Was Jim Carrey Right About the Christian Right?

By Michael Brown Published on November 25, 2018

According to actor Jim Carrey, America will soon “find out once and for all that the Christian right has never been about morality, it’s been about holding on to power and using morality to do so.” Was he right?

Let’s say that Carrey was talking about conservative, primarily white, evangelicals. Is it true that they (or, we) have been more interested in holding on to power than standing for morality? And is it true that they (or, we) simply use morality as a means to an end?

The answer is absolutely, categorically not — and I can say this as someone who would be classified as part of the “Christian right” and who knows many of the leaders in the so-called “Christian right.” I can also say this as someone who raised a question very similar to Carrey’s in my recent book on Trump and evangelicals. (In other words, I am not tone deaf to the accusation.)

“American democracy rests on the belief in the reality of God and His respect for the individual.” — Billy Graham

Speaking of evangelicals who supported Trump, I asked, “Did these evangelicals (especially the leaders) sell their souls for Donald Trump? Did they compromise their convictions to gain a seat at the table?”

While I can’t speak for all of them, I can speak for those I know personally. In each case, the answer is no. They were voting to preserve American liberties, not to gain a seat at the table.

With Billy Graham

I recently wrote about Billy Graham’s warnings from 1962 as he raised his strong concerns about organized public prayer being removed from the schools.

His warning had nothing whatsoever to do with “holding on to power” and everything to do with preserving a moral God-consciousness in the nation. As he said, “American democracy rests on the belief in the reality of God and His respect for the individual. Ours is a freedom under law. But it is also a freedom that will evaporate if the religious foundations upon which it has been built are taken away.”

His goal was to preserve freedom, not to establish a theocracy.

What About Francis Schaeffer?

Back in October, I cited warnings from the philosopher and theologian Francis Schaeffer in which he also raised serious concerns about the moral deterioration of our society.

As early as 1968, with prophetic precision and with a specific focus on sexual issues and the importance of gender distinctions, he could already point to a serious decline in our standards. Yet in this case too, his warnings had nothing to do with holding on to power, nor was morality being used as a tool to maintain governmental control.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

In his words, “It is imperative that Christians realize the conclusions which are being drawn as a result of the death of absolutes.”

Failure to realize this would result in societal collapse. And so, Schaeffer was pointing to a moral and spiritual crisis, urging believers to wake up and see the handwriting on the wall. It was not a call for political action in order to maintain control.

Or the Moral Majority?

It is very true that the Moral Majority, founded in 1979 by Rev. Jerry Falwell, included a strong call to political involvement, urging Christian conservatives to get out and vote.

But here too, Carrey’s understanding of things is backwards.

In other words, it was not Christians using morality as a means to hold on to power. Rather, it was Christians burdened about the loss of morality in our country who were encouraged to vote for candidates that would push back against the downward slide.

Did the lines sometimes get blurred, to the point that the Moral Majority became an appendage of the Republican Party? Yes, to some extent, those lines did get blurred.

And is it possible that, to this moment, lines are blurred when believers identify primarily with one party, thereby looking to that party to help see their agenda realized? Certainly, this does happen, both with liberals (i.e. “progressives”) and conservatives.

Voting for Values

But the fact is that the reason the “Christian right” votes primarily Republican is because: 1) the Republican Party platform largely mirrors their conservative values when it comes to life, family, Israel, freedom, the economy, and the function of government; 2) the Democratic Party platform is diametrically opposed to most of our most important spiritual and moral values; 3) we oppose judicial activism and want to see Constitutional justices appointed to our courts; and 4) we believe the radical left is fighting against our most fundamental freedoms, including the freedoms of speech, conscience, and religion.

I suggest that Jim Carrey (and others who share his convictions) would do well to ask themselves a series of simple questions.

So, we’re not trying to maintain a seat at the table because we want to stay in power. And we would vote the Republican Party out in a heartbeat if their platform changed and we found others who would represent our values.

I suggest, then, that Jim Carrey (and others who share his convictions) would do well to ask themselves a series of simple questions.

Sincere Convictions

First, Mr. Carrey, when you express your outrage against Donald Trump is it because you find him morally offensive and a threat to our nation?

Second, if your answer is yes, then do you vote for Democratic candidates because you believe they will do a better job of fighting against the dangerous, conservative “right”?

Third, are you therefore using your moral outrage in order to gain political power, or are you voting for candidates who share your moral outrage?

Fourth, assuming that you are not using your moral outrage as a tool but are sincere in your convictions, why is it so hard to understand that those of us on the right feel the same way, just from the opposite side of the spectrum?

One Simple Question

Or, to reduce this whole article to one simple question: Mr. Carrey, if you and your ilk can be sincerely motivated, why can’t you recognize that those of us on the right are likewise sincere?

Or, perhaps, there’s a more fundamental problem? Perhaps, Mr. Carrey, it’s that you don’t believe Christian conservatives can ever be sincere?

If that’s the case, I suggest you get to know some of them up close and personal. It might just change your perspective and even your life.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Trilemma

    I think Mr. Carrey might be thinking that the Christian right and the political right are the same thing. I would agree with him if he had said, “find out once and for all that the political right has never been about morality, it’s been about holding on to power and using morality to do so.” For the Christian right, it’s all about getting everyone else to live according to their morality and using power to do it. The political right, wanting to hold onto power, promises to impose the morality of the Christian right in order to get votes. The Christian right votes to help the political right hold onto power in hopes that the political right will make good on their promises.

    • Jason Trena Dagenhart

      Isn’t that what EVERY political party (ideology, movement, etc.) EVER created is trying to do? What kind of political ideology would form together to support values that aren’t theirs? Every time a person votes they are imposing their values (religious or otherwise) on the people around them. EVERY TIME!!!

      • What does Truth owe to error?

        • Ken Abbott


      • Juan Garcia

        That’s why the founding fathers of America were adamantly opposed to “factions” (political parties) gaining power in our nation.

      • Trilemma

        Every time a person votes they are hoping the person they voted for will impose the values the voter wants. The voter may or may not get what he wants.

        • Jason Trena Dagenhart

          I don’t understand that idea. Is a Christian supposed to be ashamed of that? I certainly am not, and I know that my opponents constituents aren’t ashamed of that. The only way you could stop that is to deny Religious people the right to vote. Yeah I really don’t feel guilty about trying to “force my values on society” those values are attached to my ballot and the only way you can separate them is to deny my right to vote based on my religion. Is that what Jim Carrey wants?

          • Trilemma

            Everyone has the right to vote according to their values in the hopes of getting their values imposed on others. When the Democrats got control of the federal government, they imposed Obamacare on everyone. When Republicans got control of a state government, they imposed bathroom bills on everyone. It’s up to the courts to decide what’s constitutional or not. That’s how our government works.

          • And where the the room for Absokute Truth here in your silly deconstruction?

