Quote# 85074

The book of Revelation confirms we are headed toward a radical persecution of believers, as the kingdom of antichrist will kill innumerable amounts of people who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Already, Christians are considered by many to be less than human and as the cause of the world’s woes. It is very likely that as it was in the days of Rome, where Christians were sacrificed as objects of entertainment in spectator sports, that modern day alternative sports, like the WWF, are warming up an aggressive hostility that will ultimately culminate in televised Christian persecutions. Network executives will do anything for high ratings, and to a depraved people devoid of the Spirit of God, pay-per-view death games would quickly catch on.

Jason Kovar, Good Fight Ministries 99 Comments [12/5/2011 3:38:11 AM]
Fundie Index: 97

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 3 4 | bottom


Cry more, emo boy.

12/5/2011 2:17:30 PM


The book of Revelation confirms we are headed toward a radical persecution of believers

The Book of Revelation doesn't confirm squat. It's the unintelligible ravings of a lunatic. No one actually understands it. People just put any interpretation they like onto it.

12/5/2011 2:33:45 PM


as much as i'd love to see unreal tournament replace the carceral system (when i'm in a freeform capitalist mood)... no, ain't gonna happen again, bub

12/5/2011 3:16:36 PM


No non-Christian has ever been elected President*, and only a handful have ever gotten to Congress or the Supreme Court. About three in every four Americans are Christian. Who the hell will be doing the persecuting, exactly, and why are they so able to overpower you?

*Even if you're under the delusion that Obama is not a Christian, doesn't the fact that he apparently has to pretend to be Christian in order to get elected kind of make it clear who's in charge here?

12/5/2011 3:36:45 PM


No, I doubt we are going to see an all-Christian Hunger Games anytime soon. [If you don't know what they Hunger Games are, you should read more often.]

12/5/2011 4:05:49 PM

Burning Stake

The Book of Revelation was written by someone Thomas Jefferson considered to be "a maniac" ... Did I just blow your mind? I hope so.

Now please let this one piece of what, at the time, was common, apocalyptic literature, that is only being worshipped by Christian fundamentalists due to being considered important enough to stay in (apparently, the notion that it was "voted in" at Nicea in 325 AD is more of an urban legend than truth-at least, according to Wikipedia) an interesting historical piece of literature, and nothing more. Rome fell, Christians aren't being persecuted, now please move on to things Jesus spent most of his time talking about: helping the poor.

12/5/2011 5:44:29 PM


@breakerslion: You win an internets, good sir or ma'am.

12/5/2011 6:09:34 PM


Since they seem to want to be persecuted so much, fuck it, let's persecute them.

12/5/2011 6:09:34 PM


It's been the WWE for years as the World Wildlife Federation didn't wish to be associated with the vast wasteland of pro wrestling fans. Try to keep up, Jason.

12/5/2011 6:27:55 PM


I agree that Christians ARE being persecuted in other parts of the world (such as the Coptic Christians in Egypt) but in the West? Hell, no! You're the majority, the government bends over backwards to please you (tax breaks, anyone?) and your doctrine constantly manages to dictate policy, despite the intended high wall between church and state. So, Western Christians . . . give me a break.

Persecution is not being not allowed to kill everyone you disagree with/not being able to establish an oppressive theocracy.

12/5/2011 6:30:25 PM

Brendan Rizzo

@ Canuovea:

In the commenters' defense, I think they all said that before Anon-e-moose made his comment. As for Anon-e-moose, I really hope that you were exaggerating, good sir.

@ Wehpudicabok:

Wasn't Jefferson not a Christian? Considering his low opinion of religion in general and all... Now, it's true that no non-Christian has been elected president for the last 150 years or so, but you said "no non-Christian has [...] ever been President." Just a semantic nitpick.

12/5/2011 6:40:00 PM


Right, as much as this guy is a typical paranoid nutbag, I feel that as a (Dutch university student) wrestling fan I have to speak out a bit here.

First of all, regarding the sports aspect of things... these guys really are ballerinas, in the sense that they spend hours every day training their body to perform feats and take punishment that the human body simply isn't supposed to take. Try finding something that weighs roughly 150 lbs and is more or less the size of a human, then try throwing that thing around a few times, see how long you can pull it off before you get tired. Now imagine having to keep that up for five, ten or twenty minutes. Now while doing that, remember that you have to do it in such a way that neither you nor the object you're throwing around gets damaged. That's another thing you need to pay attention to. Wrestling may be fake in the sense that the results are predetermined, but the wrestlers themselves are still highly trained and highly skilled athletes.

