Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Focus on THIS
How does Focus on the Family dare call itself a "Christian" organization and *brag* of its opposition to this?
Members of the foreign operations subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee have voted to double President Bush’s budget request for The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
It's not a U.S. program, it's an international fund ...
The Global Fund is a joint public-private Swiss foundation that operates under the auspices of a board of directors largely dominated by an alphabet soup of United Nations-affiliated international organizations — including the World Health Organization (WHO), the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and the World Bank. Private corporations also contribute.
GOD FORBID.
Read all about it.
Weep in the comments.
--ER
Members of the foreign operations subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee have voted to double President Bush’s budget request for The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
It's not a U.S. program, it's an international fund ...
The Global Fund is a joint public-private Swiss foundation that operates under the auspices of a board of directors largely dominated by an alphabet soup of United Nations-affiliated international organizations — including the World Health Organization (WHO), the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and the World Bank. Private corporations also contribute.
GOD FORBID.
Read all about it.
Weep in the comments.
--ER
Comments:
<< Home
I will dance in the streets and praise God when this alleged "Christian" organization collapses on the whited sepulchur of the founder's selfish self!
They never do go away. They just (shudder) evolve. Take the Newspaper the Christian Science Monitor as an example. Once you have a complex of excessive not for profit salaries involved, it becomes the boards objective to protect the organization to perpetuate its payroll if nothing else. FOTF will follow some such course, meanwhile it will pursue its evangelite agenda and produce far more unintended negativity that productivity.
Maybe, just maybe it may evolve to be somthing more. Now that would be worth praying for.
Maybe, just maybe it may evolve to be somthing more. Now that would be worth praying for.
# posted by 
: 10:32 PM
: 10:32 PM
The Christian Science Monitor was started in 1908 by Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of the Church of Christ, Scientist. Even at the beginning it was never a "rag" as per my example it has evolved passed its founder.
Some things evolve up, some things evolve down. Evolution is not always "progressive".
And yes I actually know Humans that work for FOTF, I think ER might as well, hell we even have one who visit this site on occassion.
Some things evolve up, some things evolve down. Evolution is not always "progressive".
And yes I actually know Humans that work for FOTF, I think ER might as well, hell we even have one who visit this site on occassion.
# posted by : 7:15 AM
: 7:15 AM
The Christian Science Monitor is definitely an example of evolving up. Great paper. And, truth be told, the Moonie-born Washington Times ain't a bad paper. Conservative. But a good paper nonetheless.
Quick: Find my a righty who will acknowledgee that the WaPo, while a liberal paper, is a good 'un!
Sheila, I just read a wonderful speech by Henry Ward Beecher, who was one of the first public men to dare accept evolution and adjust his faith accordingly. Guess what? His faith survived -- it EVOLVED. God may be "unchanging," but I doubt it -- and human perception of Him definitely is not. If I could type worth a dang, I'd input the text. Stillmight if I find time.
I'm sure not the best example of a "true" Christian -- 'cause there ain't no such thing, save Jesus His Self!
But I sure do know a con when I see one. And the Dobsonites are the modern real-life descendents of the fictional Elmer Gantry's dupes. Their political "spin," like ALL spin, is dishonesty spritzed with some smell-good. It's still dishonesty, it's still a lie, and it's unJesusian.
Quick: Find my a righty who will acknowledgee that the WaPo, while a liberal paper, is a good 'un!
Sheila, I just read a wonderful speech by Henry Ward Beecher, who was one of the first public men to dare accept evolution and adjust his faith accordingly. Guess what? His faith survived -- it EVOLVED. God may be "unchanging," but I doubt it -- and human perception of Him definitely is not. If I could type worth a dang, I'd input the text. Stillmight if I find time.
I'm sure not the best example of a "true" Christian -- 'cause there ain't no such thing, save Jesus His Self!
But I sure do know a con when I see one. And the Dobsonites are the modern real-life descendents of the fictional Elmer Gantry's dupes. Their political "spin," like ALL spin, is dishonesty spritzed with some smell-good. It's still dishonesty, it's still a lie, and it's unJesusian.
ER,
How in the FUCK did you get past that horrible home page at family.org?
I have to go take some aspirin now...talk about bad layout!
How in the FUCK did you get past that horrible home page at family.org?
I have to go take some aspirin now...talk about bad layout!
You ask how does FOTF dare call itself a "Christian" orgsnization and "brag" of it's opposition?
Well you might actually read the article before drawing conclusions. But I understand it's difficult to do that when you have preconcieved notions.
Then, you might notice that they ware not objecting to the allocation of funds to The Global Fund to fight AIDS, etc.
They are objecting to the additional U.S. contribution, which comes at the expense of more effective, accountable plans like PEPFAR, which stands for the President's Emergency Program for AIDS Relief.
Just as the article says.
The United Nations is corrupt. It is rife with scandal and misappropriation of funds. FOTF points out, rightly, "we have very, very little control over how it allocates money."
They also point out, also rightly, that the program the funds will go to are programs that support needle exchange programs, that have been proven ineffective and even make things worse, and abortion, which FOTF (and most Christians) abhor, the legalization of prostitution, and other agendas that run counter-productive to curing AIDS.
To trust the likes of Kofi Annan with your tax dollars is akin to throwing a high percentage of your hard earned money into a toilet, and then releasing hordes of AIDS infected prostitutes into Africa with orders to give services away for free.
Throwing good money after bad money and watching the UN organizations distribute it happily into their own pockets without doing a damn thing to fund research into AIDS cures is hardly an endeavor that right thinking Christian Americans would support, given the history of such failed United Nations run programs like the Oil for food program which worked so effectively to making Saddam richer and his people poorer.
You ask how? That's how.
Well you might actually read the article before drawing conclusions. But I understand it's difficult to do that when you have preconcieved notions.
Then, you might notice that they ware not objecting to the allocation of funds to The Global Fund to fight AIDS, etc.
They are objecting to the additional U.S. contribution, which comes at the expense of more effective, accountable plans like PEPFAR, which stands for the President's Emergency Program for AIDS Relief.
Just as the article says.
The United Nations is corrupt. It is rife with scandal and misappropriation of funds. FOTF points out, rightly, "we have very, very little control over how it allocates money."
They also point out, also rightly, that the program the funds will go to are programs that support needle exchange programs, that have been proven ineffective and even make things worse, and abortion, which FOTF (and most Christians) abhor, the legalization of prostitution, and other agendas that run counter-productive to curing AIDS.
To trust the likes of Kofi Annan with your tax dollars is akin to throwing a high percentage of your hard earned money into a toilet, and then releasing hordes of AIDS infected prostitutes into Africa with orders to give services away for free.
Throwing good money after bad money and watching the UN organizations distribute it happily into their own pockets without doing a damn thing to fund research into AIDS cures is hardly an endeavor that right thinking Christian Americans would support, given the history of such failed United Nations run programs like the Oil for food program which worked so effectively to making Saddam richer and his people poorer.
You ask how? That's how.
Mark I turned off my tolerance for your prattle when you actually said killing a few of the Mexicans coming into this country illegally was a good thing, then I called you on it, and you said it again. Your opinions mean less than nothing to me. "Most Christians" oppose murder. That leaves you out.
Post a Comment
<< Home
