they wanted, but thats not how things work. It should also be noted that "scientists" or persons with a scientific background are RARELY nominated to gov't positions, including the CEQ.

Do some research. Mr. Taylor is past president of the American Association of State Climatologists. He is a member of the American Meteorological Society and has received certification as a Certified Consulting Meteorologist by the Society. He also has a California Lifetime Community College Credential. He has published over 200 reports, symposium articles, and journal articles.

Then obviously, the problem is with our sentencing practices and laws, not guns. Obviously, but that is understating the issue. We have lawmakers that think having more guns is better than having stricter laws. I thinks its obvious that a possibility of life in prison is NOT an effective deterent for murder. Making murder easier, or more efficient by putting more guns on the street is insane. We should start inacting laws to curb gun sales, and make the laws and sentences more extreme, and enforceable.

First...I am squarely in the corner of these two agents...and i hope for their release. However, they broke some rules. They did some things that night that they "admittedly" should not have done. Every law officer in this country knows you don't shoot someone in the back, unless you can identify them as a threat. Thats basics. The officer says he thought he saw a weapon...and thats fine, but WHY, WHY, WHY would he pick up his shell casings (again basic scene preservation), and then he didn't report the shooting. How does he not report a weapon discharge? I don't think he deserves 11-12 years in prison. But even he knows he screwed up.

What a stupid idea. He wants to make guns legal so people have to register them, thus making it easier for police to keep track of the guns. Did he ever stop to consider that the people who are commiting crimes with guns may not exactly care to regster them? It would also be interesting to note that he wants the penalty to be raised to 15 yrs. Does this guy even do research??? According to the National Parole Board Statistics in 2003 people found guilty of 1st degree murder are most often paroled after serving 15 years. If you have a good lawyer that can get you dropped to 2nd degree murder..most get paroled before serving 7 years! All this guy is doing is encouraging people to pull the trigger, since the time is the same.

This is a typical Reuters liberal piece of reporting. As usual they report ONLY what they want you to see. Fact is that the Union of Concerned Scientists (a liberal anti-Bush group) sent out over 1600 surveys to gov't scientists and 308 of them felt strongly enough to respond. Of those 308, less than half of them, felt that there was gov't pressure on their work. What we basically have here is a NON-STORY. Approximately 140 gov't scientists reported some form of pressure from the Bush Admin. out of 1600 scientists. How absolutely interesting that Reuters left that little bit of info out. For a more thorough report: The rest of the story...

Boy-oh-boy...I'll sure bet God was surprised when Russia went to crap! Your understanding of Russian history is kinda flawed. It wasn't the Christians who stopped caring that was the problem. It was when the Russian Empire along with the Tsarist gov't was overthrown and the Bolsheviks took power. The Bolsheviks then declared "separation of the Church and state" and for the first time in its history the church had to stand on its own. Thats where the Russian church went wrong. Then when Russia erupted in civil war...the Orthodox church picked the wrong side. When that side lost...the church lost. By the time the civil war ended and the Soviet Union was established (with its militant atheism) it was too late. The gov't of the USSR took control of the church and outlawed religion as "counter-revolutionary." Overall...it is VERY shortsighted to say the problems in Russia happened because Christians "stopped caring." Most of this happened in a two-year period and had very little to do with ANYTHING Christians were doing. It would also be wrong to assume that God's hand wasn't involved. In regards to irrelevancy. I am not being side-lined. In fact, I don't believe that these common sense laws regarding the care and feeding of the homeless are leading to irrelevancy. The best way to avoid becoming irrelevant is to stay active. If we stop helping the homeless...we could be irrelevant. But NOBODY is advocating that we stop helping the homeless. In fact...I will deal with the homeless tonight (I work tonight) and I suspect that the laws of our city will NOT be a deterent in that regard. However, if I stopped working every time the gov't came up with another scheme I'd get no work done.

Alrighty...well I'm justifiably confused. In one thread you are "kinda" pro-government...even going so far as to go bold and underline "and those which exist are established by God." All this proves is that you can change you stance whenever it meets your needs. We'll save whether or not I understand history for a day when history matters to the topic. Don't be so worried about what might happen "later in life" that you marginalize God. Did it not ever occur to you that ALL the hardships that the church has been through...were ordained by God? Maybe you're so worried about this because you are afraid of hardship...I don't know. You've definitely got some problems with this that I can't comprehend. I've seen hardship. My dad smuggled bible's into communist Russia in the 1970's...one of my good friends nearly lost his father who was preaching God's word in South America...my friend (and manager) was kicked in the face for praying during an alter call in a border town...I was beaten by a gang in South Houston because I refused to stop witnessing to a group of young kids during a street ministry. I've seen a few things my friend. Your complaining about a law that protects EVERYBODY involved...including the homeless. There is nothing to fear, cuz God is in control. There are 1000's of stories in history about how God overcame corruptness in governments in order to get His work done. There are people who complain about not being able to get the work done...and people who do it. I am glad that my dad raised me with the mentality to just get things done. As far as my discernment skills go....I apologize. It was not my intent to make this personal about you. We are just having a little go at each other. If I offended you, I am sorry. For the record, I am NOT offended. Its just a little bit of passionate debate.

I would agree Forrest. One of the best books I read in the last year was "Jesus Freaks"...about persons who suffered persecution. It is unbelievable the amount of persecution Christians face in our modern world. Americans really have no case to cry about persecution from the government.

It doesn't take a genius to know that Gov't and church doesn't mix. Your not brightening any bulbs with that nugget of truth. What you seem unable to grasp is that we are told not to worry about it. Find me one verse that says its okay to worry about this kinda stuff. We were told to respect the governments that God established over us...we were told not to worry...we are told to work and expect to be persecuted. You don't seem to be accomplishing ANY of that. You don't respect the gov't...you worry alot...and because of that your not doing the work. You are so concerned with how the past turned out, and how it might affect the future, you are not focused on what needs done today. You act as though every avenue for doing God's work has been shut off. I love religious history. It is what I do. However, I never studied church history so I could apply it to my life today. I studied church history so I would know where it came from. I like to know why people believe the way they do. Perhaps we will have some enlightening historical discussions at some point. Unfortunately, at this point, I don't see God telling us to see what happened 1500 years ago in church history so that we can overcome whatever hardships may hit us in 25 years. As someone who has been persecuted for preaching Christ, I don't really see what my knowledge in church history has to do with it. ANYONE who is consistenly laboring for Christ, even in America, will face persecution. If you don't know that, you aren't working.

Okay we've gone from America being like Nazi germany...to communist China. Thats just insane! You can't even REMOTELY claim that the USA is that bad....and you shouldn't be harboring fear of what the USA might be in 20..30...50 years from now. Live for Christ today! China has it WAY worse

Honestly AK...you kinda seem like a worry wart. We gotta do this and do that cuz tomorrow the gov't might come in a wreak havok upon us Christians. What are you so worried about? DO you not believe that God is in control. That God's promises to His people will be fulfilled and that we don't have to worry about this stuff. Jesus basically prohibited this type of worrying 3 times during His Sermon on the Mount. If you worry, what kind of faith are you manifesting? "Little faith," according to Jesus in Matthew 6:30. Jesus said,

Hey Bro...looks like we are on the same schedule...lol I see what you are saying about the building permit...so maybe that wasn't the perfect example. Bottom line for me is I really don't see the crisis. Overall, I see that you are concerned about the gov't having an influence in the church. I am not that concerned because I believe that the gov't only has the power given to it by God. I do take issue with you saying I have a "lazy attitude." I think I have made it clear that I personally am actively involved in this area, as is my church. A lazy attitude would be giving in and not doing anything. In my life, these types of rules have NOT affected the ministry of reaching out, or helping, in any way. God has, and continues to bless the efforts of the ministry. Also, not to make too fine a point of it, but the Christian life is borne of struggle and hardship, and through that comes the blessings of God. Lastly...there is scripture on both of our sides. I will not fault your activist mentality, becasue perhaps God has given you a burden in that area. There was a time when Peter and the Apostles were arrested for public preaching, after being told not to. Peter quite plainly said "We ought to obey God rather than men." So I won't fault your boldness. However, I don't see this scenario as quite as harrowing as that. In the case we are discussing there are social and health issues involved. In Acts, Peter was dealing with persecution in that he was flatly ordered to NOT preach. I work with the homeless. I understand some of the issues that are brought to the table in regards to community, and health...on both sides. If this were an issue in which city gov'ts were attacking Christianity...I would be with you. It is not that type of issue. I think you could find MUCH BIGGER fish to fry, and put this one on the back burner.