    • “Their morality,” dear subversive? Is Truth Universal and Absolute or not?

      Truth is Universal, Eternal, Immutable, and Absolute. That is reality and the position the Church takes because it is reality. If reality was different, the Church would take a different side.

      Now, belief in relative truth as sophecles and the gnostics and the liberals/marxists promoted is your view. It is not the view of the Church, so you claiming Christians push “their morals” as if we came up with them on our own out of our ego is total BS.

      What carrey and you are doing (him being an open satanist and you denying it in public) are using the devil’s old truck of accusing your enemies of what you alone do.

      • Juan Garcia

        Very well stated Nigel. My argument exactly. To put it succinctly: I would use the logical argument:

        1.) If God does not exist then moral values and duties cannot exist.
        2.) Moral values and duties exist.
        3.) Therefore, God exists.

        • Trilemma

          “If God does not exist then moral values and duties cannot exist,” is a false premise.

          • Not at all, God is the only valid foundation for anything.

            Despite treating your ego like a foundation, it isn’t one.

          • Juan Garcia

            Trilemma: a person needs to be humble enough to admit their mistake. In my haste to type on my phone I omitted the word “objective” before moral in premise 1 and 2. Re-read it with that term inserted and see if you still disagree.

        • If gods exist then morality can’t exist.

          Because if gods exist, then whatever they desire, we are compelled to call good, no matter how cruel and unjust it may be.

          If that is not the case, then gods cannot be called “good” unless the concept of goodness exists outside of deities.

          Consider Romans 2:14-15

          • Patmos

            You really shouldn’t quote scripture if it doesn’t back what you’re saying.

            On top of that, you really shouldn’t speak if all you blurt out are nonsensical reckonings.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Your Holiness, your self importance is revealed.

          • Holiness means that which is from another world, as in transcendent and from Heaven and not here.

            your marxism is the base thing that is the exact opposite of Holy.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Your lack of depth is revealed in your inability to recognize, that was an insult, not a debate point.

          • Well I don’t play childish games, I answered and informed.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            You insulted and invented. You digressed from the points.

          • ARB

            This entire argument relies upon a conflation of Moral Good and Benificiality. Moral Good is God’s Will for our lives. Beneficiality is what benefits humanity, overall or personally. These coincide due to the fact that our Creator is Love, and thus always wills for the ultimate benefit of humanity. Moral Good and Beneficiality are therefore inextricably correlated, resolving the supposed conundrum, but they are not conceptually identical.

            Why would God’s Will and Beneficiality be inextricably linked—i.e., why is it necessary that God is Love for His creation? Because it is precisely that which He has Willed it to be. As God is beyond time, His Will does not change. Therefore it is impossible for Him to Will anything other than the sustainment of His Will, which is to say the Benefit of His creation; to Will the destruction of the creation He has Willed into being would be self-contradiction, a foible only temporal, limited beings as we are capable of. Therefore God’s Will is identical with our Benefit—not as if God is a servant to His creation, but rather because the order of His creation is His own Will made manifest.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            “Moral Good and Beneficiality are therefore inextricably correlated,
            resolving the supposed conundrum, but they are not conceptually

            Ah what Jesus would have made of your word games.

          • It means that “temporal good” as sophecles promoted (ie “ends justify the means devilry) is not the same thing as actual Good.

          • God is the uncreated, uncontingent Prime Mover, stop pretending demons are “gods.”

            Good is anything as God created it to be. God creates out of Love, which means without regard to Himself and for the Good of the created.

            If by “cruel” you are referring to your own damnation. That was freely chosen by you and not by any defect.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Your last sentence is blasphemy.

          • blasphemy is the suicidal denial / denigration of God or God’s relation to man or man’s relation to God.

            Examples include:
            – suicide
            – devil worship / paganism
            – implicitly assuming God’s forgiveness

            Two of which I know were freely chosen by the reprobate I was repsonding to. I do not know of any suicide by them, outside of spiritual suicide by repeated blasphemy and partaking in devilry.

            God does not send people to hell, people freely request to be sent there by their evil actions and evil inclinations in service of the devil.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            That’s not even close to the definition of blasphemy.

            The rest has no connection to the point.

          • I explained what it is.

          • BobFromDistrict9


          • BobFromDistrict9

            Where did she mention demons as gods?

          • pagan “gods” as your kind are beholden to, are demons.

          • Juan Garcia

            First of all Zoe you need to recognize the logical fallacy of your strawman rebuttal. I did not say gods I said God, meaning a maximally greatest being. There can only be one. And your Roman’s reference proves my point perfectly. The gentiles referred to KNEW there were absolute objective moral values and duties that are written on the hearts of humanity. Those cannot be written BY humanity because they would not be absolute and objective, they would be individually perferencial.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Yet her argument is quite interesting as a way of looking at the question. Her citation backs up her analysis.

          • Only “interesting” if you cannot tell right from wrong, reprobate.

            Good is as God created things to be. There is no other standard. God is uncreated and uncontingent, therefore all is by His design.

            What your reprobate mind is showing here is called “evil.” This is decay caused by sin.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            I’m tired of your insults. I offered reasonable discussion, all you do is insult and make things up.

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

          • When you consider frantically devolving into a disassociative state while projecting in the hopes of making your ego feel better as “reasonable,” that certainly puts the rest of you into perspective.

            I wish I could say you were the worst reprobate I have seen. Unfortunately, I have seen worse, though that doesn’t mean you aren’t bad.

            Is the solar radiation thing referencing sodomy?

          • BobFromDistrict9

            It is an insult, just a pure insult. Do you not recognize it?

        • ARB

          Unfortunately, Juan, your argument falls apart on point #2. Your argument *specifically* demands that *objective*, not subjective, moral values and duties exist. The sad reality is that the moral compasses of most people today are so distorted by sin, self-absorbed and impulsive; that they bear little resemblance to God’s morality, informed as it is by His omniscience and universal Love for humanity. Most today have pitiable moral fiber–an understanding of morality comparable to a child convinced that candy is good and that vegetables are bad based only on sense of taste with no comprehension of either’s healthiness. And your argument does nothing to convince one equipped with such a naive moral compass.

          • Truth is Eternal, Immutable, and Universal. Morality (as in what you should do) is clearly defined.

            Because your kind defines “moral” and “immoral” in regards to whatever benefits your ego, that is where your problem wth such a simple statement lies.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            I missed Donald Trump’s comment, but you are obviously responding to DT. Or was that just one of his supporters?

          • I am talking to the reprobate my message is in response to. disqus clearly states what message I am responding to.

            you are projecting again

          • Juan Garcia

            Non compliance with objective moral values and duties does not defeat the idea that objective moral values and duties exist. The fact that you can look around and see people misbehaving is proof that you believe those standards do exist.

