Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rights and Liberties

Very Bizarre 'Holy Laughter Annointing' Theology at Sarah Palin's Juneau Church

By Bruce Wilson, Talk To Action. Posted September 13, 2008.


'Third wave' sermons supported by religious leaders at Juneau Christian Church, include "uncontrollable laughter, weeping, shrieking."
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Mike Rose is the senior pastor of Juneau Christian Church, where Governor Sarah Palin attends when in residence in Juneau. The Alaska Update of the Alaska Assemblies of God featured a story on Palin's attendance at the 2008 Alaska District Council and stated that "Superintendent Ted Boatsman, who was Palin's junior high pastor at Wasilla Assembly of God, along with Pastor Mike Rose of Juneau Christian Center, where Palin presently attends church when in Juneau, laid hands on the Governor and led the Council in Prayer."

Watch Bruce Wilson's video - Palin's Churches and the Holy Laughter Anointing:

Rose is well known as far away as Australia for his participation in the "new wave" of the Holy Spirit. Former General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God in Australia, Dr. Andrew Evans, has also been a supporter of the "new wave" and its manifestations which he lists as falling, shaking and drunkenness (in the Spirit),and uncontrollable weeping and laughing. (He has been a controversial figure for his belief that these manifestations would aid in church growth in his denomination in Australia although these activities have been repeatedly denounced as Deviant Behavior by the U.S. General Council.) Evans writes about Rose's ability to manage these manifestations in his church without excessive disruption of services. He also notes that Rose had been an advisor to Rodney Howard-Browne's Revival Ministries committee and had "sat in over 110 of Rodney's meetings." Andrew Evans went on to found the Family First Party of Australia.

Rodney Howard-Browne is one of the most controversial and publicized figures of the Third Wave movement. While many of the leaders have been almost invisible in the mainstream media, Howard-Browne and his Holy Laughter anointing have been covered by CNN , Time, Newsweek, PBS, and numerous British media outlets. Howard-Browne refers to himself in many of these articles as the "Holy Ghost bartender."

He is also one of the most controversial figures in the Evangelical world and is the subject of many hundreds of internet pages from other Evangelical and Fundamentalists discernment groups who view his unusual revival manifestations such as uncontrollable laughter, weeping, shrieking, and animal noises, as cultic. Other conservative Christians also find fault with Howard-Browne's end time belief that a unified and purified church is currently being restored through a "great awakening" that is manifesting itself through these "signs and wonders." Howard-Browne, like the other leaders of the Third Wave, believe that they are raising a great end time army that will take control of the world through spiritual warfare, and triumph over Satan before the millennial reign of Jesus. Many in the movement, such as C. Peter Wagner believe that the Apostolic age began in 2001. John Bevere, author of curriculum for the Master's Commission of Wasilla Assembly of God, believes that he is teaching the final generation before the Millennial which he calculates will begin in 2028 or 2029.

Rodney Howard-Browne and his family moved from South Africa to the United States in 1987, and settled in the Lakeland/Tampa area after having a successful revival at the church of Karl Strader, Lakeland's first Assemblies of God, Karl is father of Stephen Strader of Ignited Church and the current Lakeland Revival fame. Howard-Browne and his wife continued to lead revivals around the world and often worked closely with the late John Wimber of the Vineyard movement and the the Kansas City Prophets. They introduced hyper-charismatic activities in widely publicized revivals in both the United States and Great Britain including the Toronto Airport Blessing which began in 1994, and drew people worldwide to experience the phenomenon. Howard-Brown is also credited with a role in the Brownsville Revival, 1995, and more recently, the 2008 Lakeland Healing Revival with Todd Bentley.

Additionally Howard-Browne has been instrumental in the introduction of these "signs and wonders" all over the world including Brompton Holy Trinity, a high-profile charismatic Anglican church in May, 1994. The resulting Holy Laughter and other unusual manifestations at this prominent church and others in London shocked the British press and was the biggest story covered by British Christian media in 1995 and 1996. Brompton Holy Trinity is now primarily known as the source of the ALPHA course.

