LeftofLarry is honest about William Lane Craig

And don't let anybody tell you different. Like the time when cowardly and no-good Christian fundy debater Dr. William Lane Craig said he does not debate his own students, well, by golly, that means he won't debate his former student John W. Loftus. Loftus even knew this:

I learned from DC member Darrin at the Carrier/Craig debate that Craig said he would not debate his former students.

So, it makes perfect "rational response squad" sense when rational response squad member LeftofLarry says,

"So I started this facebook group in order to try to convince William Lane Craig, a leading christian apologist, to debate John Loftus who is now an atheist after many years as an evanglical christian and christian apologist who studied under Craig. William refuses to debate John for some unknown reason."

I think anybody who thinks LeftofLarry is trying to lie to get Dr. Craig to debate are stupid. Larry makes perfect sense when he says there is an "unknown reason" for Craig to debate Loftus when Craig said the reason he won't debate Loftus is because he doesn't debate students of his. Yeah, I know Loftus says he knows the reason, but you people are stupid anyway. And don't you dare say Larry doesn't know what he's talking about. So put that in your pipe and smoke it, buddy!

Loftus is the greatest debater in the world. That's why he admits his claims are absurd. And why he got "grilled" by Paul Manata:







And don't you believe stupid Frank Walton when he says John W. Loftus lost his debate to David Wood.

Kelly O'Connor is not a prostitute!

She just copulates for money, that's all! But if anybody says she's a whore... they're wrong, dammit! Here's proof:

Brian Sapient vs Greydon Square

There's a rumor going around the internet that someone beat up my friend Brian Sapient:

...Greydon Square apparently beat the shit out of Brian Sapient. Money or something.

[source]

I've decided to make a Q&A to stop rumors about my pal Brian Sapient...

FAQ about Brian Sapient's fight with Greydon Square

Is it true that Greydon Square beat the shit out of Brian Sapient?

This is not true! Greydon did not beat up Sapient. Sapient broke Greydon's hand with his face. Brian repeatedly head-butted Greydon's knuckles! Finally, people separated Greydon from Brian, because Greydon's knuckles were sore from all that violence.


Is it true that Brian Sapient had to go to a hospital? That he was put in an ambulance?

This is true. Brian Sapient's face was a mush of pulp after using it against Greydon's fist.


Is it true that Brian Sapient was screaming like a little bitch during the fight?

Not true. Brian Sapient threw so many head-butts on Greydon's fist that there was no time to scream.


Is it true the fight was over Brian Sapient's handling of Greydon Square's album sales?

Yes, this is true. Brian wanted about 90% of all of Greydon's album sales. That's only fair! Brian Sapient works harder than Greydon Square. That was probably Sapient's voice on the CDs, too, dammit! According to a commentor named "Joe" (an atheist who doesn't care for either Brian or Greydon, but witnessed the event):

Here are the facts as told to me by one of the two witnesses who were asked to be there by Greydon during the 'talk' that turned into a vicious attack. I don't even know Brian, never met him, and don't vouch for any other aspect of his personality. The true story is it had to do with some customers buying Greydon's cd's (I tried to like this guy before this happened too, but now he is a low life scum bag who gets no respect from me and apparently didn't rise above the disgusting glorification of the ghetto culture) from the RSS website. Many customers were getting lost after they paid for their CD's, and they complained directly to Greydon that they were not getting their CDs they ordered. Greydon then wants a mediated (his request) meeting with Brian Sapient about the issue. From one of the only two eye witnesses, he was "very irate" before even going to this meeting. The meeting was arranged a bit later, and Greydon airs his complaints about the CD's to Brain. When Brian explained this was an issue that was being worked out, Greydon then demanded of Brian that he not sell any CD's at the event. Brain refused, and Captain Dipshit flipped over the table and pummeled his fists into Brian's face repeatedly, more times than could be counted, as the the other two in attendance ran for help.

Is it true that Brian Sapient was too lazy to distribute the CDs to customers?

Kelly's tits got in the way of the mail box. Is that our fault for being "lazy"? Sheesh!


Is Greydon Square a sellout to atheists?

Yes. He is no longer a member of the Rational Response Squad. Anybody who's against us deserves to be called "cunts."


Is it true that most atheists (and not Christians) are happy that Brian Sapient got his ass kicked?

That's a lie!!!! A lie! Lie! Lie! Look at what everybody is saying about us:

Everybody at RantsNRaves respects Brian.
Everybody at Richard Dawkins' forums respects us, too.
Even the commentors at teapot atheists likes us.

So, get off our case! Atheists love us, dammit!


Is this picture...



... of Brian Sapient after the fight?

Yes. Not only did Brian use his face against Greydon's hands, he used his whole body. See, Brian's really tough.



Is it true that most atheists (like this guy) disapprove of Brian Sapient and the Rational Response Squad?

That's a stupid question, and a lie. We're a minority among a minority, so what?


Was this a black-on-white fight? Or a black-on-black fight?

This was a black on black fight, stupid. Brian Sapient isn't white, dummy. He acts too black to be white.

Encyclopedia Dramatica

Frank Walton was too cowardly to put this link in his blog, because he thinks it's wrong for people to look at hardcore nudity. What's wrong with porn? We at the Rational Response Squad love looking at porn, but we're not perverts or anything. The next time we meet your daughters we'll see if we can put them in a porno. That's a great way of making money! See, we're trying to help you guys. Anyway, we have the link cowardly Frank doesn't have the balls to show you guys:

www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Rational_response_squad

We at Rational Response Squad are not afraid of opposition. So look at the site and tell everybody about these lies.

Have an IP address you want to share?

If you have an IP address of Frank Walton or anyone who he claims to be impersonating him, please feel free to post it as a comment to this post with the title or opening phrase "I pee on your IP address."

This post is a statement of confirmation that the information will not be posted publicly on this site and will only be used to prosecute Frank Walton or whoever the real person is behind him to the fullest extent of the law. We would like to connect more dots to this puzzle. Spread the word to anyone you know that has been attacked by Frank Walton. You have our promise the information will only be used in a court of law.

If you would like to add a disclaimer stating that it is ok to post the IP if we can find confirmation that such action is legal, please add the disclaimer. So, uh, I guess we will post Frank's IP to the public. No, we just didn't contradict ourselves. What we said was we won't show the IP address to the public but we will show it to the public. That makes sense in a "Rational Response Squad" kind of way.

If you have been cyber-stalked, lied about, attacked, threatened, or harrassed by any of the following people help us complete the puzzle by posting the comment/IP here and it will wait in moderation for our crack staff. There are many ips known within this puzzle, we're looking to find more conclusive connections here.

If you doubt the legitimacy of this site please view the footer of the highest ranked atheist website in the world to see that they have our "blessing" (though we believe that Richard Dawkins had an affair with another woman, he still blesses us by golly!) http://www.rationalresponders.com

These are the names we believe the Christian who calls himself Frank Walton goes by:

Abnoxio, Alan Baxter, HGissufficient, Mark Cote, MrBright, Rich Voss, S_Allegory, stanlee, Terry Pritchard(fully confirmed), John G. Deering(highly likely), Scary Jesus

Yes, Frank has said these people were actually Ted Bell. But it's not true! Here's proof:

• Frank Walton likes putting his own home address out and to make his wife's name public. Why? So, people can kill him and rape his wife.
• Frank also likes calling himself a fag, and a nigger, and a child molestor. Why? Because it just makes sense to, that's why.
• Frank likes to pretend to be other people while putting out his own home address and wife's name so people can get him. Makes sense doesn't it? That's what we Rational Response Squad peeps are all about.

