I passed a milestone today.

The one zillionth time I’ve heard somebody say this:

“What was once perhaps in the background has emerged to the surface: a deep divide between White, Black, Latino, and Christians of varying backgrounds. With estimates that 4 out of 5 White Evangelicals voted for Trump, many non-White Evangelicals feel betrayed.”

I want to celebrate this occasion.

So I will respond to these sentiments with an appropriate level of seriousness.

Anybody remember the 2008 election?

Anybody remember the 2012 election?

Barack Obama ascended to the most prestigious, most powerful position on Earth.

It was mentioned, at least twice, that he was the ‘First African American President’.

After the election my opinion was…

…and you can quote me…

“So what?”

It really, really, really, really, really, really, really

REALLY

doesn’t really matter what color the President is, really.

…except to racists.

I heard the gleeful, gloating racists proclaim that Obama’s election had overcome racism.

Our nation elected a black guy, proving ourselves to be progressive, enlightened thinkers.

There were no sanctimonious sermons lecturing non-white Christians to be sensitive.

Nobody lamented, “…many white Evangelicals feel betrayed.”

Had I heard such a sermon, I would have responded appropriately:

But you know what?

This election, I am starting to feel a little betrayed.

(Pastors, stop reading now because I’m a white guy and it doesn’t matter how I feel.)

…are the pastors gone…?

…okay…good.

I’m feeling betrayed by white Evangelical pastors.

Statements like this:

How can White Evangelicals shut their eyes to the reality of a man (Trump) who seemingly allows and even perpetuates painful and ongoing wounds that many of our brothers and sisters deal with each day—prejudice, harassment, marginalization, violence, and rejection?”

Sort of seem ‘stabby-in-the-backy’ to me.

Apparently, this spiritual leader is not aware…

…some Non-White Evangelicals also voted for Trump.

Think we’re going to see a ‘shame-on-you-Black-Christians’ article?

NOBODY voted for Trump in hopes that he will perpetuate ‘prejudice, harassment, marginalization, violence, and rejection’.

A few people voted Trump because we think children should not be assassinated before they’re born.

(And it doesn’t matter what color the babies happen to be.)

The non-Trump option thinks child-murder is a shining example of liberty.

But, I noticed something when I looked closely at Hillary…

…she is white!

What if  I voted for Hillary?

Would all these non-white evangelicals STILL be wounded and scared?

No?

So maybe this doesn’t have anything to do with skin color…

Never mind…

Here is my final statement.

It comes directly from a mega-super-enlightened-ultra-spiritual pastor:

“It is also inappropriate to judge the reason for people’s pain or to tell them how to process this election.”

Agreed.

So let’s encourage our pompous, self-righteous pastors to shut their mouths.

Christian Comedy for Hire

If you like my blog even a little bit, then you should know I do Christian Comedy live shows! It’s all the faith and fun you read here, but on stage, it’s even more hilarious. Hire me for your next corporate bash, church event, or school function, and let’s make it a night of laughs with my unique brand of Christian Comedy!

three little pigs

Three Little Pigs

Three Little Pigs in Shakespeare is available as a children’s book. Get the illustrated story based on my viral comedy routine from Amazon.  Makes a great gift for the word-lovers in your life. 

You gonna keep lurking forever or are you gonna join this exclusive clique?
Stop procrastinating. Click This.

Leave a comment

263 Responses

  1. Well-written. As a Pastor I never place supremacy in public or the pulpit of one candidate over another. I watched within my own denomination people cast aside brotherhood/sisterhood and years of friendship over this election. Process it how you will, outside the church. The church is for the gospel, not the ballot box.
    Just one average, middle-class, white conservative Pastor’s opinion…

  2. @Wally.

    So, John..why are you, Ark, and Mike women hating pigs and how do you justify it.

    Hi, can you give just one example of why you believe I am a woman hating pig please?

    Just one will do.

    Thanks,

    1. In your case it would be your rather unnatural fixation on the past some of people especially the past sexual sins of women

      Or maybe your already referenced post

      Or your unwavering back slapping support of John and Mike your pig friends

      You pick

      The point is you and your friends think you have free rein to say anything you wish….because.well..you are right after all and we probably deserve it anyway

      1. Again, can you identify specifically the case in point where I have made reference to any woman’s ”past sexual sins”, Wally.

        And then explain how this makes me a woman hating pig.

        1. So, it bothers you when you feel forced to explain your own life when the conduct of another might really be the issue.

          Interesting

          But, no I won’t play the interrogation game. Your actions speak for themselves, and those of your friends.

          Not my problem really

          1. Bothers me? Once again you are not making any sense whatsoever.
            I cannot and will not speak for John or Mike but you leveled a rather vile accusation that I had an interest in womens’ past sexual sins.
            To me this sounds like you may have overstepped the mark here, Wally and have not only been caught lying but maybe also a degree of projection?

            I shall ask again.
            Please identify a single instance concerning this interest in past sexual sins of woman you are accusing me of that you seem to have developed a rather grubby fixation over?

          2. Hey nicely done how you turn that right around

            Bravo

            Hey if the shoe doesn’t fit don’t wear it

            I got confused and thought vague accusations and innuendo constituted good arguments

            Sorry teacher

          3. Another odd reply.
            Now you sound as if you are trying to cover your backside,Wally.
            A simply apology that you made a mistake, Wally would suffice.
            Do you have the balls I wonder that you alluded I don’t have to make one and simply say: ”Sorry, Ark.”

          4. Hi Buddy!

            Amanda is busy with a birthday bash for her youngest. She’ll be happy to post the screenshots to help jog your memory when she gets a chance.

            In the meantime… Remember YHWH.

          5. I am sure she will. But can’t you help Wally out Branyon in the meantime.
            Leave a link or something as he is fretting a little.
            Thanks awfully.

          6. Odd isn’t it, you make a statement that you would vote for Trump even if his rape accuser was your own daughter.
            Oops!
            However, she then goes to great lengths to assure the world, or at least your 15,000 followers, that it was merely a joke and you were laughing at me and therefore this makes it perfectly acceptable.
            Don’t worry, everyone,It was just to try to make Ark look an ass. Ha bloody ha, right?
            You are an odd duck , Branyan, you really are.

            And here’s poor old Wally getting his pants in a knot by accusing me ( erroneously of course) of a fixation of womens’ past sexual sins, and yet, he utters not a peep about how you, Amanda’s father, joked about the make -believe rape of your own kid.

            I wonder how you would write such a joke for one of your shows and how it would go across with your audience?
            Especially if one bears in mind that there is a very high probability that a number of woman in the audience have been raped.
            Do you think they would be rolling in the isle?

          7. And, that was not in reference to you, as you well know it.
            The dialogue was with McQ
            So, can we ad liar to your list as well, Amanda?

          8. Me a creep?

            Your own father makes a joke about you being raped and you think I am a creep?

            And you lambaste my morality?
            You are a piece of work.
            Gobsmacked doesn’t even come close as to how I sometimes feel after reading blog posts by the Branyan Duo

          9. Yes, Ark. People who ask strange women what “naughty sins” they’ve committed are way worse than my dad answering your loaded question with sarcasm.

            Every woman has a “creep” radar, and I guarantee that most of us feel more uncomfortable around a foul-mouthed manic depressive than a Christian comic.

            Creepy.

            You asked. I told.

          10. Aah, well if you wish to interpret something smutty in what I wrote there isn’t anything I can do, now is there?
            The facts however, are not the same as what you are so keen to accuse me of.

            First, Old, now manic depressive?
            What next, axe murderer?

            What truly is creepy is the level of documented cases of child molestation, pornography addiction, misogyny, wife beating, divorce, infidelity etc etc that is rampant among certain branches of the christian community and within some circles the extremely creepy efforts to keep this out of the public eye and to avoid prosecution.
            Hate the sin love the sinner and all that, suppose?
            Maybe you should focus your attention on these issues, rather than try to erroneously accuse me when your own father thinks it is acceptable to make rape jokes about his own daughter?

