Coreeece

no but they did kill civilians. Your point is? American lives worth more than UK or Irish lives? If they kill their own, then it's OK to let them in as long as they promise not to kill us? Man, You people are really getting a bit too glaring - you may wanna dial it down a bit. There are refugees trying to escape the grasp of various terrorist organizations all over world - terrorists in India, Sri Lanka and all throughout Africa. We generally don't close the border since the terrorists in these areas - for the most part - aren't preoccupied with bringing death to America, nor are they particularly interested in bringing world war and widespread terror. Tamil Tigers, the LRA and Janjaweed typically express political discontent through terror in their respective locales. Again, we have a proposed refugee admissions quota of about 70,000 annually. I didn't hear Obama and all his other puppets lamenting over "a betrayal of our values" when the entire refugee family reunification program was suspended in 2008 after it was discovered that Kenyans were defrauding the system. Where was all the political posturing and cries of "xenophobia!" in 2011 when Iraqi refugee processing was scaled back significantly after it was discovered that Iraqi operatives found their way into the US by way of the refuge program? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

But that dude is white and probably a Christian, how can we call him a terrorist? Growing up in the the 90's, the word terrorist brought to mind images of Oklahoma City - however, in 2001 Al-Qaeda effectively stole the title from Mcveigh fair and square. The Provisional IRA killed far more than McVeigh, yet no-one called for closing the border to Irish catholics. Why would they? Same reason as some people think the border should be closed to Syrian refugees following the Paris attack. Did the IRA claim that "American blood is best, and we will taste it soon." Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

I'm not sure if I'm following that part correctly. Can you please clarify? One of the shareholders of the trust company is the Covenant Church in Chicago. Nothing I've read suggests that Lakewood (their church) has anything to do with it. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Then it shouldn't be so hard for you to provide at least one link to a source that states it so "clearly and most certainly." Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

But that dude is white and probably a Christian, how can we call him a terrorist? Growing up in the the 90's, the word terrorist brought to mind images of Oklahoma City - however, in 2001 Al-Qaeda effectively stole the title from Mcveigh fair and square. The Provisional IRA killed far more than McVeigh, yet no-one called for closing the border to Irish catholics. Why would they? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Me neither, but probably for different reasons. Personally, I'm just not a big fan of the "prosperity gospel" I'm sure the trust provides benefits that exceed anything a homestead credit would offer, but that's a far cry from "tax free." Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

He doesn't own them. An outfit called "Covenant Trust" holds the deeds. I'm not exactly sure what that all means from a tax/tax exempt point of view. Does that mean that the trust company allows Osteen to live there for free? Is there not $200,000 in property taxes due every year? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

You're preaching to the choir... Normiss said that the house was tax free, so I'm wondering where the $200,000+ in property taxes per year is at? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

I was simply showing how the perception has changed. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

How about proving yourself right for once? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

I think it's called "Extreme Couponing," but you should pitch that name to the producers. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1836419/ Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

But that dude is white and probably a Christian, how can we call him a terrorist? Growing up in the the 90's, the word terrorist brought to mind images of Oklahoma City - however, in 2001 Al-Qaeda effectively stole the title from Mcveigh fair and square. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

no it's not, what are you talking about? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Religions are all communicable forms of mental illness. Some are more virulent than others... Or, perhaps organized religion manipulates the inherent human characteristics of faith, whereby the mentally ill become more susceptible to virulent manifestations of that faith. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Did they have skittles? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Again, you continue to ignore that the Soviets employed the League of Militant Atheists that did in fact intimidate and kill under the name of atheism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Militant_Atheists The CPSU Central Committee delegated to the LMG full powers to launch a great antireligious attack with the objective of completely eliminating religion from the country, granting them the right to mobilize all public organizations. In 1929, the Second Congress changed the society's name to The Union of Belligerent (or Militant) Atheists. At this Second Congress of Atheists, Nikolai Bukharin, the editor of Pravda, called for the extermination of religion "at the tip of the bayonet." There, Yaroslavsky also made the following declaration: "It is our duty to destroy every religious world-concept... If the destruction of ten million human beings, as happened in the last war, should be necessary for the triumph of one definite class, then that must be done and it will be done." congress called on public institutions to treat antireligious propaganda as an inseparable part of their work and to provide regular funding for it. "There can be no doubt that the fact that the new state of the USSR led by the communist party, with a program permeated by the spirit of militant atheism, gives the reason why this state is successfully surmounting the great difficulties that stand in its way - that neither "heavenly powers" nor the exhortations of all the priests in all the world can prevent its attaining its aims it has set itself." - Yaroslavsky Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

