Skip

Well, I *would* have given to The Family Values Party,
May 20, 2001 6:26 PM   Subscribe

Well, I *would* have given to The Family Values Party, but, alas, I have tattoos. That makes me a sinner. Sinners can't donate. Neither can gays, women, gun owners, and the guy who sold me my gin this morning. Damn.
posted by jcterminal (17 comments total)

 
Hell, I feel like sending some money to his campaign...just to piss him off!
posted by jpoulos at 6:38 PM on May 20, 2001


Love that Photoshopped yarmulke!
posted by MrBaliHai at 6:48 PM on May 20, 2001


Good news for "female homosexuals," though... they can still donate.


didn't see anything in there stating that women in general can't donate.
posted by lizardboy at 6:54 PM on May 20, 2001


I found it an easier read by mad-libing every bolded "OUR HEAVENLY FATHER" with some rnd word.
posted by zerologik at 7:05 PM on May 20, 2001


Tobacco is the only legal product that I know of that there is documented evidence that 5,300 innocent people are killed from second hand smoke.

I'm not sure if I even know what comment to make about this. I can think of at least three right off the top of my head.
posted by tweebiscuit at 7:05 PM on May 20, 2001


Many are called. Few are chosen.
posted by Postroad at 7:22 PM on May 20, 2001


Hey, we already have a "bad web design" thread...
posted by dogwelder at 7:22 PM on May 20, 2001


haha dogwelder, i agree. i thought i'd seen bad websites, that was horrible.
posted by caren at 8:15 PM on May 20, 2001


If you use, grow, sell, promote, own stock, or work to manufacture alcohol products.

Does that count people who turn water into wine?
posted by dagnyscott at 8:24 PM on May 20, 2001


I think my favorite bit was the disclaimer at the bottom: "Pd.Pol.Adv. Paid for by The Family Values Party to elect Tom Wells". Oh, they paid for that? AOL doesn't give you 900 hours for free anymore?
posted by RylandDotNet at 8:34 PM on May 20, 2001


actively, or passively participate in male homosexual acts, or tell others that male homosexual acts are not against GOD'S HOLY LIVE-GIVING LAWS
What does this say? "We Still Love Lesbians." We know where he gets his kicks.
posted by benjh at 8:55 PM on May 20, 2001


When I read tripe like that it makes me almost embarrased to be an ordained minister...but as most of you have pointed out - there is NO clear logic to their statements - it is fundamentalist claptrap at it's very worst...
posted by RevGreg at 1:11 AM on May 21, 2001


A few thoughts. First, these restrictions are only for people who want to give money to the party.
All who wish to contribute their time and labor in helping with the Family Values Party (FVP) work or help in working on the presidential campaign are welcome and are encouraged to volunteer, but when it comes to giving money there are some serious restrictions.
So you see if you want to volunteer they'll accept you even if you're a tatooed homosexual alcoholic cigar smoking abortionist. That said, if you ignore the homophobia and the anti-choice stuff I like the idea of a party only accepting money from people who agree with it's principles. Imagine if the democrats or the republicans did that. Oh wait a minute I forgot that they have no principles.
posted by rdr at 2:08 AM on May 21, 2001


When I read tripe like that it makes me almost embarrased to be an ordained minister...but as most of you have pointed out - there is NO clear logic to their statements - it is fundamentalist claptrap at it's very worst...

The problem with any of it, is that there's no clear way to divine rationalism or logic to any of it anyways, anytime. That goes for any true belief. It's great that you, RevGreg, a Christian minister, can post here among a mostly liberal and forgiving crowd and rarely be taken to task. As in a community like this you'll tend not to have to endure the vitriol of incensed atheists nor aghast Christian fundamentalists. Yet regardless, you believe and preach that which cannot be backed up emperically, only really shown to appeal emotionally to hard up, empty lives. You bring someone to Christ; what then do they do? Supppose that that someone then is then "led astray" into another flavor of Christianity, such as that of our good Tom Wells.

Suppose it was you who "witnessed" to Tom Wells. Are you to be commended for bringing such a monster to Christ?

Is it that "perfect" idea of Christ that has made him the monster?

Have you "succeeded" in the goals of all Christendom simply by dint of him now being a Christian via your personal testimony?

If you disagree with him politically, could it be said that you both believe in the same god and are both actively doing his work?

Where's the arbiter?
posted by crasspastor at 3:06 AM on May 21, 2001


> AOL doesn't give you 900 hours for free anymore?

They do, but you have to use 'em up in the first week.
posted by jfuller at 7:04 AM on May 21, 2001


I hate to tell you this, but this smells like a faux-site to me ... just a little too over the top. All it's missing is a links to Betty Bowers!
posted by bclark at 7:12 AM on May 21, 2001


lizardboy: Good news for "female homosexuals," though... they can still donate.

not if they have tattoos!!!!
posted by lumiere at 10:33 AM on May 21, 2001


« Older People are stupid.   |   VoterMarch Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post