        2. And besides, even if it’ only my opinion, probably cause by the fact the evolution had predetermined that I would fell that way, it’s valid and doesn’t require reference or proof.

          In fact, if I say it often enough it becomes true, right?

          Maybe I should put in in bold face or something.That seems to help

          1. So in truth you were simply leveling your vile accusation out of pure ignorance and spite.
            Would this be a more accurate description , Wally?

          2. I’m sorry teacher. I really thought ignorance and spite was the standard by which valid arguments were measured.

            Perhaps if it’s not, you might be interested in actually reading this post you are commenting on and see how the arguments presented here simply prove the point of the post better than even the post itself.

            Oh, the irony.

          3. Well, they do say where there is no sense there is no feeling.
            I guess for you, telling lies is all part of the Christian Value System you are so keen to champion.
            Make you fell good inside does it?

          4. I am curious. Why did you say nothing about Branyan’s ”joke” over the rape accusation concerning his daughter?
            Do you think it was funny as well?

  3. Hi John
    op
    Wow. I am catching up in my blog reading. This is interesting. If you don’t mind, an open comment to three of your more vocal visitors.

    @ Ark, John Zande, and Mike(wherever you are, watching I am sure)

    Donald Trump is a degenerate pig. Yep, Sure enough he is. I didn’t vote for him as I am a Darrel Castle guy. Oh, and John Zande, for somebody who has many words of criticism about all things American, your not knowing who he is destroys any credibility you have to even speak to these issues and proves you are a God hating blowhard.

    Anyway, back on point. This is for all the ladies watching too. You know who you are. Yeah, those that howl in outrage unless it’s their non believing buddies saying things, then it’s all good. Yes, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, and a whole bunch of people have character issues and probably are women using, out of control misogynists.

    But what I see from you three is some of the most awful, sexist, condescending,misogynistic and morally outrageous behavior that I have ever seen in my entire life. What is wrong with you people? You all make me want to puke. But, I suppose all of your own “moral” codes no longer matter as long as you are speaking to people of faith. We deserve whatever we get. Got it.

    Suggestion for all three of you. Stand up straight. Sort of lock your legs some..not too locked though. Jump up and down real hard on your heels. Things might fall down that men need.

          1. Of course it’s my fault!

            Mea culpa mea culpa

            I am responsible for the fact that all you guys are pigs, just like the guy you are so upset about.

            Darn me

          2. I’m confused… are you upset with someone talking about pussy and treating women like shit?

            Well, get used to it… He’s your President.

          3. Yeah, and that’s my fault, and I must explain it.

            Which if you know how to read, is exactly the point of this post. I don’t have to explain or justify why anybody happens to be president of this country. Least of all to a politically illiterate blow hard who didn’t even know the name of the person I actually voted for. You sort of lose a lot of credibility when you apparently know nothing about what you criticize.

            But back to the point of the post. Why do I have to justify the election of anybody? Who exactly do I owe that to?

            Teach me John, as Ark and I have fallen out and I have been expelled from Ark U.

          4. Am I asking you to justify it, Wally?

            Odd, I don’t recall doing so.

            I do find the hypocricy of Evangelicals hilarious, but hey, I’m not at all surprised that 81% voted for Trump.

            I’m pleased, though, to hear you’re not a hypocrite. That’s honourable. Well done.

          5. I have seem the words…”how do you explain” “how will you explain”, or some variation over and over…from you

            Got it. You aren’t demanding and explanation

            You aren’t a much better teacher than Ark, as I am not learning very well

          6. Gosh, thanks for clearing THAT up!

            Well, afraid I must go for now.It’s off the cave for me for some good old fashioned indoctrination.

            Peace out.

            Oh…btw…I get to teach the young folks tonight. Knew you would appreciate that tidbit, John.

          7. You can teach your children the earth is 5,000 years old.

            That’s your right.

            Just understand though, my kids probably won’t employ your kids.

          8. That’s just as hilarious as it was a few weeks ago when you told the other Atheists on Ark’s blog to use it.

            Lol!

            I can see it now…
            The streets littered with all the Young Earth Creationists…

          9. HAHAHAHAHA! Seriously, when I saw you telling everyone it’s one of your favorite one-liners, I brought it up to my dad…

            Just imagine…

            On every job application in the world…

            “Name? Aliases? References? Have you ever been convicted of a felony? Oh, one more thing… How old do you think the earth is?”

            LOL!!!!!

          10. Perhaps that question should be asked more often in your country… especially to your politicians? 😉

            But again, you’re free to teach your kids the earth is 5,000 years old.

            Knock yourself out.

          11. I won’t tell them how old the Earth is because I don’t know. But I’ll be sure to warn them that, if they believe it’s younger than you do, they can just FORGET ABOUT ever being hired to review your self-published books.

            And they are DEFINITELY not qualified to type dozens of quotes into good reads.

            So they better choose very carefully.

          12. Oh, and that “won’t hire your kids” is not my line. Some woman said it years ago in response to your Creationists there. The full quote is quite good, but I forget who said it.

          13. Of course it’s “your line”… You’re the one who likes to use it. (Over and over and over.) Hey, maybe there’s a 10-year-old somewhere who would like to help you Google to figure out where you first heard that awesome zinger! Just make sure the 10-year-old agrees with your age for the earth first.

            Look–I did some of the work for you:

             photo Job Application edited_zpsttw0r3en.jpg

          14. You following the windbag’s lecture about how embryos aren’t really alive?

            I’m truly impressed by his dogmatic adherence to his chosen religious convictions. I’ve not been as loyal to my own faith. I’ve abandoned many ideas over the years after discovering they are stupid.

            JZ never gives up on the void!!!

          15. Odd thing is I have a normal job doing normal things. Just like most Christians I know

            Really odd is that some non believers work FOR me lol

            Really really odd is that i have never once stated what age I think the earth is

            As usual John Zande either lies or is slow in the head

          16. A good portion of the Branyan family is self-employed, too.

            Wealth generators. That’s what I’ll teach my kids to be. And then they can tell people like JZ the moon-landing was a hoax, just to watch them melt down and then scramble for a really good, witty come back. 😉

            (“Go ahead and teach your kids the Moon-Landing was a hoax! But… they are smelly!”) 😀

          17. NOTE: WE DID NOT compare notes before writing our responses!

            I just sent Wally a similar comment.
            Troll on!

          18. Touche. I’d settle for a chocolate milk.

            Here’s something even a little bit weirder: I actually changed my comment to say “moon hoax” at the last second. Before that, I had written something like, “My kids can tell people like JZ that the Earth is 6 months old.”

          19. You gotta just have fun with him, Wally. If your goal is to have a conversation, you’re just going to get frustrated. Here’s a fun response for next time an atheist asks you the age of the Earth:

            “I think the Earth is 60 seconds old. We were all created 1 second ago with a lifetime of memories in our heads.”

          20. Oh I am having fun John. I gave up hope for actual conversation with either on of those guys a couple of years ago.

            I do like that answer though..may have to keep on file for instant use in any situation. Cut and paste. They would understand that pretty good actually, the cut and paste, one comment fits all posts approach.

          21. Bear in mind that they are simultaneously telling each other that they don’t read this blog anymore.

          22. Well, technically John, that is probably a true statement. I rarely see much evidence the most of these guys actually have read what they are commenting on. Not to defend then, but technically they don’t read most of the blogs they comment on!

      1. Actually, John, something else is far more fascinating to me. Of course you won’t address it, because as we all know, none of you and your pals are here to answer anything. Mostly because we all know atheists don’t have anything to answer for, only Christians.

