Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 32098 comments on the CNN story from Oct 12, 2011, titled Who says Mormons aren't Christians?. In it, CNN reports that:

Editor's note: Dean Obeidallah is an award-winning comedian who has appeared on TV shows such as Comedy Central's "Axis of Evil" special, ABC's "The View," CNN's "What the Week" and HLN's "The Joy Behar Show." He is executive producer of the annual New York Arab-American Comedy Festival and the Amman Stand Up Comedy Festival.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CNN.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20786 Feb 27, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Dana,
You TRY to TWIST EVERYTHING possible.
You LIE constantly.
//
AND, you constantly fetish on everyone's genitals and underwear.
YOU MOCK GOD the FATHER.
NOTHING YOU SAY CHANGES THE FACT THAT GOD WILL WIN IN THE END!
Let us know when you actually have something new to say. You're like a bad rerun of the Love Boat, which was horrible to watch even the first time.
concerned in Egypt

Europe

#20787 Feb 27, 2013
sportxmouse

I thought I would try a dumb dumb post like yours looks like fun.

No reading needed, no research needs to be done, no fact checking and most definitely not checking what the Bible says on the subject.

So here I go I am going to give it a whirl.

You are so TWISTED more than I EVERY THOUGHT possible.
You make dumb posts constantly.

AND, you constantly fetish on Christians abilities to show you up as you are so dumb and always wearing that holy underwear.

YOU MOCK Christ Jesus and his Gospel by spreading that false LDS mythology Many God's one day I too will be a God.

NOTHING YOU SAY CHANGES THE FACT THAT until you stop believing dumb dumb LDS theology you being LDS means you are not Christian.

Wow how easy no work logic rational thought involved at all.

However its not for me

Because Truth Matters.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20788 Feb 27, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
No, he didn't get his theory/fantasy correct, Jews did not come to America. Those who did come didn't start any civilizations.
<quoted text>
The buildings and the cities of the Aztecs were well known by the 1800's as the Spanish reported them centuries before. Pitiful.
The above is called a 'dodge.' You 'dodged' my questions (as you did last time) because you can't find another person that claimed what Smith claimed happened more than 2000 years before Smith was born. No one else wrote a book about it and no one else wrote even a paper pertaining to 2000 years in the past of the Americas and how things were.
So I'll ask the questions again.
"So give me links to an educated person in America who believed prior to 1832 that two thousand years ago and more men sailed across the seas from the old world to the new world.
Next, give me a link to a book or written paper in 1832 or before, where a single author also proclaimed natives of America 2000 years ago built multi-storied buildings, were experts in agriculture, astronomy, making large cities, herding of animals, had a written language and had extensive knowledge in mathematics. That the natives warred on large scale battles and sacrificed captives."
Now either dodge them like a coward or answer them with the civil intelligence God blessed you to have.
Waiting...

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20789 Feb 27, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Smith screwed his wives, all your BS isn't going to change that.
Your response is a pathetic non-stop uneducated many times repeated reply. Why am I not surprised that you wouldn't use a grain of intelligence to try and answer the questions eh?What's a norm for you as has been pointed out by a few in these threads, is you have well proven evidence is your best buddy when it suits your opinion but when it doesn't suit your opinion, evidence becomes BS.
You should try intelligent replies in stead of BS replies, just saying :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20790 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
You sure like accusing everybody of something yet again another post to many to count and going without and evidence biblical or historical that proves the LDS cult is Christian. NOPE more rantings from the lunatic fringe.
Liar. I have never accused every body so your a liar to say I have done that. And to think you claim to be an honest Christian. Real Christians don't lie with purpose as you do. You're a liar. You'll remain a liar till you stop telling lies.
By the way, I accused you of being a liar because you did lie. You claimed I was on Topix when I wasn't. You said I said I was a RCC once. I never said any such thing so your a liar. You claimed to have ousted me in a thread years ago. That's another lie. Today you said I accuse everyone. That's another lie. You're establishing to many here that you have no qualms about making out right lies about some one. Their is no truth or honesty in some one that states so many lies in such a short time period. Your lying will never define you a 'true Christian.' Because a 'true Christian would rather say nothing than to say or perpetuate a lie to just be a liar. Like you have done and continue to do.
You can quit lying. Just saying :)
concerned in Egypt