Sarah Diamond includes Howard-Browne's rise to fame in her book, Not by Politics Alone. After the introduction of Holy Laugher, Diamond states,

"he became a celebrity in charismatic circles. Charisma magazine published a cover story about him. Trinity Broadcasting Network aired many hours' worth of Howard-Browne's videotaped laughing services so that viewers could see exactly how ordinary-looking churchgoers look when they land on the floor and laugh hysterically. The TV images served as a form of role modeling for others who would eventually experience the Toronto Blessing."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: juneau christian church, holy laughter anointing, mike rose

Read more of Bruce Wilson's work at Talk to Action.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Um, I care only a little.
Posted by: PaulK on Sep 13, 2008 5:26 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Except for one pastor hoping another will drop dead, (really dog eat dog tactics in a world where the money and the flock to support ministers is limited) I kind of shrug.

How people collectively alter their conscious minds on a Saturday night is interesting voyeurism, I guess. In some ways, it's parallel to the collective groove vibes at parties where psychedelics have been used.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Um, I care only a little. Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Um, I care only a little. Posted by: VZEQICVA
uncontrollable laughter, weeping, shrieking
Posted by: foreverhope on Sep 13, 2008 5:27 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My kids have often made me feel like doing those things. ;-)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Knock off the Palin bashing.
Posted by: VetAgainst McCain on Sep 13, 2008 6:50 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on, AlterNet. Attacking Palin's church is crossing the line.

Besides, I practice laugh therapy every morning when I get up.

No matter how shitty my wife and I might feel climbing out of bed, by forcing ourselves to laugh out loud always results in smiles on our faces instead of frowns.

One more thing. Today Lioheart said very few Vietnam vets are against John Mccain. Here's my response:

FACTOIDS:

In 1992, 50 former POWs signed a letter asking McCain not to stop the Senate's Select Committee on MIA in Southeast Asia. He ignored the letter, got the hearing shut down and sealed DOD records of POWs and MIAs, including his own. McCain's betrayal of the signatory POWs and family members of missing servicemen earned him the "Manchurian Candidate" nickname. LionHeart can rest assured all of those outraged Americans are still against McCain 16 years later.

In 2004, veterans from both political parties formed the national organization, "Veterans for John Kerry." I know because I was a member and went to the meetings. Where I live, we had over 100 vets show up.

Interestingly, in 2008, there is NO similar pro-McCain organization.. There are pro-McCain websites, certainly, but no grassroots, boots on the ground outfit doing grunt work for McCain like we did for Kerry.

If you google "veterans McCain," you will get more hits for sources against the Arizona senator than for him.

One explanation is McCain's puzzling opposition to pro-veteran legislation. For reasons I don't understand, he voted FOR veterans funding bills only 30% of the time (according to a scorecard of roll-call votes put out by the nonpartisan Disabled Americans for America).

Under the same system Obama has a far superior, 90% rating — even though he has spent a much shorter time in Washington.

Said Paul Sullivan, director of the nonpartisan Veterans for Common Sense, “Senator McCain clearly needs to be recognized for his military service and in some respects that will play to his advantage, but when it actually comes to delivering health care and benefits during war, he’s going to have some explaining to do.”

Ron Paul's campaign web site promoted VietnamVeteransAgainstJohnMcCain.con and added the following thumbnail summary: "John McCain -- Unfit to serve as Commander-In-Chief. The spoiled son of military privilege got a free ride throughout his military career despite repeated instances of sex scandals and screw-ups...."

VoteVets.org, the largest group of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with 100,000 members, has consistently opposed the policies of John McCain.

Finally, while I'm on the subject, will someone from AlterNet please explain why the editors prohibit the mention of UnfitMcCain.com in reader comments?


Vet against McCain
To find out why, click on the links below:

American View
(now my favorite anti-GOP Web site
Vietnam Veterans Against McCain
(self-explanatory)
Vote Vets
(maintained by Iraq and Afghan war vets)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I disagree Posted by: Dboy
Who the Hell cares?
Posted by: racetraitor on Sep 13, 2008 7:54 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seriously?

Genuine journalistic endeavor was wasted on this piece?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who the Hell cares? Posted by: ranchero42
» RE: Who the Hell cares? Posted by: sunlakedude
» RE: Who the Hell cares? Posted by: Dboy
I must agree with the above comments
Posted by: Jbuuty on Sep 13, 2008 9:18 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article only serves to make fun of some people's beliefs. It points out the egotism of a few religious leaders who are marginally related to Palin's church. Nothing particularly striking nor disturbing. So what if some people laugh in church, it's better than the falling asleep people used to do in the church I grew up in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» If that's really the next step Posted by: truthlover
Many attack Palins Religion but did you know Obama a Muslim?
Posted by: Ky Lake Dave on Sep 13, 2008 9:45 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama admitted he was a Muslim in his intereview with George Stephanopoulos. He was quoted to say "John McCain has not used my Muslim Religion against me."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» He said it; you're incorrect Posted by: Forrest for the Trees
» THANK YOU, VetAgainstMcCain Posted by: Smackback
» Sirios you may think I am a blessing Posted by: Ky Lake Dave
» What if Obama were Muslim Posted by: bookie
» LIAR! Posted by: hurricane hugo
Goodness Gracious!
Posted by: Tom Degan on Sep 14, 2008 4:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That certainly was a hoot, wasn't it?
Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Goodness Gracious! Posted by: Grandma Crabby
They Can't handle the truth
Posted by: swooshy on Sep 14, 2008 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This works great as crowd control, a place where you can release your troubles and cares.
As long as the Republicans can convince these people they are part of "their" club" they will win. These people should try and visit some of the rich white republican enclaves and see how fast they will be given the bum's rush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is it just the strangeness that poses a problem?
Posted by: DanYHKim on Sep 14, 2008 7:02 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[Disclosure: I have attended several meetings held by Howard-Browne, and believe he is preaching the 'real thing'.]

I am not sure what is the message in the article. While the 'laughter revival' is controversial among churches, and the outward manifestations are unnerving to see, they are not themselves evidence that Sarah Palin is unsuitable for the vice-presidency. I don't think it's enough to say that 'this candidate associates with people who adhere to unusual religious beliefs'. To make such an assertion is to follow the path of the 'Obama is a Muslim' meme. It makes as much sense as saying that 'JFK is a Catholic' or 'Truman's grandfather was a Jew'.

I do not recall Howard-Browne making inroads into politics, even to the modest degree we've seen in such icons a Billy Graham. His focus has been on reviving the church and its people from worshiping out of habit from the 'faith of their fathers' to worship as a relationship with the living and immanent Holy Spirit, and thence to be re-energized as Christians. In some ways, it is reassuring to me that many Evangelicals, a label that I have come to associate with the politicized 'Christian Right', find reason to oppose Howard-Browne. I do not recall hearing any instruction or teaching to take up arms in the 'culture wars', but to change the way we relate to God. It has been a while, however, and the great popularity Howard-Browne has enjoyed in some circles may have changed him and his preaching. If that is the case, then I would be very sad.

My own experience, which may not be indicative of anything, as been a greater understanding of my calling to be the compassionate face of Christ on earth. As such, my family has been active in church-sponsored ministries of charity and advocacy for the poor in our city. Our pastor; who is not political, and who is not associated with Howard-Browne or his ministries; encourages the congregation to live lives of simplicity and thrift in order to have money, time and resources available to give to the poor or those in crisis. Jesus said that "Whatever you do for the least of these, my bretheren, you do for me", so this is not inconsistent with Christian core beliefs.

So:

- The laughter-in-church is strange, but not itself a reason to reject McCain-Palin
- Evangelicals oppose the 'laughter revival', which puts it in good company
- Palin attends a church where the revival is not opposed, but it hasn't had a transformative effect on her
- My own experience has been that Rodney Howard-Browne is not political
- A person's religion, however different from my own, is not directly relevant to their suitability for government office. Their past behavior, character and abilities are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Anywhere Else
Posted by: Last Chance on Sep 14, 2008 8:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
such behavior would be regarded as insane, but in church it's OK? Not to me it isn't, especially not when one of the shrieking laughers may become the Vice President.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:Good Point Posted by: cwilsondrum
The real question: will this affect policy decisions?
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Sep 14, 2008 11:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Religious beliefs are private only if they're not going to drive policy decisions. It's a dead certainty that Palin's religion drives her decision-making. Therefore, religion, silly beliefs, bizzare rituals, etc. are fair game.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chuckles at Church? Can you imagine if this was Obama's church?
Posted by: thinks4herself2008 on Sep 14, 2008 2:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The media would be playing the shrieking, weird laughter over and over and over again, and it would be over. This isn't mainstream religion--it's extreme just like Palin's views about many issues. I guess to each his own, but what's more frightening than their style of worship (if you can call it that) is their viewpoint on Alaska being a refuge before the rapture, etc., and that they're job is to help usher in the end times. Strange, strange stuff. I would like to know where Palin stands on some of this stuff, that is if she'd even tell the truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Isn't this just a modern version of the Shakers?
Posted by: IntnsRed on Sep 14, 2008 5:42 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Shakers "shook" with the spirit of God, often rolling on the floor in something we'd now call fits or convulsions.

Of course.

They led highly structured lives with little joy and no outlet to blow off steam -- but in church they could "shake, rattle and roll" all they wanted to without seeming politically incorrect.

Isn't this the same dynamic happening in a modern setting?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"New Order of Change" = Religious persecution
Posted by: IPF on Sep 14, 2008 6:02 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or religion is OK only if it applies to "Global Warming", Al Gore or "The New Social Order" which includes sex free for alls, sex with children, etc, etc.

Or is this a "tit for Tat" piece? Obama's pastor was found to be treasonable and objective, so now we MUST find the same on the other camp...

Does anybody still wonder why the Dems are morally bankrupt? I don't. It's obvious: get some good leadership and you won't have to spend 15 years findidng excuses and trying to find ways to blame the GOP for the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» REALLY NOW Posted by: HPipe
SCARES THE BEJESUS OUT OF ME
Posted by: HPipe on Sep 14, 2008 7:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Man--these guys make the Islamic Mullahs look good. I mean really now--what a bunch of strange puff balls. If Palin would come forward and renounce all this garbage, it would go a long way to help the rest of America accept her as a credible person to actually take the helm of Government if something were to happen to McCain. Right now the concept of a President Palin is enough to scare the bejesus out of me. I know that I would be laughing and crying at the same time though if that were to ever happen. Maybe then I would be a good candidate to join her church?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's the big deal?
Posted by: aceriter on Sep 15, 2008 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, so Sarah Palin's church is a bit unorthodox. So what? So isn't a mormon church, the Roman Catholic Church, the Islamaic faith, voodoo, fundamentalist Baptist churches, etc. And to an agnostic just about all religion is crazy. Even Obama's church proved out to be crazy.

So what does all this mean? It means absolutely nothing. It really doesn't fit into the mix to any extent. So why not get back to the real issues of illegal immigration, the formation of a North American Union, the idiocy of the Iraq war, etc., and begin acting like adults?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's the big deal? Posted by: Malamute
» RE: What's the big deal? Posted by: Lauren
» RE: What's the big deal? Posted by: terrymo
» RE: What's the big deal? Posted by: Lauren
anonymous
Posted by: solangel on Sep 15, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's quite fascinating that this "preacher" comes from Africa. In, ( I believe ) 1965 an epidemic of uncontrollable laughter, weeping, and other strange behavior began with a school girl and spread through out much of a newly liberated nation. As I recall it was Rwanda, but I may be incorrect on that.

After ruling out water contamination etc, it was later determined to be caused by extreme stress and response to the radical changes which had swept over the nation in such a short period of time. The resulting emotional breakdown by so many people in village after village, men, women, children, elders, was deemed an epidemic illness. No one, to this day, has an explaination for this behavior which debilitated entire communities.

Interviews with people who experienced this told the interviewer that it was not a wonderful experience of joy, but rather a sort of breakdown which prevented these villagers from moving on with their lives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: anonymous Posted by: babs
Check Things Out First
Posted by: sallyride on Sep 15, 2008 8:58 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have to be sensible about Palin, and realize that she is McCain's victim--a mere puppet. Anyone who did not 2nd think the invitation to become a Veep candidate has something else going on that we know nothing about. In fact, she may not have been able to decline, and go on with her life.

McCain obviously hadn't a clue how to function and the "timeline" was upon him, so his 'friend' found Palin ... easy to manipulate, quick to emotional extremes, and clever at coping as evidenced by her speeches (written for her), interviews, and extemporaneous outbursts. It would be impossible for someone like her to keep "family" in the background, as so many professionals and politicians do if for no other reason than protecting them.

All of this doesn't make the woman "bad," but it's a red flag when it comes to being able to center oneself in heated dicussions, and planning that may save lives, indeed the world. Any hint of welcoming "Paradise" needs to be acted upon; that's what we went to war with Iraq for wasn't it; the willing suicides of those who "flew into" the Twin Towers on 9/11. And, remember the Japanese pilots in WWII?

What her "church" actions do evidence is that she apparently believes in blessings coming from cell phones, and dying for Jesus ... and Armageddon is a blessing, like "being there first ..." Read "Blessed Assurance" to see how desperate this cult thinking affects people. Once they're 'outside' of manic situations like this, they can level out, for a time, but ... the stardom of salvation overcomes every rational effort to self-stabilize.

A person’s faith is their own business, unless it is so totally unorthodox that it creates brain-washing, which in turn causes no end of mental health problems – it’s dangerous ultimately and requires psychiatric evaluation for anyone intenting to head a country - at least the USA.

To think that the poor Unitarians are discriminated against – our nation’s gone mad. These are merely “gang” tactics to bring in money and power. I think the quieter end of this thinking is called “Mafia.”

It is also important to remember that the Aleuts are native to Alaska, and Indians (and the genotype) are prone to substance problems – it’s cultural, so we need to understand this better. It’s not an indictment, only something that is important to know exists in the culture. AA knows it well.

It is not mentally healthy in any church, organization, group to foster high-level emotions; it does however bring in money ... that's why cults and gangs have the full effort of our criminal justice system behind them - or we hope they still do. Sheesh

But, we the people own America and it is our responsibilty to check everything and everyone out with objective sources ... and if people lie, they must be removed from office or candidacy immediately. They cannot continue unless "we the people" step down.


http://www.mnh.si.edu/arctic/features/croads/aleut.html

http://tinyurl.com/5r88hg

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Third Temple in Jerusalem ?
Posted by: Alex Hidell on Sep 15, 2008 10:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If she's one who believes in the necessity of having a Third Temple in Jerusalem, and destroying the mosques that already sit atop the Temple Mount, then the press had better dare to ASK HER about this now, not after she gets the VP position handed to her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Have a friend
Posted by: bettyn on Sep 15, 2008 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
whose mother was involved with the AOG chuch. These people are seriously WEIRD. However, this is an issue that will not harm Gov. Palin in the least if we continue to bring it up. It will just look like she is being persecuted for her religious beliefs and make her a sympathetic figure, thus garnering more GOP support.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Have a friend Posted by: Lauren
One word
Posted by: robgo2b on Sep 17, 2008 3:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nuts!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not an issue of 'Beliefs' ,it's a matter of 'Practice'
Posted by: Purple Girl on Sep 23, 2008 4:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I could careless what they do in their churches - as long as no one is harmed and children are not exploited- after that who really gives ashit about 'tongues' 'laughter' or animal noise Religious expression.
HOWEVER these 'Chrisitians ' who seek to eliminate Pro choice Docs, facilities and bring about 'End of Days' must be considered Terrorists. Who was assasinating Planned Parenthood Docs, blowing up clinics and set off a Pipebomb full of nails at the Atlanta,Ga Olympics-HOME GROWN TERRORISTS.
Who is helping beat the Drum towards more 'pre-emptive Strikes'(FYI SARAH..."Bush Doctrine')this time against Iran? And Which Political figures have Parroted their Delusional/Sociopathic Dreams..Bush,Cheney, McCain, H.Clinton, LIEberman. Not only are they working to Undermine Our Way of Life (Unamerican tactics) but are also assuming duties Well above their Pay scale.Who are these Heretics who assume God requires Their mere mortal help to bring about the 'End of Days'. Who are these self anointed 'Special people' who feel they have th eright to determine who are worthy of saving and Who is not? Who granted them 'judgement' Rights? These psychologically unbalanced Groups are akin to the Taliban in their Self Righteousness.Whether they refer to the rest of Us as 'Infidels' or not that is their view. How many Similarities can be found between these Rogue fanatical 'christians' and their counterparts in the Middle East- Multitudes!How many of the 10 Commandments have they Broken..or they've added their Own * to
'thou Shall not Kill'- *unless they have already been born, then who gives a shit
'Will have no other God before Me'-* Unless it's Jesus, Mohammad, David..Add 'Graven Images' to the Worship of these mere mortals
'Honor thy Mother & Father"-* Unless it requries we support them on Social security and Medicare, or have to take care of them( send them to a Nursing Warehouse instead)
'keep Sunday's holy, tend to no commerce'- *except when Paying up to the church, or Pitching your doctrine Door to Door- thus screwing up the other person behind each door you solicit
'Shall not Steal'-* unless you can make a killing on Wall street, or invade a country..Which brings in 'Coveting'
'Shall Not Bear False Witness' *Unless you are a NeoCon, then say anything you want - spin or Outright Lies
'Coveting the Wife' Or 'Adultry'- * unless you are FuCking them over some other way- BS interest only loans,psuedo 'shortages', Blood for Oil war costing Treasure & Lives..Which brings us back to murder/killing
Oh and the Doozy...'Wrongful Use of the Name of god' - * Unless you use it to tell someone else they are a sinner and God will send them to burn in Hell.Well of course that's well beyond the 'Using' it has moved to the action of Condemning..Agin Way above their Pay Scale!
LOOKS LIKE THEY GUTTED THE 10 COMMANDMENTS LIKE THEY HAVE THE US CONSTITUTION & BILL OF RIGHTS!!
HERETICS & FACISTS..WRAPPED IN A FLAG AND WAVING A BIBLE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can they reanimate John McCain?
Posted by: taxidriver on Sep 23, 2008 5:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This sure would've made the Republican National Convention more exciting! Screaming, yelling, laughing--Republicans haven't been that inspired since Giuliani was mocking Obama's service as a community organizer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Palin, the macho-pandering women, and the abandoned softball dads. Thank you Martianbachelor.
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 23, 2008 6:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I came across a post on another site posted by Martianbachelor about women who actually want their men to be warmongers even when there is a soft side to these young men who want to say no. Now, I don't agree with him on everything against women but I have come across some women who are more macho-egotistical than even men and I came across this post that he wrote two years ago, long before Palin came up obviously. This got me to remember that there are so men who are just as moderate and liberal as many women in this world and yet both parties abandon these fair minded men. It's bad enough that not only can women wear everything men can wear and play all their sports and their own but men are restricted in terms of fashion and sports unless they want to be persecuted. Below is a description of the pro-macho women that pretty much explains why Palin "identifies" with them:

08-27-2006 08:04 AM

Re: The real reason
MartianBachelor

PANDORASBOX123 wrote:
Unfortunately the reason why we have so many problems in the world today is due to men trying to control and concur. We see this in the Middle East…

Hey, let’s perpetuate some stereotypes about the peaceful, loving, nurturing female and the violent, bestial male. Naturally I’m not buying it — plenty of women voted for Bush, and plenty of men didn’t vote for him. Probably the strongest and clearest anti-war voice in 2004 was Ralph Nader, and hardly anyone male or female voted for him. Go figure. [For the record, both my sisters voted for Bush, while my brother and I being in hopelessly red states voted for Ralph...]

“Contrary to many myths about man’s natural proclivity to fight wars, most … men do not make good soldiers. Most men have to be inspired to fight; if that fails, they have to be forced at gunpoint by their commanding officers. Numerous studies have shown that the average soldier is extremely timorous in battlefield situations and that he ‘regresses’ and reacts ‘passively’ under enemy fire. Obviously, as it often includes military obligation, the male role often requires certain kinds of discipline or indoctrination to put reluctant youths in the proper frame of mind.” - David Gilmore

There’s something else you’re missing. Women love these knuckledragging warmongers. I happen to live near an Army base. They’re the grunts and cannon-fodder — yes, there’s still a cavalry in the Army — the lowest of the expendable lower-class and working-class males. Since unlimited immigration has knocked the hell out of wages for unskilled labor, they don’t have a lot of good career choices. Quite a few haven’t made it back from Iraq. And you know what? Everyone of them has a wife. I see the stories on the local news as they trickle in. Yes, it may come as a shock but women actually want these Neanderthals, and what’s worse — they breed with them like mad! The same could be said for other thuggish and gang-leader types.

There are also quite well documented instances during WWII of women publicly shaming men who wouldn’t fight, goading them to own up to their male responsibilities to fight.

I’d also note that it was feminists who were raising a big stink before 9/11 about the Taliban in Afghanistan and what they did to women, effectively egging on the warrior types in this country to be “real men” and do something about it.

The more things don’t change the more they stay the same.

Maybe wars end when it’s the anti-war activists and conscientious objectors who attract the hot babe groupies. But I’m not holding my breath because I know that the average woman is just about as unevolved as the average man is. And when I go to the malls I can’t help but think we wouldn†?t be having all these resource wars if women would just stop buying so much STUFF.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

See Anchorage Daily News
Posted by: Lilly on Sep 23, 2008 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Go to Anchorage Daily News 9-20-08 for better understanding of the plan to put The Trojan Moose in the administration, hopefully the White House, within five years. And to the poster who thinks "attacking Palin's church is off-limits": in your dreams. A huge majority of Americans do not want a government that's infused with Christian Fundamentalist belief. Check this out: the lawsuit to halt the Troopergate investigation is supported by the Liberty Legal Institute, a group that exists to defend Christian Fundamentalists. And the LLI is part of The Arlington Group, a 75-member consortium of organizations that exist to put Christian Fundamentalism in our government. The choice of Sarah Palin was made by those folks and forced onto John McCain as the price of church-based support. The Anchorage Daily News is on this like a cat on liver.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Religion and politics
Posted by: LeeAnnG on Sep 23, 2008 9:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is disturbing that religion has infiltrated the political world to the degree that a candidate's religious views are dissected, displayed to the public, and even distorted for political advantage (or disadvantage to the opposition). One's religion is not supposed to be a consideration for elected office in the US.

Why should Barrack Obama have to prove his affiliation with Christianity over and over again? Why should his pastor's point of view come into play? Why should rumors of ties to Islam even matter?

Under most circumstances, I'd say that Palin's church is (to me, as an agnostic) not significantly more outlandish than any other form of 2,000 year old mythology and should not be a factor. However, it's the Right and the Far Right evangelicals who have, if not caused, at the very least aggravated the problem of religion as a qualification for office.

Hysterical laughter, screaming, and talking in tongues all may often be signs of mental illness. But believing that God picked the earth as the main dwelling place of intelligent life out of billions and billions and billions of locations in the universe, created that life with flaws so ingrained that he had to spend 33 years here in order to "save" their souls through a gruesome death, and that God communicated with human beings over 2,000 years ago - but no longer does so in any concrete manner - is pretty farfetched, too. It's a matter of degree, not kind.

