Quantcast

Dianne Feinstein Gets Religion: Calls On God to Assist in Mass Disarmament

Transquesta 2013/01/24 21:09:13
Wait. I thought the State was the unofficial god of control freak Democrats.

I'm sure there will be far more disgusting displays of emotive, hypocritical pandering on the party of slavery, but for now this one is a contender for first place!

Video at site
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sen. Dianne Feinstein opens up anti-gun presser with a prayer
January 24, 2013 | 11:16 am
Charlie Spiering
Commentary Staff Writer
The Washington Examiner

As Sen. Dianne Feinstein D-Calif. opened her press conference on gun control today, she invited Dean of the National Cathedral Rev. Canon Gary Hall to offer a prayer.

Hall spoke briefly before the prayer, calling for Washington lawmakers to stop fearing the gun lobby and fulfill their “moral duty” to restrict guns.

"Everyone in this city seems to live in terror of the gun lobby," Hall said. "But I believe that the gun lobby is no match for the cross lobby."

Hall said that he could no longer justify a society that allowed ordinary citizens to keep and bear "assault weapons."

During the prayer, Hall asked God to “bless our elected leaders with the wisdom and the courage needed to bring about the changes that the people demand.”

Read More: http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-diane-feinstein...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • Lanikai 2013/01/24 22:48:20
    Lanikai
    +8
    She doesn't know God, she is not a Christian and she has no magic back door to Him. Contrary to the DEM belief, obama is not God.


    Feinstein is a hypocrite and a joke. She can stick her gun ban.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Nareen Lake 2013/02/12 17:52:34
    Nareen Lake
    +1
    Her religion is the religion of power. I assume she was calling on the Devil (not God) to help her, since she has already sold her soul to him.
  • Quazimoto 2013/02/11 17:35:12
    Quazimoto
    +2
    Dianne Feinstein voting record speaks for itself:

    Voted NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies. (Mar 2009)
    Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
    Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
    Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
    Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
    Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
    Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
    Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
    Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
    Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
    Voted NO on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
    Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women. (Apr 2001)
    Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
    Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
    Provide emergency contraception at military facilities. (Apr 2007)
    Let military perform abortions in cases of rape or incest. (Jun 2011)
    Require pharmacies to fulfill contraceptive prescri...


    Dianne Feinstein voting record speaks for itself:

    Voted NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies. (Mar 2009)
    Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
    Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
    Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
    Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
    Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
    Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
    Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
    Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
    Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
    Voted NO on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
    Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women. (Apr 2001)
    Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
    Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
    Provide emergency contraception at military facilities. (Apr 2007)
    Let military perform abortions in cases of rape or incest. (Jun 2011)
    Require pharmacies to fulfill contraceptive prescriptions. (Jul 2011)
    Protect the reproductive rights of women. (Jan 1993)
    Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007)
    Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception. (Jan 2009)
    (more)
  • princess 2013/01/28 01:49:27
    princess
    +1
    LMAO....Hey Feinstein, I think you meant Allah.
  • Bassinman 2013/01/27 23:24:36 (edited)
    Bassinman
    +2
    “bless our elected leaders with the wisdom and the courage needed to bring about the changes that the people demand.” Which PEOPLE is he in reference of that DEMAND changes? This PERSON, and 99.99% of those whom I am acquainted with, are NOT screaming for gun control, ONLY the weak-minded Liberal Democrats who cannot take ALL FACTS into consideration are promoting gun control, and some are even promoting COMPLETE disarmament.



    These 'people' whom this clergyman must be referencing, are not even familiar with guns and most of them have a 'built-in' fear of guns from the start because they have always lived in cities and suburbs, have NEVER been to a farm, a ranch, or to the woods to enjoy hunting, have NEVER grown fond of target shooting or skeet and trap shooting (for fun or for competition), and have NEVER had their lives threatened with a gun. If they had these experiences, the majority of them would have a different opinion today, and would realize that there is absolutely NO (0) difference between a semi-auto hunting rifle and a semi-auto assault rifle - OTHER THAN THE STOCK.