Here are the IP addresses Frank Walton has used (yeah, I know, Frank said it's Ted Bell's IP addresses but what does Frank know? I mean, he likes to pretend to be other people while putting out his own home address and wife's name so people can get him):

131.50.151.8
68.110.10.131
64.4.31.16
68.110.10.131
68.110.8.13
204.14.107.202
204.14.107.1
131.50.151.8
24.255.46.47
199.2.50.8

If you feel insecure posting the ip info here you can send the info to anyone you trust within the RRS and they will add it to our findings and help prepare the info for the courts and the feds. We will get Frank Walton and arrest him and make him pay money for mental damages to us. We need money and we will try getting it from Frank.

Best of all, here's how Frank Walton looks like and sounds like (again, stupid Frank Walton thinks that this is Ted Bell... Ha! We know you said you were half-black, Franky, but in this video you're white, so by logic that means this man has to be you!):



[source]

Dr. Avalos kicks Frank's ass

Lookie here.

You go, boy! Man, Avalos handed Walton' ass in a platter. Avalos expected an undergrad like Frank to know Armaic, and do all the studies of a PhD guy. That's thinking, Dr. Avalos! Only scholars like you would deduce this from an undergrad.

Yes, we hate Richard Dawkins!!!

Ha! Frank was too cowardly to post what was actually said about our conversation on Richard Dawkins' affair with another woman. We hate Richard Dawkins because that new manager bitch wouldn't allow us to use Dawkins' name for our organization. So by logic that means the new manager is having an affair with Dawkins. See, how logical that was. Here's the stuff Frank doesn't want you to see (we hate Richard but we're going to use him anyway... we need money! Help us so we don't have to use Richard anymore):

Link and link.

Frank Waltons favorite Christian activity and entertainment

Frank Walton likes to fight UFC style. That's so un-Christian of him. Remember in the Bible where Nehemiah protects himself with a knife or when Jesus spoke of buying a sword or when David talked about kicking his enemies teeth in in Psalms. See, Frank Walton was following the Bible's example, therefore he was not being Christ-like! That's so logical! We at the Rational Response Squad know what we're talking about.

Frank Walton is a hypocrite!

Frank Walton is a hypocrite because he craves anonymity but exposes Brian Sapient's true identity. That's hypocrisy, dangit! No really, it is. Can someone please non-violently murder Frank Walton? We believe that Sapient's life is in danger, therefore, it makes perfect atheistic sense to murder Frank Walton for that. We at the Rational Response Squad want that. It's logical and very non-violent. Give us his name and street address so we can find him and non-violently stab him to death. We'll also non-violently rape his wife in front of him. Make sense? Of course, it does!

Brian Sapient does not want violence on Kent Hovind

Stupid Frank Walton thinks that Brian Sapient wants violence on Kent Hovind. If you watch this video you'll see that's not true, especially the end with the cartoon where it jokingly says Kent Hovind gets raped. What Sapient wants and what the Rational Response Squad support is that Kent Hovind gets raped in prison. But we don't want violence on Kent Hovind. We just want him to get raped. We at Rational Response Squad support that. But we hate violence. We hope that Hovind gets un-violently raped. That's rational.

Brian Sapient has tits!

"Anti-scientists... make claims of intelligent design, yet everywhere we look we see the evidence of a system that wasn't intelligently designed. I have nipples and mammary glands."
-Brian Sapient

We have exclusive video of Brian Sapient showing off his jugs. He wanted me to show you guys this just to be clear:



We are proud that Sapient is upfront about his tits. They disproved the existence God and intelligent design. You're our hero, Sapient! Screw theists! Your tits did it!

Brian Sapient is happier with a smaller penis

From here.

Usually, the bigger someone's penis is the prouder they should be. Not with my leader Brian Sapient. He's happy that he has a smaller penis. He just had his penis reduced. He even said he had a "God-small penis" (18:22 in this audio clip). You fundy Christians say that God is infinite right? So that means Brian Sapient's penis is infinitely small. And he wants it even more smaller. Beat that, you big-sized penis Christians. The next time you see Brian Sapient at the beach don't be surprised to see him skipping along in a G-string, okay? He's covering all but a half inch of his pee-pee, because that's how masculine he is. What makes him more masculine is the fact that he has big nipples, too. He even uses it to disprove God! Beat that you wacky douche bag of a Christian.