        Oh wait…I forgot that small problem of you and your friends acting like sexists, misogynistic pigs and offering no explanation for you own behavior but demanding others answer for Trumps.

        So, John..why are you, Ark, and Mike women hating pigs and how do you justify it.

        Ready set go

        Easy you can do this

        One two three

        Justify you OWN lousy behavior John

        Be a man for once

        I may be wrong when I said you do this, it may actually be beyond your abilities.

        Come up, all of you, with something that justifies your own horrible conduct.

          1. Always a question answered with a question.

            I
            Am
            not
            babbling.

            In
            fact
            my
            question
            is
            clear

            You just have no answer. There can be no answer as to why you used the very same conduct you condemn to condemn the conduct you are condemning.

            Wow. you are correct. It doesn’t make a bit if sense! When I put your tactic in writing it seems idiotic.

            Thanks for helping me clarify that.

          2. Are you saying I sexually assault women, am a habitual sexual predator, and treat them, women, like shit because I’m a narcissistic sociopath?

            That’s an interesting accusation, Wally.

  4. John,

    One more thing… when you said that you passed a milestone today, I was wondering is it was as painful as when I passed my kidney stone…

    Just wondering,

    Dave

    Genesis 29:2 (ESV) – As he looked, he saw a well in the field, and behold, three flocks of sheep lying beside it, for out of that well the flocks were watered. The stone on the well’s mouth was large,

  5. John,

    Sorry in advance for the lengthy rant to follow. But blessed is the man who endures to the end.

    Here is my problem with so many people freaking out over who the president is after every recent election:

    The Constitution provides for three co-equal branches of government, with checks and balances to keep any one branch from going too far in power.

    But somehow, people see the office of the President of the United States as the ruler of our country. He isn’t. He is the one who presides (hence the word President) over the Executive Branch. That is all, folks. His job is to execute the laws that the Legislative Branch puts into effect. He can attempt to veto them, but if it fails, he (at least according to his job description) is to execute the laws. Plus, he serves as the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. He is not the Commander-in-Chief of the United States, just the armed forces. He also gets to appoint Supreme Court Justices, with the approval of Congress.

    Sadly, the office has been ever evolving (heh) into a type of monarch, the very thing the Founding Fathers worked hard to prevent as they penned the Constitution. Recently, the foolish members of Congress voted to give the President discretionary powers he didn’t (and shouldn’t) have in making trade deals that amount to treaties. Approving treaties is one of the powers of the Senate, and they were fools to weaken their check and balance power.

    The Constitution provided for the Electoral College to select the President because of the limited role he had back then. The system was put together very well back then, with everyone having a say in the selecting of parts of the Federal Government. The Electoral College chose the President, the state legislatures chose the Senators, and the people chose the members of the House of Representatives, rightly called “The People’s House”. Only when the 17th Amendment was adopted in 1913 did the states lose their ability to send people to the Senate, changing it to a popular vote. It was very unwise to do so, as the states now could no longer recall a Senator who failed to accurately represent the interests of the state legislatures, or instruct him how to vote. It eroded the sovereign power of the states, where they are now mostly just artificial lines on a map, bowing to the power of the Federal Government.

    Yeah, yeah, not only am I a Bible nerd, but I am a Constitutional nerd, too. If more Americans knew their Constitution, and understood why the Founding Fathers (I love calling them that, if only to irk the liberals) set things up as they did, much of the craziness of modern politics would not be happening.

    Amendments to the Constitution were part of the original plan, and were made difficult to put in place by design. Many are good. No right-thinking person would oppose the first ten, the Bill of Rights, (oops… some liberals do… but I stand with the right-thinking part… pun intended). The 13th Amendment was essential to finally wipe out slavery, and was a very good thing. The 15th and 19th were important as well. The 16th was icky.

    But one of the most important Amendments, the one most forgotten (which is silly because of just how important it is!!!) is the 10th Amendment. This one is violated every day by the Federal Government.

    The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution says thusly:

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    Ka-chunk.

    The things the Federal Government has taken upon themselves to do, in addition to what is laid out in the Constitution, is unlawful. They are too numerous to attempt to list. But I do not need to. All I have to do is read the Constitution to see what the limited powers are that the Feds are entitled to. The rest is bogus.

    And that is the end of my lecture for today, as I have rambled far afield. I hope that someone, somewhere out there was edified by this short (yeah, right…) lesson in our founding document.

    Thanks for reading.

    Dave

    Isaiah 9:6 (ESV)

    For to us a child is born,
    to us a son is given;
    and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
    and his name shall be called
    Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
    Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    1. I’ll make it simple: he’s ALWAYS trying to prove that Christians are evil. Sometimes the journey is long; sometimes we wander, lost in repetition that almost make it sound like HE’S the unstable one. But the unwavering belief that it’s possible to find something to criticize in every, single religious post will always be his lighthouse. 🙂

          1. The title of the post is, “Pastor, You are the Problem.”

            So–either you were suggesting that pastors who criticize Christian Trump-supporters are correct.

            OR…You hijacked the thread and intentionally took it off topic.

            Do you want to let us know which it was?

      1. Sweet Cheeks –

        I see that the Superstitious Naked (from the waste down) Ape with the fedora is now curious about your children’s body parts. Wow.

        And Ark Garfunkle is into black female police officer voyeurism. Wow again. I feel my vote was wasted.

        ~CQW

        1. …I’m again going to need someone who is more experienced in “outrage” to tell me the proper response.
          When a stranger on the Internet makes a reference to my young daughter’s “pussy,” am I supposed to faint and then sue and then stand shirtless on the steps of courthouse holding a sign that says “END RAPE CULTURE?” Or do I have those out of order?

          (I’ll need Carmen or another Feminist to tell me for sure.)

  6. Dear cousin, while I fully understand the points in play here, in the spirit of lively (and civil) discussion I must disagree with a couple.

    Electing the first African American president was not a “so what” moment. It was history making. Much like Jackie Robinson made history as the first black professional baseball player but on the largest scale imaginable. African Americans used to be owned in our country. They were counted as 2/3rds of a human being in the constitution. That election gave black kids and adults hope for achieving something they never thought possible. I would also argue, those people aren’t racists for being excited that the president, for the first time, represents something they see in the mirror.

    My other point of contention (courteous contention, naturally), is the idea that NOBODY voted for Trump because he might perpetuate prejudice, harassment, violence, rejection and marginalization. Not everyone who voted for trump wants those things, obviously. Not a majority, not a high percentage, maybe not even a handful. But to say NOBODY is unrealistic. The KKK were voted for him. And I doubt their motives were 100% policy driven. Throughout the campaign, Trump used rhetoric to court the racist, xenophobic, and sexist vote. He also raised issues that resonated with a lot of Americans. But to some, those issues were buried underneath the angry rhetoric.

    That’s why so many people are upset. They are upset because they are scared. And unfortunately, fear is a very powerful thing.

    But these are fears you and I will never have to face. You will never be kicked out of the country because you are a Christian. I will never have to experience sexism the way women do.

    Toward those who are terrified of a future which could mean less rights or possibly being forced to leave their home they have made here, toward those people, i would “preach” compassion and understanding.

    1. Hey Josh,

      Your play is still one of the funniest theater pieces I’ve ever read…

      I’m not going to argue about the important historical significance of any presidential election. If Obama represents hope for anyone, of any color, then so be it. We pick our own role models. I’m not criticizing anyone for looking up to Obama.

      My point is that there were no preachers telling Obama voters to show patience while the losing side ‘mourns’. I don’t recall hearing anyone suggest that Obama voters had ‘betrayed’ their fellow Christians.

      My theory (and it’s just a theory) is that the KKK is fully aware of the impact their endorsement has on any political candidate. If the KKK wants to help one candidate, their best move is an enthusiastic endorsement of the opponent. You think there’s any merit to this idea or am I completely off base?