        • you should look up St Aquinas for more of those proofs.

          • Juan Garcia

            His “five ways” are frequently incorporated into my own discussions and writing. His “Summa Theologia” are fundamental to Christian soteriology. I also like the fact that he supports analogy as a legitimate method of developing theological arguments for knowing God through the creation. I also like his argument that faith and reason need not be at odds. Some criticize him for arguing against Augustine’s doctrines of revelation but read him carefully and one will find he never held that position, he was just arguing for a natural theology that could be used as a tool to prove the existance of God.

            What do you think about his claim of a vision that caused him to state shortly before his death that “All I have written seems like straw to me?”

          • It wasn’t a vision or a claim. St Aquinas met God, and knew he was selling God short with his works.

            St Aquinas died of depression because he realized his attempts to explain the infinite as if it was finite is futile. That said, they are useful and he is a Saint.

          • Juan Garcia

            I’ll agree with your explanation. I think we all fall short trying to do the same. I guess my question to you would be: Do you think meeting God is something necessary for salvation or is it reserved only for Sainted people like St. Aquinas?

          • It is reserved only for Saints, as there is no way into Heaven outside of the Church and a Saint simply means someone who is in Heaven.

            If you mean officially recognized Saints, that is a different thing. Those are people the Church hold up as an example for emulating.

            Origen is clearly in Heaven, but the Church refused to recognize him as a Saint because he castrated himself to stop his sexual urges. That is mortally sinful and not to be emulated.

            Simon de Montfort III not only funded the creation of the Dominican Order but defeated the proto-freemason satanists called the albegenisians. Not recognized as a Saint because he exterminated the albegenisian citizens to prevent them from spreading after he defeated their army.

            Ironically, he let the women and children live because he figured they would be happy to be freed from oppression. The women and children were actually true believers in satanism though and killed Simon with his back turned. Because Simon died, the leaders of the albegenesians (the count of tolouse, the rothschild’s, etc) managed to go into hiding before they could be caught.

            There is a reason God ordered even the women and children of pagan tribes be killed.

            Ultimately, Clergy are bookish people and therefore hold up bookish people to be emulated. Great warriors like Charles Martel, Simon Montfort III, Jan Sobieski, Don Juan of Austria, etc are snubbed for official Sainthood despite each of them saving the entire world from destruction in battle.

          • Juan Garcia

            It’s a few days late for a reply Nigel but it appears you monitor your comments and your responses and and I wondered if you could give me a definition of what you consider the Church

          • The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ and the Bride of Christ. Formed at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit consecrated the Apostles (the last Prophets of the Old Covenant) as the first Bishops of the New and Eternal Covenant.

            It is the perfection of Isreal as the members of the Old Covenant was promised, headed by Christ who fulfilled the promises of Isreal.

          • Juan Garcia

            Just an observation: The official Roman Catholic Church description is the One Holy, catholic, and Apostolic Church.

            Do you have any comments on the difference you see here?

          • Grammar.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            God never ordered innocent people killed. God most certainly never ordered children killed.

            If your god ordered innocent people and esp children, killed than your god is false and does not get capitalized.

          • Never has God ordered innocent people killed. God has ordered guilty people to be executed to make fallen man learn that guilty people must be executed to keep our societies safe.

            That is the problem you have, and what makes you nervous: there is nothing sacred about truly guilty people.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            If the children were ordered killed than innocent people were ordered killed. QED.

          • young people over the age of 7 are considered rational enough by God and therefore by the Church to be judged fully for their sinful actions.

            As lenin said, if he could brainwash a child as a communist, they would be a communist forever. Just because they are children does not mean they do not do satanic and evil things. Most satanists get involved with their covens before the age of 10.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            You did not specify a minimum age, and the Church reached a decision not supported by either modern psychology nor religious consideration. It was an arbitrary decision. No sane person considers a 7 yr old capable of making decisions leading to a death penalty.

            Your Lenin comment goes back to ancient Christian teachings.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            A saint would not make it up as he goes, as you just did.

          • A Saint is someone in Heaven. Something your reprobate mind and devilry is keeping you from.

            St Aquinas is a Doctor of the Church, THE Doctor of the Church. There is a reason for this, and that is because all of St Aquinas’ work was gained by a lot of Good, hard thinking. Similarly how everything the Church has achieved is because of Good, hard thinking.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Your arrogance and lies are keeping you from Heaven.

            Isn’t assuming the powers of God as yours a form of blasphemy?

            St Aquinas is a “Doctor of the Church” in the Catholic Church.

            Unless you are Catholic your use of that defense is fraud.

            As I posted before, isn’t assuming unto yourself powers of God a form of Blasphemy?

            Which pagans? Pretending all pagans believed the same thing is stupid.

            However, both Jewish and Islamic teachings say to kill one innocent person is as if you killed the entire world. What is your position on that.

          • pagans are primitive people who worship demons because they do not know who God is or what God is. They see a demon making rain or a storm and worship without any rational thought applied. This is how you act, though you worship demons through the proxy of a totalitarian marxism.

            The koran stole much of itself from the talmud. The talmud was written by the pharisees looking to reconsolidate their power after

          • BobFromDistrict9

            I thought it was the Torah. Hmmm…

            And if either was stolen for the Quran, so also it was stolen for the Bible. Hmmm…

            Since both derive from the Jewish scriptures.

            The rest of what you say is just you claiming the authority of God to judge the souls of others.

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

        • BobFromDistrict9


          • And screaming that to protect the demon in your head from the Truth does not seem to work.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            You make things up and pretend they apply to God.

            Just which sin is that?

          • I would call that the capital son of pride, by way of “gnosis” or the satanic belief that you will literally replace God with yourself by wishful thinking.

            This is shown very clearly in all of your messages, and then you project this via despair.

            I see this every single day in various forms, but it is rare for me to see someone as far gone as you are. It is very unpleasant, which is why it seems your demon has sent you to cause trouble.

      • BobFromDistrict9

        You may well be right…

        Hillary, Trump is Putin’s puppett.

        Trump, “You’re the puppet, you’re the puppet.”

        • hillary is the actual puppet, and evil people hate Truth so they say the exact opposite of the Truth.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Yes, so you are evil by your own testimony.

            Hillary is hated by Putin. Trump is Putin’s buddy/lap dog.

            You made up your claim which makes you a liar.

          • Again, despair is the mortal sin born of the capital sin of pride. The capital sin of pride is believing that you have usurped Divine Will.

            Now, you believe that you have replaced God with your ego by your delusion stated above. Of course, being proven wrong and totally riddled with sin disproves your delusion that you have achieved self-apotheosis. your pride won’t let you admit this to yourself though, but you think you can use this usurped authority you do not have to project your faults onto me as if that would absolve you. This is the main way you determine if despair is what you are seeing.

