West Wing. Martin Sheen is a badass.. I clout say homosexuality is an Yes' it .... l abomination on President. 1 wanted tomasc you a couple of The Ernie thoes.
Home Funny Pictures YouTube Funny Videos Funny GIFs Text/Links Channels Search

West Wing

Martin Sheen is a badass.

Tags: dumb | bitch
I clout say homosexuality is an Yes' it .... l
abomination on President. 1 wanted tomasc you a couple of
The Ernie thoes. questions while i had you here.
While thinning about that,
we last: anothere
l' m in 'eidur' iiy
youngest daughter one slave
Exodus . 71
moee. iter.. 2/ iri. iiss,
would a good her be?
working an the , Am I morally obligated have to be together to atone
Exodus 35.: 2 clearly gays he; to lull him myself. brol_ her for pla_ r_ itarim
should be put to death or Ia it to call the police? '. we '?
tant burn my Jolla- in a‘ aaq' aal
family gatherer's for wearier‘
ii?"" made from two glittering
threads?
Think about o, sugestions,
would you,
...
+743
Views: 28479
Favorited: 133
Submitted: 04/12/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to sexysexysexysex E-mail to friend submit to reddit
Share image on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend

Comments(175):

[ 175 comments ]
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#151 - anonymous (04/14/2013) [-]
So if the bible says that gays are an abomination then why did Jesus or God created gays in the first place?
#119 - anonymous (04/13/2013) [-]
I'm a christian but I say **** the bible. God gave freedom of choice soooo, that means we can do what we want
#149 to #119 - biddo (04/13/2013) [-]
thats what we call blasphemy
#131 to #119 - tobistrigoivii ONLINE (04/13/2013) [-]
**tobistrigoivii rolled a random image posted in comment #2 at Facebook...Really? ** mfw your gay ass comment
#125 to #119 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
You must be one of those modern ********* Christians who go to Church once a year and have no sense of morals at all.
User avatar #136 to #125 - theshadowed (04/13/2013) [-]
Because they're worse than Christians like the WBC?
User avatar #137 to #136 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
The WBC at least a sense of guidelines which they follow. Your personal interpretation of their believes does not make them apocryphal. "Christians" like the above are like the American Indians who still dance around in circles despite the fact that the culture is truly dead in them; they are upholding dead tradition within themselves.

You are not going to change Christianity by saying, "lol **** the bible." To say this, you might as well be an atheist. It's like being an American and saying, "lol **** the Founding Fathers; they're just some dead old White men." I'd bet the person I responded to originally is a liberal, too.
User avatar #155 to #137 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
Ooh, raising a storm about religion AND politics? You live on the EDGE!

...

Seriously, man, that's dangerous.
User avatar #141 to #137 - theshadowed (04/13/2013) [-]
Or maybe they still believe in the trinity, but see the bible as outdated, and obviously written for the the culture back then.
And they're automatically liberal for being that type of Christian? I'm guessing you don't like liberals.
User avatar #143 to #141 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
Liberals are people who want to manipulate society into being, "fair." Traditional Liberals are people who want to change society, generally. Yes, he sounds like one. He wants to mold Christianity into a Politically Correct doctrine that all the ******* and Jews will enjoy.

True Christians would never, despite its outdated text in some regards, say " **** the Bible."
User avatar #144 to #143 - theshadowed (04/13/2013) [-]
So I'm guessing you don't like change?

And yes, they would. Everything adapts, everything evolves. Everything has a right too. Its not gonna stop just because you don't like change. Is it too scary for you?
User avatar #145 to #144 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
If Christianity dismisses the Bible, Christianity would die. We are already seeing it dying as the Catholic Church has done nothing in the past century to save its European foundation.

Traditional Liberals are many times different from modern American liberals, by the way.
User avatar #146 to #145 - theshadowed (04/13/2013) [-]
Christianity is the belief in the Trinity, not the bible. The Bible itself has changed repeatedly over the centuries, and the Vatican is likely keeping some parts of it from the world. So Christianity does not rely on the bible, just uses it to teach.
Sorry about being a dick before
User avatar #147 to #146 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
I believe such an adaption is too radical to work. Christianity will continue to die. The trinity is under foundation of the Bible's principles.

It is irrelevant taking this any further, as we can only speculate.
User avatar #115 - danniegurl (04/13/2013) [-]
You need to login to view this link

Please take some time to read this.
User avatar #110 - ninjasquirle (04/13/2013) [-]
Before any one on here decides "aha! that's old testament, I will show those haters." Please keep in mind that the woman is also using the old testament to justify hatred because the first instances on homosexuality in the bible is in Leviticus, the same part that gives death for wearing mixed fibers.
#109 - anonymous (04/13/2013) [-]
if you read the bible (yes im a christian) you would notice that most laws from god are only fr the israelites as it says "Give these instructions to the israelites" (Leviticus) so them laws doesnt apply to everyone
User avatar #129 to #109 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
shh you'll upset the banana boys
0
#106 - admiralamory **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#105 - anonymous (04/13/2013) [-]
Aww, cute. Funnyjunk trying to be like reddit.
#92 - brothergrimm (04/13/2013) [-]
mfw "get 'em!"
mfw "get 'em!"
#90 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
>a badass

No, he sounds more to me like an ******* . Let the woman believe what she wants.
User avatar #93 to #90 - darthblam (04/13/2013) [-]
Not all beliefs should be believed...
That's what he's meaning with all this...
#94 to #93 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
Like it matters. He's quoting things from the Old Testament as if she's Jewish.
User avatar #96 to #94 - darthblam (04/13/2013) [-]
"Like it matters"
... you're the one that brought it up...
#97 to #96 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
Because his points are proving nothing. He's bringing things up that Jesus abolished.
User avatar #100 to #97 - darthblam (04/13/2013) [-]
What point are you even trying to make here? That we should be OK with the Bible claiming homosexuality is an abomination? Did you even read the first panel as to why he said what he said?
#101 to #100 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
The fact that he's bringing up Old Testament sayings as any form of "argument" to a Christian.
User avatar #104 to #101 - ninjasquirle (04/13/2013) [-]
Yes except for the little fact that the part the mentions homosexuality as a sin is also in the old testament. It's called being a hypocrite.
User avatar #121 to #104 - lazengahn (04/13/2013) [-]
It's also in the New Testament, unlike everything else this guy said
User avatar #122 to #121 - ninjasquirle (04/13/2013) [-]
Slavery is in the book of luke
The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)
User avatar #156 to #122 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
I feel I should also add that that was a parable.
User avatar #124 to #122 - lazengahn (04/13/2013) [-]
Except, you know, you don't go to hell for not owning a slave.
User avatar #127 to #124 - ninjasquirle (04/13/2013) [-]
Because the bible approves of it. But not homosexuality? Sorry but I rather have gays than slavery.
User avatar #133 to #127 - lazengahn (04/13/2013) [-]
I'm trying to say you can't compare Homosexuality to Slavery in the bible. On was a Sin, the other was just RULES for IF you owned a slave. Jesus could care less if you owned one or not, as long as you followed the moral code that came with it
User avatar #157 to #133 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
Yes, slavery was very different back then from what we think of. Slaves were not shipped miles across the ocean while crammed together in conditions that would kill even a water bear. At the time, slaves were more like a social class, having been sold into slavery by either themselves or their family to work for one master in exchange for food and money until their time as a slave was done.
User avatar #86 - YourAnalProbe ONLINE (04/13/2013) [-]
Christians don't base everything they follow on the Bible. There's a nice thing called Oral Tradition and Catholic Catechism you know.
0
#89 to #86 - lolfire has deleted their comment [-]
#81 - anonymous (04/13/2013) [-]
hating homosexuality and not allowing them to get married are two completely different things
#77 - lambocj (04/13/2013) [-]
I really wish we could just decide to be good people instead of using the bible for hate/prejudice/unequal laws/etc.
I really wish we could just decide to be good people instead of using the bible for hate/prejudice/unequal laws/etc.
User avatar #91 to #77 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
fun fact: More lives have been taken and more wars have been fought due to religion than anything else. People may refute this by saying "greed" is the number one cause.

It's true, but religion has been a front for greed as well....basically religion is fueled by greed and blind devotion.
#123 to #91 - anonymous (04/13/2013) [-]
except for the fact that almost all wars have been fought for political or economic reasons
(name me one war started for religious reasons and i can tell you how it was really started for political or economic reasons)
User avatar #126 to #123 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
1) you must have not understood anything I wrote in the previous post
2) you're anonymous
3) the crusades

come back when you're not anonymous
User avatar #128 to #126 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
He is right, most wars with a religious front have been fought for economic reasons. It is not the other way around. The crusades, if you would have actually studied them, happened because of Muslim conquests. The European Christians saw this, and wanted to repel them. The Muslims were invading European lands for economic reasons, mind you.

Dogma will not die with religion, which is something you libtards can't seem to get. Just look at the invasion of Iraq. It was perpetuated under the guise of democracy; "Operation Iraqi Freedom."
User avatar #130 to #128 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
welcome from being anonymous.

also to you:
if you actually read and understood my post, you would have seen. "religion has been a front for greed " Which implies that economic and political reasons were the behind it all but religion was what was used to get it all in motion.

There may have been greed involved, but the "holy land" was still a large part of the war.
#142 to #130 - anonymous (04/13/2013) [-]
that guy isnt me
and now that youve explained your post, i feel that you could have worded it better
User avatar #135 to #130 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
Religion has been a front for greed in so far as it is one of the ways of showing it. I disagree with you placing a negative connotation on religion because it is human to show blind devotion to your country and die for it, a virtue which is also vice depending on your perspective.

Many people in the invading American armies believed that Saddam was a baby ******** and an oppressor.

I am not the one you were responding to before, actually.
#114 to #91 - lambslider (04/13/2013) [-]
The crux of it is that religion makes people feel safe in the knowledge that death isn't the end for them. It brings people together and creates communities for those who may otherwise have connection to the outside world. There will always be someone who will manipulate the ignorant through religion but to say its an evil concept is rather narrow minded. To me it falls under the same principal as "guns don't kill people, people do."
User avatar #117 to #114 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
No, it's actually a decent concept.
In fact, buddhism (though it falls more under a philosophy) probably has been the most successful in keeping peace.

However, I honestly believe that if something like religion is needed to keep people in line, those people have no hope. You need a almighty being to scare you, so you behave.
User avatar #99 to #91 - sirbutterballs (04/13/2013) [-]
It's more like people use religion to start wars with people they don't like. You're not supposed to kill anyone because of their beliefs, that's a sin. Don't blame religion blame the person.
User avatar #103 to #99 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
You are exactly right.
The problem is due to human nature, religion will be twisted and shaped to their needs.
People can't go around pointing fingers at each person that does something wrong, so the whole image of religion will be blamed instead.

And those who do something wrong in the name of religion are not held accountable by others of the same religion. so once again, religion is to blame, religion is bad
User avatar #107 to #103 - sirbutterballs (04/13/2013) [-]
The thing is, it's not meant to be. It's supposed to bring people together not use it to squander over petty details. In my opinion, it would be better if we simply said 'We're going to kill you and you're people because we can and want your land and resources.' That's the problem with humanity, too many lies.
User avatar #108 to #107 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
and what better way to say more lies than religion.

sad truth
User avatar #111 to #108 - sirbutterballs (04/13/2013) [-]
...Politics
User avatar #112 to #111 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
problem with politics is that you don't get as much blind devotion compared to religion.
People actually do question stuff
#116 to #112 - sirbutterballs (04/13/2013) [-]
Whatevs, everyone's entitled to their opinion. I'll just be sitin' here doin' my own thing. Interesting conversation kwanzalord, it was nice meeting you.
User avatar #118 to #116 - kwanzalord (04/13/2013) [-]
you as well
#84 to #77 - tehphire (04/13/2013) [-]
That's an awesome gif.
User avatar #78 to #77 - monkeysniper (04/13/2013) [-]
That's why i hate religion, it divides people, imagine if people got past religion, ethnicity, age, everything and managed to work together for once.
+3
#72 - zombieplayground has deleted their comment [-]
#70 - tazze (04/13/2013) [-]
fun fact: Martin Sheen hates the Illusive Man, even though he voices him
User avatar #95 to #70 - bobbybeats (04/13/2013) [-]
Fun fact: Martin sheen has been arrested more than Charlie sheen,
#67 - anonymous (04/13/2013) [-]
its funny how constantly posts with the old testament are posted to show "haha Christians are stupid bible is stupid" when old testiment as no longer followed after the coming of jesus and all the old laws are no longer to be followed and the thing about shrimp ect and pork is back in the day we could clean it properly so eating those food would kill you.
#132 to #67 - xmattx (04/13/2013) [-]
I hate when christians use this argument...   
   

			
			You need to login to view this link
			
		 testament.htm   
   
Jesus himself (according to the bible) advocated the old testament as the inspired word of god.
I hate when christians use this argument...

You need to login to view this link testament.htm

Jesus himself (according to the bible) advocated the old testament as the inspired word of god.
#168 to #132 - xmattx (04/14/2013) [-]
Get thumbed down for stating fact... Not that I'm surprised with the people on this site. I used to be christian myself. Picking and choosing what you want to follow isn't how religion works.
0
#140 to #132 - xmattx has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #65 - dinosauraids (04/13/2013) [-]
You see the protests for Homosexual marriage,

You don't see the protests for divorce between a man and woman who hate each other
User avatar #59 - williamweatherford (04/13/2013) [-]
Reading the comments, watching the news, hearing friends and family talk about the issue of gay marriage... it's just disappointing and pointless.

Jesus Christ would've been friends with gays. He was able to look past whatever may or may not be considered sin. And He didn't give one **** what anyone thought about that, nor did He give a **** about keeping the old laws.

He was more concerned with actually bringing people to Him; He cared about their relationship with God, not their relationships with others. And I don't think He would care if gays could legally marry or raise children. All that would matter to Him is people's salvation.

So there. My opinion: BOTH sides of the gay rights debate can shut the **** up, especially the Christians.
User avatar #113 to #59 - danniegurl (04/13/2013) [-]
You need to login to view this link

I really like this article.
I mean, Jesus wouldn't just not hate gays, or prostitutes, or whoever. He would be friends with them, and show how God has made life good. He would love us all, regardless of our sins.
That's what really annoys me about some Christians. They say gay marriage shouldn't be allowed because it's a sin, but EVERYONE sins and all sin is seen as equal in God's eyes-- as evil.
So, instead of embracing the sinners and showing how God has made a difference in their lives, they condemn them and push them even further away from God than they ever would have been.
User avatar #138 to #113 - williamweatherford (04/13/2013) [-]
"The Bible that I read says that God did not send Jesus to condemn the world but to save it... it was because "God so loved the world." That is the God I know, and I long for others to know."

That is a great line. Thanks for sharing this article!
User avatar #139 to #138 - danniegurl (04/13/2013) [-]
no problem!
#58 - felixjarl ONLINE (04/13/2013) [-]
User avatar #159 to #58 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
How to get thumbs on FJ:

Step 1: Post above image.
Step 2: Gain undeserved thumbs.
User avatar #98 to #58 - mynameisfoo (04/13/2013) [-]
except, you know, spider man was made for entertainment purposes, not to be a bloody religious doctrine. we know that spider man isn't real, believing God depends on one's belief
User avatar #158 to #98 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
YES! SOMEONE GETS IT!
#134 to #98 - xmattx (04/13/2013) [-]
belief in something doesnt make it real.
User avatar #150 to #134 - mynameisfoo (04/13/2013) [-]
I didn't say it does, I'm just saying one thing is something that we have no way of knowing if it's real or not besides how we interpret life and events or what we believe and another was made solely for entertainment and is obviously false
#169 to #150 - xmattx (04/14/2013) [-]
You're going off-point. The argument was that spiderman books give the same amount of evidence for spiderman as the bible gives for god. It's irrelevant what the original purpose of each book is, the fact is that as they stand, they each provide the same evidence for their subject matter. At least spiderman books don't contradict themselves as much as the bible does. I'm also getting sick of factual comments being thumbed down on this site.
User avatar #50 - twilightsparkleftw (04/13/2013) [-]
Indeed.
User avatar #49 - darman (04/13/2013) [-]
It makes me sad watching the West Wing and seeing the same issues presented in that show are the same we are dealing with today. If only we could move forward as a nation.
[ 175 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)