      To the upset and scared people in our nation. The most compassionate thing I can do is offer a measure of truth. The President cannot just kick citizens out of the country. It’s illegal. Citizens have rights. Christians, atheists, Muslims, and Zoroastrians are all safe. Black, white, yellow, red and lime green citizens cannot be kicked out of the country either. The fear is totally unfounded. The President works for the citizens of the United States. We are not his subjects.

      People living in the country illegally are not citizens. They are criminals. Compassion does not require ignoring the law. It is no secret that not EVERY immigrant enters the US with good intentions. Bad people slip in with the good people and it is the government’s job to protect the citizens from those bad people.

      There is, of course, the possibility that Donald Trump will step into the Oval Office, pull off his fake skin and reveal that he is a reptilian alien life form bent on destroying women, Muslims and everyone who voted against him. If that happens, I will stand in solidarity with everyone who rises up to overthrow his tyranny.

      1. All I have ever wanted from you is your willingness to stand with me and fight against green lizard alien tyrannical dictators. Now that I know you will, I’m at peace.

  7. Amen! That guy and his ideas – oy. People choose to be offended at all kinds of imagined monsters. Instead of coddling them, the Church needs to forget the “ministry to felt needs” and return to sharing the TRUTH and the ONLY solution to ALL that ails EVERYONE: God sent His Son to set us free from fear and death. Only when we are His can we have peace. Thankful the elections are over and the season of celebrating EMMANUEL is arriving!

    1. “Imagined monsters” is my evaluation of a lot of this stuff, too…

      See, I know what it’s like to be caught up in irrational fears. I know what it’s like to have my emotions lie to me. And the LAST thing I needed when I felt like my world was crumbling was for people to agree with all of my irrational fears.

      Eventually, I came to realize that the truth sets people free. And sometimes the truth is “You’re imagining the danger.” (Unless a person is currently breaking the law. In which case, I understand why they’re uncomfortable. lol.)

      For most of us though, we’re just caught up in sensationalism. That goes equally for the Christians who were utterly CONVINCED they should fear persecution when Obama was elected. Relax, wait a few weeks, and ask yourself whether it’s as bad as you thought. The truth is: our generation had to invent the term ‘microaggressions’ because actual aggression is in such short supply. The worst most of us have to deal with is internet profanity (and maybe a catcall?). But the #EveryDaySexism and #EveryDayRacism claims are grasping at straws.

      Any American who is afraid–like genuinely FEARFUL–for their lives needs to turn off the news for awhile and evaluate whether they still feel like victims when people aren’t constantly telling them they are one. Perspective is a powerful thing.

          1. Oh yes, that’ll never get out of hand… and no kid has ever committed suicide in US schools due to threats and abuse, have they?

          2. Kids commit suicide because they believe they’re nothing more than chunks of carbon.

            We’ve already covered that.

            But I don’t know what your hopeless worldview has to do with this thread? I’m just tired of seeing things posted by people ON BOTH SIDES as if 30 seconds of video showing people behaving badly is the same as a point.

            Do you need me to ask my Conservative friends for videos of black kids beating the crap out of white ones? Or can we agree it’s not relevant to whether or not it makes sense for people to literally be afraid whenever a politician is elected?

          3. It’s from believing that the opinions of other balls of carbon actually matter.

            That’s another thing that Naturalists will agree about. Words matter! (Though they can’t explain why…)

            Sorry, the teen suicide rate can’t be blamed on the people saying that Love is a person who made humans carefully, with a purpose. I’m actually shocked you wanted to bring up this topic again, when you couldn’t answer the question I asked multiple times months ago: how would you talk a suicidal teen off a ledge?

            I guess maybe the answer is, “Tell the teen his problems are all Trump’s fault.” lol.

  8. Just relax.

    Grab some pussy. Get a good handful. Assault that bitch, because, well, you can do it. It’s Okay. You have treat women like shit.

    “You have to treat ’em like shit.” (New York magazinemagazine, Nov. 9, 1992)

    And after you’ve had that pussy, get some married pussy… It’s explained how in “The Art of the Comeback

    Then let’s look the other way as David Duke lynches some niggers. They should never count money… or rent in any of our properties.

    “I have black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”

    And when that’s over, let’s write a cheque to ourselves from our “Charity” to buy that 6ft portrait of ME, ME, ME, ME, ME, ME.

    Enjoy your next 4 years, Y’all

    Do please keep the noise down, and when its all over, re-attach the phone lines and call us out here in the world and let us know what emergency aid to send so you can start your rebuilding.

    1. I’m not sure what rock you’ve been living under, JZ. But 125 million copies of 50 Shades of Grey seem to agree with Trump’s comment about treating women like shit. Evolution has given women a strange desire to be dominated, now hasn’t it?

      1. Just calm down.

        Grab some pussy.

        Literally, grab a woman by her pussy.

        Reach down and just grab it.

        Grab it hard.

        Grab that pussy.

        It doesn’t matter if its single pussy or married pussy.

        And fuck it if she doesn’t like it. You have to treat ‘em like shit.

        You’re allowed to.

        It’s Okay.

          1. Grab that pussy.

            It’s Okay, apparently.

            Do you have daughters with pussy’s for the grabbing… Or just sons to do the grabbing?

          2. In other words, “I don’t have an answer for you, MrsMc. I’m just going to keep posting this quote because the excited particles in my head tell me it’s wrong to treat women the way they fantasize about being treated.”

            I bet our Christian readers could explain why Trump was wrong better than that…

          3. You didn’t answer the question:

            Do you have daughters with pussy’s for the grabbing… Or just sons to do the pussy grabbing?

            But if you like, we can move onto your soon-to-be President’s belief that women “have to be treated like shit.”

            I’m guessing that’s between the sexual assaults.

          4. *rolls eyes*
            You guys with your loaded questions… Well, at least maybe Kevin or Jasmine or another reader might find the place in my last comment were I said “Trump was wrong.” That’s why *I* didn’t read 50 Shades of Grey.

            Odds are good that your wife did, though.

          5. You still haven’t answered the question.

            Do you have pussy grabbers, or pussy’s-to-be-grabbed?

            But tell me… Would you feel at ease with your daughter (provided she’s good looking, of course) being alone in the Oval Office with the man you voted for?

          6. I’m really not interested in any further interrogation from you, JZ.

            Here’s what you need to know:

            1. I didn’t vote for Trump. I voted for Darrell Castle. My dad didn’t vote for Trump, either: but he did check his name on the ballot in order to vote AGAINST Hillary Clinton.

            2. Having conversation about US politics with foreigners is getting old. I’m over it.

            3. If you want to take a crack at explaining WHY you’re so outraged by the kind of dirty talk which evolution/biology has programmed MILLIONS of women to be turned on by, then I’m all ears.

            Until then, you can wag your finger at my dad all you want to. I’m just going to “like” your next response.

          7. But tell me… How have you explained (or will you explain) to your children that their grandfather voted to elect a sexual predator… A predator who boasts about his sexual assaults?

          8. I’ll let you explain it to them, Windbag!

            “Donald Trumps enlightened self interest evolved differently from some other people’s. He didn’t choose anything. There is no free will. It’s just molecules and cosmic forces.”

          9. I’m afraid that doesn’t even begin to explain why you, John Branyan, consciously choose to elect a vindictive, sociopathic, pathologically lying, narcissistic, racist, sexual predator with multiple and severe personality disorders.

            Did you think assuming the Oval Office would somehow straighten him out?

            Does history tell us that the behaviour of sociopathic narcissists with multiple and severe personality disorders improves after they acquire enormous power?

          10. “I’m afraid that doesn’t even being to explain…blah blah…”

            You poor thing.
            I keep forgetting that you never realize when your arguments have burned to the ground.

