Pat Robertson says what?

[phyco126]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12851397/

Seriously, I can see it now. The first hurricane to hit the US this year will be followed by: "I TOLD YOU SO! GOD IS GOING TO PUNISH US ALL! OMFGLOLOLOLOL111!1!11!" and "OH MY GOD PAT ROBERTSON WAS RIGHT WORSHIP HIM OMFGLOLOLOL!!111!!!1111"

[lucia24]

maybe he is right.. the world has seen some very bad weather.

[Werefrog]

Oh boy, Pat Robertson. He always has something to say. If not for him, we would never know which Supreme Court Justices to pray for God to kill. A lot of people say that they wish entertainers would just shut up about politics and perform. I wish the same about clergy.

[GhaleonOne]

Except not all clergy are like that. In fact, many of the theological circles out there really find some of what folks like Robertson and Falwell say to be a joke. Christianity can't be summed up based on what folks like that say anymore than Islam can be summed up based on Osama or Saddam's words and actions.

[phyco126]

Indeed (on what G1 said)

However, my point is that a blind monkey can say the same thing about a hurrican hitting the US and it will eventually happen sometime that year. Does it mean that God spoke to the monkey? Maybe if it came from a more respectable person (that *I* think is respectable) then I'll be more inclined to believe. I never rule out the possibility of forsight.

[Werefrog]

Except not all clergy are like that. In fact, many of the theological circles out there really find some of what folks like Robertson and Falwell say to be a joke. Christianity can't be summed up based on what folks like that say anymore than Islam can be summed up based on Osama or Saddam's words and actions.

Oh, no, I realize this, nor do all entertainers get involved in poiltics. I just feel that the political world degrades religion.

[GhaleonOne]

Does it mean that God spoke to the monkey? Maybe if it came from a more respectable person (that *I* think is respectable) then I'll be more inclined to believe. I never rule out the possibility of forsight.

Well, how did he word it? Was it Robertson saying it was based on gay marriage or some such thing like some of those folks have said in the past? If he just said he had a dream or vision about a big hurricane or something, I see nothing wrong with that. Of course, most folks won't buy into it, and in most cases, rightfully so. But, as a Christian, if it was someone I trusted saying they had some kind of dream or vision, that's another story. I wouldn't be able to believe in the majority of the Old Testament stories if I didn't believe in prophetic events and such. But that doesn't mean I'll blindly buy into something some TV preacher says either. And especially not when they're usually saying it as some kind of judgement against the random sin of the moment.

[JWL]

I have no idea why the media is so interested in what Pat Robertson has to say. The guy always speaks his mind, and sometimes, he says some really stupid stuff. Most of the time, however, there's absolutely nothing wrong with what he says.

In addition, Robertson's wacky comments often get exaggerated and become even more crazy. For example, the Supreme Court Justices thing. Robertson prayed for some of them to retire, not for them to be killed.

While Robertson's blending of religion and politics might be distasteful, I don't agree with a complete divide between the two. My own Catholic church teaches that in order to be good citizens we should participate in the political system, vote, speak out against injustice, etc.

[phyco126]

"If I heard the Lord right about 2006, the coasts of America will be lashed by storms," Robertson said May 8. On Wednesday, he added, "There well may be something as bad as a tsunami in the Pacific Northwest."

That's what he said G1. He worded it loosely. If storms hit, he'll be "right" and if they don't he'll say "Must have not heard the Lord right..."

[Kizyr]

I have no idea why the media is so interested in what Pat Robertson has to say. The guy always speaks his mind, and sometimes, he says some really stupid stuff. Most of the time, however, there's absolutely nothing wrong with what he says.

I find that most of the time when he is saying something very stupid or intentionally offensive, he's trying to publicize his comments. I don't have any sympathy for how his words are exaggerated, since I've always found his entire aim to be to encourage enmity between people.

While Robertson's blending of religion and politics might be distasteful, I don't agree with a complete divide between the two. My own Catholic church teaches that in order to be good citizens we should participate in the political system, vote, speak out against injustice, etc.

I wholeheartedly agree there... I spent most of my extracurricular time in college trying to get more Muslim students interested in being politically active, with regards to the faith's directions to protect our community and improve the society around us. Made harder by the fact of a lot of folks don't want us involved. KF

[Werefrog]

In addition, Robertson's wacky comments often get exaggerated and become even more crazy. For example, the Supreme Court Justices thing. Robertson prayed for some of them to retire, not for them to be killed.