    Any hunting rifle can be made into an assault rifle by replacing the wooden stock with a plastic (poly-carbonate) stock with a different configuration (for appearances sake only, no performance of the ...













    “bless our elected leaders with the wisdom and the courage needed to bring about the changes that the people demand.” Which PEOPLE is he in reference of that DEMAND changes? This PERSON, and 99.99% of those whom I am acquainted with, are NOT screaming for gun control, ONLY the weak-minded Liberal Democrats who cannot take ALL FACTS into consideration are promoting gun control, and some are even promoting COMPLETE disarmament.



    These 'people' whom this clergyman must be referencing, are not even familiar with guns and most of them have a 'built-in' fear of guns from the start because they have always lived in cities and suburbs, have NEVER been to a farm, a ranch, or to the woods to enjoy hunting, have NEVER grown fond of target shooting or skeet and trap shooting (for fun or for competition), and have NEVER had their lives threatened with a gun. If they had these experiences, the majority of them would have a different opinion today, and would realize that there is absolutely NO (0) difference between a semi-auto hunting rifle and a semi-auto assault rifle - OTHER THAN THE STOCK.



    Any hunting rifle can be made into an assault rifle by replacing the wooden stock with a plastic (poly-carbonate) stock with a different configuration (for appearances sake only, no performance of the rifle action would be changed whatsoever) And, any assault rifle can be converted into a hunting rifle by removing and replacing the stock and replacing it with an original wooden stock (for appearances sake only, no performance of the rifle action would be changed whatsoever) , or an assault rifle can be used for hunting - as is.

    The caliber (diameter of the projectile) of each rifle is identical to the other as in .223, 30-06, .308, etc. The barrel lengths can be identical also. The actions can be identical, and the round capacity can be exactly the same. Even a 'Bolt Action' rifle can "look" like an assault rifle with a simple change of the stock. AND, even bolt action rifles can be fired rapidly, as evidenced by the narrow time window that Lee Harvey Oswald had when he fired 3 (three) shots at President Kennedy.

    Below is a picture of a Ruger Mini 14 HUNTING RIFLE in .223 caliber, as it comes from the factory for HUNTING purposes, with a picture of the same Ruger Mini 14 in .223 caliber with a poly-carbonate stock. These two are EXACTLY alike other than the stock. The action has not been modified to shoot more shots, nor to shoot more shots at a faster rate. The flash suppressor has no 'real' function other than to keep the fire from the muzzle from spitting out on someone else near by. The barrels are both 18.5" long and have no modifications. Therefore, if banned, farmers, ranchers, hunters, and target shooters would not be able to enjoy the collapsible configuration stock, nor would they be able to prevent coyotes from attacking their cattle, nor would they be able to hunt deer and other small game to keep these populations under control. But, they could still use THE IDENTICAL RIFLE ACTION in the original stock. This makes absolutely NO SENSE to me.

    http://images.sodahead.com/pr...

    At the bottom is again the SAME RIFLE ACTION, with a FOLDING STOCK and no mechanical modifications to the working parts of the rifle. A folding stock allows the total length to be compromised and is easier to handle in the trunk or in a scabbard. A collapsible stock, as the rifle in the middle has, gives several benefits: 1. It takes less space to carry the rifle in the vehicle. 2. It has an adjustable stop for different lengths of pull (distance between the trigger and butt of stock) to accommodate the owner without having to cut the old wood stock off, or having to add a thicker butt pad for more length, since arm lengths are often different. 3. Most women and youngsters can adjust the stock to a comfortable position to allow them to use the same rifle, to try the rifle out to see if they would be likely to use one of there own, or if a friend borrows your rifle, he can adjust it to fit him.

