Congressman calls evolution lie from 'pit of hell'

Oct 7, 2012 | Posted by: NightSerf | Full story: www.knoxnews.com

Georgia Rep. Paul Broun said in videotaped remarks that evolution, embryology and the Big Bang theory are "lies straight from the pit of hell" meant to convince people that they do not need a savior.

The Republican lawmaker made those comments during a speech Sept. 27 at a sportsman's banquet at Liberty Baptist Church in Hartwell. Broun, a medical doctor, is running for re-election in November unopposed by Democrats.
Comments
41 - 60 of 80 Comments Last updated Jul 18, 2013

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Oct 13, 2012
 
3OHA wrote:
Evolution is indeed a lie. God created human beings and gave them moral fiber setting them apart from animals.
Music proves it. There is no logical reason harmonies, rhythm and tone would cause profound emotional responses in humans based on evolution.
The blocked mind can diss the Loving God of Scripture and believe what they want, but they CANNOT explain the Miracles of Lourdes, proven more by secular sources than the Catholic Church.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Oct 13, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny, since most amputations are due to natural, or in your fantasy land "god," causes. But that is not the point. The point is that it would be indisputable evidence supporting your god, it would be easy to show the world, and would prove that prayer is more than a waste of time as well. But ... since you cannot deliver such an example within recorded history ... sucks to be you, worshiping a non-existent god and all.
Lol

He can't help being Australian.

He must really hate seeing his country getting trashed at sport by the Brits.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Oct 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol
He can't help being Australian.
He must really hate seeing his country getting trashed at sport by the Brits.
Hey! I am from OZ that scumbag is an embarrassment.
Gillard-Supporte r

Seven Hills, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Oct 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey! I am from OZ that scumbag is an embarrassment.
I agree Richard, guys like that are an embarassment because they don't believe in international socialism like we both do. When we win the next election and put Julia Gillard in for another 3 years we'll show those xtians what's what!
We'll simply flood the land with afghans and other muzzies and they'll burn all the churches, surprised it hasn't happened already seeing as we brought in 25k of them and put them in public housing and on welfare.
Never fear my Labor brother, we will destroy the anglo-racist state!
I declare to all that Richardfs is a revolutionary brother for the Labor Party of (soon to be extinct) Australia!!

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Oct 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey! I am from OZ that scumbag is an embarrassment.
Sorry, Richard

I was just saying it to annoy the troll.
3OHY

San Jose, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chuckles wrote:
<quoted text>
The Catholic Church accepts evolution as do other CHRISTIAN denominations. How many amputees have been healed at Lourdes? Why won't god heal amputees? Read and be amazed:
http://whywontfagscrawlunderarock.com/
Evolution in the sense of adaptation certainly exists, but mankind was made very much the way he is by God. If science was correct about natural selection, humans would produce asexually. Nine months and discomfort isn't efficient. It certainly wouldn't create eleven dimensions.

It appears belief in a God really chaps many hides here. It brings out a disproportionate number of very angry people, mostly queers, who have a distinct interest in lost people seeing themselves as animal, living as if there's no tomorrow and what's for breakfast?

Not evolution, but people of faith are the only reason queers exist. Natural selection would put them out of their misery.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, Richard
I was just saying it to annoy the troll.
That's cool, I was just stirring.

But I do find the mollusk a waste of space.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

3OHY wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution in the sense of adaptation certainly exists, but mankind was made very much the way he is by God. If science was correct about natural selection, humans would produce asexually. Nine months and discomfort isn't efficient. It certainly wouldn't create eleven dimensions.
It appears belief in a God really chaps many hides here. It brings out a disproportionate number of very angry people, mostly queers, who have a distinct interest in lost people seeing themselves as animal, living as if there's no tomorrow and what's for breakfast?
Not evolution, but people of faith are the only reason queers exist. Natural selection would put them out of their misery.
There is not now, nor has there ever been, any proof that any god has ever existed.
Amused

Lowell, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Oct 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Who says I'm not conservative, or a Conservative Party supporter?
And don't most of the regulars on this forum see themselves as socially liberal and fiscally conservative?
AmericaIsNotTheSame wants to see Pres Obama impeached.
I'm happy to vote for the Conservative Party led by a Christian (current PM), or the Labour Party led by an agnostic (Ed Miliband), or a LibDem led by an atheist (Nick Clegg). I simply judge them on their policies. voting shouldn't be personal and still less affected by a candidate's religion or lack of any.
From here it seems that USAmericans see every issue as a knock-down-fight. And then there is the extreme superstition of USAmericans today,(those going North by Northwest excepted.:-)
Amused and others have tried to explain to me why US politics are so polarised. People look to the USA to set standards, or as 'the model', but I think that the USA has could learn from elsewhere sometimes,(e.g. dump the anti-atheist sentiments)..
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155285/atheists-mu...
Perhaps it's less natural over there, to look over here?- as you've got all the money!
http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/GB
'This telephone is an amazing invention but who would want to use one of them?' American President, Rutherford Hayes 1876.
'Edison's electric light bulb is good enough for our transatlantic friends, but unworthy of scientific or practical men'. British Parliamentary society set up to investigate electric lighting in 1878.
'X-rays are a hoax'. Lord Kelvin, president of the Royal Society in 1900.
"conservative' in the USA is quite different from 'conservative' in the UK or the EU. America has gone so far to the right that a UK conservative would be considered liberal by American standards. Positions that were considered 'conservative' even 30 years ago would now put one on the further part of the left.