The answer as usual is probably a little bit of both and somewhere in between. Belief in Christ will be evidenced by a positive change in behavior, however, I don't think ones political view on refugee policy and it's perceived threat on national security is a means by which one's faith should be measured. Many referrals and applications from refugees around the world are denied in the US for a variety of reasons every year, yet we typically manage to take in the proposed quota of 70,000 refugee admissions annually, not to mention the 2-4 billion in financial aid given for the Syrian crisis alone - hardly a "betrayal of our deepest values." I didn't hear Obama talking about "slamming the door in the face of refugees" when the Refugee Family Reunification Program was suspended because of "fraud" in 2008 - hell it wasn't even a perceived national security threat. I didn't hear Obama talking about "a betrayal of our values" when we missed our 70,000 refugee quota by 15,000 in 2011 when refugee processing was significantly scaled back due to Iraqi operatives that found their way into the US through the refugee program in 2009. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

We do, about 70,000+ a year for the past 40 years. You can bet that every one of those 70,000+ spots will be filled by poor, tired, huddled masses yearning to be free from oppression. This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Well that much is obvious - and according to the video, you're part of the problem as well: "If you're just someone firing off misguided missives of hate, you're helping ISIL." Says the guy who apparently thinks Islamic terrorism is somehow related to the church's tax exempt status. At the end of your rant you called for the removal of religious freedoms - hypocrite much? You're probably right. Communist regimes with the assistance of atheistic terrorist organizations like the LMG intimidated and tortured religious folks for years in a desperate attempt to maintain an atheistic state. In the end, 20+ million killed, yet religion still persists - as strong as ever, if not stronger. wtf does that have to do with Islamic extremists or, excuse me, "Jihadi Terrorist?" (if you prefer politically correct redundancy) Yes, that's exactly what you're saying. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

It's not racy, it's hackneyed and lazy. Wanna be really risque in your marketing? Make a dick joke. Aspercream had one a couple years back that lasted on TV only about a month. Tagline was, "you bet your sweet Aspercream!" That's an ass joke that would've worked much better for hemorrhoid treatment. In any event, I still think it was much better than the dick 'n bush ads. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Perhaps you didn't get it when I acknowledged in post 63 that atheistic leaders have not have always tortured or killed directly to promote atheism. You're also ignoring the history of the atheistic terrorist organizations that did. The quote that Kallend was responding to is from an objective audit of the relationship between religion, war and secular society that's derived from a multitude of credible sources. It's very informative and provides some perspective on the issue - highly recommended. The more important part of the quote that some people seem to be missing is this: "The common thread here linking the disposition to war of religious and atheistic states is absolutism: the more absolutist the state, the more likely it is to go to war." Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

"Atheist governments in the USSR, China and Russia were in fact the biggest perpetrators of mass violence that the world has ever seen, with both governments individually responsible for many more deaths than the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler. Apples and Oranges. If you're going to classify all murders committed by atheists as done for the purpose of promoting atheism, then you have to classify ALL murders committed by Christians as done in the name of Christianity. When you do that, Christianity wins hands down. Especially in the USA. Do you have a running tally? I'd venture to guess that atheists would win in the categories of efficiency and kill rate. It took Christians about 1500 years to build their body count after Constantine's militarization of Christianity. It took only a handful of atheistic goons to kill 100 million people in just the middle part of the 20th century alone - maniacal savages! Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

I love it when theists mention this. Nobody was killed in the name of atheism, they were in the name of a political ideology. Trying to link it to atheism is pathetic. Groups like the LMG used propaganda, intimidation and murder to maintain an atheistic state and eliminate religious expression. They even had their own banner! http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/File:Bezbozhnik_u_stanka_-_The_Fifth_Anniversary_of_the_Union_of_Militant_Atheists,_1930,_n._7.jpg There were over 100 million pages of anti-religious propaganda publications - books, brochures, magazines. Here are a few in case you missed them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bezbozhnik_u_stanka_15-1929.jpg https://img1.etsystatic.com/035/0/6202694/il_570xN.536329397_e9is.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bezbozhnik_u_stanka_22-1929.jpg The most chilling aspect about all this, is that the same bigoted ideology espoused by the LMG back then is practically the same ideology espoused by many atheists here today - with the exception of being overtly homicidal, of course. Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

No reason to get all defensive and lash out - it's just science. I wasn't asking you to take my word for it, but it does appear that we are predisposed to faith that tends to manifest itself in a variety of ways. You can read more about it here: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/08/evolutionary_st088461.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v455/n7216/full/4551038a.html On a lighter note, I think Stewie from Family Guy said it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMWgE1GFp0M Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Meh, just seems like more passive aggressive non-sense. If you were being "honest...No games, no hidden agenda... genuinely curious" then why not just ask him straight-up about the american muslims without all the clueless detective pretense - trying to draw a parallel that isn't there? Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour