The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan warned Tuesday a Florida church’s threat to burn copies of the Muslim holy book could endanger U.S. troops in the country and Americans worldwide.

“Images of the burning of a Koran would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan — and around the world — to inflame public opinion and incite violence ,” Gen. David Petraeus said. “Were the actual burning to take place, the safety of our soldiers and civilians would be put in jeopardy and accomplishment of the mission would be made more difficult.”

His comments followed a protest Monday by hundreds of Afghans over the plans by Gainesville, Florida-based Dove World Outreach Center — a small, evangelical Christian church that espouses anti-Islam philosophy — to burn copies of the Koran on church grounds to mark the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Petraeus warned images of burning Korans could be used to incite anti-American sentiment similar to the pictures of prisoner abuse at Iraq’s Abu Graib prison.

“I am very concerned by the potential repercussions of the possible (Koran) burning. Even the rumor that it might take place has sparked demonstrations such as the one that took place in Kabul yesterday,” Petraeus said.

… “It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort in Afghanistan. It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community,” he said in a statement provided to Fox News.

To the idiots at this retarded church: whose side are you on, exactly?? I can understand the desire to burn the Qurans and piss the perpetually-offended Muslims off. I really do. But wouldn’t the Christian thing to do be to, I don’t know, not be hateful? It doesn’t sound like they are trying to be very Christ-like.

That aside, what Petraeus is saying makes perfect sense. Part of what we are doing in Afghanistan is trying to convince Afghans that we are the good guys. We are trying to earn their respect, and show them that we are better than the Taliban. But, as Petraeus pointed out, burning these Qurans plays right into the hands of the Taliban. The Taliban will use images of Americans burning Qurans against us. They will use the images to convince Muslims that Americans can’t be trusted and that we don’t respect them. It’s an easy way to push Afghans off of the bench and into the game. It’s easy propaganda for extremists to use to convince other Muslims to join in the jihad.

All of this is really not that difficult to figure out. So, again, exactly whose side is this church on? They’re not on the side of America. They’re certainly not doing the Christian thing.

Frankly, they sound more like Muslim extremists than Christians to me.

“We are using this act to warn about the teaching and ideology of Islam, which we do hate as it is hateful. We do not hate any people, however. We love, as God loves, all the people in the world and we want them to come to a knowledge of the truth,” the blog reads.

If they don’t hate anyone, then why are they going out of their way to piss a bunch of people off? They aren’t going to get any Muslims to convert to Christianity by offending them. If anything, they’ll just make them more entrenched in Islam and more anti-Christian than they were before. This is quite possibly the stupidest idea I have ever heard.

ShareThis

One week before the most solemn day in the Christian year, the city of Davenport, Iowa removed Good Friday from its municipal calendar, setting off a storm of complaints from Christians and union members whose contracts give them that day off.

Taking a recommendation by the Davenport Civil Rights Commission to change the holiday’s name to something more ecumenical, City Administrator Craig Malin sent a memo to municipal employees announcing Good Friday would officially be known as “Spring Holiday.”

“My phone has been ringing off the hook since Saturday,” said city council alderman Bill Edmond. “People are genuinely upset because this is nothing but political correctness run amok.”

Edmond said the city administrator made the change unilaterally and did not bring it to the council for a vote, a requirement for a change in policy.

“The city council didn’t know anything about the change. We were blind sided and now we’ve got to clean this mess up. How do you tell people the city renamed a 2,000 year old holiday?” said Edmond.

It didn’t take long for the city the resurrect the name Good Friday. Malin was overruled today and the words “Spring Holiday” disappeared.

… The Civil Rights Commission said it recommended changing the name to better reflect the city’s diversity and maintain a separation of church and state when it came to official municipal holidays.

“We merely made a recommendation that the name be changed to something other than Good Friday,” said Tim Hart, the commission’s chairman. “Our Constitution calls for separation of church and state. Davenport touts itself as a diverse city and given all the different types of religious and ethnic backgrounds we represent, we suggested the change.”

Please. This PC crap in the name of some kind of phony “diversity” pisses me off. And of course, it wasn’t the angry residents that changed the city council’s mind — it was the unions.