Ladies and gentlemen. We got him: Kirk Cameron commits adultery!

Look here.

Shocking? Not really. Those eyes on Kirk Cameron are as real as the theory of evolution.

First, we have Ray 'The Banana' Comfort who had the nerve to challenge Richard Dawkins to a debate after getting raped by the RRS. Ha! Who commits adultery now! We men and women of Rational Response Squad love rape, especially when it comes to Christians.

And now we have Kirk 'Growing Pain' Cameron committing adultery by looking at Kelly's big o' chest!

"He looked at Kelly's chest. So what? Kelly's airbags she calls 'tits' are as real as Brian Sapient's logic. So Kirk Cameron was looking at something unreal and fake."

So what? So WHAT?!?! Look at him! Doesn't it look like he's a little too "happy"? I thought so. I'm convinced that he was looking at her with lust. Everybody likes fake boobs. Kelly knew how ugly she was so she made herself look "prettier" by making herself look fake. That's logical.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Kirk was grabbing Ray and Sapient's butt in that picture. Sapient admitted to me his nipples got hard when Kirk was looking at them. That's why Sapient brought up his nipple argument against God. He wanted to turn Kirk on. Kirk looked like he wanted to grabbed something anyway! We ought to know since we approve of rape. Grabbing someone when they don't want to be grabbed is the perfect atheistic thing to do.

Kirk, dude, I know that Kelly takes some pictures that might make you say, "OMG! wut iz she doin'?!?!", but if you look at a woman like that again, she's gonna beat you like ya stole something! In Kelly's case, it's stealing silicone implants.

So there ya have it folks! We caught Kirk Cameron red-handed. Or full-handed, ass-handed...whatever.

Special thanks to Pile for the picture. Continue to make what's real fake. That way, we can beat these pesky Christians in a "honest" fashion.

[source]

Frank Walton's face

Have you ever wondered what Frank Walton looks like? Me too! You see, I'm gay and I would love to meet Frank Walton.

I'm pretty sure that there has never been an atheists that knocked on Frank's door, pointed a gun to his face and robbed him or something. So why hasn't he ever posted a picture of himself? I want to point my "gun" at him, if you know what I mean. Hee-hee! That's how Miguel De Alba likes it!

What are you so scared of, Frank? Show yourself! Come on, ya chicken! I want you! Reginald Finley posted your home address on his website and I'm going to pay you a visit for a little play time. You and me, baby. Or, we, at the Rational Response Squad want to know what you look like so we can aim a gun at you and kill you off the "Mr. Gawn" way. We're happy that Falwell is dead and we'll be happy if you're dead.

[source]

Television evangelist Falwell dies at 73

Source

*SIGH*

It looks like right-wing fascist Christians are questioning my buddies here:

Daddy Cool to "Atheism Sucks" sucks

Are you guys happy that he's (Jerry Falwell) dead?

You see that! That's once and for all proof that Daddy Cool loves the fact that Falwell is dead. Yeah, I know his question says nothing of the sort, but my spidey senses are tingling and it tells me that that questions says that Daddy Cool not only loves the fact that Falwell is dead but it also tells me that Daddy Cool lives on Mars and plays with red aliens. Dude, you guys have to read what the head strong Rational Response Squad had to say in direct response to Daddy Cool:

Atheism Sucks! sucks said...

Just because you're happy doesn't mean that we are.

Oh, snaps! That's so logical. In your face, Daddy Coolio! But to be truthful with you, the Rational Response Squad are happy that Jerry Falwell is dead. Notice we haven't denied it in the quote above. But that's what we want after all. Take it from my friend, Mr. GAWN (a faithful RRS member) when he said:

Fuckin' Christians, if I can't convert 'em I'll burn 'em. Learn 'em a lesson with my Smith and Wesson straight in they sternum.

From the song I would say God

That's the RRS way, man! Also, my main man, Rook Hawkins said,

"... this is what the RRS is fighting for - to free minds and rid the world or irrational people..." (source)

Yes, we here at RRS must get rid of people! Not ideology or false philosophies per se. But human beings. People! P-E-O-P-L-E! People! Christian people are better off dead. May they all die with bullet wounds to their sternum!

Christians hate Frank

This is nothing new to me. Hell, we hear about atheists who hate the Rational Response Squad (like Jim Lazarus) so we can relate to losers like Frank. But I've always heard of Christians that hate Frank. But I'd like to post some of the stuff that the Christians from TOL had to say about Frank Walton.

Frank, you are a petty, pathetic jerk.

From Knight.

Calling someone a "jerk" equals hatred. Knight probably wants Frank dead now. That's ok, we can relate to that, too.

Frank is a liar and a fool...

.. Frank hurts the gospel and damages the cause for truth.

From Knight, again.

Yup, we hate it when Christians damage the cause for truth. They should let atheists do that only. But the truth is, Frank's opponent went past the word limit and Knight didn't do anything about it. I love it when moderators give the Christians a hard time! The best part was when Knight blamed Frank for his screw up! That's right Frank, because you complained about an infraction your opponent did, that was your fault. Not Knight, even though he was suppose to give a warning, but, oh well.

Frank if you read this, you brought shame to the name of Christ and gave
legitimacy to the atheists on this board and their positions. I have a feeling
we will be hearing about this for a long time. You should be ashamed of
yourself. God's truth will always prevail, you should know that!

Further, I don't appreciate your treatment of Knight, is a friend and a
brother in Christ to me. You don't even know the man, and you made some very
serious accusations against his character. I find that behavior to be utterly
inexcusable! I have always found Knight to be reasonable and he always attempts
to do the right thing. Your banning comes well-deserved in my opinion!

PastorKevin.


Ouch! PastorKevin loves kissing butt, doesn't he. Let's hope he kisses atheist butt next.

The best part was when Frank accused these Christians of not following the rules. So Frank had to cry like a baby and tell them that they were wrong. Here's more complaining from the cry baby:

Axiom-Tech (Frank's atheist opponent),

You have just broken one of the rules of the debate. As you can see in the very first post in this forum (by Knight) you were to write an opening no more than 1500 words, yet you’re opening is 1625 words (not counting the references… I don’t count those… but, uh, it seemed liked you were doing more arguing in the third reference! Give me a break!). And you wonder why I called you a moron? As far as I can tell none of the moderators warned you about this infraction, which is unfortunate, and which is why I'm posting this message myself. My sole purpose of going to a forum was to have a fair debate while being properly moderated. I will post my opening tomorrow, but if you continue to break the rules of the debate (or weasel in more arguments in your reference section), I will not continue it. I hope you would be more civil in your conduct.

Thanks,

Frank Walton

Guess what happened after that? Axiom-Tech broke the rules again! Ha! Ha! And the moderators didn't do anything about that. But this is what Franky said,

Axiom-Tech,

This is the second time you have broken the rules of the debate! In your first rebuttal, you were to give no more than a 1,000 word reply. Yet again, like a moron, you have surpassed that number! Why should I even bother debating you if you are being unfair? Right now, I'm debating whether I should continue this debate. "Sorry" is not going to do it anymore, Axiom-Tech. There's just no more excuses for your behavior.

Frank Walton

And why did Frank complain to the Christian moderators that they were wrong? Telling other Christians that they're wrong? That's not a right thing for a Christian to do. So what if Paul was mad at Peter? That doesn't count. Stupid, cry baby, Frank. You're always complaining about fairness. We at the Rational Response Squad knows what's fair. When we have a Christian on our radio show we have 5 people gain up against him, because that's fair. All your atheist opponent did was go over the word limit 3 times. And yeah sure, he even admitted it. But what's the big deal? I'll be your referee, Franky, and the next time the bell rings for the time limit, I'll let your opponent have the last punch at you. That's fair and you know it and you deserve it!

[source]

Frank isn't a Christian

Is Frank Walton really a Christian? I doubt it. Yeah, sure, Christians sin all the time. But if a Christian like Frank sins, well, that automatically means he's not a Christian.

In fact, Frank was too busy debating last Sunday! And you know he broke one of the Ten Commandments: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. The great wacko, Jesus, actually performed a miracle on the Sabbath, and the Pharisees said that counted as work and said he was breaking the Sabbath. But Jesus said they were interpreting the Sabbath incorrectly. Pfft! What does Jesus know. All he is is the son of God. Big deal.


As some of you know, Frank claims to have sent Knight "countless" emails. Here's what the liar said,

===========================

From: Frank Walton
To: Knight
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 16:23:10

Subject: Thanks for banning me.

Now, if you would kindly remove our debate from your forum that would be helpful (don't worry, I have mine and Axiom-Tech's openings and rebuttals) I really don't care to associate myself with people like you. By the way, you're lying. I sent you about 3 emails about the infraction not 1 (I can forward you those emails if you want).

Here's my first email ( Sat, 28 Apr 2007 19:05:41):

I guess we won't be posting our openings at the same time. Axiom-Tech insisted he post his opening first. That's fine by me. He already posted it by the way. And I think you should give it a look, because Axiom-Tech has just went over the word limit (and that's not counting his references; I don't count references)! Please, let him know about this. Thanks.

Frank Walton

Here's my second email (Sat, 28 Apr 2007 21:58:07):

Hi Knight,

Not sure if you got my last emails but if you look at Axiom-Tech's opening, it's over 1500 words long. And that's not counting the references. He has posted 1625 words! I hope I don't sound like a tattle tell but I was afraid something like this might happen. Though I treasure my relationship with Axiom-Tech I don't trust the guy. That's why I needed you guys to moderate the debate.

Thanks,

Frank

Here's my third email (Sun, 29 Apr 2007 12:11:26):

Knight,

Please, be up front with me. Are you or aren't you going to warn Axiom-Tech about breaking the rule? If not then I may not continue the debate, because the rules are obviously not being reinforced and the forums don't seem to be moderated properly. God only knows Axiom-Tech's first rebuttal will be over 1,000 words long and nothing will be done about it! Forgive my impatience but according to theologyonline.com you were in the forums today and I just don't see how you couldn't return my emails.

Frank

And finally, my last email (Sun, 29 Apr 2007 13:38:07):

I took the matter into my own hands:

www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1395475&postcount=5

I shouldn't be the one posting that, you know.

Frank

Also, I also sent an email to Turbo and Polly!

You don't have to lie to your readers about me, Knightypoo. And of course you won't allow people to read my side of the story. Indeed, you are a coward. Figures.

Always,

Frank

===========================

So, why didn't Knight respond?

Because:

Why didn't I respond to your email yesterday? Because it was Sunday and I was at
church.

Source.

Frank, dude, keep it holy. And we at the Rational Response Squad know what holy is. I mean, we're so holy we tell people to blaspheme the Holy Spirit. You're such an idiot, Franky.

[source]

FRANK WALTON MAKING EXCUSES FOR HIS WEAKNESS

For those of you who don't know, Axiom tech (aka QXDC) has challenged Frank Walton to a debate. Axiom should have know that Frank doesn't have an honest bone in his body. I mean, look at my friend Rich Rodriguez. When he debated Frank he knew that Frank was never honest anyway, but decided to debate Frank anyway, but only to bail out of the debate because of Frank's dishonesty. Makes perfect sense, don't it? In fact, that was his excuse. And Frank, being the cry-baby that he is, complained about it. But Axiom is wasting his time with Walton who is the even worse than Ray Comfort at trying to argue the theist side. That is why Brian Sapient is going to argue with him. He's going to argue with Comfort just to waste his time. People with a life do that. And we all know that Brian Sapient, who uses his mother for money, has a life. As you can see from the following post Frank tries to weasel his way out of their exchange over 125 words!

Axiom-Tech, You have just broken one of the rules of the debate. As you can see in the very first post in this forum (by Knight) you were to write an opening no more than 1500 words, yet you’re opening is 1625 words (not counting the references… I don’t count those… but, uh, it seemed liked you were doing more arguing in the third reference! Give me a break!). And you wonder why I called you a moron? As far as I can tell none of the moderators warned you about this infraction, which is unfortunate, and which is why I'm posting this message myself. My sole purpose of going to a forum was to have a fair debate while being properly moderated. I will post my opening tomorrow, but if you continue to break the rules of the debate (or weasel in more arguments in your reference section), I will not continue it. I hope you would be more civil in your conduct. Thanks, Frank Walton


Talk about grasping for straws. All you can do with 125 words is make more arguments. What's the big deal? What Axiom is doing is throwing a last punch after the bell rings. What's the big deal? Sheesh! I can't believe this joker believes he would have lasted a micro second against my friend Rich Rodriguez. That's why Rodriguez decided not to finish his debate with him. That's pretty logical if you think about it: Rich Rodriguez would have beaten Frank so badly that he decided not to finish debating him. That's an absolutely non-cowardly thing to do. No really, it isn't. So don't go off calling men like Rodriguez a coward. He's so brave he won't debate Frank. Makes absolute sense.

Rich Rodriguez had more to say:

####QUOTE####

QXDC is one of the weakest Atheist I have ever come across, he has been regularly pwned by both Rook and I in the stickam room. Frank can't even handle a wanna be Atheist! lol!

Why do I call him a wanna be Atheist? Does this look like something an Atheist would do?

(Axiom tech on the left getting friendly with Kent Hovind)

####END QUOTE####

You see, Rich Rodriguez wants atheists to not have any Christians as friends. And that's exactly what the Rational Response Squad wants. Take it from my friend, Mr. GAWN (a faithful RRS member) when he said:

Fuckin' Christians, if I can't convert 'em I'll burn 'em. Learn 'em a lesson with my Smith and Wesson straight in they sternum.

From the song I would say God

That's the RRS way, man! Screw all you, Christians!

[source]

Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron VS. Brian Sapient and Kellym78

It'll be Kelly and Sapient, May 5th in NYC talking with Way of the Master's Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron on ABC's website. Martin Bashir will moderate and you'll be able to see the whole thing live (90 minutes) on ABC's website (probably the Nightline section). Then there will be a recap on a Nightline segment later. Remember, Sapient never wanted to debate Way of the Master radio host Todd Friel. You know why? Because Friel is too easy to beat in a debate. He's so easy to whip and embarrass, my leader, Brian Sapient, said he won't debate him. What? He's not using any excuses not to debate Friel. And Sapient certainly is not scared of him. That's a lie straight from Frank Walton's mouth. Here's what that stupid Christian fundy said,

Now as we all know Brian Sapient said he'd only debate The Way of the Master pupils (Comfort and Cameron) if only Todd Friel was not present in the debate. Why? Because Friel is much more hard hitting than Cameron and Comfort (with all due respect to them). In fact, Sapient suggested Cameron and Comfort. You see, Sapient is still a softie.

*SIGH*

No, Franky. You're the softie, buddy. Because you can't handle the truth. Sapient has the balls big enough not to debate some people. That's like Mike Tyson saying "I won't fight you physically, which proves I can beat you up physically." Make sense, dip stick? It sure does in an atheist kind of way.

[source]

Chuck Norris: ‘Secular Progressive Agenda’ Responsible for Virginia Tech Tragedy

America's favorite kickass asshat is at it again. Get this, he wants the bible to be taught in public schools. What a loon. He should do it the secular progressive way: teaching Darwin's theory of evolution where we learn men are no better than animals. That's right, the VTech shooting was like duck hunting. What's the harm in teaching people that? Stupid fundy Christians! But Chucky has this to say...

--------------------------------------------------------------------

...

On April 16, 2007, more heroes left Virginia. This time they were students and professors at Virginia Tech University – 32 to be exact. And like those on 9/11, they were martyrs in a war they weren't fighting – unintentional patriots caught in a head-on clash with our culture's values, denials and degradation.

...

Heroes from the holocaust to Norris hall

Most have heard by now of the heroic measures of people like 76-year-old Virginia Tech professor and Holocaust survivor, Liviu Librescu, who shielded his students when the shooter tried to enter a classroom. The Jerusalem Post cited his son Joe: "My father blocked the doorway with his body and asked the students to flee. Students started opening windows and jumping out." Librescu was killed by the gunman, and last Thursday he was given an honorable burial in Israel – one fit for a hero.

As one blog notes, there were several valiant students too.

During Monday's tragic shootings at Virginia Tech, college senior Kevin Sterne grabbed an electrical cord and fashioned a tourniquet to stem the bleeding from the bullet wounds to his thigh. Twenty-year-old Derek O'Dell, who had been shot in the arm, shut the classroom door and along with some other students, pushed himself against it so the gunman, who had briefly left the classroom, couldn't reenter. Twenty-year-old Trey Perkins used his clothing to staunch the wounds of bleeding classmates.

As time goes by, I'm sure that we will hear more heroic deeds. Truly, every victim of this reprehensible executioner is in some way heroic, for they were injured or died in the midst of a cultural war in which our schools increasingly have become a battleground. As Dr. Marisa Randazzo, a psychologist who contributed to an extensive study of school shootings for the Secret Service, concurred, ''... the intensity and frequency of the attacks have increased since the events at Columbine.''

Are we partially to blame?

Though one can point to Cho's own psychotic behavior and our graphic slasher media as potential contributors to his deplorable murder spree, we must also hesitate to consider how we as a society are possibly contributing to the growth of these academic killing fields. I believe those who wield the baton of the secular progressive agenda bear significant responsibility for the escalation of school shootings. Even conservatives who refuse to speak when evil flourishes must acknowledge some culpability.

We teach our children they are nothing more than glorified apes, yet we don't expect them to act like monkeys. We place our value in things, yet expect our children to value people. We disrespect one another, but expect our children to respect others. We terminate children in the womb, but are surprised when children outside the womb terminate other children. We push God to the side, but expect our children to be godly. We've abandoned moral absolutes, yet expect our children to obey the universal commandment, ''Thou shalt not murder.''

Though I respect the Buddhist, Muslim and Jew who shared at the VTU convocation, our country needs to return and call out to the God of our founders, Jesus Christ. As Reverend Schenck concludes:

When kids kill kids, there's something desperately wrong in the culture. No amount of laws, police officers, courts or prisons can stop a murder from happening. Only a conscience built on the fear of God can do that. Whether it's teaching the sanctity of life or God's commandment against murder, Christian leaders must tell young people that accountability for doing wrong doesn't stop with death. We will ultimately face God as a righteous judge. People who contemplate committing this kind of act need to know that.

If we are ever to restore civility in our land and our schools, we must turn back the clocks to a time when such shocking crimes didn't even exist – when we valued life and respected one another much more then we do today. We must use the Bible (humanity's blueprint for life and ''bluebook'' for value) to retrain our youth about theirs and others' value as children of God, made in His image. We must each contribute to rebuild the infrastructure of our homes, schools, and society upon respect. Instilling strong moral character is at the heart of why I started Kickstart in schools across Texas and hope eventually to fill the schools across this land.

...

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55333



[source]