Europe

#20791 Feb 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>

Next, give me a link to a book or written paper in 1832 or before, where a single author also proclaimed natives of America 2000 years ago built multi-storied buildings, were experts in agriculture, astronomy, making large cities, herding of animals, had a written language and had extensive knowledge in mathematics. That the natives warred on large scale battles and sacrificed captives."
Now either dodge them like a coward or answer them with the civil intelligence God blessed you to have.
Waiting...
So you want him to give you something that does not exist.

There is no evidence that any of the above happened because it never happened.

The Only person who ever wrote a book about such a thing was a guy who was into the occult, prophesied men lived on the moon and dressed like Quakers, married women still married to men in his Cult, married children, use magic glasses to translate a book made of Gold that nobody has seen in a magical hat. Was shot and killed in a gun fight while trying to escape from jail after ordering another man's business to be burnt to the ground. And that's just for starters.

The Guy is what the Bible defines as an Anti-Christ because he contradicted the Gospel of Christ Jesus, believed God was once a Man and that he one day would be a God unto himself and populate his own universe with all his Polygamist wives in Celestial Heaven he married on earth.

The WACKO's name was Joseph Smith Jr.
concerned in Egypt

Europe

#20792 Feb 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Liar. I have never accused every body so your a liar to say I have done that. And to think you claim to be an honest Christian. Real Christians don't lie with purpose as you do. You're a liar. You'll remain a liar till you stop telling lies.
By the way, I accused you of being a liar because you did lie. You claimed I was on Topix when I wasn't. You said I said I was a RCC once. I never said any such thing so your a liar. You claimed to have ousted me in a thread years ago. That's another lie. Today you said I accuse everyone. That's another lie. You're establishing to many here that you have no qualms about making out right lies about some one. Their is no truth or honesty in some one that states so many lies in such a short time period. Your lying will never define you a 'true Christian.' Because a 'true Christian would rather say nothing than to say or perpetuate a lie to just be a liar. Like you have done and continue to do.
You can quit lying. Just saying :)
DUMB DUMB

Clearly you don't even have a basic High School education.

I suppose as you don't now what a metaphor is you also don't know what a Hyperbole is either. NO surprise!

Now I have told you a thousand times get an education.

And now you going to call me a liar because it has not been a literal 1000 times LOL ROFL

That why you are a dumb dumb
concerned in Egypt

Europe

#20793 Feb 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Your response is a pathetic non-stop uneducated many times repeated reply. Why am I not surprised that you wouldn't use a grain of intelligence to try and answer the questions eh?What's a norm for you as has been pointed out by a few in these threads, is you have well proven evidence is your best buddy when it suits your opinion but when it doesn't suit your opinion, evidence becomes BS.
You should try intelligent replies in stead of BS replies, just saying :)
If you are seeking truth about the LDS Mormon Sect.
If you want access to verifiable footnoted sources that you can verify yourself
Then these sites all document their assertions with EVIDENCE Biblical Historical and verifiable.
Because the Truth Matters not vial name callers.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp ...
category=11&article=1221
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/michaeldavis/d ...
http://www.mrm.org/
http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/
http://www.utlm.org/
http://irr.org/
http://carm.org/
http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/search/colle ...
http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/index.h ...