Take, for example, Ronald Reagan. He was an enthusiastic supporter of the UN Convention on Torture and the driving force behind getting it ratified in the US. From his signing statement ratifying the UN Convention on Torture from 1984:
"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.

The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction.' Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."

Compare that with Dick Cheney's enthusiastic support for torture, and with Obama's willful blindness to the legal requirement that torturers be prosecuted. Reagan is more 'liberal' than Obama.

Consider that during the first 6 years of Reagan's term, the highest marginal tax rate was 50%. It then went to 38%. Under Obama, the rate is 35%. Obama supports lower tax rates for millionaires than Romney did. Who's the 'liberal'?

Reagan spent his way out of a recession, with the full support of republicans in congress. Obama put forth a 'stimulus spending' that he knew was not adequate because he didn't want to spend too much. Who's the 'liberal'

Despite the worship of Reagan by latter day conservatives, the simple fact is that someone running on Reagan's exact policy provisions would not be able to win a single republican debate, caucus or primary, because he would be far to 'liberal' fro republican voters.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Oct 14, 2012
 
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
That's cool, I was just stirring.
But I do find the mollusk a waste of space.
Lol - that's for sure.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Oct 14, 2012
 
Amused wrote:
< left.
Take, for example, Ronald Reagan. He was an enthusiastic supporter of the UN Convention on Torture and the driving force behind getting it ratified in the US.
Reagan was an enthusiastic supporter to regimes that repressed and murdered their people including Marcos, the contra rebels in Nicaragua, he defended the racist apartheid government in South Africa, he supported the perpetrators of the murder of hundreds of El Salvadoran villagers, and more.

Actions speak louder than words...

Since: Mar 11

Florence, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Oct 14, 2012
 
Scientology Minister Accused Of Molesting Thetans!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Oct 15, 2012
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
Scientology Minister Accused Of Molesting Thetans!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =JCQKvGczqfcXX
Think of the Thetans!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Oct 15, 2012
 
I wonder if this guy is a 'bible freak'

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
Oct 15, 2012
 
3OHY wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution in the sense of adaptation certainly exists, but mankind was made very much the way he is by God. If science was correct about natural selection, humans would produce asexually. Nine months and discomfort isn't efficient. It certainly wouldn't create eleven dimensions.
It appears belief in a God really chaps many hides here. It brings out a disproportionate number of very angry people, mostly queers, who have a distinct interest in lost people seeing themselves as animal, living as if there's no tomorrow and what's for breakfast?
Not evolution, but people of faith are the only reason queers exist. Natural selection would put them out of their misery.
Shut the f*ck up you lying sack of Creationist sh*t.
you are a moron

Oak Hill, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
Oct 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>

Actions speak louder than words...
Yes they do, obamas failures:
1. 4.1 Million Fewer Jobs than Projected: In January 2009 the Obama Administration forecast there would be 137.6 million jobs in December 2010. Instead there were 130.3 million jobs in December 2010. Even 21 months later in September 2012, there are just 133.5 million jobs – 4.1 million fewer than the Administration’s forecast for late 2010.

2. Slower Jobs Recovery than during the Great Depression: This is the only “recovery” since World War II when jobs lost in the recession had not been recovered by this point. In fact, the recent pace of job creation during the “Obama recovery” has been slower than during the Great Depression.

3. Less Full Time Work: Since January 2009 the number of full-time employees has fallen by over 600,000 while part-time employment has grown by almost 1.4 million. This means part-time workers account for all of the net employment growth in the Obama years – the opposite of what Democrats predicted when they said their stimulus plan was “likely to move many workers from part-time to full-time work.”

4. Manufacturing Jobs Down: Since January 2009 over 600,000 manufacturing jobs have been eliminated, the opposite of the Administration’s projected increase of 408,000 manufacturing jobs due to their trillion-dollar stimulus.