Having said all that, in view of all the other outrageous characteristics of Sarah Palin, her religious extremism does point to a person I would most definitely not want a step away from the presidency of a PTA much less the USA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: eligion and politics Posted by: leafsong1
» True Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: True Posted by: Lauren
Would you vote for Charles Manson?
Posted by: leafsong1 on Sep 23, 2008 9:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There can be no religious test for public office enshrined in law, but voters are perfectly free to apply their own test when they cast their votes, and they have done that in each and every election ever held under the authority of the Constitution. There is always an apocalyptic cult. Sometimes they expire at the date they predict the world will expire, sometimes they persist for centuries. All of them are dangerous, promoting extremely irrational behavior motivated by fear and hatred. My own experience with non-denominational churches, which extends back two decades, is that they are the dregs of christianity. These are the churches where the people who are too crazy, too violent, or just too wierd for even the Pentacostals go to feel comfortable practicing their bizarre beliefs. For these people, anyone who does not closely adhere to their own very rare beliefs is necessarily possessed by demons. Any act which they take and later regret is automatically demonically inspired. Given half a chance, they will excorcise passers by. The end result is that these people have no real moral character; they have no real concept of reality; they are utterly unqualified to lead this nation, and are barely capable of performing as citizens. Many of them are insane, either congenitally, or drug induced, or some combination of the two. Others are merely stupid, or wierd, or some combination of the two. These are the fanatics that the fanatics reject as being too fanatical. None of them can be trusted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some say the sky is blue; others disagree
Posted by: Gregory Kruse on Sep 23, 2008 10:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The last time I got in on the cosmic joke was when I took LSD. I still think there is a joke, but I don't get it anymore. I was present at an attempted healing of a wheelchair bound young woman by a bunch of Assembly of God characters back in the 70's. When the healing didn't work, they blamed the cripple. I always thought it might have been my fault, a skeptic. People will do what they do, there is no stopping them. When group psychosis takes hold, hang on to your hat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"uncontrollable laughter, weeping, shrieking"--during sex?
Posted by: zooeyhall on Sep 23, 2008 10:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now--if this occurs during sex, then I say "go for it!!!"

But in Ms. Palin's case--if she is like the other Stepford Republican wives I have met, I doubt it happens because of the physical act.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: sex? Posted by: Lauren
My Minister is weirder than your Minister
Posted by: MTguy on Sep 23, 2008 11:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sorry but I find it difficult to hold Palin's feet to the fire because her religion and minister are weird. However, when SHE starts saying that various policies and happenings are 'God's Plan' I start to have a major problem with her.

Isn't this deja vu on Bush being the Johnny Appleseed of Democracy in the Middle East? I already know how his version of God's Plan for him worked out there, and frankly, I've had all I can stand.

Enough!... as Mr. Obama would say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sick of all this crazy religion shit
Posted by: lindat on Sep 23, 2008 1:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
from both the McCain and the Obama side. Both these candidates are too close to these psycho religion cults, and neither should get anywhere near the White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ACROSS THE BOARD WIERD!
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Sep 23, 2008 1:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sarah Palin is a pathetic creature who has nothing going for her but her looks, no small thing. If she were a sexy blonde, no one would take her seriously. But the beehive hair and the glasses present a believeable picture. She refuses to answer questions, because she doesn't know the answers. It's that simple. I'm not surprised the she belongs to this strange church. I am appalled that she brags about NOT having had an abortion and then leaves the child at 4 days old and goes off to work. The child who has serious health problems was left in the care of a teenager. In New Jersey, where I live she would be arrested for reckless child endangerment and the child would be put in foster care. Does this religion preach anything about parental responsibility? Ms. Palin is phony, crazy and should never be allowed near the White house.Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Does it matter if Palin knows next to nothing about world affairs?
Posted by: Garvagh on Sep 23, 2008 3:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seems the girl likes flakey religion. Who needs to understand global economics and world affairs when John Hagee and the Rapture are at hand? Wonderful groups like the Christians United For Israel (CUFI), who want the Christians (and the Muslims) expelled from "The Land of Israel"!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the assembly of clods...
Posted by: Annapurna1 on Sep 23, 2008 4:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
n/s...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]