            It doesn’t work, but as I said, it is mortally sinful.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            I’m tired of your insults. I offered reasonable discussion, all you do is insult and make things up.

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

    • Patmos

      “For the Christian right, it’s all about getting everyone else to live according to their morality and using power to do it.”

      Where do you come up with this garbage? Do you pull it out of your behind?

      • ARB

        Agreed. At this point, at least, it’s not about forcing anyone else into our religious or moral system (the former has historically been very rare in the US; the latter has happened, however, encompassing both the abolitionist and temperance movements)—the political left has declared a war on several fundamental freedoms which we Christians need: namely, the freedom of religion to worship as we please (see Dr Eric Walsh); the freedom of speech to communicate and preach our faith truthfully (see the battles fought by the left to anathemize open Christianity by attempting to have outspoken Christians fired); and the freedom of conscience, to behave in accordance with our sincere beliefs (see the Colorodo Baker Case). All of these the left openly threatens to deny us, and so we are forced to confront the radical left, and of the two major political parties only the GOP is willing to–even ostensibly–defend our rights on these matters.

        • BobFromDistrict9

          Forcing others into accepting religious restrictions in the law has a long history in this country. Non Christians could not testify in court, for one. In some states, at least, you had to be Christian to be naturalized. I do not know if that was federal or just local.

          Every law compels you to comply with some moral dictates.

          “the political left has declared a war on several fundamental freedoms
          which we Christians need:”

          I call this a lie.

          “namely, the freedom of religion to worship as
          we please (see Dr Eric Walsh);”

          I am not familiar with the actual sermons by Dr Walsh, but I do equate the attempt to fire him with the removal of an FBI investigator and a DoJ lawyer for their comments about Donald Trump, with no evidence they ever did anything out of line. After all, if they found the evidence showed Donald Trump to be guilty, well, LEOs are supposed to be biased against those who break the law.

          “the freedom of speech to communicate and
          preach our faith truthfully (see the battles fought by the left to
          anathemize open Christianity by attempting to have outspoken Christians

          I do not know of any such attempts. As to preaching your faith truthfully, it is not permitted for the government to judge the truth of your beliefs, only if they are being preached in good faith… double meaning intended. A fake preacher could be subject to action, but mere disagreement on the meaning or the reality of the beliefs is not subject to government review.

          “The Left” has fought no such battles. As Will Rogers said, “I belong to no organized political party, I’m a Democrat”. The Republican party is now firmly locked down the the extreme elements and those beholden to the Billionaires.

          As to having outspoken Christians fired, it depends on what they said. I can imagine some things they could say that would require they be fired from either private corporations or government agencies. You would have to be more specific.

          “and the freedom of conscience, to behave in accordance with our
          sincere beliefs (see the Colorodo Baker Case). A”

          I suppose the civil rights act of 1964 should be included, as it did require people who might think mixing black and white people is against God’s will to conduct business with both.

          However, they at least had a sign out front saying whites only.

          At the very least, if you walk into a bakery and try to order a cake, and be refused because of some belief on the part of the baker that you should not be served, you should be allowed to sue.

          The least he could do, if he has beliefs that prevent him from serving you he should post a sign by the entrance.

          Single race, heterosexual, protestant, English language cakes only.

          No Irish need apply.

          That should cover his objections.

          Personally, I believe Jesus would bake the cake.

          • So you believe that God Himself would partake in a satanic ritual designed to mock His own Sacreament of marriage? God already answered what He thought of people mocking the Sacrament of Marriage by bringing about the deluge which He then remade the world after.

            In fact, the satanic mockery of marriage where you pretend to “marry” two men is what prompted God to say enough and erase the old earth to make a new one.

            The reason why Christians were only allowed to testify is that only Christians have a Love of Absolute Truth and rightfully consider lying a sin. All pagans consider lying permitted as long as it benefits you, as you show here.

            Also only Christians could be citizens because our country only functions when people are Good, honest, civilized people. Only Christians qualify for that. you can look up the self-destruction of marxism and paganism to see where that leads.

            The fixation on trump goes in hand with your washing over of Christian persecution.

            trump represents a sharp turn away from government dependence, meaning your means of establishing your marxist “god-state” are being made moot, and you hate him for that.

            Similarly, the Fabians knew that the “revolution” could not take place with the Church still standing. Therefore you consider it “revolutionary” to persecute Christians.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Where did you get the idea that God brought about the deluge because of mocking of the sacrament of marriage? What Satanic ritual? You are making it up.

            “Where do you find that “erase the whole Earth? ”

            Do you actually suggest God would even consider that and yet allow the selling of women for marriage, giving them away as property even for marriage?

            Actually, the entire Christian belief in lying as a sin goes to the Old Testament, which is Jewish, and the Quran also continues that tradition.

            Pagans had strong respect for those who told the truth. Since you lied in your accusation you disprove your claim, unless you are not a Christian.

            Again, Jesus was a Jew and the commandment against lying is Jewish.

            Trump is guilty of everyone of the 7 Deadly sins, over and over.

            Yet you support him?

            Marxist God State? Marxism is a near forgotten theory, with no real support in any major nation in the world. Even China has forgotten it.

            You lie and lie and lie. I understood the ultimate impossibility of communism before you were even capable of thinking it through. Which, BTW, I doubt you are even now.

            My entire political philosophy is built around the teachings of Jesus, but you really don’t know them so how would you understand?

          • Each satanic ritual seeks to mock or reverse a Sacrament. your kind has long tried to mock Marriage by pretending to “marry” two men.

            That you claim God is in support of it is blasphemy on top of blasphemy. Actual blasphemy, what you have decided to dive into in this comment section repeatedly, is the third worst sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance.

            The quaran is a regularly changing political document intended to excuse a totalitarian political system masquerading as a pagan state religion. Nothing of value there, though they do swear on quarans in the higher rank freemason meetings, so that might be where you learned to pretend to respect that form of devilry.

            The pagans believed, as sophecles promoted, in what is called a “temporal good.” The idea being that it is bad to get caught doing wrong as you lose your reputation, but if you get away with it you retain your reputation. This is presented in the modern world by your marxism’s “ends justify the means” nonsense. Therefore pagans will lie, especially if it suits them. One major example is the mohammedan principle of taquiya, or the requirement to tell any lie or do anything needed to push subjugation of man to their totalitarian “god-government.”

            Christ is God, not a “Jew.” Christ is not a man born from a mother and father’s union. Christ was implanted in Mary’s womb as He was already concieved in Heaven at the beginning of time.

            Again, your fixation on trump is because he presents a roadblock in what you were promised was an unchallenged march into overthrowing God’s order. This is why you hate him, because you could not possible understand how the devil’s promises to you could be defeated so easily. Of course, the devil is a liar so the devil’s promises are worth nothing. It seems you have not realized this at all.