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20794 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
conjugal visits would be a better Christian way to say it.
But as you know in his day a marriage was not official unless consummated with in three months. So it goes with out saying if one is just a little educated about the era J.S. lived in one knows he would of consummated them or they would not have been consider a marriage.
If one is just a little educated of Mormon history and US laws in the 18th century, one would know that Smith was never legally married to any wife but one, Emma. Evidence of a legally married relationship by consummation was the fact they had many, many children.
So one with a wee bit of intelligence would know that Smith was not obligated by any law on earth or in heaven to consummate 'pretend marriages' so they would be consider 'legal.'
So one would know with just a wee bit of intelligence, that if just one wife of a 'pretend marriage' had a child and told others in Navoo, Smith haters could have taken him to court on a charge of bigamy. In this case, 30 women in three years, smith should of had enough children born under the age of one to receive multiple bigamy charges for an actual prison sentence.
Just saying :)

“Now do whats right!”

Since: Jan 09

Doolittle, Mo.

#20795 Feb 27, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Dana,
You TRY to TWIST EVERYTHING possible.
You LIE constantly.
//
AND, you constantly fetish on everyone's genitals and underwear.
YOU MOCK GOD the FATHER.
NOTHING YOU SAY CHANGES THE FACT THAT GOD WILL WIN IN THE END!
Not to seem negative religious here, but if God is in competition for souls and is so all powerful, why does he not just "do away" with Satan now, and save all mankind?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20796 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
I would request one thing of you.
Release comments on your user name so we can see when and what you have posted since 2008?
Ya I thought you'd say no to that
Um, can we say idiocy? I-d-i-o-c-y. You do realize that Topix doesn't keep posts that far back for retrieval from one's Topix profile? You do realize with even short posts, your profile won't contain more than 20 to 25 posts? Mine contains 15 at present.
This thread has a beginning of Oct 14th 2011. If you wish to chase any one's older posts, you have to go back to the time period of a thread when you remember having a discussion and begin to search for what you seek.
Just a suggestion, but maybe you should read the Topix guide lines to see an individual Topix poster cannot have all their 'older posts' to view on demand. Doesn't work that way. You would know that if you read the fricking rules...lol...just saying :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20797 Feb 27, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I know. But "screw" is a more visual and emotion term for No Surprise, and yet still very accurate way of describing what Smith was really doing.
lolol....absolutely not. I couldn't care if you said Smith was *ucki*g his *hor* wives up the *ss.
See, all you prove to one and all who read your posts is that you have an issue with using real civil type language. What you have proven is you would rather use a gutter slurring language than a polite, civil language. So it's not hard to imagine that how you speak in here, that's the type of language you have preferred to use to raise your children with. Thus your children language wise are your split image because you made them that way.
Now if you wish to claim that isn't true, that you use polite and civil English with your kids as they grew, than that would leave us to really wonder why a guy that speaks so polite and civil off the web would feel the need to speak foul gutter language when on the web.
See, if you use gutter language off the web, it would stand to reason you would use gutter language on the web. If you speak politely and civilly off the web, reason would say you would speak that way on the web.
But to speak politely and civilly off the web and to be totally opposite on the web, that would denote internal mental problems and or stress causing a person like that to show such a hyde/jeckel verbal personality.
So you don't use foul gutter language to jerk my chains dude...lol...you use gutter language because that's how you like to speak. At least fricking be honest about it lol.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20798 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
ONE OF THE REASONS HE WAS TO BE TRANSFERED ON THE DAY HE DIED IN HIS JAIL HOUSE SHOT OUT WAS TO BE CHARGED WITH EXACLTY WHAT YOU POST BIGAMY BUT HE DIED BEFORE THE TRIAL.
NOW YOU ARE ONE OF HIS MANY WIVES WHAT YA GONNA DO. SAY ITS J.S.'S KID TO YOUR STILL LIVING HUSBAND OR TELL EM ITS HIS?
RHETORICAL QUESTION
AND THAT BEING SAID IF YOU GO TO MY LINK OF J.S. WIVES YOU WILL SEE THERE IS LOTS OF DNA EVIDENCE HE HAD KIDS.
SORRY DUMB DUMB YOU STOP POSTING WHILE YOUR BEHIND YOU ARE ALREADY
lol...sorry dude, even Dana (if being honest) will tell you that DNA testing done for the last several years on 'possible' Smith descendants have not found one. You can Google that. All the people said to be Smiths in books and writings for the last 140 years WERE PROVED TO BE ALL LIES. Ask Dana. Dana and I have agreed that a possible DNA match could happen in the future. But as it stands, all the best matches for descendant connections were all perpetuated lies.
Next, Just before Smiths death, the reason for his being jailed was 'rioting'. Not bigamy but you would know that if you did just a bit of wee intelligent research on your part instead of listening to crap. He was set before two courts. The first was biased and excused. The next was with the wrong judge and excused. So the third was to be before an actual judge that would hear evidence that Smith had a group of men 'in riot' break into a printing press office and destroy it. Bigamy had nothing to do with the proceeding.

You know, just saying but a little bit of intelligent research goes a long way to know what actually took place :)
concerned in Egypt

Europe

#20799 Feb 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
If one is just a little educated of Mormon history and US laws in the 18th century, one would know that Smith was never legally married to any wife but one, Emma. Evidence of a legally married relationship by consummation was the fact they had many, many children.
So one with a wee bit of intelligence would know that Smith was not obligated by any law on earth or in heaven to consummate 'pretend marriages' so they would be consider 'legal.'
So one would know with just a wee bit of intelligence, that if just one wife of a 'pretend marriage' had a child and told others in Navoo, Smith haters could have taken him to court on a charge of bigamy. In this case, 30 women in three years, smith should of had enough children born under the age of one to receive multiple bigamy charges for an actual prison sentence.
Just saying :)
Hey dumb dumb if your above post is right..

NOW think hard is it right??????

Because if you just answered yes then your LDS faith is false.

Why because J.S. would be obligated as he claimed God commanded him to marry these women. He would be obligated by his own word by his assertion God gave him revelation to do so.

He claimed God through him restored the lost church and to be a Polygamist.

YOU Can't have it both ways.
concerned in Egypt

Europe

#20800 Feb 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, can we say idiocy? I-d-i-o-c-y. You do realize that Topix doesn't keep posts that far back for retrieval from one's Topix profile? You do realize with even short posts, your profile won't contain more than 20 to 25 posts? Mine contains 15 at present.
This thread has a beginning of Oct 14th 2011. If you wish to chase any one's older posts, you have to go back to the time period of a thread when you remember having a discussion and begin to search for what you seek.
Just a suggestion, but maybe you should read the Topix guide lines to see an individual Topix poster cannot have all their 'older posts' to view on demand. Doesn't work that way. You would know that if you read the fricking rules...lol...just saying :)
Just protect it and prove me wrong. It will show all threads.
concerned in Egypt

Europe

#20801 Feb 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
lol...sorry dude, even Dana (if being honest) will tell you that DNA testing done for the last several years on 'possible' Smith descendants have not found one. You can Google that. All the people said to be Smiths in books and writings for the last 140 years WERE PROVED TO BE ALL LIES. Ask Dana. Dana and I have agreed that a possible DNA match could happen in the future. But as it stands, all the best matches for descendant connections were all perpetuated lies.
Next, Just before Smiths death, the reason for his being jailed was 'rioting'. Not bigamy but you would know that if you did just a bit of wee intelligent research on your part instead of listening to crap. He was set before two courts. The first was biased and excused. The next was with the wrong judge and excused. So the third was to be before an actual judge that would hear evidence that Smith had a group of men 'in riot' break into a printing press office and destroy it. Bigamy had nothing to do with the proceeding.
You know, just saying but a little bit of intelligent research goes a long way to know what actually took place :)
already posted the LINK to you today wivesofjosephsmith again you just blah blah and never do any research.

So once again the thread will notice only hot air from you no evidence that can be verified sad you are.
Just sanyn
1 post removed

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20803 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
If marrying a woman still married does not penetrate an LDS and they have no moral objections to this and still consider a man that marries an already married woman to a still living husband
a living prophet after reading the NT and the teachings of Jesus then only the Holy Spirit and a divine act of God will.
Let's pretend you're married. Let's pretend your wife gravitates towards a charismatic religious minister. You suspect things but have no evidence.
So one day a friend of your's that goes to this faith, they tell you that your wife has married that minister. You're first response is denial and disbelief.
When you're wife comes home from work you ask her if she married the minister and her guilty look tells you the answer. So now your hurt and pissed and mad. You rant and rave as your wife cries seeing you hurt by the news.
So you tell her your reporting her and the minister to the police on charges of bigamy and you're divorcing her. She looks confused hearing this and getting you to calm down a bit, she tells you it wasn't a real marriage. That she and the minister weren't legally married as you and she were married legally.
You're really confused now. Your friend told you she was married to the minister and she admitted it. But it wasn't a real marriage? no legal marriage certificate?
Your wife kind of smiles warmly seeing now how you don't understand because who ever told you, didn't tell you everything. So your wife tells you it was a spiritual marriage for the here after and nothing more. You ask/accuse her of consummating the 'spiritual marriage' and she says no they didn't. That the minister was happily married and had several 'spiritual wives' but none were legal marriages. They were really just 'pretend marriages'.
She tells you she didn't think you'd mind because you don't believe in marriage after death continuing. But she liked the idea of being married after death and didn't think you'd mind.
So what now? The air just got blown out of your sails. Your wife did a pretend marriage for the next life, not for this life. She is there for you till death do you part, not the minister. And she said no sex had taken place and you have never known your wife to lie to you. Tough to still be mad huh.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20804 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
So you want him to give you something that does not exist.
There is no evidence that any of the above happened because it never happened.
You like Dana hate to swallow these facts of Smith's imagination.

Around 1830 Smith stated 2000 years in the past people came by boat to the Americas from the old world not once but twice.
Around 1830, no one else had written a story that stated 2000 years in the past people came by boat to the Americas from the old world.
In the twentieth century, science has shown hard evidence that people from the old world did in fact sail boats to the Americas more than once.
The things that Smith claimed took place on the Americas 2000 years in the past, that no one else in the 1830s said took place, science in the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries have confirmed these things did in fact take place.
So call what Smith described what you will. But science would prove long after his death that in many instances of what he claimed in the BOM took place 2000 years ago, did in fact happen.
For instance. Smith spoke of human sacrifices happening 2000 years ago. Evidence of actual human sacrifices didn't materialize till the 20th century.
In the 15th century Spain came over and literally conquered South and Central America by war and disease. Monks finding writings of the Aztec history on bark and such, they burned them all. Only the writings on the buildings remained.
Check this link... http://www.ancientscripts.com/maya.html
Spain's military returned with gold and things and said nothing to other old world countries. This new world was their cow and they were milking her for all she was worth. They returned and spread out and established plantations with African slaves to be slaves with those in America.
This history was hardly written about. Only a few books were written and they remained in the abbeys in Spain. One made it's way to an London library in the seventeenth century.
So no one knew what Spain had been doing in the Americas for a long time till rumours spread. Than the French sailed over and then the English.
But by now three centuries of jungle growth covered one time civilized areas where jungle didn't exist and fields after fields of agriculture were worked with animal husbandry because Spain left these areas and forgot them to time.
Over 50 years after the death of Smith would the areas Spain once sacked would come to be found again. And there would be evidence in the forms of 'stella's' that Eurasian men with beards and turban looking hats were there. Stone carved reliefs of elephant heads are there now.
These cities buried to time would verify that what Smith said existed 2000 years to the past did in fact take place.
So call it coincidence or what ever but of that much, Smith got it right when no one else believed it took place that far back in time. Just saying :)

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20805 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
So for you it does not matter what J.S. and B.Y. taught on Sunday's as declared prophets and leaders of a new Sect.
How about you just go through the list be honest tell the thread what statements you do believe and then I will just deal with the ones you say you and LDS don't believe.
Again please stop greasing the pig, please be forth right and declare your beliefs.
ARE you ashamed of what you believe?
Is that why you play this game of I won't tell you what I believe unless you can show me what I believe?
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a prophet that speaks for God. God gives additional revelation as he sees fit. In some cases things revealed by a previous prophet no longer pertain to us today. For example: We no longer are commanded to do animal sacrifices. Is God still the same God? Of course! But what he expects of us has changed.
I'm not ashamed of what I believe.
To answer your questions directly:
1._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that Elohim (God the Father in Mormonism) was once a mortal man and that he was not always God?
-God always existed, but not always as God. He always was, but not always as God.
2._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God has a body of flesh and bones?
-God does have flesh and bones.
3._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that God is married in heaven?
-I don't know of anywhere in LDS scripture where it talks about this. However, some people come to their own conclusions. I have never heard it spelled out directly in any church meeting or discussion, but you can work your mind around to it. If there is a Father, a son, a daughter, a family then there must be a mother.
4._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that men can become Gods?
-What else would we do in Heaven besides striving to become more like our Father?(this is in the Bible and Book of Mormon)
5._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that temple participation is necessary to become exalted?
-Necessary to be in heaven? No. Necessary to reach our greatest potential? Yes
6._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?
-They are brothers in the sense that God created them both.(NOT with Mary)
7._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach the blood of Christ does not cleanse certain sins?
-This is in the Bible Matt 12:31
8._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that a person can lose his salvation if he is not baptized on behalf of dead relatives?
-I don't believe this. But work for the dead is important and some one needs to do it in order for the earth to complete its purpose.
9._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it say there is more than one God?
-To us there is only one God.
10._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it say males must hold either the Aaronic or Melchizedek Priesthood?
-You don't have to.
11._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it say you can't drink coffee or tea?
-You can drink tea or coffee, but its bad for you and God says its a good idea to stay away from it.
12._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that there are "three degrees of glory"?
-I believe in three degrees of glory. Its in the Bible.
13._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it teach that the Holy Ghost is a son of God just as Jesus is a son of God?
-I don't know exactly where the Holy Ghost came from, but I assume he came from heavenly Father. More important is the role of the Holy Ghost.
14.______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it say that God allowed the Nephites to practice polygamy?
-Nephites didn't practice polygamy that I know of.
15._______ Where in the Book of Mormon does it say that if a man wishes to be saved he must have a woman by his side?
-Its not really talked a lot about in the Book of Mormon.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20806 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
Just protect it and prove me wrong. It will show all threads.
How fricking ignorant are you? Are you really trying to prove your ignorance goes beyond pathetic?
My posts as I previously said exist in the threads that still exist in all the forums I have posted in.
But neither I nor you nor any one else has access to all your postings from your profile. And if I am incorrect, than tell me how to retrieve them from my profile where you stated they all were.
Listen again. You can't access all your past posts from YOUR PROFILE. IT'S NOT ALLOWED.
If you go to a forum like the Mormon forum or the gay forum or the Christian forum and search the threads there, you can access your old past posts if they still exist. Topix has erased threads that proved to be to volatile after a while so posters had to start a new thread.
Understand? The only thing hidden from you is what you're to lazy to search for that you claim exists :)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack and Michelle Obama sign Netflix deal to ... 4 min Say What 119
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 5 min GodDog 80,374
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 8 min June VanDerMark 340,700
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min Chuckles-Divine 1,760,702
News President Donald Trump has demanded answers abo... 10 min bottlecap 161
News Supreme Court delivers blow to workers' rights 16 min inbred Genius 59
News Trump: Justice Department planted spy in 2016 c... 25 min Erl 159
News Donald Trump calls unauthorized immigrants 'ani... 38 min davy 239