Fred Phelps thought that fags were special. They’re not.
Fags think that fags are special. They’re not.
None of us is special.
We all sin differently. Schadenfreude is a sin. (It’s a form of vengeance. “Schadenfreude is mine; I will laugh, saith the Lord.” Perhaps Fred Phelps got that bit right.)
You people are fucked in the head for rejoicing in another human beings death, no matter how much of a cunt he was.
I’d rather see them play a set out front than picket it!
Me too, bro. But I suspect that news article’s a hoax, anyway. So let’s have another ridiculously over-the-top Slayer fan video instead. 🙂
Just a note on Slayer. Slayer’s lyrics are sometimes anti-Christian, due in large part to the fact that guitarist Kerry King is a notorious atheist douche-bag. Notwithstanding that some heavy metal bands (whom I won’t name) are genuinely anti-Christian, Slayer is not really an anti-Christian band. Art is art. It’s just an image thing.
It’s not that these people believe in this stuff. It’s just … a cool imagery that goes along with the music …
Slayer is just a bunch of guys having fun. Metal is fun! Keep it metal!
God loves us all. As vocalist Tom Araya makes clear, “He doesn’t … God doesn’t hate.”
God loves us all. He loves fags, Fred Phelps, Slayer, the Schadenfreuders … and you. Repent!
Repent now and accept God’s gift of eternal life.
RIP Fred Phelps. (Goodbye and thanks for all the good excuses to post more Slayer.)
To: psychoactives@moh.govt.nz
Subject: Regulations Consultation
The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party exists to legalise cannabis for recreational, spiritual, medicinal and industrial purposes; to empower people to work together for peace and true justice; and to institute a proper and just balance between the power of the state and the rights and dignity of the individual.
Psychoactive substances regulations exists to give government some measure of control over what substances people use, how they use them, and who uses them.
Cannabis is not regulated. It is prohibited. Paradoxically, in the case of cannabis, prohibition means that cannabis is almost entirely uncontrolled. Nearly everyone who wants to use cannabis does so, including minors. For minors, cannabis is as readily available as alcohol.
Ostensibly, the purpose of cannabis prohibition is harm reduction. The three pillars of harm reduction are supply control, demand reduction and problem limitation. Under prohibition, there is no control of supply of, no reduction in demand for, and no limitation of problems caused by, cannabis.
Government must regulate cannabis if it is to gain any measure of control over who uses cannabis. Regulation is de facto legalisation. For the government and for the cannabis law reform movement, a regulated, taxable market in cannabis is win-win.
Various parties, including the Associate Minister of Health himself, have suggested that substances currently controlled (or not, in the case of cannabis) under the Misuse of Drugs Act might, in future, be controlled under the Psychoactive Substances Act. A simple legislative amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act removing cannabis from its schedules would immediately bring cannabis under the Psychoactive Substances Act, where its risk of harm could then be assessed against the same standards as will apply to any other psychoactive substance.
There is more than one way to skin a dead cat, and this is not the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party’s preferred pathway to cannabis law reform. However, the Party makes the present submission on the assumption that the future pathway to legal cannabis will be as has just been suggested.
Cannabis is not a substance, nor is it a product. It is a plant, a plant that anyone with a green thumb can grow. Therefore, many of the consultation questions in the supplied consultation document are inapplicable to cannabis. Since we do not have to answer all the questions, we answer only those questions we deem to be relevant.
Our main concerns are “truth in labelling” and appropriate measures to minimise access to cannabis by minors. Hence, the questions we answer below are mainly those concerning labelling and packaging (in Chapter 4 of the consultation document), and place of sale and advertising (in Chapter 5).
14. Are the proposed requirements and restrictions on labelling sufficient?
Yes.
15. Are the proposed requirements relating to health warnings sufficient?
Yes.
16. Are the proposed packaging requirements and restrictions sufficient?
Yes.
17. Do you agree with the proposal to restrict a packet to one dose? Please give reasons for your answer.
No. There is no need to restrict the size of a packet of cannabis. Because no one has ever overdosed on cannabis in all of human history. If there must be restriction, the size of a packet of cannabis should be restricted to 1 oz. There is no need for decimalisation.
18. Do you agree with the proposal that a dose, in whatever form the product takes, is split wherever possible?
No. Consumers can do this themselves with scissors or grinders.
19. Do you think there should be restrictions on the form products can take? If so, what forms do you think should and shouldn’t be allowed?
No. Cannabis should be allowed in smokeable, vaporisable, topical and edible forms.
20. Do you think there should be restrictions or requirements on the storage of psychoactive substances? If so, what should the restrictions or requirements be?
See below. (As previously noted, cannabis is neither a substance nor a product. It is a plant, but can be made into a value-added product.
21. Do you think restrictions or requirements should be set for the storage of approved products? If so, what should they be?
Yes. For security purposes, to prevent cannabis from falling into the hands of minors or of thieves who might on-sell to minors, cannabis retailers should store cannabis products under lock and key when not physically present on the retail premises.
22. Do you think restrictions or requirements should be set regarding the display of approved products? If so, what should they be?
Yes. We suggest that such restrictions or set requirements be in line with those applicable to other psychoactive products. Additionally open discussion around public health best practices such as plain packaging must occur, in the context of whatever is publicly acceptable for tobacco and alcohol should also be acceptable for cannabis.
23. Do you think restrictions or requirements should be set regarding the disposal of approved products? If so, what should they be?
Up in smoke. Persons disposing of cannabis must ensure that there are no minors or non-consenting adults downwind of the conflagration.
24. Do you think there should be signage requirements in the regulations? If so, please give specific suggestions.
25. Do you think the regulations should specify further places where approved products may not be sold? If so, please provide specific suggestions.
We have no special objections to regulations preventing the sale of cannabis near schools or other places where minors might otherwise tend to congregate.
26. Do you think the regulations should prescribe restrictions or requirements for advertisements of approved products? If so, please provide specific suggestions.
We have no special objections to the regulations that currently apply to advertisements for synthetic cannabinoid products also applying to advertisements for cannabis.
27. Do you think the regulations should prescribe restrictions or requirements on internet sales of approved products? If so, please provide specific suggestions.
We have no special objections to the restrictions and requirements that currently apply to Internet sales of synthetic cannabinoid products also applying to Internet sales of cannabis.
28. Do you think the regulations should prescribe restrictions or requirements on the advertising of approved products? If so, please provide specific suggestions.
We have no special objections to the restrictions and requirements that currently apply to the on-site advertising of cannabinoid products also applying to the on-site advertising of cannabis.
In closing, a few words about the fees and levies proposed (in Chapter 6 of the consultation document) and also on determining the risk of harm posed by cannabis.
The ALCP envisages that many commercial suppliers of legal cannabis will be small scale suppliers. The suggested fees and levies in the consultation document would be harshly punitive in the context of “cottage industry” cannabis. They would provide a major disincentive to comply with the regulations, and drive the cultivation and supply of cannabis underground, where it now is, uncontrolled by the government. We suggest that the PSRA sets the fees or levies payable by homegrown commercial cannabis suppliers commensurate with those set by authorities in the State of Colorado.
Cannabis has been tried and tested over several millennia. Risk of harm has already been determined. We know that cannabis poses no more than a very low risk of harm to those who choose to use it.
This submission was completed by Dr. Richard Goode, Vice President of the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party, on its behalf.
You know Fred Phelps. You loathe Fred Phelps. You despise everything he stands for, like his family members’ infamous protests at soldiers’ funerals with their awful “God Hates Fags” signs. They’ve been a symbol for many years of the religion-based animosity against the LGBT community — to the point that they’ve been labeled a “hate group” and even the most fundamentalist Christian groups denounce his church’s activities.
Nate Phelps … is Fred’s son and a former member of Westboro Baptist Church. He left the church, and therefore the core of the family, in 1976 when he was 18 years old and has since come out as an atheist, but he still keeps in touch with some of his extended family members, many of whom have also escaped from the church.
Tonight, on Facebook, Nate posted this:
I’ve learned that my father, Fred Phelps, Sr., pastor of the “God Hates Fags” Westboro Baptist Church, was ex-communicated from the “church” back in August of 2013. He is now on the edge of death at Midland Hospice house in Topeka, Kansas.
I’m not sure how I feel about this. Terribly ironic that his devotion to his god ends this way. Destroyed by the monster he made.
I feel sad for all the hurt he’s caused so many. I feel sad for those who will lose the grandfather and father they loved. And I’m bitterly angry that my family is blocking the family members who left from seeing him, and saying their good-byes.
It seems that Fred Phelps badly misconstrued the meaning of
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. (KJV)
As for Phelps and fags … sure, if you truly believe that people are destined for eternal conscious torment in hell, then arguably it is a loving act to warn them as loudly as you can of their impending doom, but I don’t think Fred Phelps really understood or practised the second great commandment. Do you?
I found reading his son Nate’s Facebook post incredibly sad but I find reading the reactions that news of Phelps’ impending demise has engendered even sadder. Here are some typical reactions I’ve seen on (or linked to from) Facebook.
Fuckin hate this cunt with a passion !! If he needs help gettin over that edge Holla !!!!
Someone give him a shove, and maybe stab him in the back a few times
sweet i so hope he lingers on in utter pain and has to spend the remainder of his miserable existence being hand bathed slowly by a FLAMING HOMOSEXUAL 3 times a day
To the people who spew such venom, I’ve simply got to ask. What did Fred Phelps ever do to you? Did he picket your funeral? Did he personally come and pee on your rug? Seventy times seven, peeps. And don’t you think you’re getting a bit overwrought over something that’s essentially a clown act?
Hate breeds hate. Luckily, I don’t loathe Fred Phelps and never did, but so many people do. Phelps bred hate and spread more than a little hate worldwide. And I’m guessing he might even have inspired some of heavy metal band Slayer’s lyrics. 🙂
No reciprocal hatred from me. Just a wish, in the spirit of yesterday’s St. Patrick’s day, that Phelps’s is “a quick death and an easy one.”
No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. (KJV)
“I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but I will not be mastered by anything. (NIV)
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: (KJV)
Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. (ESV)
For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. (ESV)
So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.
So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. (ESV)
Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? (ESV)
A top Auckland restaurateur has given $105,000 to the National Party, saying although he was too Right-wing for any political party, his “love” for the prime minister prompted him to do it.
[…]
Asked the reason for his largesse, restaurant owner Tony Astle said Mr Key was a customer he had known for several years.
“Well, I just love the prime minister. I’ve never really been a person to give money to parties, but I decided this time I would. We need them back again, we don’t need those other pretenders.”
The Honours Unit is a small team within the Cabinet Office, which is part of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
To my mind, there’s nothing inherently wrong with donating money to political parties, and there’s also nothing inherently wrong with accepting a Royal Honour (although my friend Gary, who put me on to this, would beg to differ!) for genuine culinary achievements and services to restaurateuring.
But had I been in Astle’s shoes? I’d not have accepted. At the very least, the timing is waaay inappropriate! Why couldn’t Astle have waited until Labour’s next term in government to accept his award?! One must not only behave honourably, one must be seen to behave honourably. (Perhaps the alternative version of the meme above is better. “There are some things that money can’t buy … like manners, morals and intelligence.”)
I don’t think the new vocalist Hernan Hermida is as good a vocalist as Mitch Lucker. But, even if he were, that’s not the point. The point is, he’s not Mitch Lucker.
Did the Doors get a new vocalist when Jim Morrison died? No, they did not. They quit. (After trying to carry on for a little while as a threesome, releasing two “Doors” albums into oblivion.) Some band members are essential to the identity of a band, not mere session musicians.
Mitch Lucker was such an essential. Too bad he had to get drunk, argue with his wife, then jump on his motorcyle only to wrap himself around a utility pole, leaving his wife a widow and his 5-year-old daughter fatherless. 😥
What is rationality? The truth is, it’s something that most of us don’t actually have.
But we sure like to kid ourselves.
Here’s a quote I saw on Facebook from someone called Deidra Mae Ryan.
I’ve been thinking a lot lately that a lot of homosexuals and their supporters consistently state that God made them this way and that it isn’t a biblical or church issue its a human rights issue.
I keep coming back to the fact that if God had intended homosexuality to be natural then he would’ve made it possible for us to procreate without the need of the opposite sex AND then why did God only create 1 woman and 1 man in the beginning. Then there is the fact that God destroyed 2 major cities in part due to homosexuality, Sodom and Gomorrah. If God had intended for homosexuality to be part of our natural being then why destroy those cities?
Personally I believe people get so steeped in their sin that they have blinders on and refuse to see the truth. I see it over and over, not just with sexual sins. They don’t want to see and admit that they are wrong. What’s more, is that it’s our human nature to justify all our wrong choices, even if that means we make up our own truth…case in point – Homosexuals and their supporters coming up with every excuse in the book to justify the choice of homosexuality.
We all do it with our own individual sins.
Please note that this is not a judgement on homosexuals and homosexuality. I’m also not convinced that Ryan’s logic is sound. I post this for her conclusion, “I believe people get so steeped in their sin that they have blinders on and refuse to see the truth …” This is so very true.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye. (KJV)
It’s also very true that people get so steeped in their own particular worldview and its presuppositions that they have blinders on and refuse to see the truth.
For a long time, I accepted the tenets of atheistic materialism. They seemed obviously true. And I rejected the tenets of Christianity. They seemed obviously false. And I had plenty of arguments with which to ably defend my worldview. But then I thought about what I was doing. Doing exactly that. Using rational argument to defend a worldview I already had. As opposed to putting all my presuppositions aside and taking all the arguments, both for and against theism, together and on their own merits, to see where they would lead (if, in fact, they lead anywhere).
[People] don’t want to see and admit that they are wrong. What’s more, is that it’s our human nature to justify all our wrong choices, even if that means we make up our own truth.
Man is not the rational animal. He’s the rationalising animal.
I acknowledge that I am generalising from my own intellectual habits to those of others, but I think that it’s legit to do so. I figure that other people have corrupt minds like mine.
I suggest that for the most part we all believe our own bullshit. Unashamedly.
I strive for intellectual honesty. I’ve recently reviewed many of the arguments for and against God’s existence, and tried to leave my ideological baggage at the door. I used to find the Design Argument unsatisfying inconclusive. Now I find it disconcertingly suggestive! I used to have serious doubts about God’s existence. Now I have serious doubts about his non-existence!
My Humean scepticism has stood me in good stead. I realise that man can truly know nothing based on reasoning from his limited sense data alone, unless he posits the existence of a guarantor, e.g., God. This was Descartes’ way out of radical scepticism. God’s existence is taken to be axiomatic. Yes, it’s a bootstrapping method of escape. But so are all the others, e.g., positing a uniform and self-sufficient Nature, which is one of the methodological axioms of science and a metaphysical axiom of scientism.
From the perspective of an atheistic materialistic worldview, the tenets of the atheistic materialistic worldview make sense. But from the perspective of a Christian worldview, the tenets of the Christian worldview make even more sense. But not, perhaps, until one has adopted that very perspective.
How’s that for a rationalisation of my religious conversion? 😉
Still falls the rain,
the veils of darkness shroud
the blackened trees, which,
contorted by some unseen
violence, shed their tired
leaves, and bend their boughs
toward a grey earth of severed
bird wings. among the grasses,
poppies bleed before a
gesticulating death, and young
rabbits, born dead in traps,
stand motionless, as though
guarding the silence that
surrounds and threatens to engulf
all those that would listen.
Mute birds, tired of repeating
yesterdays terrors, huddle together
in the recesses of dark corners,
heads turned from the dead, black
swan that floats upturned in a
small pool in the hollow.
there emerges from this pool
a faint sensual mist, that
traces its way upwards to
caress the chipped feet of
the headless martyr’s statue, whose
only achievement was to die to
soon, and who couldn’t wait to
lose.
the cataract of darkness form
fully, the long black night begins,
yet still, by the lake a young girl waits,
unseeing she believes herself unseen,
she smiles, faintly at the distant
tolling bell, and the still falling rain.
On Friday 13 February 1970 Black Sabbath released their eponymous debut album.
The Gospel is that the Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose from the dead showing his victory over sin and death and guaranteeing our salvation and justification before God.
Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord *Shall* be saved.
For by grace are ye saved, through faith… it is the gift of God.
Not of works lest any man should boast.
For God commendeth his love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ.
You cannot *add* or take away anything from this…. God’s ordained prescription for salvation in this age.
You cannot deny Christ’s Sacrifice and resurrection and be saved.
You cant say “I’m a good person.. I dont deserve to go to hell”…. for there is none Righteous no not one, For all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God.
If you deny that it was necessary for Christ to shed his blood for you…. you reject the gift of God.
False preachers of the Law say that a person must keep the Law to be saved…. ie they add *works* as necessary for salvation.
They prove they dont understand the Gospel of grace at all!
They fail to ‘Rightly divide’ the word of truth and so twist the scriptures to say what they want…. by mis-applying the old testament, the Kingdom preaching of Christ, St Peter, St James, etc…. and corrupt the Gospel of grace into Slavery under the Mosaic Law.
They add things like baptism, like keeping the Sabbath etc as necessary for salvation.
These ‘additions tend to enslave those whom they deceive into obeying *The Church hierarchy*….. ensnare them in tithing etc.
This is to deny the Liberating Power of the Cross, which sets us free from the Law.
If all this seems confusing….. Satan Laughs and spreads his wings…. He created this confusion to keep you from the Simple truth.
That Christ has paid the penalty of our sins and that if we simply ask God to save us in Christ’s name…. we will be saved indeed… no ifs…. no But’s….
Christ came to save us Sinners. No matter who you are or how evil you have been, or what your personal struggles and vices are.…. Christ s Blood can save you!
Rejoice in the Love and GRACE of God our Heavenly Father.
Tim Wikiriwhi
Protestant King James Bible believer Dispensationalist Libertarian Independent.
Today was Peter Dunne’s first day back as Associate Minister of Health. I never thought I’d say it, but welcome back, Peter!
Yesterday was Todd McClay’s last day as interim Associate Minister of Health. Yesterday McClay went full retard.
In his swansong announcement, McClay welcomed the decision by the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority to withdraw five psychoactive products from the market.
The five products were: Anarchy, Voodoo, Karma, AK47, and Northern Lights Primo. Their interim product approval numbers were (respectively): P0002, P0003, P0004, P0008, and P0038. Their licences have now been revoked.
Let’s take a closer look at two of these products, AK47 and Northern Lights Primo. Here are screenshots from the Ministry of Health’s interim product approvals page prior to their revocation. (Google’s latest cached copy of the page is here.)
I included two additional products which have interim product approval, Amsterdam Long Island Tea and Tai High Purple Passion. Note the following facts.
The product Northern Lights Primo, which contains CL-2201 at 50 mg per gram, has been taken off the shelves. Meanwhile, the product Amsterdam Long Island Tea, which contains CL-2201 at 50 mg per gram, stays on the shelves. The active ingredient in both products is exactly the same. The amount of the active ingredient in milligrams per gram is exactly the same. The only difference between the two products is different packaging. One gets to go, the other gets to stay. Wat.
The product AK-47, which contains 5F-PB-22 at 60 mg per gram, has been taken off the shelves. Meanwhile, the product Tai High Purple Passion, which contains 5F-PB-22 at 60 mg per gram, stays on the shelves. (PB-22-F and 5F-PB-22 are the same chemical.) The active ingredient in both products is exactly the same. The amount of the active ingredient in milligrams per gram is exactly the same. The only difference between the two products is different packaging. One gets to go, the other gets to stay. Wut.
Unless people smoke the packaging (I think not) we have two pairs of identical products. Todd McClay says
These withdrawals underscore the effectiveness of the Psychoactive Substances Act in getting harmful products off the shelves
I am satisfied that one of my last acts as Associate Health Minister is to see the removal of yet another suite of products that would have risked the health of young New Zealanders.
He might as well have said
These withdrawals underscore the ineffectiveness of the Psychoactive Substances Act in getting harmful products off the shelves.
I am satisfied that one of my last acts as Associate Health Minister is to see the non-removal of yet another suite of products that risk the health of young New Zealanders.
Is Todd McClay a complete idiot? I think so. (He’s just been made the Associate Minister of Tourism. I think the tourism industry should be very worried.)
But there’s quite possibly something more sinister going on. Industrial sabotage. Apparently
The five brands were previously assessed by the Ministry of Health and in August were judged low risk enough to be sold to the public.
But a spike of calls to the National Poisons Centre will lead to a recall today of the AK47, Anarchy, Karma, Northern Lights Primo and Voodoo brands.
A “spike” of calls. Does this indicate the depths to which some operators in the legal highs industry will stoop? Hoax calls to the National Poisons Centre, advising of “adverse reactions” to competitors’ products? I don’t know. But something doesn’t seem at all right to me.
What I do know is that the Ministry of Health is a serious health risk. The morons who comprise the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority are supposed to assess the scientific evidence of potential harms of these products. Sorry, guys, but self-selected self-reports phoned in to the National Poisons Centre hardly count as science. You might as well consult the Amsterdam Long Island Tea leaves you’ve been smoking!