            Your insipid ‘void’ of a worldview tells us that a ‘vindictive, sociopathic, pathologically lying, narcissistic, racist, sexual predator with multiple and severe personality disorders’ is not a free moral agent. He is a collection of mindless molecules. The chemistry is determined by the universe. Trump did not choose to be Trump. And I did not choose to elect him. Evolution did it. That’s it.
            Put that great big brain of yours to work for a microsecond and you should realize that moralizing about the predetermined eventuality of the Universe is futile. (But you won’t…instead, you’ll just keep blowing…like the wind…)

            If you were truly a rational thinker, you’d ditch atheism in favor of a belief with more room for philosophy.

          11. Nope, sorry, still doesn’t begin to tell me, or anyone, how you will explain to your grandchildren why you voted for a vindictive narcissistic sexual predator who believes women should be treated like shit.

          12. I know it doesn’t tell you anything.
            You’re incapable of rational thought.

            Does Donald Trump have free will?

          13. And there’s the predictable Straw Man pantomime.

            Have I ever said I don’t believe in free will?

            I believe my thoughts on the matter were made quite clear to you. I’m not generally interested in the subject as I see the term, Free Will, as only bearing significance in the religious mind as some sort of last ditched effort to find a home for whatever deity you want to believe exists.

            What I recall telling you, quite specifically, was that I don’t have a hard opinion on the matter, but, and it’s a big but, if you read the literature and review the experiments you would be led to believe (like most, if not all, neurologists today believe) there is no such thing. Indeed, for the last five years, ever since the technology became available, test after test has been conducted where the researcher can tell before the subject becomes consciously aware of their choice what their decision will be.

            That is a fact.

            Make of it what you may.

            That being said, I wouldn’t call myself a hard determinist. Evolutionarily speaking, there are enormous benefits to “automating” most decision processes.

            Thinking burns up a colossal amount of energy, it’s prohibitively expensive, so there are serious benefits to the organism (the species) in speeding that process up by falling back on established neurological pathways and patterns.

            It’s cheap, and it works extremely well on pedestrian decisions.

            So, if I had to feign interest in the subject and make an educated guess, I would say with a level of confidence that a very high percentage of decisions are pre-packaged, despite the illusion (delayed-cognitive-feedback) of an actual choice being made. This number could be as high as 99%, but who knows?

            When, however, we get into more complicated decision making, established patterns will certainly affect the cognitive processes, but as multiple parts of the brain are firing, parts not usually associated with straight up or down decision making (like the right supramarginal gyrus), I’d say there we actually do draw our decisions from something less-than-pure-determinism.

            The right supramarginal gyrus is where our capacity for empathy is housed, and I think even you would agree, there’s no great need to engage this part of the brain when deciding whether to buy white or dark chocolate.

            However, the right supramarginal gyrus lights up like a carnival when, for example, deciding whether or not put out that camp fire, drop that bomb on civilians, or donate to tsunami victims.

            In my mind, it’s not, therefore, black and white… Not at least as your simplistic worldview would want it to be.

            So, yes, you did decide to vote for a vindictive, sociopathic, pathologically lying, narcissistic, racist, sexual predator with multiple and severe personality disorders…. Including psychopathy.

            What I’m interested in is how you will explain this decision to your grandchildren… especially if they are ever raped by Donald J. Trump and they ask, “Why did you vote for him? Didn’t you know who he was?”

          14. Whew! I’m blown away!

            Here’s what I’ll tell my grandchildren:
            “My supramarginal gyrus determined that killing unborn children is more heinous than narcissism, lying, or unsubstantiated charges of sexual misconduct. Many other people’s supramarginal gyrus determined differently. In the long run, it’s irrelevant since morality is relative to individual brains.”

          15. There is no question to answer, Windbag. You haven’t told me what it is that cannot die.

          16. A foetus… you know, the thing you were talking about to rationalise your voting for trump.

            Now PLEASE answer the question… Or are we going to witness another John Branyan song and dance dioversion?

          17. I said babies. You said foetus. Either one can be killed.
            It’s your song and dance.
            You lost.
            But please, keep saying things. Keep blowing you useless bag of wind!

          18. Lesson No. 1: A zygote, a blastocyst, an embryo, and a foetus is in the womb.

            Not a baby… But we can start thinking that way at week 25 to 28.

            Can we move on now to you answering the question, please…?

            Or is it the Branyan Diversion Song and Dance?

          19. Lesson No. 1: A zygote, a blastocyst, an embryo, and a foetus are all living things which can be killed.

          20. Wrong.

            You cannot “kill” something that cannot “die,” so your stated reason for voting Trump is a fanciful delusion.

            Defined Human Life begins at the moment its twin, death, also springs into existence. Without death there is no life. The former begets the latter. The latter assigns meaning to the former. One delineates the other, and the definition of death is not in dispute. Death is when electroencephalography (EEG) activity ceases. That’s it. That’s death. It follows quite naturally therefore that the onset of defined human life is when foetal brain activity begins to exhibit regular and sustained activity, and for this reason, a foetus, until week 25, but more actually week 28, cannot “die.”

            It is literally impossible.

            You see, John, your problem here is you think “life” magically appears in the foetus.

            It doesn’t.

            At no stage does “life” magically appear in a zygote, a blastocyst, embryo, or foetus. Life began on earth 3.8 billion years ago and hasn’t been interrupted since.

            A foetus was never inorganic and suddenly becomes organic.

            For this reason, the only true method we have to distinguish the onset of a distinct, functioning human being is when the brain begins to exhibit sustain EEG activity, and this begins at around week 25, although it is not until 28 weeks till we see full bilateral synchronisation. That is when you may call the foetus “On.” After week 28 it can therefore be turned “Off,” and meet the legal, scientific and medical definitions of death.

            To argue anything to the contrary, and to use language such as “killing,” is patently absurd.

            (And if you want to see the legal/scientific/medical definitions of “death,” just say the word)

          21. Well, my right supramarginal gyrus lights up like a carnival when deciding whether or not to stop the development of blastocysts.

          22. Seriously, why?

            A few minutes ago you seemed to say this subject was so important that it outweighed everything and forced you to vote for a narcissistic sexual predator.

            Now…?

          23. Lesson No. 2: In sociopaths, it doesn’t function. Sociopaths, like Trump, cannot feel empathy.

            That is why he finds cheating and hurting other people so easy.

            So, I hope your happy now to know your one reason (as stated) for voting for that man is factually incorrect.

            Well done!

          24. He got you there, Dad! Sociopaths don’t feel empathy!

            So–technically, JZ’s supramarginal gyrus is THE SAME as Trump’s.

            That’s why JZ doesn’t feel empathy for dead babies.

          25. He’s dead wrong about the 25-28 weeks thing.
            Unless he SERIOUSLY wants to flip through the pictures and videos of babies born at 22 or 23 weeks and say they weren’t REALLY alive…

            As you know, this is the topic that boils my blood. Ark continues to insist you made a joke about rape like it’s the worst thing you can do. And they are denying the word “life” to babies like this: http://www.newsweek.com/babies-born-22-weeks-can-survive-medical-care-new-study-finds-329518

          26. Cells are alive.
            Viruses are alive.
            Everybody knows that.
            He is dead ended, again, and just won’t admit it. Coward. Faux intellectual. Insipid. Windbag.

          27. I don’t blame him. If I looked at those pictures and realized I was complicit in the deaths of MILLIONS of babies, I would beg a lawyer to tell me they weren’t really alive, too.

          28. In all seriousness, I understand the appeal of JZ’s perspective on everything. If he likes it, then that’s how it’s supposed to be! (Evolution!!!) But if he doesn’t like it–then anyone who disagrees is a sociopath.

            I can see definite benefits to seeing the world that way.

            Again–I don’t need to keep reasoning with people about why a 6-week-fetus should have more rights than a dandelion.