City employees, beginning with local police, feared the name change would violate their union contracts with the city, which specifies Good Friday as an official municipal holiday. Employees that work city holidays are paid time and a half.

For all of the separationists’ bluster, it’s an empty premise. The words “separation of church and state” appear nowhere in the Constitution. This entire idea came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, ensuring them that there would be a “wall of separation” between the church and the state — and he didn’t mean that Christianity couldn’t be expressed or honored in the public or by the government. He meant that state would not interfere with religion, an idea that actually is in the Constitution. What also is in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are many, many references to God and Christianity. But what does that matter? Whenever someone uses the word diversity in reference to the so-called separation of church and state, all they mean is a lack of Christianity in the public. Christians, according to separationists, should apparently only practice their faith in the privacy of their own homes. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Wiccans, atheists — they’re all free to practice publicly, but not Christians.

After all, have you ever seen Hanukah referred to as “holidays in winter”? Or a movement for Rosh Hashana or Ramadan to be removed from calendars? Of course not. It’s only Christianity that is targeted. And there you have the truth: the separationist movement is nothing more than a movement to ban Christianity from the public square while allowing for politically correct “diverse” religions to be celebrated.

Cross-posted at The Green Room.

ShareThis

Byam Elementary School apparently has a gift shop they arrange every year during the holiday season. But in the interest of political correctness, religion must of course be promptly removed — we wouldn’t want to anger the atheists, after all — and Christmas is the holiday that’s most in the crosshairs.

After meeting with members of the Byam Elementary School PTO, two mothers asking to put the holidays back into the school’s annual holiday gift shop say Byam isn’t budging.

Kathryn McMillan and Kathleen Cullen, who both have children at Byam, asked school officials to allow all holiday items at the gift shop following a ban on Santa, candy canes, stockings, and all Christmas, Hanukkah and other “religious items.”

But a meeting with some PTO parents on Thursday night grew heated as emotions got in the way.

Red and green tissue paper to wrap presents was also crossed off the list because it looked too “Christmasy,” McMillan said.

“One of the parents said, ‘If we allow Santa, what do we say if a child brings in a swastika? Do we allow that too?’ ” McMillan said. “All I could think of was, are you kidding? You’re comparing a Christmas ornament to a swastika? It seems as if reason is lost somewhere and I just hope we can find it again.”

Superintendent Donald Yeoman told The Sun on Tuesday that the rules for the gift shop are under the authority of Byam Principal Jane Gilmore. Ultimately, said Yeoman, the policy for the gift shop was set so no child would feel left out.

“It’s operated under those same rules for a number of years with success and without complaint,” Yeoman said.

Until now.

Gilmore did not return a reporter’s phone call yesterday.

McMillan and Cullen have asked that if the children can’t celebrate their traditions – whatever they may be – at the holiday gift shop, then maybe the school should move the gift shop to another time of year.

Not all Chelmsford schools have adopted the same policy as Byam. The South Row Elementary School, and the former Westlands Elementary that closed last year, had no restrictions on gift-giving.

“It makes sense that the school probably makes the most money by holding the gift shop over the holidays,” McMillan added. “So all we’re asking is that if you’re letting kids buy gifts for the holidays, let them donate stuff that celebrates those traditions and use it as a teachable moment so these kids can learn.”

McMillan and Cullen will appear before the School Committee on Tuesday, Nov. 24.

It seems like these parents are the only ones who possess any reason whatsoever. But, as always, there is the one parent who gets OFFENDED!! for their children’s sake, and must ban Christmas, Santa, Christianity, and anything that might even resemble it. But going so far as to link Santa Claus to Nazi swastikas is taking it further than I think I’ve seen before. I mean, really, let’s see… we have Santa Claus, a saint who has grown into a myth, a man who believes in kindness and giving. And then there’s Nazis, who were responsible for the torture, starvation, slavery, and murders of over six million people. How does one’s mind link Santa Claus and Nazis? When someone mentions Christmas or Santa, how screwed up do you have to be to automatically think that letting a kid celebrate that in school means that you’re opening the door to celebrating Nazis? I mean, that’s one hell of a leap there. On top of that, the rules seem more than a little outrageous. You can’t even have red or green wrapping paper because it just might remind someone of Christmas? Good Lord, this takes worshipping at the altar of political correctness to a whole new level.