"One justice is 83-years-old, another has cancer and another has a heart condition. Would it not be possible for God to put it in the minds of these three judges that the time has come to retire?"

Well, in this quote he only requests for them to retire. But by mentioning the heart condition and the cancer, it really seems as if he is implying that he wants one of them to die. Maybe I'm just reading between the lines too much.

[JWL]

I find that most of the time when he is saying something very stupid or intentionally offensive, he's trying to publicize his comments.

I haven't noticed that, but it may be true. However, Robertson clearly doesn't control NBC, yet they're repeating his comments anyway. I just don't get why the media cares. Robertson isn't an elected official. He might be a well known media personality, but the media hardly reports it every time, say, Howard Stern says something stupid or offensive.

I don't have any sympathy for how his words are exaggerated, since I've always found his entire aim to be to encourage enmity between people.

Regardless of your personal feelings for the man, it's not a good idea for anyone's words to be exaggerated. I feel that if people are going to dislike Robertson, they should dislike him for what he's actually said, not for what somebody else claims he said.

Well, in this quote he only requests for them to retire. But by mentioning the heart condition and the cancer, it really seems as if he is implying that he wants one of them to die. Maybe I'm just reading between the lines too much.

Most likely you are applying more sinister motives to a man you find unseemly, if not loathsome, to begin with. If you ask me, there's nothing wrong with saying that you want officials to retire if they wield political power in a way that you don't like. Robertson's wackiness comes in when he prays for their retirement. Yet he really looks like a psycho when you assume that Robertson wants God to kill certain people.

[GhaleonOne]

Going by that quote only, it doesn't seem that he wants them to die, but rather that due to their health, they should step down as they were getting too old. But that's just what I got out of it. I don't know Robertson that well, because I don't watch his show really, so I can only comment based on that quote.

[Werefrog]

Most likely you are applying more sinister motives to a man you find unseemly, if not loathsome, to begin with. If you ask me, there's nothing wrong with saying that you want officials to retire if they wield political power in a way that you don't like. Robertson's wackiness comes in when he prays for their retirement. Yet he really looks like a psycho when you assume that Robertson wants God to kill certain people.

You know what... I'm not debating this.

[NallOne]

As an uninvolved third-party who is Agnostic and thinks rather lowly of Pat Robertson, I'm going to have to agree with G1 and JWL on this one. In that quote, it seems like a rather innocent statement that they should retire due to their health, not that he wishes death upon them or for their health to get worse. I mean it could very well be just an excuse to avoid saying he doesn't like them, but it still seems rather innocent.

Though I have to admit I do enjoy watching FoxNews dig up old interviews with him when he is a guest and point out his off-the-wall statments. (Like Sharon being killed, for example).

[Imperial Knight]

Here's the entire text of Robertson's letter, which puts the quote into context. You can all obviously make your own judgments, but I find it to have some creepy undertones.

"Dear Fellow American,

Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, wrote:

"You seem to think that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of constitutional interpretation, a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one that would place us under the tyranny of an oligarchy."


How wise Jefferson was. Yet even Jefferson could not have foreseen what the Supreme Court has done to the Constitution of the United States since 1962. Just think what five unelected judges have done to our nation's moral framework.

1. In 1962, they ruled prayer out of the public schools.
2. In 1963, they ruled the Bible out of public schools.
3. In 1973, they applied a "right of privacy" not found in the Constitution as the basis for opening the door to the slaughter of more than 43,000,000 innocent unborn children.
4. Subsequent federal courts have ruled the Ten Commandments were illegal in schools, that statues of Jesus were illegal in public parks, that prayers on a map in North Carolina were illegal, and that it was illegal for little elementary school children to give thanks over their milk and cookies at snack time.
5. Now, the Supreme Court has declared a constitutional right to consensual sodomy and, by the language in its decision, has opened the door to homosexual marriages, bigamy, legalized prostitution, and even incest.



The framers of our Constitution never intended anything like this to take place in our land. Yet we seem to be helpless to do anything about it. Why? Because we are under the tyranny of a nonelected oligarchy. Just think, five unelected men and women who serve for life can change the moral fabric of our nation and take away the protections which our elected legislators have wisely put in place.