    If the complaint is merely that the stock and clip 'look' intimidating or scary, and seeing that the stock and clip have '0' bearing on the performance of the rifle, that's about the weakest platform for gun control refinement as has ever come down the pike. Better get all your kids toy guns that look scary away from them or they will ALL grow up to become mass murderers (according to this train of thought, anyway). I am 58 now and I grew up with GI JOE and all his armaments including the (replica) 'TOMMY GUN' or Thompson drum firing machine gun with 100 round capacity.

    I have never killed anyone and never will. But I'm sure that some paranoid 'someone' thought that my plastic Tommy Gun looked scary in the early '60's. If looks could kill, I could see getting rid of these guns. But the trigger of ANY gun has to be pulled by someone who WANTS to pull it and WANTS to kill a person. The gun, no matter how scary it may look, cannot pull it's own trigger. A living person must be in the equation for "MURDER" to occur. We need to penalize the 'weird-o nut cases' that have tendencies to kill people, and NOT penalize the law abiding hunters and target shooters for being good citizens.

    But, this is the way of the current administration. Good example? How about penalizing 300 million citizens with a tax that WASN'T A TAX, causing higher medical costs for them, forcing them to buy insurance, forcing religions to go against century-long beliefs, bringing in the 'death panels' that never were supposed to exist, and penalizing many doctors, nurses, and hospitals for the sake of the FEW 30 million, just to ensure that 1/10 of the population can have health insurance AT ANY COST. Now, this administration wants to penalize the majority of law abiding citizens for the sake of the FEW who cannot seem to control themselves. THIS NATION IS UPSIDE-DOWN AND INSIDE OUT.
    (more)
  • T A 2013/01/27 21:14:09
    T A
    +1
    Wrong constituency for the show. Besides which, she self identifies as Jewish.
  • Bocephus 2013/01/27 20:01:27 (edited)
  • JET 2013/01/27 16:26:26
    JET
    +1
    Good old Dianne, her mind has turned to jello.
  • george wells 2013/01/26 05:16:24
  • NECHOII 2013/01/26 02:37:27
    NECHOII
    +1
    Humph ! With a Republican Congress determined to do absolutely nothing on the issue of gun control as children continue to be shot dead, Senator Dianne Feinstein is going to need all the help she can get ! Prayer ? Yeah, go for it, Dianne.
  • Rick NECHOII 2013/01/27 04:10:34
    Rick
    +2
    STFU! Cars and abortions kill more kids than guns idiot!
  • NECHOII Rick 2013/01/27 06:13:42
    NECHOII
    +1
    People are NOT deliberately killed with cars ! Abortions are legal.
  • Rick NECHOII 2013/01/27 06:53:10
    Rick
    +2
    It is still murder no matter what you want to call it. as far as cars they are operated buy individuals and kill people do you want to outlaw them because they also kill kids or people. what is the difference between a mentally ill, gang banger, criminal, or under the influence person that is in a vehicle that gets into an accident and kills another human being and a firearm? be carefull and think about the question before answering.

    Nothing! Both are instruments that can be used as a weapon. double standard!!!
  • NECHOII Rick 2013/01/30 01:35:55
    NECHOII
    +1
    @RICK : How ridiculous is this debate going to get ? Following your logic, shall we ban people from riding on planes as it has been proven that the vast majority of plane crashes were caused by pilot error ?!
  • Rick NECHOII 2013/01/31 02:34:48
    Rick
    +2
    well by liberal definitions yes we should stop flying airplanes and anything else that can kill kids including abortion ( murderers to innocent unborn kids with no avenue to be herd). double standard
  • Bassinman NECHOII 2013/01/28 00:43:03
    Bassinman
    +1
    So, since a drunk driver runs a School Bus off the road into a river and all the kids die, that's excusable because 'he didn't deliberately intend to kill the children' and this senseless murder is okay with you? If so, you are one sick individual. It is ALWAYS the person's fault, if it's drunk in a car, or with a loaded gun. It's never the car or the gun that is at fault since it takes a human in the equation for the car to crash into the Bus, or the gun to be fired into the crowd. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. You just can't see the truth of the matter.

    99% of Americans have a decent to better head on their shoulders, and the 1% of the 'NUTS' that do kill, make it tough on that 99% because people like you believe the hype of extremists. And YOU can't admit that IF 99% of Americans were 'NUTS', they would eventually eliminate each other with their guns and there would only be 3 million people in America, but that hasn't happened since most people are educated and NOT mentally handicapped. Beside that, IF 99% of Americans were mentally disturbed, I would be all for gun confiscation because it would be too hard for the 1% to defend ourselves against the 99%. If you disarm the 99%, you eliminate the ability to defend yourself, and allow the 1% (who will always be able to get their hands on ...
















    So, since a drunk driver runs a School Bus off the road into a river and all the kids die, that's excusable because 'he didn't deliberately intend to kill the children' and this senseless murder is okay with you? If so, you are one sick individual. It is ALWAYS the person's fault, if it's drunk in a car, or with a loaded gun. It's never the car or the gun that is at fault since it takes a human in the equation for the car to crash into the Bus, or the gun to be fired into the crowd. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. You just can't see the truth of the matter.

    99% of Americans have a decent to better head on their shoulders, and the 1% of the 'NUTS' that do kill, make it tough on that 99% because people like you believe the hype of extremists. And YOU can't admit that IF 99% of Americans were 'NUTS', they would eventually eliminate each other with their guns and there would only be 3 million people in America, but that hasn't happened since most people are educated and NOT mentally handicapped. Beside that, IF 99% of Americans were mentally disturbed, I would be all for gun confiscation because it would be too hard for the 1% to defend ourselves against the 99%. If you disarm the 99%, you eliminate the ability to defend yourself, and allow the 1% (who will always be able to get their hands on guns) to continue to kill more people.

    Please read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... If you want to cut it short, scroll down to 'Gun Law' and bypass the technical crap (and then of course, you can claim that Wikipedia is brainless). Better yet, I'll post it here for your convenience...............Gun law
    In 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21][19]
    (a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
    (b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
    Gun rights activist David Kopel has claimed that there is evidence that this gun law has reduced the incident rate of home burglaries citing that in the first year, home burglaries dropped from 65 before the ordinance, down to 26 in 1983, and to 11 in 1984. Another report observed a noticeable reduction in burglary from 1981, the year before the ordinance was passed, to 1999. A 2001 media report stated that Kennesaw's crime rates continued to decline and were well below the national average, making citizens feel safer and more secure. Later research claims that there is no evidence that the law reduced the rate of home burglaries in Kennesaw EVEN THOUGH the overall crime rate had decreased by more than 50% between 1982 and 2005.
    The city's website claims the city has the lowest crime rate in the county.


    25 years 'MURDER FREE'

    As the nation debates whether more guns or fewer can prevent tragedies like the Virginia Tech Massacre, a notable anniversary passed last month in a Georgia town that witnessed a dramatic plunge in crime and violence after mandating residents to own firearms. (This means that the City officials REQUIRED citizens to carry a weapon at all times)

    In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, DESPITE DIRE PREDICTIONS of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, NOT A SINGLE RESIDENT has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.


    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2007/04/41...
    (more)
  • NECHOII Bassinman 2013/01/30 01:40:12
    NECHOII
    +1
    @PHIL : The fact remains that the United States remains far and away the worst country in the Western world for murders by guns.
    The N.R.A.'s simplistic solution of recommending throwing more guns to everybody NATIONWIDE, to try to solve this dreadful problem is only going to make matters much worse !
  • Nareen ... NECHOII 2013/02/12 17:58:06
    Nareen Lake
    +1
    It's also LEGAL for Americans to be armed (2nd Amendments)!
  • Claybern 2013/01/25 20:09:38
    Claybern
    +3
    If Diane Feinstein wants our guns she will not be able to do so by any means. Because it would cause a war in this country. I really don't think she wants that. We the People have the 2nd Amendment on our side.
  • Rick Claybern 2013/01/27 04:11:09
  • Bassinman Claybern 2013/01/28 00:51:14
    Bassinman
    +3
    Yeah, we have the 2nd on our side, until this administration abolishes it. I certainly wouldn't put it past them to do it, either. Look at all the other things that they have done in the last 4 years.
  • Claybern Bassinman 2013/01/28 03:40:48
    Claybern
    +1
    We The People employ these people. We can also fire them.
  • Nareen ... Claybern 2013/02/12 17:58:58
    Nareen Lake
    +2
    Well, PLEASE FIRE this monster that's in the WH!
  • Claybern Nareen ... 2013/02/15 00:22:45
    Claybern
    +1
    It will happen.
  • JonDeniro 2013/01/25 19:16:59
    JonDeniro
    +1
    And just why does society require that pompous ass to "justify" it?