And for what it’s worth, I think the suggestion of McMillan and Cullen seem perfectly sound to me. If they won’t let children celebrate their respective holidays at the gift shop — Christmas, Hanukah — then why not just move the gift shop to a different time of year and avoid the whole issue? Instead, the school has seemingly gone out of their way to deliberately snub religion. It’s simple, though. The school wants to capitalize on the holiday season without having to actually deal with those pesky holidays, and they know that having the gift shop in the middle of, say, September just wouldn’t be as profitable. I don’t begrudge them wanting to make money, but it seems hypocritical to want to make money off of the holiday season — and also by taking advantage of the festive, giving holiday spirit of parents — while being completely unwilling to include the holidays they’re capitalizing on.

And while surely if enough parents complain enough, the school will change the rules, it’s disturbing enough that this would even happen. This was a country built on faith-based principles, after all — and now, we have more and more schools trying to keep faith out of the public eye in any way, shape, or form.

Jane Gilmore, the religion hating principal of Byam Elementary School.

ShareThis

The newest outrage comes from the UK, where a play is being performed called Jesus Queen of Heaven, featuring Jesus as a transsexual woman.

A controversial play which portrays Jesus as a transsexual woman was defended yesterday by its writer who has herself crossed the gender barrier to live as a woman.

Jesus, Queen of Heaven, has caused a storm of protest from Christian evangelical groups, who picketed the Tron Theatre in Glasgow when it opened this week.

However, their attacks have caused deep offence to the play’s author, who also acts the leading role. For Jo Clifford — formerly the playwright John Clifford — wrote the piece in an attempt to create greater understanding of transgendered people like herself.

The play’s opening night was attended by about 300 demonstrators. Roman Catholics joined evangelical Christians for a two-hour protest during which they waved placards and sang hymns.

Yesterday Ms Clifford, 59, from Edinburgh, expressed deep disappointment in the reaction.

“Most of it is happening because of a complete misunderstanding of what I am and what I am trying to do … They thought awful, sacrilegious things were going to happen on stage,” she said. Her critics, she added, ought to reread the Gospel. “Jesus said: ‘judge not’.”

Ms Clifford is clear that much of the motivation for protestors is disapproval of her transgendered identity. Not only has she written the play, she also performs the title and only role.

“One of the placards turned up later in the bar. It said, ‘God: My Son Is Not A Pervert’. That was upsetting because what’s behind it is prejudice against transgendered people.”

… While God’s New Frock was a partly autobiographical piece about Ms Clifford growing up as a male and trying to suppress her need to become a woman, Jesus, Queen of Heaven, imagines the son of God alive in the present world as a transsexual woman, and attempts to present how she would relate the parables under this transgendered identity. “I have showed the script to priests and they’ve said it corresponds to what the Bible says,” Ms Clifford added.

The negative response by some church groups to the play is one of the strongest seen since Jerry Springer: The Opera, a West End musical written by Stewart Lee and Richard Thomas, was screened by the BBC in 2005. Yet Ms Clifford says she did not think she was being especially controversial when she wrote the piece. “I thought the story was a very respectful one, and a very loving one.”

Those who have seen the play, she said, have found it uplifting — “even a man from the Daily Mail”.

Even a man from the Daily Mail?! Well, jeez, it must be OK then!!

Of course, as per usual with liberals and gays, this play is all about the playwright, not about God. The fact that this is sacreligious doesn’t even occur to him; I doubt it really would even matter anyways. It’s all about him. He’s transgender, so he imagines Jesus as transgender. It doesn’t matter that it’s blasphemous, and it doesn’t matter that it insults the very foundation of Christianity, and it doesn’t matter that it will strike the very core of the beliefs of Christians. It’s all about how it makes him feel. It validates his own sense of self and makes him feel more secure as he basks in the glow of his audience. And when the outrage inevitably begins, he starts his media tour about how he’s just so offended, because the mean old Christians are just so prejudiced!

This is a video of the protestors. See for yourself just how harmful they are:

Well, oh my gosh! They’re… standing outside. With candles. Singing. And… praying!! How dare they?!

In all seriousness, look at the difference between how these Christians are protesting and how the gays protest. Look at Prop 8, for example. Prop 8 protestors went insane, wanting to completely destroy the lives and livelihoods of any Prop 8 supporters they can. One group, as referenced above, actually stormed into a church in the middle of a Mass and desecrated it. These Christians aren’t demanding that the play be shut down. They aren’t storming in and causing a scene. They’re staying outside, protesting peacefully, singing, and praying. And yet, the playwright still complains, because I guess he feels that the way he feels is the way that everyone should feel. A transsexual female Jesus is OK to him, so all Christians should be OK with it too. Anyone who feels differently is obviously prejudiced and wrong and mean!

And don’t forget, Jesus said to judge not. He also said that homosexuality is a sin, so making Jesus a transsexual woman isn’t exactly down with Christian teachings, either, is it?

This play is immoral, disgusting, and wrong. It’s sacreligious and blasphemous, and it’s even worse that the playwright would try to insult the Christians who are rightfully offended by it and simply trying to stand up for their Christian beliefs.

ShareThis

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

A little over two hundred years later, we’ve come full circle. We’re right back to religious persecution again, albeit not in the way people automatically think. In our modern age, persecution doesn’t so much mean killing someone over their religion. It’s more along the lines of banning the practice of your faith, and then fining and jailing you if you continue. What’s next?

And sadly, the above scenario is actually being played out in San Diego, California. A home bible study has been prohibited, and the couple who held the bible study was notified on Good Friday. Classy, huh?

A local pastor and his wife claim they were interrogated by a San Diego County official, who then threatened them with escalating fines if they continued to hold Bible studies in their home, 10News reported.

Attorney Dean Broyles of The Western Center For Law & Policy was shocked with what happened to the pastor and his wife.

Broyles said, “The county asked, ‘Do you have a regular meeting in your home?’ She said, ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say amen?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you pray?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say praise the Lord?’ ‘Yes.’”

The county employee notified the couple that the small Bible study, with an average of 15 people attending, was in violation of County regulations, according to Broyles.

Broyles said a few days later the couple received a written warning that listed “unlawful use of land” and told them to “stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit” — a process that could cost tens of thousands of dollars.

“For churches and religious assemblies there’s big parking concerns, there’s environmental impact concerns when you have hundreds or thousands of people gathering. But this is a different situation, and we believe that the application of the religious assembly principles to this Bible study is certainly misplaced,” said Broyles.

News of the case has rapidly spread across Internet blogs and has spurred various reactions.

… Broyles also said this case has broader implications.

“If the county thinks they can shut down groups of 10 or 15 Christians meeting in a home, what about people who meet regularly at home for poker night? What about people who meet for Tupperware parties? What about people who are meeting to watch baseball games on a regular basis and support the Chargers?” Broyles asked.

… If the County refuses to release the pastor and his wife from obtaining the permit, they will consider a lawsuit in federal court.

It’s good to see that the couple is not taking this lying down. Because what would the implications of this be? Let’s say we agreed that you couldn’t hold religious services in your home for some insane reason, and they could only be held in a place of religious worship, i.e. a temple, a church, a synagogue, whatever. How long do you think it would be before they came for those places as well?

I attended similar meetings every other week in high school. I was a member of my church’s youth group, and we went to a conference every year. Part of the responsibility of attending that conference was attending the bimonthly meetings. We studied the bible, we discussed theology, we prayed. The youth group ministers were a husband and wife, Sal and Maria, an elderly couple from up north. Sal was also the deacon at my church. There were usually around 15 – 20 teenagers there. Would this meeting have been shut down if it had taken place in San Diego today? We prayed. We read the bible. We said the Our Father, the Haily Mary, and the Glory Be to end each meeting. We gave prayer intentions each meeting as well.

I know that technically one could say that this isn’t our battle. But the thing is, it really should be. Getting away with infringing upon our rights is always hardest the first time, just like lying or stealing or cheating is always hardest the first time you do it. After you do it and get away with it, you become emboldened. And you continue to do it. And if San Diego County is allowed to get away with this, do you really think they won’t continue down this road?

Stand with the First Amendment. Support freedom of religion. You can sign the petition here. Or, you can take the time to go straight to the source yourself and contact San Diego County officials. I personally would recommend the Office of Internal Affairs. Here’s the contact info for the Office of Internal Affairs:

1600 Pacific Highway, Room #400
San Diego, CA 92101, USA
Phone: (619) 531-5174
Fax: (619) 685-2514
E-Mail: eloy.villa@sdcounty.ca.gov

ShareThis

Criticising the ‘hysteria’ around cocaine, she said: “The only story is that drugs are bad and they will kill you – you will become a prostitute, a rapist or a dealer. But that’s not true. I know lots of people who take cocaine three nights a week and get up and go to work. But we never hear that side of the story. I wish people wouldn’t sensationalise it. Some people are just bad at taking drugs.”

… Speaking about religion in the interview with Word magazine, Lily continued: “I don’t like Christianity much.

“I was brought up in a Catholic school and they told me gays, adultery and drugs were bad.

“All my mum’s friends were gay, my dad was having affairs and there were drugs in the house when I was a kid, so it was a bit cruel.”

Even record label EMI didn’t escape Lily’s wrath – as she talked candidly about her earnings.

She added: “I got £50,000 for my first album and I sold a lot of records.

“Twenty years ago, I’d have been booked in at the Ritz with five grams of cocaine on my table and 10 bunches of flowers. Some new clothes. A chauffeur on 24-hour call.

“Now I’m lucky to get an Oyster card. I ask for a hotel in Paris and I get a two-star place in the eighth arrondissement on my own.

“I’m like: ‘Do you want me to get raped and killed?’”

Yes… celebrities! These are the people we should be looking up to!!

ShareThis

Here’s the transcript:

ANN CURRY: Your position [on gay marriage] has raised the spectre that you are homophobic.

Warren responds with a hearty laugh.

CURRY: You laugh, but that is why gay people are angry.

RICK WARREN: Well, I could give you a hundred –

CURRY: Are you homophobic?

WARREN: I don’t know any church in America that’s done more to help the gay community, particularly with AIDS, than Saddleback. But the hate speech against me is incendiary.

CURRY: If science finds that this is biological, that people are born gay, would you change your position?

WARREN: No, and the reason why is because we all have biological predispositions. I’m naturally inclined to have sex with every beautiful woman I see. But that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.

Back in the studio, Willie Geist and Joe Scarborough openly laughed at Rick Warren.

I think we’re seeing yet again the death of journalism here. Ann Curry, Willie Geist, and Joe Scarborough couldn’t possibly have shown the slightest professionalism and kept their personal feelings to themselves? It would’ve been too much to ask of them, wouldn’t it, when Warren’s statements go against all their liberal agenda holds dear.

Hat Tip: Newsbusters

ShareThis

I think Feministe, though, sums up the real problem liberals are having here rather well:

While we on the left obviously do need to understand that Obama is going to make compromises and he’s going to disappoint us, it’s crucial that we don’t just follow in lockstep. Part of the reason the religious right has political capital is because they kick and scream and mobilize when their agenda isn’t on the table. It strikes me as phenomenally stupid for progressives to sit down and shut up now that we have a center-left President-elect. Instead, this should be the time for us to really raise our voices and remind Obama that we are his base and we are part of the electorate as much as religious conservatives. Sitting around backing up his more moderate decisions isn’t going to give him any incentive to move left. We have to be pragmatic, and we have to understand why he takes a particular course (and we have to remember that he’s not a left-wing dream; he’s a fairly moderate Democrat). But insisting that everyone get in line and support every decision he makes is not a good strategy if we want to give him a reason — and the ability — to support our agenda.

Aside from the insane notion that Obama is a moderate — and out of curiosity, if he isn’t the left-wing dream, what the hell is?? — it’s especially interesting how honest this post was. The real issue at hand is that Obama is “catering” to the “religious right”. Get it? He’s supposed to do nothing but appease the radical liberals, and ignore anyone who doesn’t fit exactly into that mold. The terrifying notion is that apparently, Obama needs to move more to the left!

The other interesting thing about the Feministe post was the whining about Rick Warren’s advocacy for wives to submit to their husbands, as is said in the Bible. Now I know, that goes against everything feminism holds dear: a woman actually deferring to a man?! SEXIST!!! But if there were any feminists willing to delve a little deeper into what God asks of men and women in their marriage, perhaps they wouldn’t find it so terrible.

The commandment for wives to submit to their husbands is found in Ephesians, and goes as follows:

Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— for we are members of his body. “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Notice how much emphasis is put on how much the husband is supposed to sacrifice for his wife, how much he is supposed to love her. Women, meanwhile, are supposed to respect their husbands and submit to them. The fact that feminists do not understand this at all shows that, as usual, they have absolutely zero understanding of men and healthy relationships.

See, for most men and most women, they want different things. Men need respect more than they need love. If a man’s wife loves him more than anything in the world, but never shows him any respect, he will be unhappy. Likewise, women do not crave respect the way that they crave love. A woman needs to know that her husband loves her, and that she will always come first to him. And while everyone is different and there are of course exceptions to every rule, it stands to reason that men would rather be unloved than disrespected, and women would rather be disrespected than unloved. Could it possibly be that this Bible verse is simply advocating that we give our spouses what it is that they need?

Of course, when it comes to feminism, that wouldn’t matter anyway, because it would get in the way of their shrill screeching of SEXISM!!!!! But like I said, if feminists had even the slightest understanding of men, they likely would not get so offended at the command for wives to respect their husbands… but then again, they also likely wouldn’t be feminists anymore, either.

And because Rick Warren, a Christian, wants to follow the commands presented in the Bible (a shocking concept, I know — a Christian following the Bible!), it’s one more notch against him, unsurprisingly. Add in the fact that he’s — gasp!! — against abortion (another shocking concept, a Christian who is pro-life) and he doesn’t stand a chance with feminists. And given the ideological strangehold currently in existence in feminism, anyone whose ideas aren’t perfectly in synch with the feminist leaders aren’t allowed. Not only are they not allowed, but they shouldn’t be given a platform and probably shouldn’t even exist!

I’m not a huge Rick Warren follower, but it is really sad to see someone so demonized by the left simply for daring to lead his life using Judeo-Christian ideals. It’s not surprising in the least, but it is still very, very sad.

ShareThis

ShareThis

In his upcoming biography of Jesus, “Basic Instinct” director Paul Verhoeven will make the shocking claim that Christ probably was the son of Mary and a Roman soldier who raped her during the Jewish uprising in Galilee.

An Amsterdam publishing house said Wednesday it will publish the Dutch filmmaker’s biography of Jesus, “Jesus of Nazareth: A Realistic Portrait,” in September.

It will be translated into English in 2009, Marianna Sterk of the publishing house J.M. Meulenhoff said. Verhoeven hopes it will be a springboard for him to raise interest in making a film along the same lines, she said.

The 69-year-old director, who also directed “Showgirls” — starring Elizabeth Berkley in one of the most panned films of the ’90s — and sci-fi action hits like “Total Recall” and “RoboCop,” as well as the sci-fi bust “Starship Troopers,” claims he and co-biographer Rob van Scheers have written the most realistic portrayal of Jesus ever published.

In addition to suggesting that the Virgin Mary may have been a rape victim, the book will also say that Christ was not betrayed by Judas Iscariot, one of the 12 original apostles of Jesus, as the New Testament states.

This kind of stuff is simply ridiculous. Is it insulting that someone would imply that Jesus was fathered by a rapist? Of course, but people are allowed to believe anything they’d like. What’s annoying about claims like these is that these idiots have absolutely no evidence to back it up. It’s about as credible as the idea that there was a spaceship being dragged behind the Halle-Bopp Comet. He just decides that this is how it maybe happened and call it “the most realistic portrayal” EVER.

Um, sure, buddy. And Starship Troopers and Showgirls were GOOD movies.

Hat Tip: Newsbusters

ShareThis