            I can just tell the Pro-Choice people their brains don’t work.

          29. Apparently, he is done blowing now.
            It seems that sociopaths should be held accountable for their non-functioning supragyrowhatchacallit.

            He is astoundingly inconsistent.
            I may have to reconsider his nickname. Even wind serves a purpose…

          30. It’s not inconsistent! He is the barometer of right/wrong!

            Whenever humans disagree about something, JZ is the tie-breaker. Just ask HIM which group is supported by science and which group is simply unsound.

            I like it!

          31. Right. I get it.
            My point is that he is undermines his own arguments. He is refuting the statements he made earlier in the same conversation. JZ disagrees with JZ. How can he possibly break ties between himself?

          32. Whatever the particles in his head are doing RIGHT NOW is the Truth…

            It’s ever-shifting.

            You wouldn’t understand.

            You’re not the barometer of Right/Wrong.

          33. This is me your talking to now.
            You think he really believes the stuff he says?

            I don’t. I think he knows he’s lost but his pride keeps him from confessing. I couldn’t bring myself to keep going and going after I’ve imploded. I might not admit I was wrong, but I would slink quietly away.

          34. I can’t even know for sure that you and I are seeing the same thing when we look at the color “blue.” So I can’t say what he really believes. I can’t think like a godless person.

            So who knows?

            Meanwhile, when he gave that long (long, long) explanation of how he never said “free will doesn’t exist” but experts believe free will doesn’t exist and he leans toward free will not existing but free will might exist, but he never said it exists or that it doesn’t exist… When I read that long, obviously complicated and not-black-and-white answer, I thought to myself: There’s hope yet for this man to understand that not everything fits inside his tiny little hats. 🙂

          35. All part of a living system, John.

            To repeat: A foetus was never inorganic and suddenly becomes organic.

            At no stage does “life” magically appear in a zygote, a blastocyst, embryo, or foetus. Life began on earth 3.8 billion years ago and hasn’t been interrupted since.

            A virus is a complete organism. A foetus until week 28 (but let’s err on the side of caution and say 24 weeks) is not.

            “When the coordinating and individuating function of a living brain is demonstrably present, the full human organism exists. Before full brain differentiation, only cells, organs, and organ systems exist, which may potentially be integrated into a full human organism if the brain develops. After brain death what is left of the organism is once again only a collection of organs, all available to us for use in transplantation, since the full human being no longer exists.” (Professor Goldenring, New England Journal of Medicine, “Development of the Fetal Brain)

            An organism can die… and the definition of death is not in dispute.

            In 1979, the Conference of the Medical Royal Colleges, “Diagnosis of death” declared: “brain death represents the stage at which a patient becomes truly dead.”

            This was updated in the 1980s and 1990s to state that brainstem death, as diagnosed by UK criteria, is the point at which “all functions of the brain have permanently and irreversibly ceased.”

            Further still updated in 1995 (to present), “It is suggested that ‘irreversible loss of the capacity for consciousness, combined with irreversible loss of the capacity to breathe’ should be regarded as the definition of death’

            This is mirrored in US law:

            U.S’s Uniform Determination of Death Act (§ 1, U.L.A. [1980]) states: “An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory function, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead.”

            It is also mirrored in Australian law:

            The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Statement on Death and Organ Donation define death as: a) Irreversible cessation of all function of the brain of the person; or b) Irreversible cessation of circulation of blood in the body of the person.

            So, John Branyan, the question stands: How can you kill something that cannot die?

            You did say something was being “killed,” didn’t you?

            So tell me.

            How can you kill something that cannot die?

          36. No, John Zande, the question does not stand. Mess around with the definition of death all you want. I’ve answered your insipid demand for my voting rational.

            You’ve responded by explaining that babies can’t die.

            ANYONE who isn’t sold out to atheism can recognize that you remain, as always, nothing but a useless wind.

            http://i.giphy.com/fD8aSIg2LwXyE.gif

          37. ”Mess around with the definition of death all you want…”

            LOL! Yes, John, I write the legal/medical/scientific definitions of death for the US, the UK, and Australia/New Zealand.

            You got me!

            And sorry, but I’m afraid the question does stand, starring you right in the face.

            You used the language, so please back it up in a rational and coherent manner:

            How can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?

          38. You made the most recent Podcast, JZ!
            It was posted this morning.
            Your insipid, useless rants were actually germane to the conversation we were having.

            I remain hopeful that the spark of reason will penetrate your hardened stubbornness.

          39. Be sure to respond if you ever recognize that your moronic question has been answered many times.

            Enjoy the podcast!

          40. Has it?

            LOL!

            Must have missed it.

            All I saw was the typical Branyan Song and Dance Diversion

            Please, answer it again so I can read it….

          41. No.
            I’m driving to a gig. (Successful, evangelical comedian y’know).

            Enjoy the podcast!

          42. Oh, and do be sure to answer the question…. when you come up with answer, of course

            How can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?

          43. How can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?

            “When the coordinating and individuating function of a living brain is demonstrably present, the full human organism exists. Before full brain differentiation, only cells, organs, and organ systems exist, which may potentially be integrated into a full human organism if the brain develops. After brain death what is left of the organism is once again only a collection of organs, all available to us for use in transplantation, since the full human being no longer exists.” (Professor Goldenring, New England Journal of Medicine, “Development of the Fetal Brain)

          44. The timing and physical development of neurons, dendrites, and axons with synapses between them (capable of carrying electrical impulses) is rather well known… And I have absolutely no confidence at all that foetal development will suddenly alter from its 1.5 million year old gestation pattern where brain activity commences at week 25, and full bilateral synchronisation kicks in at week 28.

            So, the question remains: How can you turn something “Off” that is not “On”?

            How can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?

            You want to use that type of language then great… Rationally justify it, like an adult, using facts.

            “But when does the magical journey of consciousness begin? Consciousness requires a sophisticated network of highly interconnected components, nerve cells. Its physical substrate, the thalamo-cortical complex that provides consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place between the 24th and 28th week of gestation. Roughly two months later synchrony of the electroencephalographic (EEG) rhythm across both cortical hemispheres signals the onset of global neuronal integration. Thus, many of the circuit elements necessary for consciousness are in place by the third trimester.” (Prof. Christof Koch 2009)

            And here’s the so-called “Father” of the forced-birth crowd, Jack Willke, supporting my position.

            “Since all authorities accept that the end of an individual’s life is measured by the ending of his brain function (as measured by brain waves on the EEG), would it not be logical for them to at least agree that individual’s life began with the onset of that same human brain function as measured by brain waves recorded on that same instrument?” (Dr. Jack Willke, Abortion: Questions and Answers)

            There it is, in black and white from an anti-abortionist.

            The funny part is, Willke had no idea when he said this that he was drawing his words based on false forced-birth factoid. A Japanese research paper had been mistranslated and Willke (and others) leapt on it… Only to accidently confirm precisely what the facts actually are.

            Ooops!

            So, until you can demonstrate how you can “kill” something that cannot “die” I’m afraid the subject is closed to you and your fact-less whining.

          45. I’ve read lots and lots and lots about human development.

            I’m not interested in reading your ramblings on the subject.

            You’re playing with words to try and justify what ALL HUMANS (who aren’t sociopaths) know instinctively: the loss of a fetus is the death of a human.

          46. You’re begging your own question with the way you asked it. You think that because you shared a couple of quotes, that the babies in all of the pictures I’ve shared aren’t really alive. They couldn’t be killed.

            And that’s why people voted for Trump. They’re tired of trying to reason with people like you who are in denial. People who look at these photos and are completely unmoved.

            Gross!

          47. The FACT is that doctors don’t define person hood. But keep telling yourself they do so that you can justify being a COWARD who won’t go to one of those grieving mothers and explain that her baby didn’t actually “die.”

          48. Here’s another FACT, in case Wally is still reading.

            There are three different ways people often argue for defining personhood: the genetic view, the embryologic view, and the neurological view.

            JZ is engaging this conversation as if the “Neurological View” is cut-and-dried. Set in stone. He wants to pretend that EVERYBODY AGREES people are alive when their brain does certain things and they are dead when their brain stops doing those certain things.

            But that’s not the consensus at all.

            Mostly because anyone who has watched a 12-week, human fetus kicking and spinning in the womb knows how utterly stupid it is to suggest it’s not possible to kill it.

          49. Fact: John Branyan used the word “Killing.”

            Fact: Neither you nor John Branyan can rationally justify that language use.

            Fact: Until you can tell me how you can “kill” something that cannot “die,” this subject is closed to you.

            Sorry.

          50. My son or daughter was in embryo stage when he/she died in November of 2012.

            My sister-in-law lost TWO, tiny human babies at less than 12 weeks gestation.

            My aunt took donuts to work and announced her third pregnancy at 10 weeks…the same day she went in for a ultrasound and learned HER BABY DIED.

            I’m sure you’ve already been told before that the American College of Pediatricians affirms that life begins at conception–so you’re already prepared to call all of the members there “quacks” or “right-wing-extremists” or something else that helps you sleep at night.

            But here’s a link to their abstract anyway.

            https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins

          51. “The American College of Pediatricians concurs with the body of scientific evidence that human life begins at conception. Fertilization. Scientific and medical discoveries over the past three decades have only verified and solidified this age-old truth. At the completion of the process of fertilization, the human creature emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is not one of personhood but of development.”

          52. Religious quacks, yes!

            Here’s what rationalwiki has for them:

            The American College of Pediatricians (ACP) is a wingnut collection of pediatricians who espouse a socially conservative and “family values” agenda in opposition to the pediatric mainstream that, in their view, has a liberal bias. The SPLC has described it as a hate group.[1]

            They adopted the strategy of picking a very official-sounding name so that conservative information outlets could cite them and still sound smart, and to provide confusion to unsuspecting people. For those looking for a more mainstream body of pediatricians, one can turn to the similarly-named American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), which is the group the ACP split from.

            Good for you… citing a recognised hate group.

            Persuasive.

          53. Your “fact” is that babies can’t be killed until somewhere around 28 weeks. That’s not a fact. It’s your wishful thinking, so you don’t have to explain why you’re such a disgusting coward.

          54. To actually suggest babies in the womb can’t be “killed” until some arbitrary, neurological line is bordering on psychotic.

            Blinded by your godless religion.

          55. You are complicit in the genocide of millions of humans, based on an arbitrary line of discrimination being bolstered by a handful of people who already agree with you.

            “They’re not really alive! They can’t be killed!” Nonsense. Fetuses die every day. Because you’re a heartless monster.

          56. No, a human organism did not “die.”

            Until week 28 (but let’s say week 24 to be on the safe side) it cannot “die.”

            It is, quite literally, a physical impossibility.

            Fact.

          57. Let’s let Professor Goldenring, a leading figure in the anti-abortion movement, explain this (as published in New England Journal of Medicine, “Development of the Fetal Brain):

            “When the coordinating and individuating function of a living brain is demonstrably present, the full human organism exists. Before full brain differentiation, only cells, organs, and organ systems exist, which may potentially be integrated into a full human organism if the brain develops. After brain death what is left of the organism is once again only a collection of organs, all available to us for use in transplantation, since the full human being no longer exists.”

            As you can see, you’re just making irrational noise.

            So, last chance, tell me how you can “kill” something that cannot “die,” or just accept this subject is closed to you…. And you can happily retreat to your fact-less “wingnut” literature.

          58. I’m glad you didn’t answer that question (for your sake).

            If Gallup asked Americans whether those pictures showed “dead babies,” I guarantee that the people saying “no” would be in the minority.

            I’m done with you.

          59. To help drown out your screaming conscience. You should thank me.

            And to think you pretend to be outraged by the phrase “grab a pussy!” You are A THOUSAND TIMES more horrible.

          60. I’m sure Trump was just talking about using forceps to “grab” the genitalia of potential-humans who have only been growing for about 24 weeks.

            So, no harm done.

          61. Yes Amanda, I was just doing some catching up. This is a pointless conversation, as John Zande in the past has failed to address why he takes such cold glee in the murder of children.

            He has additionally failed to explain where the line between murdering babies, and those people like him deem useless to his evolved society is…so I really have zip to add to this.

            Your pictures have certainly sealed the deal. I would love to see some effort to explain to those mothers how they are sorely mistaken, and that the baby they hold didn’t really die.

            But, it’s ok for John to say or do whatever he wants; after all he is just a clump of neurons, or cells, or whatever his term of the moment is, driven solely by his evolutionary state with no control of his own actions.

            Which still confuses me as to why he has a moral problem with anything in the first place. So, because I am so stinking confused…I really can’t add much to this muddled position he has taken.

          62. He doesn’t really take cold glee in murder. But I understand how hard it would be to look at the pictures and make them mesh with my godless worldview.

            Naturalism requires you to deny everything you think you know. All of reality can be reduced to particles…including the particles that make you feel like that statement is pretty cold!

            The only thing that will save JZ is if he stops rejecting everything that has a whiff of spirituality. Only THEN can he embrace things like love, compassion, and justice…and he can mourn for those dead babies like a NORMAL, healthy human.

          63. Perhaps so, perhaps so.

            Those were just….hard to look at.

            Then perhaps I should rephrase my question.

            @John..how CAN you see those…and feel nothing?

          64. This boy’s name is Hunter Ridley.
            He was a unique person from the moment he was conceived. People shouldn’t be pulled apart violently for any reason.

            I just wish Hunter’s parents could read your disgusting rationalizations for why it would have been fine to make a Baby Smoothie out of him (and his twin sister, Darcy), in certain circumstances.

            https://lifesite-cache.s3.amazonaws.com/images/made/images/remote/https_s3.amazonaws.com/lifesite/Miscellaneous/premature_prayers_645_484_55.jpg

          65. This is Celeste. On a blog post, a family friend said, “She lived for three hours after her birth.”

            Maybe you should go leave a comment on that blog explaining to her parents that Celeste didn’t really “LIVE,” because at 22-weeks, her brain wasn’t developed enough to qualify as a living human organism… They’d be glad to know their daughter didn’t really die.

            https://melaniepritchard.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/corinna-and-celeste-2.jpg

          66. FYI, if you’re ever having a conversation with someone who’s actually teachable: I learned about bilateral synchronisation when I was teaching special education. That process is “atypical” in the brains of people with autism…

            So…they’re not FULL human organisms, I guess.

          67. True, with extreme artificial intervention, a foetus beyond a certain stage of development can be delivered prematurely and with varying degrees of success survive.

            It can’t survive by itself.

            You are confusing viability with an actual “human organism.”

            Viability begins (at the very earliest) at 24 weeks but requires mechanical ventilation, intravenous feeding, etc.

            The earliest baby to have ever survived premature birth was born at 21 weeks and 6 days. The generals stats are, 23 weeks = 17% survival rates, 24 weeks = 39%, 25 weeks = 50%, 26 weeks = 80%, 27 weeks = 90%, 28-31 weeks = 90-95%, 32-33 weeks = 95%

            You see, there’s a very good reason why the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the U.S. National Library of Medicine call natural abortion after week 20 “preterm deliveries,” while before that date it is labeled “miscarriages.” There is a line.

            So, we are talking about a complete human organism… and I’ll let the anti-abortionist, Professor Goldenring, a leading figure in the anti-abortion movement, explain this (as published in New England Journal of Medicine paper, “Development of the Fetal Brain):

            “When the coordinating and individuating function of a living brain is demonstrably present, the full human organism exists. Before full brain differentiation, only cells, organs, and organ systems exist, which may potentially be integrated into a full human organism if the brain develops. After brain death what is left of the organism is once again only a collection of organs, all available to us for use in transplantation, since the full human being no longer exists.”

            See that: “When the coordinating and individuating function of a living brain is demonstrably present, the full human organism exists… After brain death what is left of the organism is once again only a collection of organs, all available to us for use in transplantation, since the full human being no longer exists.”

            Quite clear, isn’t it?

          68. I saw that you were still justifying chopping up tiny humans in the womb, and so I didn’t read past your first sentence.

            I’ve actually carried life in my womb three times, JZ. So I’ve done my research. I don’t need some disgusting abortion apologist trying to clear his conscience by rambling at me.

          69. 1. Nobody is reading these comments.
            2. He lost with his ‘free will’ answer.
            3. He REALLY does know right and wrong.
            4. He is without excuse because his consciousness convicts him.

            We need to get another nickname. The wind is at least occasionally useful. Help me think of something that never serves any purpose.

          70. Let me know when you want to talk about the facts.

            You guys brought up the subject, not me, so please now address it in a rational and coherent manner.

            How can you kill something that cannot die?

          71. So you’re fine with all abortions before week 24?

            Good.

            I will expect you to now change your position on the matter and regret your decision to vote from Trump, knowing now it was in error.

            And just so you know, only in absolutely extreme cases are any abortions performed after week 20, and this typically concerns severe risk to the mother’s life. Post week 20 abortions account for 1.2%, and the vast majority of that 1.2% (+80%) are performed in that week, 20.

            As Susan Terkel in the book ‘Abortion – Facing the Issues,’ says, very few physicians are willing to perform abortions after that time.

            I would agree with that stance. We should err on the safe side… and this is in-line with the majority of abortion legislation.

            However, it is not until week 28 until the foetus has full bilateral synchronisation. Until that moment, there is no human organism.

            It’s as simple as that.

          72. I’m fine with Donald Trump saying “Grab women by the pussy” too.
            So I don’t need to change my position.

            Enjoy the podcast!

          73. The facts are:
            1. You’ve made the argument that morality is based on what a majority of humans think/believe.

            2. You’ve made the argument that people who don’t “feel” like the rest of humans do are broken. Malfunctioning. They’re just sociopaths.

            3. The vast majority of humans know the “fetuses aren’t really alive” treatise that you delivered (as if we haven’t all heard it before) is a crock.

            So–either you’re rationalizing what you know instinctively is wrong.

            OR, you’re a sociopath.

            Here’s another picture of HUMAN BEINGS who DIED.

            http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f10/468477d1374497040-woman-carrying-quads-terminates-two-then-remaining-two-die-ivf.jpg

      2. Now hang on, I’m going to stand up for readers everywhere on this one.

        Reading a fictional book has nothing to do with how a person wants to experience life. I read Lord of the Flies, but I don’t want to be taken to an island and left to fend for myself with a bunch of my friends, and then start a creepy new society and kill one of my friends…

        50 Shades of Grey may not be literary excellence, but to suggest that every woman who read that book is some hedonistic floozy who likes to have her privates grabbed without permission is a broad and ridiculous claim.

        1. Very true. Not every woman who read the book likes to have her privates grabbed without permission… In fact, NO woman wants to have her privates grabbed by a fat, bald, no-armed homeless guy with missing teeth. (RAAAAPE!)
          But Christian Grey?… Or that hot guy in the bar who reminds them of him?

          Sorry, I’m just the messenger. LOTS of women are turned on by rape porn. Look, I admit I don’t have a lot of first-hand experience picking up women. lol. But I’ve read a fair number of blog posts from “Gamers” who insist that the worse they treat women, the more action they get. Women don’t want to be treated “like shit” on a conscious level. But when a rich guy who’s married to a model tells you how he has bedded his probably hundreds of conquests, he probably knows what he’s talking about.

          My point to JZ, of course, was that an Atheist like him has a hard time explaining WHY that’s a bad thing.

      3. I would also make the claim that no woman COULD have her privates grabbed by a fat, bald, no-armed, homeless man with missing teeth. You know, since he doesn’t have arms. Also, I wouldn’t necessarily site “Gamers” blog posts as reliable news sources. They become “Gamers” because the real world doesn’t work out so well for them. But I get your point. JZ is a real gem. Nothing like trying to prove a point by being worse than your “bad” example.

        1. Lol! I totally thought of the no-armed thing after I hit send. I hoped you’d miss it… Shucks.

          Also, not VIDEO Gamers. I mean Pick Up Artists who blog about the hook-up “Game.” Google “Red Pill” or “Château Heartiste” blog.

          But, word to the wise, don’t open that stuff on a work computer. 😉

  9. Wait just a minute JB!

    I knew Bill Clinton was the first black President. And I knew Obama was the first black Jimmy Carter. But I had no idea that Hillary was white. I would have guessed cadaverous gray.

    And for Ark Garfunkle. Yes – Trump allegedly raped someone. And Bill Clinton has allegedly raped multiple women and possibly underage girls – and Hillary has allegedly helped cover all of it up.

    To kick a dead horse – it was a lesser of two evils kind of thing. But there is no evil – because morality is subjective anyway. Right? So big deal.

    Anyway – that’s why I voted my conscience and wrote in Ark Garfunkle as President. He’s the standard of subjective morality – AND – he’s white.

    ~CQW

    1. If anyone else wants to vote for Ark and is curious what the new standards for “good” and “bad” would be, if Ark were the benchmark, here are just a couple of bullets:

      1. If someone asks you a hypothetical question about rape, DO NOT ANSWER SARCASTICALLY. Never joke about voting for a non-existent man whom your daughter accused of rape in an imagined reality. Only scum would fail to take that question seriously.

      2. If a real-life man asks your daughter about her “naughty” sins, in an attempt to shame or intimidate, meh. She probably deserved it.

      https://culturesatwar.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/the-noah-game/comment-page-1/#comment-294

    2. 3. Always treat your daughter fairly in imaginary scenarios.

      4. Go ahead and post a picture of another person’s real-life daughter calling attention to her rear end.

      (Pictured)

      (As a side note, I can’t decide whether people would call this photo “racist” or “sexist” if a Conservative posted it. But, either way, Ark did this one! So it’s fine!)

       photo 10-7-2016 Ark Sexism_zpsn6matctc.png

      1. In actual fact the photo and the line,” get to the bottom of the problem” were in response to the overall lack of fitness the image portrayed,and also the corruption that is prevalent. Both points having been raised about the SA Police and military on a number of occasions.
        At least four of the individuals in the photo might struggle to pass the annual fitness exam – assuming previous standards had not been relaxed, of course.
        I imagine a similar situation is likely to be found in quite a number of police forces.
        Maybe even yours in the States, Amanda?

        BTW, I thought you said you never ventured onto atheist blogs? Seems you are a fan of Street Photography, at least.

        1. My dad doesn’t read your blog.
          Neither of us will participate in lengthy discussions there.

          But–yes–I will always check in to see what sort of racist/sexist stuff Carmen is okay with when it comes from her friends. 😉

          1. As a rule, I never knowingly post racist /sexist stuff on my blog.
            Remember, I am not christian.
            Although I freely admit to posting anti religious stuff.

            And thanks for popping over and reading. Even if merely to trawl my photo posts.

            One never knows what might seep into your subconscious.
            And I learn oodles of stuff reading the Branyan blogs.

          2. Well, if you would care to indicate where you have read or seen something you felt is racist I would be genuinely grateful, and will apologise unequivocally.

Dive into the discussion...

Archives
Subscribe to Blog via Email

Get my blog in your inbox!

Follow

Get the latest posts delivered to your mailbox:

Your Cart