But there is a higher tribunal than the United States Supreme Court. There is the Judge of all the earth. We must earnestly come before Him now and cry out for redress of our grievances. He loves America as much as we do, and He does not wish to destroy it. But no culture has ever endured which has turned openly to homosexuality. And no society has ever been spared the wrath of God which has been guilty of slaughtering tens of millions of the innocent.

In short, by its distorted reading of the religion clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and its "discovery" of emanations from the 14th Amendment called "penumbras," the Supreme Court is bringing upon this nation the wrath of God when the precious liberties that we love so much may be taken away from all of us.

Would you join with me and many others in crying out to our Lord to change the Court? If we fast and pray and earnestly seek God's face, then He will hear our prayer and give us relief.
One justice is 83 years old, another has cancer, and another has a heart condition. Would it not be possible for God to put it in the minds of these three judges that the time has come to retire? With their retirement and the appointment of conservative judges, a massive change in federal jurisprudence can take place.

We can have a court that no longer legislates from the bench the wishes of The New York Times and The Washington Post, but which will earnestly seek to interpret the Constitution as it is written and to give meaning to the centuries of moral standards which have undergirded this wonderful country called the United States of America.

Please join us in prayer to support a massive prayer offensive that we are going to call Operation Supreme Court Freedom.

"With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26).

God bless you.
Yours in Christ,
Pat Robertson"

[phyco126]

Bah, I couldn't force myself to read through it all. I couldn't disagree more with this guy on his views. True, I don't believe in abortion, but at the same time there are times when it is saddly called for. And the fact that I think it was the right choice in 4 of the 5 rulings.

I remember praying right before lunch in 3rd grade. The prayer was lead by our teacher, and to think now that she shouldn't have done that. I hold nothing against her, he NEVER made anyone pray, she asked for a moment of silence for those who didn't want to pray.

Eh, I believe in God, but I also believe in seperation of Church and State. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'll go to hell. Like I care. Religion in government just causes retarded problems.

[JWL]

Religion in government just causes retarded problems.

It didn't seem to cause any problems inbetween 1776 and 1962. One of George Washington's first acts as President of the United States was to call for a national day of prayer to give thanks to the Creator; his "Thanksgiving Proclamation". Some Founding Fathers were nervous about this, but history has proven that their fears were unfounded.

There's a difference between saying that there's a separation between church and state (which is not in the Constitution) to saying that Congress is not allowed to pass laws which establish a religion (which IS in the Constitution).

In fact, banning voluntary prayer in public schools is a violation of the free exercise clause of the 1st Amendment. For nearly 200 years, this nation understood the difference between forcing someone to practice a national religion and allowing individuals - even government officials - to freely practice their religions. Today, we no longer understand this concept.

A couple of months ago, a reporter went up to Supreme Court Justice Scalia while he was exiting a Catholic mass and asked him if his Catholic faith interferes with his ability to be a fair judge. That is just insulting.

[YoshiMars]

As far as Mr. Robertson goes I feel that he's an extremist and his words should be taken with a grain of salt. I myself am a Christian but I do not for a second believe (for example) that God has sent the hurricanes to America to punish us for whatever the "sin of the moment" (Good way to phrase that G1) is.
The letter, to me, does sound a bit arrogant actually. I find his assumptions for how things should be rather one sided. It could just be me but I felt that as far as the letter goes, he could care less about other religions (and why should he? I doubt that matters to him) and other opinions. As far as I'm concerned abortions are the woman's choice and if a man or woman wants to be gay, that's their own business. Whatever happens in the bedroom stays in the bedroom, there is no reason for the government to be involved in that. I think there are more important things than who's sleeping with who that the elected officials should be concentrating on (though incidentally I am for at the very least allowing gay couples to have the same benefits as a married couple. Why not I say. They're still a couple...).

Course this is why I avoid television... everyone is bias in one form or another and I'd rather do my own research and form my own opinions. And if I'm wrong about God and those hurricanes... well... I hear there are some nice condos on the river Styx...

[GhaleonOne]

A couple of months ago, a reporter went up to Supreme Court Justice Scalia while he was exiting a Catholic mass and asked him if his Catholic faith interferes with his ability to be a fair judge. That is just insulting.

... seriously? That really IS insulting.