            Chesterton once said that those like you try to protect themselves from scrutiny by denying your own believes. you are a par excellence example of a reprobate and a marxist and yet you deny both.

            As CS Lewis said, people who are truly evil cannot recognize yourself.

            I have no doubt you think you are Christian, as you must think God is remade in your image and therefore resembles whatever sinfulness you are taken by at the moment, but that does not mean you are.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            “The quaran is a regularly changing political document intended to excuse
            a totalitarian political system masquerading as a pagan state religion.”

            The earliest version of the New Testament known was written more than 150 years after Jesus’ death. It was written in Greek, not Aramaic which Jesus would have spoken.

            The oldest known version of the Quran was written no later than a dozen years after Muhammad died, according to radio carbon dating. It was written in Arabic, the language Muhammad spoke. Other versions from not too long after that are known and studied by scholars.

            So, the Quran is unchanging, as the current versions are in the same language as the original, and translations are subject to review against the originals.

            Whereas that cannot be said of the New Testament.

            So, no, the Quran is NOT changing.

            ” One major example is the mohammedan principle of taquiya, or the requirement to tell any lie or do anything needed to push subjugation of man to their totalitarian “god-government.””

            The Quran allows lying only under few circumstances. One is war as war consists of lie. One is to make peace. One is if you are threatened with death if you admit you are a Muslim.

            It is forbidden to harm Christians or Jews unless in self defense, as the Jews are the source of the original teachings, and Jesus is not just a prophet to Islam, but a greater prophet than Muhammad.

            The rest of your post is pretty much all insults and lies, so please insert them where they will not be subject to solar radiation.

      • BobFromDistrict9

        You are right, it’s really about getting richer and richer.

        • Another example of your base marxism only seeing things in regards to your own projected greed.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            You are not even bright enough to recognize the insult.

    • BobFromDistrict9

      Once upon a time there was a difference between Christian conservatives and the political right.

      There probably still are Christian conservatives, but they are far overshadowed by Trump supporters.

      • The problem with needing to paint in such broad strokes is that it means you aren’t able to think clearly on the subject.

        • BobFromDistrict9

          With you as a perfect example I need no more.

  • Brand New Key

    An actor lecturing on morals.

    OK, . . .

  • Jason Trena Dagenhart

    An avowed Socialist (from Canada BTW) admitting that Christian Morals are impeding his agenda? Sounds good to me I wonder what else I could do? Maybe something like; Love my country? Love my President? Fly our flag? Love my neighbor? Etc.

  • Euromoto

    Jim who?

  • apollo

    We are known by our enemies.

  • tz1

    Crossposted from Town Hall:

    A Pox on both your houses.

    Over this same timespan I’ve been trying to shrink and reduce government.

    Jim Carrey is rich but wants to take my money and use it for what he wants to accomplish instead of paying for it himself. He wants the courts and the police which have been becoming jackboots to put a gun to my head and force me to bake a cake for a Gay Wedding. Personally I don’t think the Government should have anything to do with marriage but that was the Moral Majority’s error, using Caesar to try to render things to God, instead of shrinking Caesar.

    We have always had separation of church and state, and we still should, but back in 1960 and more before, the state was this small thing that rarely bothered anyone and the church was ubiquitous. Now it is reversed where the state micromanages every part of our lives and the church is the small thing that rarely bothers anyone.

    But note that Carrey and Brown are arguing on who should control power, neither are suggesting we shrink government back to JFK sized, much less pre-Wilsonian. And yes, BECAUSE government is now a huge coercive and violent force, it really matters and is a proper cause for fear who controls that huge force.

    What would Carrey have to FEAR from a tiny government? Only that he could not force half of the USA to act leftist at the point of a pea shooter. He would have to spend his money, make reasonable arguments, demonstrate that his way was better. What would Brown fear?

    Both sides have created a dictatorial tyrannical monster that has ceased responding to EITHER base until Trump, and now Ocasio-Cortez maybe if she isn’t coopted like the Tea Party was.

    So my question to Carrey would be if he would be willing to “destroy the ring” so Trump would not be able to do anything he objects to, but neither would Obama, Clinton, or SCOTUS, or the other courts or the bureaucracy or DoJ or the rest so that neither the Democrats or Republicans could impose by force or policy their “morality” on the other side?

    • tz1

      A comment asked what makes me think Christians/Brown wants a Tyranny. Here is my response preemptively:

      They may not want it but don’t oppose it. The USCCB and Catholic charities get billions in federal cash. Why ANY 501c3 except to muzzle churches on things like Abortion.
      I can name exactly TWO pastors/priests that are against any form of gun control.
      Find any that say that taxation is theft, and you can’t rob me by proxy to help the poor, sick, elderly.
      And what about single mothers, or man-fault divorce?

      No, any random “Christian” has a 95% chance of wanting tyranny, but they will explain it is a nice, small tyranny in line with the Gospel.

      Go and see what we fought the revolutionary war over. Most states have higher rate sales taxes.

      Welfare, the EPA, Education, Energy, etc. are NOT enumerated in the Constitution. I could make a list longer than any post I’ve ever done.

      Has Brown come out against any of these violatoins? Add fiat currency, civil asset forfeiture, eminent domain to support crony corporations, solitary confinement, vaccine kangaroo courts (constitution says anything civil over $20 goes to a jury), …

      Or even taxpayer support for Israel. If I don’t wish to, Brown will still insist that someone put a gun to my head and say pay or else instead of raising private funds (and Palestinian supporters would have equal rights to do so).

      And the Catholic Church is chided over Constantine. Washington DC is more oppressive than Diocleaian and more corrupt than the Borgia Popes, but I don’t expect a new reformation. It would cost too much – cash

      • BobFromDistrict9

        There is a lot in the constitution that is not enumerated, but justified by clauses.

        How is the interstate highway system justified in the constitution? I know do you?

        Where do you find airports and aircraft in the constitution? I know, do you?

        I can find where the education and health care are in the constitution, can you?

        Same for energy.

        I do see where the federal government has failed in it’s constitutional duty to end gerrymandering, can you?

        Environmental protection is one of the easiest things to find in the constitution.

        Guns are not mentioned in the constitution, not even the amendments. Arms are mentioned, but I doubt very many would agree with you that every citizen has the right to keep and bear surface to air missiles, rocket propelled grenades, bazookas, and nuclear weapons.

        Oh, and you must also believe, even a criminal before and after convicted, has the right to keep and bear arms in jail or prison.

