Blogger Notes

It's funny 'cause it's true.

no...wait...

it's SAD 'cause it's true!!!!

September 18, 2005 3:42 PM

I found that on otto man's blog.

I like him, he's funny.

September 18, 2005 5:28 PM

I work with a "Christian". I am soooo tempted to send this to him.

September 19, 2005 12:28 AM

i should send this to all the mormons in my company! haha

September 19, 2005 9:33 AM

I can think of a few people to mail this too

September 19, 2005 9:36 AM

ESC, nice to see you around again. And I was thinking the same thing. Are you supposed to laugh, or sob uncontrollably?

SSB, thanks for the credit. I guess I forgot to ask you where you got it from.

OldRoses, are they conservative? DO IT!

Randi, I don't know a whole heck of a lot about Mormons, but I say this is too good to keep to ourselves! Geez, even my dad sent this to me just after I posted it here!! (he doesn't read my blog, he got it from his email circle. He's a Republican that won't admit it).

June, mail away! You get to either make someone you agree with laugh, or make someone you disagree with stew. Either way, you win!

September 19, 2005 9:50 AM

Yeah, I saw this on Otto's blog too. I was gonna post it myself, but forgot to! It's hilarious.

September 19, 2005 10:16 AM

OMG-
I thought seeing "George W. Bush and Jesus" in the same sentence was bad enough...

September 19, 2005 1:57 PM

The implication here is that you, as Democrats and/or Liberals would support the opposing view. Am I to understand that you would actually support a Christian Theocracy in America by promoting and voting for Jesus?

Why would the Republicans or Bush oppose the teachings of Jesus? Why would this amusing ad be shared here when we know too well that Bush and Republicans are condemned as Christian fundamentalts, i.e. Jesus Freaks? The non-sequitor here is way too confusing.

The ideals Jesus espoused were for the salvation of souls, not as government policy. If this was a real ad it would be laughed off the air as only the most mentally inept would give it credence.

I would like to believe the readers here are more epted than is typical.

September 20, 2005 12:17 AM

ORF, I'm going to have to check out Otto Man's blog.

Sierrabella, I cringed too.

Indigo Red, no, I would not support a Christian theocracy in America. Any one who truly believes in America and the ideals that were set forth when this country was founded wouldn't push for it either. That is very Anti-American.

This "campaign" ad is not literally about voting Jesus into office. It is was originally from MAD Magazine not a political organization. There are probably many messages that they were trying to convey.

1) It is showing how Bush would even smear Jesus to win an election if he had to run against him. (this is the funny part- it is MAD Mag)

2) Bush claims that he is doing God's work and that he is a devout Christian. But this commentary is pointing out that the the agendas that he is pushing are polar opposites to what Jesus was teaching. This shows him as either a hypocrite or a liar. Eh, which ever, it doesn't make him a very good person.

3) It shows that the very things the Republicans demonize are some of the very things that Jesus spent his life trying to teach his followers.

4) Bush and the huge evangelical Christian base that claim to have a right to running this country now because they were responsible for getting Bush back into office are being shown to be foolish or liars for backing a program that so obviously goes against Jesus. They can say that they are Christians and they can say that they follow the teachings of Christ- but they aren't cause they don't. They give Christians a bad name. They have taken the title Christian and used it for purposes that go against what Jesus believed.

September 20, 2005 10:34 AM

Oh, MAD Magazine! Well, that's different. Never mind!

I agree with the general analysis. However, we must remember that Jesus was a private enterprise carpenter like Joe, his earthly Dad. And Jesus allied himself with entrepreneur fishermen. Jesus was a big believer in helping oneself before helping others, otherwise what good would one be?

He called a government tax collector, Levi (I think it was Levi) to follow Him. Levi carried the money bag. Later, He called Saul/Paul to the ministry away from his government bounty hunter job. Apparently, Jesus did not like to mix church and state, either.

Katrina is bringigng out the churches and Christians to help in a massive way. Hundreds of congregations are providing shelter to the displaced, all without government prodding. Americas churches may prove to be the real rebuilder of people's lives, not Washington, DC.

If Jesus ran for government office, I would not vote for Him because I don't think His policies should be government policies. The precepts are quite enough for guidance, but not for implimentation.

September 20, 2005 1:44 PM

So, Indigo, are you agreeing that Jesus is wrong for America?

September 20, 2005 1:59 PM

Under the Constitution, Jesus can not be refused participation in governance as an office holder, as no religious test can be used. However, if He insisted upon turning America into a Christian Theocracy rather than the current Secular Kleptocracy, I would not vote for him. I did not support Pat Robertson for that very reason. Nor would I support a devout Muslim to office for the same reason.

I would not rule out anyone who uses religious belief as part of a personal decision making process. It essentially depends upon the degree to which religion plays a part in decisions. The Goldilocks Test should be used: too much, too little, just right. That is what we are really argueing - the degree of religiosity. Jesus is alight by me, but the degree of religiosty is too much. Well, duh! He is the Son of God and God incarnate after all.

So, I'm agreeing that Jesus is politically wrong for America. He has a fine cash-cow religion and should stick with that.

(Note: Indigo Red is an atheist.)

September 20, 2005 5:01 PM

I think to truly follow any faith one has to deny alligience to any country...Right And Not-Right, your guides are.

Yoda's words are as relevant today as they were a long time ago (in a galaxy far away).

September 20, 2005 5:08 PM

Indigo, I see Jesus as a philosopher, not as a god. I think that he was just a really smart guy with some really great ideas.

September 20, 2005 6:16 PM

I agree. But, as you can see, I write about Him as though I were a believer. The language of religion is one of the constants in American history. I treat the Christian mythology with respect as it has formed the basis of my society and culture. The mythology says He is God. I accept the myth, but not the myth as fact.

Because there is no God, it doesn't matter to me one bit, whether folks pray in public, use God in the Pledge, etc. The ideas of Jesus are well worth respect even if Jesus, in fact, never existed. Of this, I am not all together certain of His existance, but, again it doesn't matter to me. The teachings are still more important than the man or the God.

Yoda, Jesus, Buddha, Mohammad, Gandhi, etc. were all speaking of universally human truths that we can live by. The conflict is always about whos god is greatest, not which concepts actually work - my God can beat-up your God mentality.

September 20, 2005 6:49 PM

The problem here is that there is supposed to a separation of church and state. Sneaking god references into our government is stepping over the line. Each religious reference that is allowed to remain brings us one step closer to a Christian State. That is not what our founders had in mind for this country. It is very unAmerican.

Another problem with these things being associated with our government is that people who do not subscribe to the Christian god will feel that they will not be treated equivelantly. All that god stuff snuck into our government only about 50 years ago. It was not included by the founders of our country.

September 22, 2005 9:18 AM