5. Ten Times More New Dropouts than New Employees: During the Obama Administration, the number of people not in the labor force has grown by 8.2 million while total employment has grown by less than 800,000. This means that during the Obama years new workforce dropouts have outnumbered new employees by 10 to 1.

6. Far Higher Unemployment Rate than Projected: September’s 7.8% unemployment rate remains far above the 5.5% rate the Administration predicted for this month in their January 2009 report on the projected effects of stimulus. Democrats actually predicted unemployment would fall to 7.8% in September 2009 – a full three years ago.

7. Real Unemployment Is Almost 11%: If the unemployment rate included the “invisible unemployed”(discouraged workers who dropped out or never joined the workforce), the September 2012 unemployment rate would be 10.9%:

8. More Unemployed Now than When Economy Was in “Free-Fall”: In September 2012 there were 12.1 million officially unemployed workers. That’s 39,000 more than when President Obama took office in January 2009 – when the Administration said “we were in economic free-fall.”

9. Two Million More Long-term Unemployed: In September 2012 there were 4.8 million long-term unemployed (that is, for over six months)– over two million more than when President Obama took office in January 2009.

10. Economic Misery up 80%: The “Obama Misery Index” shows that unemployment and debt have risen by a combined 80% since the start of the Obama Administration.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
Oct 15, 2012
 
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
"conservative' in the USA is quite different from 'conservative' in the UK or the EU. America has gone so far to the right that a UK conservative would be considered liberal by American standards. Positions that were considered 'conservative' even 30 years ago would now put one on the further part of the left.
Take, for example, Ronald Reagan. He was an enthusiastic supporter of the UN Convention on Torture and the driving force behind getting it ratified in the US. From his signing statement ratifying the UN Convention on Torture from 1984:
"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.
The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction.' Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."
Compare that with Dick Cheney's enthusiastic support for torture, and with Obama's willful blindness to the legal requirement that torturers be prosecuted. Reagan is more 'liberal' than Obama.
Consider that during the first 6 years of Reagan's term, the highest marginal tax rate was 50%. It then went to 38%. Under Obama, the rate is 35%. Obama supports lower tax rates for millionaires than Romney did. Who's the 'liberal'?
Reagan spent his way out of a recession, with the full support of republicans in congress. Obama put forth a 'stimulus spending' that he knew was not adequate because he didn't want to spend too much. Who's the 'liberal'
Despite the worship of Reagan by latter day conservatives, the simple fact is that someone running on Reagan's exact policy provisions would not be able to win a single republican debate, caucus or primary, because he would be far to 'liberal' fro republican voters.
Absolutely!(Kittenkoder remarked, "Conservatives in the UK are actually ... conservative. lol. In the US, conservatives are actually just liberals with god delusions.." :-) But, to be fair, isn't the criticism of Pres Obama due to the constraints inherent in the US system?

He cannot get the budget he would like (even remotely like) through Congress since the lower house is Rep-controlled?
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Ho...
"Republicans regained control of the chamber they had lost in the 2006 midterm elections, picking up a net total of 63 seats and erasing the gains Democrats made in 2006 and 2008." Unquote.

Observed from the UK, Mid-presidential term Congressional elections seem less a 'check or balance' than a cause of governmental paralysis.

Isn't inflexibility on the part of modern Reps also partly the reason why the tax rate on the rich is so light and the deficit so great. Mr Soros (or someone) claimed he only paid 13% tax, which was a lower rate than his secretary?

From:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/...
"the fascination with taxes I paid I find to be very small minded compared to the broad issues we face,” he said.“But I did go back and look at my taxes and over the past 10 years I never paid less than 13 percent. I think the most recent year is 13.6 or something like that,” said Romney today"

People in the USA seem to have confused those born rich with wealth creators and now treat them as one and the same.

Since: Mar 11

Hurst, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
Oct 15, 2012
 
He was molesting thetans as young as 65 million years old! Mere infants! It's difficult to catch someone raping a thetan which makes the temptation to perverts like this so inticing. Let's hope justice is swift for the thetan's sake!
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Think of the Thetans!

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
Oct 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

I think the lie from the "Pit of Hell" was the one Hillary and Obama, Rice and Csrney made about Benghazi. If there is a hell, they are all going there.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#60
Oct 15, 2012
 
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Reagan was an enthusiastic supporter to regimes that repressed and murdered their people including Marcos, the contra rebels in Nicaragua, he defended the racist apartheid government in South Africa, he supported the perpetrators of the murder of hundreds of El Salvadoran villagers, and more.
Actions speak louder than words...
I think that actions post 1990 cannot be compared to actions prior to that date.

Everything the western nations did prior to the fall of the USSR was geared to Western interests and defence against a huge, nuclear power that asserted a need to bring Russian style communism to the West. Support for dictators under those circumstances were part of a strategy in the cold war. Now those days are over.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••