        • tz1

          Eisenhower used defense – IMPROPERLY – to justify the interstate highway system though it could be done via state compact.
          Airports? You mean where the TSA can grab and rub your genitals?…It’s all constitutional? (No there is NO authorization for it being federal property as it is not a fort). Airports are STATE property, but the feds can put customs for international flights.
          Education and healthcare are NOT in the counstitution, and it explains why both are horrible because the feds got involved. Indoctrination centers for “communist core” where prayer is banned, and where we can’t buy drugs from Canada, or even visit a non AMA crony trade union doctor.
          That you can find Energy in the constitution means you can see fake emanations and penumbras – you probably find divorce, anti-misceganation, contraception, gay sex and gay marriage, and abortion to the point of birth “in the constitution”.
          Environmental protection was there in english common law against harming adjoining or downstream properties and doesn’t belong in the constittuion.
          And the right to keep arms? So the Goverment can amputate my legs if it wants to on a whim?

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Could be done does not matter. National defense is not subject to state agreement. However, I could also justify it as post roads, as they also are used to deliver mail.

            National defense was the reason and that is constitutional.

            “Airports? You mean where the TSA can grab and rub your genitals?”

            There were airports long before there was a TSA. If that is your go to response you really do have a sick mind.

            Some airports are state property some are local govt property. Many large airports are also the site of military installations. Honolulu airport was and is, I know the Madison Wisc and Chicago O’Hare were shared facilities, but I don’t know now. Toledo Ohio is.

            Military aircraft have to take off and land somewhere.

            The Feds can regulate even those they don’t own or even use, simply because air travel is interstate by it’s very nature.

            Health care was worse before the feds got involved. I was around then. Federal interference was trivial back then.

            US health care is top of the world in technology, but so is all the rest of the industrialized world in that area. Where it falls down is in cost and delivery. We have a lot of uninsured or under insured people, and yet our health care is 50% higher than Switzerland which is one of the most expensive. Back when Hillary was trying to get Hillary care Switzerland was just starting up on their national system. The cost difference between the two was not all that much. Switzerland got it, the US did not. Now Switzerland covers 100% of their people at a cost that, scaled to the US, would save about $1 trillion a year.

            You want to buy drugs from Canada’s socialist medical system?

            Doctor licensing is done by states.

            I can justify medical care because an awful lot of Americans are not fit for military service due to medical reasons. Same for school lunches, for that matter, as that was why Great Britain established school lunches before we did.

            Education has been a govt function since the early colonial days. However, the requirements were a lot less back then. As the military became more technology dependent the need for better education became more prominent. Today the military pays for a lot of college education, or the state National Guard. It is just needed that we have educated people who are loyal to this country.

            The first amendment forbids government support of religion.

            “you probably find divorce, anti-misceganation, contraception, gay sex
            and gay marriage, and abortion to the point of birth “in the

            You clearly lie and make things up all the time. Oh, and Roe v Wade does NOT go up to the point of birth.

            Energy is very heavily interstate.

            Plus, did you know our nuclear arsenal is maintained by a division of the Dept of Energy?

            The environment is so clearly interstate it should take no more explanation.

          • Switzerland will eventually run out of other people’s money. They save costs by giving government-quality care, which is worth nothing at all.

            The first amendment prevents the government from attacking the Church.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            All the industrialized countries have national health care plans that equal the quality of our health care but cover all their people.

            Their system costs 1/3rd less than ours. The would run out sooner using our system.

            The first amendment also prevents the government from supporting the church.

        • The things you mention are basic infrastructure, and there is no right to basic infrastructure.

          What the first 10 amendments to the constitution seek to establish is that the government shall not infringe upon the rights of man. Rights are given only by God, and are endowed at creation by the creator, and the government promises to not stand in the way of those.

          The arms mentioned in the constitution are weapons necessary for the populace to forcibly fight tyranny, tyranny like the marxism you promote.

          That is it.

          If you are looking to the government to give you rights, you are on a fool’s errand as the government is not God, no matter how much you absurdly think making the government into a “god-state” will apotheosize you and give you free lunches.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            It is your opinion that there is no right to basic infrastructure. The constitution is not a religious document, but a structure for the operation of a functioning government.

            No where in the constitution is God invoked. Rights were recognized by reason. The protection against self incrimination or double jeopardy is not a matter of any religious teaching I know of, but experience with government that allowed it.

            Again you lie. At no point have I proposed Marxism, nor do I support it, nor socialism. I recognize that the conduct of business must be regulated by an agency that does not participate in business to avoid the complete corruption of business.

            You never even thought that through at all, did you.

            Oh, and the world had massive tyranny long before anyone even thought of Marxism.

            Just who gets to decide what weapons are necessary to fight tyranny? I doubt very many would agree with you that every citizen has the right
            to keep and bear surface to air missiles, rocket propelled grenades,
            bazookas, and nuclear weapons.

            You didn’t even try to answer that. So I hit you with it again.

            “, no matter how much you absurdly think making the government into a “god-state” will apotheosize you and give you free lunches.”

            You cannot defend your position without lying about mine. Next time you respond do NOT invent any position for me.

            If you do all I will respond with is accusations of you lying, and accusations of you violating the commandment, coupled with foul language.

          • Right are given by God. There was no modern infrastructure at the time of Man’s creation. That you claim that modern infrastructure is a right in the hopes of getting free stuff to satiate your greed is silly.

            It is a ploy that is easy to see through and frankly your greed will never be fulfilled. you are too evil for that, as your greed is broke of pride and therefore are jealous of God ultimately.

            Man is created by God, so the constitution does invoke God, though jefferson’s freemason ego may have gotten in the way. It is a right for men to be free and exercise free will, that is not possible if we must live in fear of being incriminated by political enemies and rogue government as your marxism relies on to quash opposition.

            marxism is based on the protestant heresy which is based on islam which is based on heathenism which is based on gnosticism. There is nothing new about evil, it just changes its branding once in a while. All of it is just the devil’s powers and principalities trying to hide itself from people who aren’t that smart.

            I know all you can do when your ego is challenged is go into a disassociative state. That you can freely admit this is what you do is rare; although tell your demon to keep the cursing out of it.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            I do not claim that infrastructure is a right, I claim it is a necessity for the survival of a modern civilized state.

            God is not referenced in the constitution.

            The rest is more of your arrogant belief that you can see the souls of others, which only God can do.

            I’m tired of your insults.

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

    • No, tz1, keep your oozes and your curses to yourself and returned to you.

      Crux sacra sit mihi lux
      Non Draco sit mihi dux
      Sunt mala quae libas
      Ipse venana bibas
      Vade retro satana
      Nunquam suade mihi vana

      Again reprobate, I understand you go to lockean bs to nurse because of shame over sin and being too weak to be a Christian under pressure, but you REALLY need to stop poisoning yourself with freemasonry.

    • Carrey is not as rich as many of the Billionaires in Billionaire Trump’s Cabinet. They absolutely love the Tax Bill the Republican Congress passed. The richer you are, the less Tax you have to pay. That will be borne by the shrinking Middle Class.

      US Christianity ignores these explicit words in their Bibles as not being relevant in this Material World. They honour the Lord with their lips, but the heart is far from his, as it says in the Book.

      They are blind to the unfolding Revelation of the Realities in this MATERIAL world.
      These things say the Amen, the Faithful and True witness, the Beginning of the creation of God;
      I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot: I would you were cold or hot.

      So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.
      Because you say, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and DON’T KNOW that you are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

      I counsel you to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that you may be rich; and white raiment, that you may be clothed, and that the shame of your nakedness do not appear; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see.

      As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
      Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

      To those that overcome, will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
      He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

      Revelation 3

      These words in all Bibles are even more explicit,

      Go to now, you rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
      Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth eaten.
      Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. You have heaped treasure together FOR THE LAST DAYS.

      Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by FRAUD, cries: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord Almighty.

      You have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; you have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter.
      You have condemned and killed the just; and he does not resist you.

      Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waits for the precious fruit of the earth, and has long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.
      You also be patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draws close.
      Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest you be condemned: behold, the judge stands before the door.

      Take, my brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience.

      Behold, we count them happy which endure. You have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy.

      But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest you fall into condemnation.

      James 5

      When 3 Americans own as much wealth as the bottom 50% of all Americans, Christians dismiss Christ’s words,

      Then Jesus said to his disciples, Truly I say to you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
      And again I say to you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

      On the flip side, if Christians are silent on the Plutocracy, it is just vain repetition to say the Lord’s Prayer, ‘Thy kingdom come, thy will be don on Earth as it is in heaven’ if Christians on Earth aren’t going to do the works to make it so.

      The Star of David is made up of 2 pyramids inverse to each other. The solid one upright on a solid base, is the system God brings to earth. The inverse pyramid on it’s tip ready to topple over is the Plutocracy the rich had the labourers build to ensure the rich get richer and the poor poorer as is happening in this Material World Today the Christians support without question.

      • tz1

        Saywhat? This would be better linked to but the Stream refuses.
        So a very long blather which might contain some truth becomes irrelevant.

        If you wish to make a point, feel free to repost a consise, on-topic response.

        • BobFromDistrict9

          It was the most on topic response I have seen here.

          There is a great deal of truth there, but you are blind to it.

          • It is the opposite of Truth. It isn’t even a lie as a lie would contain at least some truth.

            What you are promoting is total falsehood, so much so that it is diabolic.

          • And you don’t know how to read.

            The Lord told me to remind you of his Word,
            For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

          • And you totally reject God for a totalitarian ideology based on gnosticism and the promise of free stuff without work.

            That you try to project this onto me and onto the Church means deep down you know what you are and by the mortal sin of despair you think projecting will absolve you.

      • BobFromDistrict9

        I have been reading down the list of responses, this is the first I have seen I believe understands what Jesus taught.

        • This famous line still happens after 2000 years,
          He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

          • That is referring to the Jews who had rejected God Himself, not the Church that Christ established and is at the Head of.

            comminist philosopher and fabian socialist antonio gramsci said that the weak will become communist if transcendent language is removed.

            This is why you spit on prayer and the Church. Without the transcendent, you only have your capital sin of greed and therefore do not understand anything except through greed. you then assume through despair that the Church is greedy like you are because our actual motivation is transcendent.

            God did not come here to make a totalitarian marxist state where “free stuff” is used to sucker in the greedy poor.

          • Glad to see my comment is driving you crazy, your imagination making up all kinds of stuff not in my comment.

            Christians did not exist as a recognized Sect of Judaism when Jesus said those words.

            The only really FREE thing People have is Freedom of Thought to make choices and govern their own Words they speak. You can believe what you want as we all can.

            He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

            Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

          • greed is the capital sin where you believe the possessions of others belong to you because you deem others unworthy and you as worthy. That is the sin that communism uses to attract people.

            pride is the capital sin where you believe you have stolen for yourself the Divine Will of God. This is the delusion that communism is based on, whereas you and your cabal honestly think you will achieve some sort of divinity if you subvert and overturn God’s plan.

            It is absurd and based on wishful thinking, but not just any wishful thinking, satanic wishful thinking.

            Judaism was abolished long ago with the Old Covenant. The modern form is based on the talmud, and was apocryphally created by the pharisees as a political system based on the idea of a “master race.” Christians are not Jews and Jews are not Christians. There can be Christians of semetic race, but there is no way to serve two masters.

            That you rightfully recognize that false Christians exist, all while spouting gnosticism, is a weapons-grade lack of self-awareness.

        • So you think Christ a prototype marxist ideologue who cares for income instead of souls?

          Venerable Fulton Sheen said this is because you cannot admit personal fault, and instead move only to social crimes because your marxism cannot account for it. Therefore you try to remove Christ from His Cross, and refuse to see the whole picture because it refutes you.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Sheen was a Catholic Bishop. Your commentary is unfit for mentioning Sheen in.

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

          • Venerable Sheen was an Archbishop and is currently in Heaven with confirmed miracles.

            Also one of the smartest and Holoest men to live

          • As for the Free Stuff, God put all the resources in this earth to benefit ALL of Mankind. It’s government of men who go to war against other Nations to get what God put in the ground for free.

            Your trolling indicates this is addressed to, ‘you cannot admit personal fault.’ My original comment that has you so upset, are not my words, but the words that are in your in your Bible. You know nothing about Christ.

            You can’t even understand or you haven’t seen it, the message of the Harvest, where the one who worked last, for only 1 hour, is paid the same as the one who worked by the sweat of his brow all day long. It’s not a matter of works.

            You haven’t seen or understand the Bible record of Christ influencing the 1st Christians to act and behave this way,

            As Christ said the Jewish religious leadership nullified the Word of God by their tradition,

            Christianity has done the same in the 2000 years since Christ otherwise this world would not be heading to a Masada-Holocaust II unawares. Some Christians are waking up. You are not one of them.

            And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
            And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
            And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
            Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
            Acts 2:44-47

            And like confirming a password, those ideas are confirmed again in Acts 4:32,
            And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.

            Naturally, the rich land and slave owners saw preaching that idea was a threat to their privilege and power, and had to stamp out the early Christians, throwing them to the lions, burning them as torches, and other brutalities.

            I suspect Karl Marx was reading the Bible in his cold London flat in and took those Biblical ideas, turning them into the Communist Manifesto.

          • Begging the question and misconstruing words out of context to justify a literally satanic system designed to make humanity go extinct does not make an argument.

            As I said, you have to completely forget the transcendent exists and then implicitly assume God created humanity to just laze around getting free stuff from exploitative, totalitarian, secularist governmental systems that did not exist until the late 1800’s.

            you cannot understand Prayer or Sacraments as they are transcendent, so you attribute some monetary, nefarious quality to them as you can only understand nefarious, money-based things as you are personally evil and only think about getting free money.

            you cannot understand why the Church exists, as the Church transcends earth, in fact 2/3rds of the Church operates outside of this plane of existence. What you can understand is nefarious, greedy governments as you figure a communist, nefarious, greedy government will give you free stuff. Therefore since you understand only nefarious, greedy governments, and the only thing you know about the Church is that it is opposed to communism and therefore your supposed free ride, you ultimately (and stupidly) think the Church is a nefarious, greedy government itself.