rawrrrr. The gov't didn't pass a law prohibiting you from doing Gods work. You could be paranoid and say they are, but it doesn't make it so. For example, a church needs a permit to build in most cases. If the gov't deems that it doesn't want a church built at a certain location...it can deny the building permit. Now the church can get freaked out and cry about how big gov't is prohibiting them from doing Gods work...or they can find a more suitable spot. I thought we were discussing mission-type programs run by the church...why would a church get federal funding outside of that? I don't have a problem with the Arizona law. I would rather the work be done, and let God sort out the details. Most of a Christians witnessing is done through their actions...not with words. What you call a "disaster" I call an avenue for God to do His work, through His people. You seem to have little faith that God can get a job done when the gov't is involved. The government we have only has power because God gives it. I just don't see your crisis. reading comprehension...nice one! What is the "Lord's work?" Do you have a monopoly on that term? Just about every crackpot cult leader you've heard of has claimed to be doing the "Lord's work." Maybe you didn't get the memo....alot of people don't believe like you do. Therefore, maybe its not a bad idea for the gov't to step in before the next Jim Jones decides to spike the kool-aid at a homeless convention. Unless, you wanna give every Jim Jones who claims to be doing the "Lord's work" a free pass to dole out "goodies" to whomever he likes. Ironically, as I said before, my city has these same so-called anti-christian laws. And yet my church has found a pretty good response. Since we were in the city, we adopted a sister church on the outskirts. We funnel money to that church, and they feed over a thousand needy people a week. (It should be noted that they are not all homeless, some are just needy.) Instead of complaining that the gov't was keeping us from doing Gods work....we just did what needed to be done. In the meantime, our church also helps fund several other outreach ministries in the city so that needs are not neglected there either. There are people who "want" to do God's work....then there are people who "DO" Gods work. Be a DOer.

Really??? I think thats rubbish. So now you're of the opinion that ANY church, can do ANYTHING, it wants...and the gov't has no say. Sounds to me like you are not very clear on how much the church and government work together. A VAST majority of ALL funding for most churches and faith-based organizations comes from the federal government...you can't seriously think that Christians are tithing that much. Let your church do something unfair, illegal, or even publicly questionable...and you will see how involved the gov't is. The whole purpose of the gov't is to regulate...since when did a nutjob who starts a church get a pass on that?

People have compared Jews in the Holocaust...to the homeless. Our government is compared to Nazi Germany...for protecting its law abiding citizens. This is a satanic scheme...to hurt end-time Christians who don't have the MOB. Some people have implied they CANNOT serve God properly if they need a permit. If God can't "conjure" a hamburger...then He is certainly unable to help the homeless. Are you guys hearing yourselves??? Ya'll gotta quit making excuses. I live in a warmer locale. My city is FLOODED with homeless right now and there are A TON of laws/regulations concerning them. They are not allowed to congregate (I think 10 in one area is the max.) They are not allowed in city parks (thats straight to jail.) They are NOT allowed to stand in medians, or solicit for money. And, of course, there are rules about where/how food donations are done. This is for the betterment of the whole city. It hasn't stopped me (or the local church) from assisting the homeless. I work for the local gov't. As I said before I deal with the homeless almost daily. I routinely find myself in situations where I am simply someone they can talk to. Last week, I assisted a homeless man in finding a shelter (that is run by a local faith-based org.) About a month ago I assisted a nurse in cutting away an old mans socks...he had worn them so long that when he tried to take them off, his skin came off too. All that and the BIG BAD GOVERNMENT signs my paychecks. I am TOTALLY in LadyC's corner on this one. Anyone who thinks they can't work within the confines of the gov't rules to help the homeless is just making excuses. I'd also be willing to bet that the gov't spends more each year to assist the homeless than ANY CHURCH.

No, repentance is not necessary for salvation. In a sense, that would be works. All that is required for salvation is acceptance. Now, in Acts 2 Peter calls for repentance. But repentance of what? He is asking them to change their minds about Christ. Nowhere in scripture is anyone told they must repent of their sins to attain salvation. Repentance is given by God, much like Faith. Both are a result of salvation, not a cause. All of salvation, including faith and repentance are a result of God's calling us, and changing our minds.

I am beginning to get the idea that most of you people have never really dealt with homeless people. The VAST MAJORITY of them are lazy, drunken, criminals, with NO regard for decency. You may on occasion meet a homeless person who had a run of bad luck and can't get back on their feet...but by and large there is a reason NONE OF YOU would want a homeless colony anywhere near your home. I deal with the homeless on a DAILY basis. It is not something I would wish on the weak-willed (or weak-stomached.) The elected officials of the mentioned cities have an obligation to ALL the citizens of their cities...not just the homeless people. The fact of the matter is that anytime you have a large homeless population in an area of your city, crime rate goes up...quality of life goes down. Our government spends millions of dollars in efforts to assist, and provide for the homeless. It is in your best interest, and the cities best interest, that the homeless be dealt with in that capacity. A church (or any other group) that randomly passes out food to the homeless are NOT HELPING solve anything. If a church group, or individual, truly feels a need to help the homeless then they should volunteer in one the agencies that are certified to assist. The agencies provide more than a drop of food once a week. They provide counseling, medication, shelter, not to mention basic amenities like a haircut and shower. Sometimes the government isn't out to get you...sometimes they have better ideas (and more money) to accomplish things the right way.

God created global warming...about 7000 yrs ago.

Most, if not all, studies concerning genetics and homosexuality are inconclusive at best. There are many studies" that have had interesting outcomes...however, most of those studies only highlight the portions of their studies that meet their needs. A thorough study of these results show a net result of zero discovery in almost every instance. Concerning "christians" who are discovered in their sins... Ted Haggard, and those like him, will face their judgement. I am just as outspoken against adultery and fornication, as I am against homosexuality. They are all perversions of what God intended, in my opinion. They all make choices to live their lives the way they do. To answer your question...all Christians have skeletons in their closets. Some bigger than others, and some have dealt with them better than others. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be outspoken against sin, and its consequences. However, I do agree that a person who claims to be Christian and lives a sinful lifestyle, is setting themselves up. However, that should only reflect on that person. Police officers live a lifestyle that is "supposed" to be above reproach...but we ALL KNOW that is not necessarily how it is. Police officers are caught doing illegal activities on occasion too. Just because an officer of the law is caught breaking the law is NO REASON to assume the law is bad, or that ALL police officers are bad. It is a reflection on that person, and that person alone. I've never been in a church that accepted this type of behavior. This behavior isn't accepted by Christ, and shouldn't be accepted by His church.

uh...this is exactly what Snopes says.... "Take that bone out of your nose and call me again," a claim which dates to at least 1990, with the incident supposedly having occurred as far back as the 1970s. -- I don't where you are from but supposedly is a pretty vague word that DOESN"T intone FACT. Nearly all the information available on this subject is anecdotal, with no documentation and no specifics mentioned other than that the alleged quote was something Limbaugh "once said" or uttered "as a young broadcaster in the 1970s." -- Again, like I said, no hard proof that this was or is an exact quote. Seems you are almost as unreliable as wikiquote on this one. However, because I am an honest person, I gave ALL the facts. I stated that this wouldn't even be a story if Limbaugh hadn't "supposedly" apologized for making such a statement. His apology came 17 yrs ago in a Newsday interview. Rush "supposedly" brought it up as something he regretted in his career. He didn't have to bring it up, and the fact that he did should mean something. This "supposedly" occured during his first job as a disk jockey at a Top 40 station. This item is registered as TRUE on Snopes because "to the best of their knowledge" Rush has not denied making the statement during the interview. At best this is a comment made by a Morning DJ 30-35 yrs ago, and apologized for 17 years ago, of his own volition. SUPPOSEDLY!

Actually...I would just like to point out that the term sexual orientation is a very broad term that has no real definition. The term "sexual preference" is far more appropriate scientifically. In spite of spending billions of dollars and wasting millions of man hours...scientists have still been unable to find the elusive "gay gene." Statements, like the one above, are nothing more than opinion and should not be regarded as fact. In fact, the weight of evidence does suggest that people wake up one morning and think, ""I need me a new hobby, think I am going to take up homosexuality today".

I never claimed he was not man enough to keep a wife. I insinuated that he was a narcissist and sexist, thus he could not keep a wife. I then quoted him. Forrest...those quotes are NOT at the wikiquote source that you cited. Fact is...the "bone in your nose" comment is UNVERIFIABLE! There is NO proof, no recordings, nobody remembers him saying it nearly 35 yrs ago. This story wouldn't even exist if Rush Limbaugh hadn't apologized for making a similar comment to a caller he couldn't understand back when he was NEW in broadcasting, working at a Top 40 radio station. He apologized for that statement 17 yrs ago. The Adam and Eve quote about education is not a Rush Limbaugh quote....it is an old joke from the 70's or 80's (started by Carlin I think.) The Michael J Fox quote is not on wikiquote. In regards to wikiquote (or wikipedia) they are NOT very reliable sources. A person can generally add whatever they want to the database. Just click on the "edit" link at the top of the page and a person can add whatever non-confirmed statement they want to wikiquote. There are much more reliable sources for quotes.

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone. -- Jesus

Chapmac...All I asked him for was to cite his sources properly. That is for HIS protection as well. It is not respectful or honest to put words into people's mouths.