12/5/2011 6:57:25 PM


As for WWE's approach to religion... the only major storyline featuring strong religious themes in the past few years was played out in 2006. It started as a basic "evil boss" storyline with Vincent McMahon fighting Shawn Michaels, who after a four year injury (the guy broke his back in a wrestling match after being thrown out of the ring and landing on a coffin) had returned in 2002 as a devout born again Christian. This was frequently mentioned in TV. After beating his boss at WrestleMania 22, the following PPV featured a tag team match, with Vince and Shane (his son) McMahon taking on the team of Shawn Michaels and God. During the buildup the McMahon family was often seen mocking Shawn Michaels' religion. *However*, from beginning to end it was very clear that the guy mocking Christianity was supposed to be the bad guy. That's the only mention of religion in WWE storylines in recent history: Evil boss mocks religion, and gets his ass kicked for it.

Finally, I think WWE deserves some respect for all the good it does. It fulfils more wishes for the Make-A-Wish foundation than any other company. It also used to fly wrestlers to Afghanistan and Iraq every year on their own dime to put on shows for the troops, and this year they continue this tradition on an army base in the US. The show is for military personnel only, with no tickets being sold to the general public. Furthermore they work with plenty of charities and awareness campaigns, including programmes promoting child literacy and youth voter registration. Hell, one of their wrestlers is even frontrunner in PETA's vegan athlete of the year award and...

...oh dear, I seem to have gotten myself stuck on a taller than average high horse.

12/5/2011 6:58:35 PM


Brendan Rizo,

True, true. I'll grant that. And I hope Anonymoose was exaggerating too...

12/5/2011 7:29:49 PM


[Already, Christians are considered by many to be less than human and as the cause of the world’s woes.]

As opposed to Christians who think that gays are less than human and the cause of the world's woes?

12/5/2011 9:15:36 PM


Why is it that Christians feel this need to be persecuted? I suppose because it strengthens their in-group mentality, their "us-against-them" feelings, and thus makes them more susceptible to the control of their pastors and leaders. "You better do what I say, because those others are out to kill you. They'd do it on TV if they could."
It's the same old control by fearmongering.

12/6/2011 12:50:10 AM


As far as I'm concerned, Christians are as human as anybody else. And yes that includes their fundies, though (like all fundies) they tend to incarnate some of the worst traits of humanity.

As for feeding Christians to lions, nowadays that would be considered animal cruelty. [Headache]Have you seen the fat content on the average Murikkan?[/Headache] :P

12/6/2011 6:15:56 AM


@Canuovea & Brendan Rizzo

It's not my fault that it's non-fundie Christians/other beliefs who don't commit terrorist, financial & sexual crimes.

So much for 'superior right-wing Fundamentalist Christian morals:







(and - by definition - right-wing Repubicans are God-fearing people; name me one member of the GOP who is an avowed Atheist?)

Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.

...now, what was that about 'exaggeration'? Oh, and as for this:


...you call this 'exaggeration'?


"Why is it that Christians feel this need to be persecuted?"

Fundies can't consider themselves True Christians™, unless they're receiving their daily dose of 'being badly done by'. So what the fuck is the likes of Jason here complaining about?! He should be rejoicing in his (imagined) future* scenario, a la "The Running Man" and/or "Battle Royale".

...oh, and has Jason ever wondered why professional wrestling in the UK (made popular via Saturday afternoons on "World of Sport" in the 1970s) died a death in 1985? Because people realised that what they were seeing wasn't a real competition. We don't like being lied to.


And yet, it was about that time in the mid-80s, in which Sumo was started to be shown on Channel 4; and a high-ratings winner it became. Grand theatre, and Shinto, nay, samurai-esque tradition & discipline. Yet, a real competition...!

As Boxing is. No 'storylines', 'bookers' or 'Kayfabe' required. A Competition.

WWE take note.

*- Or even something a la "Robot Wars":


...but on a greater scale, a la the film "Robot Jox" - in which Atheists vs. Fundies battle each other with mecha, and the loser (via a pre-fight signed legal document) has to agree with the winner, such as 'God doesn't exist, and therefore all right-wing fundies have to become Atheists' (as per that film's scenario, in which all territorial/resources disputes previously fought in wars, are now settled in one-on-one battles).

...oh, and as fundies are by definition anti-science, they have to rely purely on faith to build, power & control their mecha; no scientists, engineers etc allowed. [/sarcasm]


@Brendan Rizzo

"However, that is not the same as saying they're less than human. They have civil rights, like everyone else."

Ah yes...:

...and the right to twist, pervert and use the 1st Amendment for their own nefarious ends? Right. [/hyper-sarcasm]

The phrase 'With rights come responsibilities' It exists for a reason.

And Fred, Shirley & co are 'human'? Yeah. Because sooooo many others speak, act and think the way the WBC do. And everyone agrees with their actions and the motives behind such, amirite?

Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church. Shining examples of Humanity at it's absolute best.

Sorry to annihilate the argument of a fellow FSTDT commenter, but it has to be said: some 'arguments' can never justify their existence in the first place.

As the argument for denying Fred & co. their rights is impossible to question in any way whatsoever. Would any normal, decent, sane, human being so much as contemplate the notion of even thinking about behaving the way they do - least of all take advantage of the very rights they'd dare deny to others, in the name of their own unjustifiable 'beliefs'? How can they possibly justify what they do, and dare call themselves human beings? You tell me.

After all, Fred & co. could always just 'turn the other cheek', and all that jazz. It wouldn't kill them to be hyper-tolerant, neither. Just ask the Quakers.

Moral: The term 'Political Correctness'. It exists for a reason. As do the words 'Tact' and 'Diplomacy'. They're what separates we civilised humans from the animals. PROTIP: Even animals in the wild don't behave like Fred & co.

There's a first time for everything. That phrase exists for a reason too. Now how about an amendment in the Constitution that makes it illegal for anyone to use the Constitution for unjustifiable purposes - in any way shape or form - and in doing so, their human rights are stripped from them, as human beings would never think of perverting the US Constitution in this way.. The WBC being the precedent, the 'first thing', to base such upon.

12/6/2011 8:46:00 AM

Brendan Rizzo

@ Anon-e-moose:

Oh, I agree with you on that. Fundies are despicable. I no longer give them the benefit of the doubt because they have never ceased to fall even lower than I could have previously imagined. So yes, I believe the worst of them. However, that is not the same as saying they're less than human. They have civil rights, like everyone else.

12/6/2011 9:39:36 AM

"modern day alternative sports, like the WWF"

Now I remember why I love this site so much.

12/6/2011 9:46:36 AM



Annihilate my argument? No no, misunderstand my argument. Nothing you said makes fundies of any stripe less then human.

Fundies tend to be despicable human beings. Tend to be. At least from most people's standards. You have managed to show that, and only that.

And for some reason you jumped from me saying that fundies are human to me saying that fundies are "shining examples" of humanity. I don't know where you got that.

As for rights. I think they aren't rights if they do not apply to every citizen equally. And that evaluation has to take place without bias. Without bias, interesting phrase that. So, are fundies citizens of the country that espouses these rights? If yes, they deserve those same rights. Of course you could argue that they aren't human, or are "less human" than the rest.

Whether they are human or not or less than human, and worthy of the same civil rights as anyone else, depends on your definition of "human". And you have to detach that judgment from bias.

I don't trust you, fundies, or anyone else to make that judgment call, simply because I don't trust anyone to be without bias. Hence, lowest common denominator.

12/6/2011 2:45:55 PM


Uh, no, it's the other way around. It's atheists and homosexuals that are oppressed by fundamentalist Christians and treated by them as less than human and the cause of the world's woes.

12/6/2011 4:54:12 PM


It takes a very special sort of persecution complex to believe that this will literally happen in modern day America.

12/6/2011 5:58:01 PM



Seems that we in the UK can make that judgement call then - and have the cojones to arm the basis of our society - via legal teeth - to force civility, to prevent the very Thoughtcrime committed by Fred & co every nanosecond of every day.

Even if the ban on their entry to the UK via our previous Home Secretary Jacqui Smith was lifted, the WBC would have to obey a little something called Section 5 of the Public Order Act: essentially if anyone uses language (either verbal or on placards.posters etc) in public that is purposely designed to outrage morals & decency, and especially enrage anyone (including certain groups in the community) to commit violent acts against such, the perpetrators of such verbal outbursts (for any reason) will have the police round there, be cuffed & stuffed, and round the police station & in a cell before their feet could fucking touch

Our police have a Zero Tolerance policy towards Hate Crimes/Speech, and anyone who uses such for any reason.

Outside of Magna Carta and the EU Convention on Human Rights, the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution has no jurisdiction in the UK, short of the US Embassy in London. And somehow, I doubt the ambassador, staff, CIA agents etc there would tolerate Fred & co. within their boundary.

PROTIP: There is no Westboro Baptist Church equivalent in the UK.

Our laws that force Political Correctness, and prevent Thoughtcrime. So the UK's own inherent hyper-secularism (and cynicism in general; 'Question everything') that has created a form of 'bias' against any form of fundieism to be allowed to exist - including our media (OFCOM, thus no Faux News UK), to say nothing of our political system (no UK 'GOP', natch). I have no problem with that.

Problem, Canuovea?

12/7/2011 9:06:01 AM



I'm a subjectivist, more or less, and as such, the UK chooses not to give the right of free speech to their citizens. Fine by me.

Or, maybe they make it more of a privilege than a right in the UK. Not sure I'd want to live there, though. I mean, one day they may decide that atheists speaking out are offending public decency and should be arrested if they don't shut up.

Also, I'm not American.

Nonetheless, I dislike the idea of forcing people to behave in a certain way when they aren't causing serious harm. All the Westboro people do is make fools of themselves and demonstrate, exactly, why we should not accept their rhetoric. You don't have that in the UK, do you? Good thing the USA provides plenty of examples then!

Finally, what disturbs me the most about your post is the use of the word "thoughtcrime." I know Orwell was British, but seriously, that is just scary. I know that usually the first person to call "fascist" loses a debate, but anyone calling certain thoughts a crime is getting pretty close to the line.

12/7/2011 10:50:28 AM

1 2 3 4 | top: comments page