          • You assume a lot about me not knowing me.

            Can you explain this, “in fact 2/3rds of the Church operates outside of this plane of existence”

            And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
            His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
            And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
            And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. […] And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies,
            gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and
            against his army.

          • The Church on earth is called the Church Militant.

            There is Church Suffering in Purgatory, who might even have more people in it than there are on earth right now.

            Then there is Church Triumphant in Heaven.

            The minority of the Church is on earth.

            That you keep projecting your satanic evil of marxism onto the Church is not only despair but also blasphemy. Not a good idea, but your reprobate mind has an impediment to good ideas.

          • The Church on Earth is hardly Militant.

            I suggest you look up these verses in your Bible and while Marx didn’t live then. the ideas are Communist-Socialist whether you believe it or not.

            And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
            And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
            And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
            Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
            Acts 2:44-47

            And like confirming a password, those ideas are confirmed again in Acts 4:32,
            And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.

          • Woe to you who calls evil and good and good as evil.

            Once more, marxism is a retread of gnosticism and is based on the delusion that overthrowing God’s order with totalitarian government will somehow allow you to “be like gods.” How does that work? It doesn’t.

            Also, once more, it was accurately predicted that by removing transcendent language, the weak of the west would become marxists without thought of their own.

            This is because marxism cannot understand personal guilt, as that is a transcendent idea. Focusing on only social guilt, you immediately let your greed drive you.

      • As Venerable Fulton Sheen said about your specific malady here:

        The Western post-Christian civilization has picked up the Christ without His Cross. But a Christ without a sacrifice that reconciles the world to God is a cheap, feminized, colourless, itinerant preacher who deserves to be popular for His great Sermon on the Mount, but also merits unpopularity for what He said about His Divinity on the one hand, and divorce, judgment, and hell on the other. This sentimental Christ is patched together with a thousand commonplaces, sustained sometimes by academic etymologists who cannot see the Word for the letters, or distorted beyond personal recognition by a dogmatic principle that anything which is Divine must necessarily be a myth. Without His Cross, He becomes nothing more than a sultry precursor of democracy or a humanitarian who taught brotherhood without tears.

        This strange bit of anti-Jewish marxism with some freemason imagery thrown in is easily explainable.

        you hate prayer, the Church, Christians, etc because all of the above are transcendent. All of that will not allow you to immanetize the eschaton and get “free stuff” from the marxist “god-state” to fulfil your greed. So you think transcendent things are either useless or evil because it gets in your way or does not fulfil your satanic, worldly ambition.

        As gramsci said, without the transcendent permeating everything in the west, the weakest of the weak will be marxists like you are.

  • Jim Walker

    Jim Carrey is an empty vessel. Put a script in his mouth and he will be it.

  • faithful

    Terrific commentary!! Kudos – My hat off to you!

  • Patmos

    The moment we consider anything loons like Carrey or DeNiro say, is the moment we have lost our way. These nut cases spend their lives dressing up as other people, playing pretend.

  • Charles Burge

    I’m supposed to care about the opinion of someone best known for a movie called “Dumb and Dumber”?

  • Chip Crawford

    Too much about what “they” are saying or doing to us. What about all-out focus on bringing God to them? Are we so prepped and field engaged that we have any time at all for this kind of thing?

    • BobFromDistrict9

      God is already with a huge percentage of Liberals. Though the Right Wing Christians tend to give Him a bad name.

      • This “god” you refer to is the same “spirit” you think will apotheosize you after you overthrow God’s order?

        • BobFromDistrict9

          Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

          • Listen I get your demon is a bit flustered, especially with having to work through your mess of a mind, but at least tell him to make sense.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            I’m tired of your insults. I offered reasonable discussion, all you do is insult and make things up.

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

  • K Hillmann

    Carry has it backwards. Conservative Christians want power in order to enforce morals. But morals are not the end, they are the means to ends. What ends? -Peace, prosperity, and well being. I think nobody is opposed to those. They are just opposed to paying the price to obtain them, so enforcement is necessary.

    • BobFromDistrict9

      Lying is immoral, and that is what you just did.

      • K Hillmann

        Hey Bob, I agree with you that lying is immoral. However I am at a loss as to what you think I am lying about. Some more information?

        • bob is an open communist and is projecting onto you.

          marx said for his followers to accuse their enemies of what they themselves are guilty of.

        • BobFromDistrict9

          “Conservative Christians want power in order to enforce morals. But
          morals are not the end, they are the means to ends.”

          If you had evidence that all Conservative Christians want those things, you would have a point. However, you have no evidence, and from what is seen the purpose of most Conservative so called Christians is scoring brownie points with God.

          Thus your statement is false.

          “What ends? -Peace,
          prosperity, and well being. I think nobody is opposed to those. They
          are just opposed to paying the price to obtain them, so enforcement is

          Enforcement is a price.

          Oh, and Nigel is lying in his msg just below this.

          Though the fact that Trump accuses his enemies with what he is guilty of does suggest a bit of connection that supports hi Marx contention.

          • Christians are trying to return the country to before your enacted silly delusion that overthrowing God’s order would self-divinize you. This angers you because you really, honestly think you will be apotheosized though your “revolution.”

            Do you know what actually happens to “comrades” like you once you outlive your usefulness to the devil?

            That you insist I am lying though projection is just sad. Even one mortal sin is enough to kill your soul outright.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            I’m tired of your insults. I offered reasonable discussion, all you do is insult and make things up.

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

          • K Hillmann

            Notice that my claim is not “all” Conservative Christians… If you want a quantitative analysis I would say, the great majority. You haven’t seen or heard my evidence so why are you so quick to your conclusion? I am a Conservative Christian, and so I travel in Conservative Christian circles and those are my observations. Notice – I am not talking about so-called Christians. They exist too.

            As for scoring brownie points with God, a real Christian knows we don’t have too. Jesus Christ already scored all the brownie points we need with God. There’s nothing we can add.

      • And projection of this sort (where you try to absolve yourself by projecting your own faults) is mortally sinful.

        Also, what standard do you have for “morality?” How do you define it?

        Are you saying that Truth is now related to your ego and it is “immoral” to question your ego?

        Woe be to you who calls evil and Good and Good as evil.

        • BobFromDistrict9

          His comment that I objected to was about Carry, not about what I said.

          • And what I said to you is about your demonic words.

          • BobFromDistrict9

            Insert your comment where it will not be subject to solar radiation.

Lessons From a Stolen Bike
Alex Chediak
More from The Stream
Connect with Us