    Not very humble of him...not very Christian at all.
  • Giantfan 2013/01/25 19:13:50
    Giantfan
    +1
    God doesn't help fools and men are fools. God will be there to meet the fools when they kill themselves but He won't help them here.
  • Jim 2013/01/25 17:36:11
    Jim
    +3
    One of the devils minions calling upon God for help; totally hilarious.
  • Tic-Toc 2013/01/25 14:03:03
    Tic-Toc
    +3
    Hows this work again? Throw God out of eveything and then call on Him when they think it will help with their cause.
  • Giantfan Tic-Toc 2013/01/25 19:22:46
    Giantfan
    +2
    I guess having God in one's home doesn't protect them from harm so they need guns. Where is God's protection from harm everyone prays for. Every Sunday in church we pray for the safety of our troops yet they still get killed and wounded we pray for the safety of our children yet they still get in car accidents and die of cancer and other sicknesses and get gunned down by crazies with guns. Where is God and why doesn't he answer our prayers? God is in our lives yet so are wars and we pray for peace, He is in our lives yet children die and get cancer yet we pray for their safety. When will people learn our prayers were answered the day Jesus died on the cross for us and that's the only answer to a prayer we'll get because it covers eternal life. Our lives were saved that day now it's up to man to be smart and do what's right to keep everyone safe. Prayers won't help it just to make one feel comfortable.
  • Tic-Toc Giantfan 2013/01/25 19:50:46
    Tic-Toc
    +2
    I agree with most of what you have written... God has given Man the power of choice, what man does with it is what causes alot of the pain and suffereing we see today.
  • Giantfan Tic-Toc 2013/01/25 22:35:36
    Giantfan
    +2
    Amen to that.
  • Bassinman Giantfan 2013/01/28 02:37:11
    Bassinman
    +2
    If you were serving God, you would know all of this. We are not to be concerned with THIS LIFE, and are to build up treasures in heaven for our eternal lives by doing the will of the Father (God). Many believers in God have died, including the Jews in the Holocaust, Christians in Muslim countries, and on and on. God DOES NOT save EVERYONE'S NATURAL life, but He WILL save EVERYONE'S ETERNAL life if they believe in Him, trust in Him, does what His Word tells them to do, and does not trust in themselves or believe in some other entity. Certainly, our natural man wants to preserve our natural lives, but our spiritual man inside these bodies overrides the natural man's desires and we are willing to die at our appointed time (appointed by God) because we know where we will go after death.

    I don't expect you to understand this, shoot, I didn't believe it either until I came to a realization (or an epiphany, which is the manifestation of the divine nature of Jesus to the Gentiles) and called on Him to save my soul. The reason why some do die is to cause a trial to the believer to see if they will turn their back on God at the first opportunity, or if they will continue to believe that He is supreme and knows what He is doing. Man's mind cannot understand the mind of God and His purpos...

    If you were serving God, you would know all of this. We are not to be concerned with THIS LIFE, and are to build up treasures in heaven for our eternal lives by doing the will of the Father (God). Many believers in God have died, including the Jews in the Holocaust, Christians in Muslim countries, and on and on. God DOES NOT save EVERYONE'S NATURAL life, but He WILL save EVERYONE'S ETERNAL life if they believe in Him, trust in Him, does what His Word tells them to do, and does not trust in themselves or believe in some other entity. Certainly, our natural man wants to preserve our natural lives, but our spiritual man inside these bodies overrides the natural man's desires and we are willing to die at our appointed time (appointed by God) because we know where we will go after death.

    I don't expect you to understand this, shoot, I didn't believe it either until I came to a realization (or an epiphany, which is the manifestation of the divine nature of Jesus to the Gentiles) and called on Him to save my soul. The reason why some do die is to cause a trial to the believer to see if they will turn their back on God at the first opportunity, or if they will continue to believe that He is supreme and knows what He is doing. Man's mind cannot understand the mind of God and His purposes, that's where FAITH comes in and we have to rely on our FAITH to see us through such tough times as you mentioned above. The scripture says, Heb 11:1 " Now FAITH is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Our FAITH is that we believe that there are things that will happen in our eternal life, but we have not seen them (and cannot see them because they are spiritual, not carnal) and are expecting to see them when this life is ended.

    AND CONCERNING DEATH AND POVERTY, and the likes, Ecl 3:1 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: 2 A TIME TO BE BORN, and A TIME TO DIE; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; 3 A TIME TO KILL, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; 4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; 5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; 6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; ................AND SO ON.......read the rest of this passage............. remember that there is a TIME FOR EVERYTHING, AND A PURPOSE FOR EVERYTHING UNDER HEAVEN. EVEN DEATH.
    (more)
  • Giantfan Bassinman 2013/01/28 03:15:42
    Giantfan
    +1
    I accepted Jesus as my personal lord and Saviour in the 70's. But believing God will protect us from all harms and give us earthly wealth is just fantasy. And they have an old song concerning death and poverty. It's by the Byrds called Turn, Turn, Turn.
  • NECHOII Bassinman 2013/01/30 01:44:20
    NECHOII
    +1
    i don't believe this ! A gun advocate quoting Scripture ?! Yeah, @PHIL - Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition !
  • Nareen ... NECHOII 2013/02/12 18:06:27 (edited)
    Nareen Lake
    +1
    You don't know much about the Bible Believing, America Loving middle class out here. We can quote scripture and shoot at the same time!
  • Nareen ... Giantfan 2013/02/12 18:03:34 (edited)
    Nareen Lake
    +2
    If you know Jesus (whom God sent to die for our sins, so that we can go to live with HIM in heaven), death is going home to God. "For me to live is Christ and to die is gain." We are not here on earth to have wonderful lives, we are here to learn what God wants us to learn and shape us into the person he wants us to be and praying (talking to God in fellowship) is part of that.
  • Giantfan Nareen ... 2013/02/12 19:30:56
    Giantfan
    +1
    That's your opinbion and I respect it but it's not mine. God gave us life and free will and a set of 10 rules to live by then he sent Jesus here to update for us what we should do for others. No more eye for an eye but forgive and keep on forgiving. Help feed the hungry, give water to the thirsty, give shelter to the homeless and weary. In other words do unto others as you would have them do unto you. But man in all his greed broke the commandment, "do not worship false god's before me" by putting money ahead of the well being of people. That is man's greatest sin in my eyes. Making greed and money their personal goal and there for a personal god.
  • fortycal_sig 2013/01/25 08:56:42
    fortycal_sig
    +1
    Wow, that's just creepy. And a bit of a coincidence as I just finished listening to this lecture:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
  • Cat 2013/01/25 07:49:45
    Cat
    +2
    Hippocrite
  • Matt 2013/01/25 05:01:11
    Matt
    +2
    Disarmed. Next request please.
    Feinstein Disarmed
  • frankie 2013/01/25 04:53:36
    frankie
    +2
    doesn;t answer people that support evil. she should try allah. she;s a big hypocrit as all of the democrats are. she packs.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/11/29 03:50:49

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals