Friday, October 29, 2010

Abomination of the Week . . . from Oxford

I’m at a loss to describe this abomination in polite terms. And, unlike other abominations, I do not find it amusing. So I’ll just get to the point. Pembroke College, Oxford had a Muslim preach in its chapel:

For the first time in Pembroke College’s 500-year history, a Muslim, Dr Taj Hargey – from the Summertown Islamic Congregation in Oxford – was welcomed to deliver a sermon at its chapel.

The Rev Dr Andrew Teal, of Pembroke College, said he had been trying to get a Muslim Imam to deliver a service at the chapel for many years and he believed it was a first.

“I think what we are doing today is very unusual, certainly it’s the first time I have heard of it being done at the college. . . .

Well, Dr. Teal, there is a reason it had not been done. The chapels at Oxford were founded to be Christian. To have a Muslim preacher contradicts the faith and is surely a gross violation of the foundation of Pembroke if its founding documents are remotely akin to those of other Oxford colleges of long standing. What you have committed, sir, is a betrayal . . . and an abomination.

Thanks to reader St. Nikao for bringing this to my attention.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Obama Slipping Further

For whatever reasons (Perhaps his opening his mouth?), Obama’s numbers are slipping in the final days of the election.

At first, I made a point not to read too much into his slippage in Rasmussen’s Daily Presidential Tracking Poll. Tracking polls have their statistical noise.

But now the decline is unmistakable. Obama’s Approval Index, which nets those who strongly approve and strongly disapprove of Obama’s performance, has slipped 5 points in two days and 10 points in 9 days to -20. You may check the trends in detail here.

At the risk of stating the obvious, this certainly does not bode well for the Democrats.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Democrat Election Theft?

The polls and indications are looking so good one may think the coming political bloodbath cannot be prevented by election fraud. But with several important races still close and with reports of voting “irregularities” around the nation, I am concerned.

In North Carolina, problems include a straight Republican vote being transformed into a straight Democrat vote:

A Craven County voter says he had a near miss at the polls on Thursday when an electronic voting machine completed his straight-party ticket for the opposite of what he intended.

Sam Laughinghouse of New Bern said he pushed the button to vote Republican in all races, but the voting machine screen displayed a ballot with all Democrats checked. He cleared the screen and tried again with the same result, he said. Then he asked for and received help from election staff.

“They pushed it twice and the same thing happened,” Laughinghouse said. “That was four times in a row. The fifth time they pushed it and the Republicans came up and I voted.”

I’ve personally witnessed fishy voter assistance in years past in North Carolina, but this is ridiculous.

Now it appears voting machines don’t like Republican votes in Virginia as well.

In Nevada, matters are worse. I can smell Dirty Harry Reid and his union goons all the way from Texas. A number of Clark County early voters found that Reid was preselected for them. How thoughtful. And I’m sure the fact that SEIU members are the technicians for Clark County voting machines has nothing to do with that. Nothing at all.

Seriously, this bothers me. If several voters are reporting Reid being preselected, no telling how many times that is occurring. Add a close election and reports of Demorat vote buying, and I am very concerned Dirty Harry is stealing this election.

And I could go on. Heck, if I hadn’t voted, I’d get the voter fraud app. In any case, double-check your ballots and verify your vote as much as possible.

Minnesota Democrats Bash Christians

The Minnesota DFL has sent out an interesting mailer against Republican candidate Rev. Dan Hall.

What is interesting about it is that it attacks Christians who do not toe the liberal line and even seems to some to attack the Catholic Church. The front of the mailer is a priest wearing a button that says “Ignore the Poor.”

What a brilliant campaign strategy! . . . for maybe the 1920’s or for certain enclaves in Europe, but not in America today. And I suspect Minnesota Democrats will experience that for themselves on Tuesday.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Obama tells me to “sit in back.” I respond.

Obama, that great “uniter,” was as divisive as ever yesterday:

“We can’t have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.”

Oh. So I “gotta sit in back.”

Allow me to spell some things out to you, Mr. President.

1. You were elected to be President of all the United States. To tell a third or more of America that “they gotta sit in back” is unpresidential and inappropriate. For all his faults, your predecessor, whom you like to blame for your failures, had enough class not to say anything like that.

2. I have no intention of sitting in the back of your bus, sir. Moreover, I will not sit in your bus at all. I am doing all that is in my power to do my part to put up roadblocks to stop your bus before it leads us all off a cliff. And millions of Americans are voting to do likewise. We are not interested in sitting on your bus. It only takes left turns.

And as for those RINOs *coughMurkowskicough* who will not do their part to stop you, I am doing my part to throw them under the bus.

3. You seem to have trouble understanding the concept of “shovel-ready.” (Or, to be more accurate, you used that term to lie to the American people.) Will you understand when I tell you take your bus and SHOVE IT*?

*With thanks to the Democrat nominee for Governor of Rhone Island.

Monday, October 25, 2010

About the Crystal Cathedral Bankruptcy

He who is wedded to the spirit of the age is soon a widower.

The wisdom of this saying is illustrated all too well in the bankruptcy of the Crystal Cathedral.

The Crystal Cathedral was founded in the 1950’s by Robert Schuller, Sr. Schuller was one of the more prominent “positive thinking” preachers popular in the Fifties and Sixties. Heck, I remember watching his Hour of Power as a kid. I did not do that voluntarily, although I admit I liked his goofy smile. So my Mom must have liked him.

And I remember being urged by various people to positive thinking. I was not the most positive kid in the world.

Well, although “positive thinking” was perhaps a precursor to Prosperity Theology, it became passé as many cultural fads do (although it certainly took a while). Then the recession hit the cathedral's income hard in 2009.

I suspect lower contributions were only a symptom of Crystal Cathedral’s problem. Positive thinking preaching became even more discredited as the economy weakened more and more. Positive thinking at least seems to work better during strong economic times, and the Fifties and most of the Sixties were that. Not so much now.

The church must not ignore the culture. She should always seek to address the culture and relate to it. But she should not buy into the culture and especially not wed herself to an aspect of the culture. The Crystal Cathedral did just that and eventually became bankrupt in more ways than one.

Here We Go Again: Democrats up to Vote Fraud

Yes, yes. I realize Democrats engaging in vote fraud may be about as newsworthy as dogs barking. But light is the best disinfectant. And our democracy is at stake. So I will continue to do my part to shed some light on the Democrats efforts to steal elections. And, yes, they are indeed at it again.

So far, the most common tactic that has come to light is stuffing the system with fraudulent registrations in Texas, Arizona and Colorado.

But, of course, there is the usual tactic of abusing absentee ballots such as in Florida and New York.

And I am sure I am only scratching the surface here.

Democrat vote fraud makes it that much more important that right-minded people get out to vote and get right-minded friends and family to vote. We not only have to outvote the opposition, we have to win by margins big enough to overcome vote fraud. It is sad that we are at that point in this country, but we are.

Maybe if we elect enough of the right people, they will do some of the things that are needful to stop vote fraud and protect our democracy.

Friday, October 22, 2010

In a Fog

There is so much to blog about this morning. But I am so sleepy and foggy from allergy medicine, I hardly trust myself to do so.

But now is a good time to remind you that if you don’t get enough of my ranting here, I do have a twitter account linked on the right. I have tweeted this morning.

Have a good weekend. And go Texas Rangers!

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Obama Omits “By Their Creator” Yet Again

A month ago, I noted Obama omitted “by their Creator” in quoting the Declaration of Independence. Although I declined to jump to conclusions, I found it disturbing and mentioned speculation that the omission was intentional.

It is no longer speculation.

For the third time, Obama has committed the same omission while (mis)quoting the Declaration of Independence.

An Apology to David Cameron

On this blog, I have not hid my disdain for David Cameron. I thought him a spineless pretty face and hardly a conservative at all.

I was wrong.

Like many, I am shocked by the courage of his first budget. I do not agree with all of it (Who does?!), particularly the capital gains tax hike, but I heartily agree with its massive cuts in government spending and employment. If only Republicans went after big government like that.

I pray his efforts succeed. And I apologize for misjudging him.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Obama the Snob

Yesterday, I briefly mentioned that Obama thinks we are not thinking very clearly because we are “scared.” This suggested to me that he is in denial about the current political situation. It also suggests something else and Michael Gerson unpacks that very well. He is thinking clearly, you might say.

First, a fuller version of Obama’s remarks:

"Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now," he recently told a group of Democratic donors in Massachusetts, "and facts and science and argument [do] not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hard-wired not to always think clearly when we're scared. And the country is scared."

So Obama’s political views are “facts and science and argument.” And his opposition? Their lizard brains are not thinking well because they are “scared.” You see, they are not as evolved as Obama.

As Gerson puts it:

Though there is plenty of competition, these are some of the most arrogant words ever uttered by an American president.

Gerson notes another revealing Obama utterance, from April 2008 before San Francisco donors (By the way, notice how Obama reveals what he really thinks of us before fat cat uberliberals in places like San Fran and Massachusetts?):

"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them."

Gerson then bluntly but correctly concludes that Obama “is an intellectual snob.”

He then wryly says some of his best friends are intellectual snobs, but that “they don’t make very good politicians.” No kidding.

I like Gerson’s conclusion:

Obama may think that many of his fellow citizens can't reason. But they can still vote.

In fact, I just early voted Monday. No, I did not vote for a single Democrat, which is a first for me. You see, I was scared and not thinking very clearly.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Is Obama Losing It?

Some odd behavior from Obama of late makes me wonder if he knows what is about to happen to his power on November 2nd and is having trouble coping with the knowledge.

He seems to be in denial. He refuses to acknowledge that his comeuppance is coming because he took a vast reservoir of good will on his Inauguration and squandered it on unpopular social engineering and massive deficit spending. No, instead he says it is . . . well . . . our fault for being so “scared” that we are not thinking “clearly.”

Not only is Obama in denial and playing the blame game, he is losing his cool. Yes, Our Cool Leader, of all people, seems to be losing his cool. Why do I say that?

These photos.

Now, granted, a well timed (or badly timed) photo can make anyone look a bit silly. But these expressions show a strange anger one would not expect from Obama. I genuinely do not think the man is coping well.

And there are reports that he is battling depression. With his recent appearances gyrating between lifelessness and a strange anger, I believe it.

Pray for Obama . . . and for us.

Groovy Abomination of the Week

What do you get if you cross Timothy Leary with an Episcopalian?


Monday, October 18, 2010

A Handshake Still Means Something

My late Great Uncle was an old school West Texas oilman. And I remember him telling me that in that the old days, oil deals were done on a handshake. The follow-up paperwork was a formality. A handshake meant something back then in Texas.

I am a bit old school myself in that regard. To me, if I shake your hand, it means I acknowledge you as an honorable person . . . or at least give you the benefit of the doubt in that regard. I cannot recall ever withholding a handshake (except as a courtesy when I was sick and contagious). But I sure can imagine situations in which I would.

What brings up the subject of handshakes? Over the weekend, Rand Paul very publically refused to shake the hand of his opponent Jack Conway at a Kentucky debate for a U. S. Senate seat.

To which, I say, good for Dr. Paul! There is a time to stop pretending that certain men are honorable, when it is not right even to go through a common formality that furthers such pretense. And Conway has proven himself to be dishonorable with his desperate and bizarre attacks on Dr. Paul.

Paul’s refusal is courageous and risky as history shows. But sometimes withholding a handshake is just the right thing to do. Kudos to Dr. Paul for doing the right thing.

First Things Rates Colleges

Over the weekend, I’ve come across so many blogable items, I do not know where to start. But I want to be sure to draw your attention to the November issue of First Things containing its ratings of American colleges.

Unlike most evaluations of colleges, First Things’ looks at a college’s moral, ideological, and religious atmosphere in addition to academics, including whether it is hostile or welcoming to orthodox Christians. And the descriptions are perceptive and even witty. Take, for example, their description of Carleton College as possessing a Leftish “ideological homogeneity greater than one finds in places where there are no local Bible churches to create the anxious thought that not everybody reads the New York Times.” Judging from what a friend who ministers at that campus tells me, that is right on target.

First Things does not presume to tell readers that colleges with low ratings on their moral and religious atmosphere are no-go areas. Instead it makes the wise observation that whereas the faith of some students thrives in a challenging and even hostile atmosphere, the faith of others is not so strong. Students and their families would do well to take that into consideration when choosing a college. The November issue is very helpful in that regard. I heartily recommend getting a copy, especially if someone in your household will be going to college in the near future.

Friday, October 15, 2010

BREAKING: Geert Wilders Not Guilty

Good news for free speech. Dutch MP Geert Wilders has been found not guilty on all counts relating to his film and statements on Islam.

The 2010 Election Year Summarized . . . in 30 seconds

This ad for Ken Buck just will not get out of my head. First, it is a really effective ad methinks.

Second – and this is a big reason it is effective – it summarizes the current political situation well . . . very well:

We protested when the government ran up trillions of dollars of debt. We sent e-mails when they nationalized health care. We asked them to get off the backs of small business so we could create jobs. We pleaded with our government to secure our border. And you know what? They heard us, and yet they ignored us. And folks, on Nov. 2, they will ignore us no more.

That just about covers it, in 30 seconds no less.

Abomination of the Week

The Episcopal Church has its Star Trek Eucharist. Why not Star Trek vestments?

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Democrats Disenfranchising Military . . . Again

Illinois has missed a federal deadline to get absentee ballots out to troops serving overseas. So here we go again: Democrats making it as difficult as they can for military to have their votes counted.

Perhaps, some of my more charitable readers think I am prejudging the situation, that these are honest administrative errors. To which I say, C’mon! This is Illinois!

And why does it seem only Democrats get in the way of our troops voting? We’ve seen this before, particularly when Democrats tried to disenfranchise troops in their efforts to steal Florida for Al Gore in 2000.

I know my history of Democrats stealing elections and disenfranchising the military. And I smell Demorats.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Absurd DADT Ruling Provides an Opportunity

Yesterday, Californicate Federal Judge Virginia Phillips told the U. S. military how to run the armed forces by declaring Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) to be unconstitutional and issuing an injunction against the policy. What next? Will she require all battle plans to be cleared by Her Highness?

Whatever one thinks about DADT, this is an absurd assertion of judicial power that is itself unconstitutional, so absurd it provides an opportunity.

For far too long, state and federal authorities have bowed down to each and every order from the judiciary, no matter how much it exceeds proper judicial authority and subverts constitutional democracy. Usurpation of power by the judiciary has gone unchecked leading us close to a dictatorship of black robes. This is far from what our Founding Fathers intended and erodes our constitutional democracy. They set up the branches of government to check the power of each other. But no one of late has been checking the power of the judiciary. And the judiciary is stuffed with miniature dictators who care not one whit for the Constitution except to be sown into fig leafs to disguise their naked power.

But here we have a ruling so absurd and divorced from constitutional authority that it invites a much needed slap-down. Her Honor is wearing “Slap me down NOW” on her robes. This begs a president to politely say, “I appreciate the concern of Her Honor. But last time I looked, I am the Commander-in-Chief, not her. She has exceeded her authority with her ruling. And I will therefore consider it of no effect and carry on accordingly.”

It would not be the first time a President has told judges what to do with their rulings. But it has been way too long since a President has done so. We desperately need a victory, however small, against heretofore unchecked judicial power.

But with our current President, I am not holding my breath.

By the way, Phillips was appointed by Bill Clinton. That President also did great damage to our judiciary.

UPDATE: The Obama Administration is appealing the ruling. It’s not a slap down, but it’s better than nothing.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Obama Plays the Race Card

Obama on Sunday said that Republicans are “counting on young people staying home, union workers staying home, black folks staying home.”

But . . . but . . . I thought Obama was supposed to be post-racial and post-partisan.

Monday, October 11, 2010

Obama vs. the Chamber of Commerce (Or I told you so)

Sometimes I’m good. Friday, I wrote Obama’s attack on the Chamber of Commerce would get more attention, to his political hurt. Well *ding* right again.

What I did not expect is how quickly Obama’s accusations are being exposed as baseless. Even the New York Times gets it already.

And in attempting to dig themselves out, the Obama Administration keeps digging itself in deeper. David Axelrod’s performance on CBS on Sunday was a gem:

White House senior adviser David Axelrod said the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has the burden of proving false the charge by Democrats that the business group is funneling foreign money to Republican campaigns.

Axelrod was pressed by CBS’ Bob Schieffer on Sunday for evidence that the foreign campaign contributions benefiting the GOP is more than “peanuts.”

“Do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?” Axelrod said on “Face the Nation.” “The fact is that the Chamber has asserted that, but they won’t release any information about where their campaign money is coming from. And that’s at the core of the problem.”

Ah, I see how it works: the Obama regime can throw charges at political opposition without evidence, and the opposition has the burden to clear itself.

Ed Morrissey also is among those who see how it works:

The government makes baseless accusations and then blames the people accused for not clearing themselves. . . . The White House launched the same kind of baseless attacks on the Koch family and Americans for Prosperity this summer and have yet to offer one substantial piece of evidence that any of these groups or people have done anything wrong at all, except to oppose Obama’s policies.

This is an administration that apparently has never learned the difference between being a political campaign and serving in the government. In the former situation, this would constitute slander, which is bad enough. When it comes from the government, it’s a form of tyranny — an attempt to use the power of government to silence dissent.

The attacks on the Chamber of Commerce are part of a pattern: the Obama regime and Democrats use the power of government to attack donors to conservative causes.

Again, this is tyranny.

Friday, October 08, 2010

Obama vs. the Chamber of Commerce

This is not getting a lot of attention yet, but it might very soon. Yesterday, Obama and comrades accused the Chamber of Commerce of using foreign funds to influence U.S. elections.

Putting aside that the accusation has scarce evidence or credibility, it raises the question . . . WHAT THE HEY IS OBAMA THINKING??

I’m not a big fan of the Chamber of Commerce myself for various reasons, but the C of C is Middle America. Obama might as well accuse Mom and apple pie.

If I were a Democrat, I would not want Obama continuing to say inanities that keep his opposition riled up for the elections and turn independents even more against Democrats. But that is exactly what Obama is doing.

Thursday, October 07, 2010

Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Another Rigged Poll from the Washington Post and ABC

This week, a Washington Post/ABC poll showed the Democrats gaining some ground as we near Election Day. Oh boy! The Democrats are making their BIG COMEBACK!

But there is a slight problem with the poll. It is rigged by an indefensible sample:

And how did the Democrats manage this rather remarkable comeback? Well, the WaPo/ABC pollster managed to find their usual sample gap. They went from a 31/25/39 D/R/I split in September in the general sample and 31/26/37 among registered voters, to 33/23/29 in the general sample and 34/25/37 among registered voters. That nine-point advantage to Democrats among RVs is almost twice what it was in the previous sample.

To believe that this represents the electorate, we would have to believe that (a) Democrats have had a big month in attracting voters to their banner, (b) Republicans somehow lost a bunch of voters in the same period, and (c) Democrats now have an advantage outstripping their 2008 situation when they won the presidency by seven points in the popular vote.

In short, the sample and hence the poll results are absurdly rigged.

And there is really no question about that. The only question is why did the Washington Post and ABC rig their poll? I can think only of two feasible explanations.

1. They intentionally rigged it to help the Democrats. Yes, that explanation is a bit conspiratorial. No, I do not wear tinfoil hats. But one would have to be naïve indeed to think the “mainstream” news media has never tried to influence elections. But I am no mind reader and do not presume to know if the rigging of this poll was intentional. I am more sure that . . .

2. Their liberalism makes it difficult for them to do a good poll, much like it makes it difficult for them to report fairly and accurately.

A good analogy of this difficulty would be refereeing in certain situations in sports. Sometimes, the atmosphere can be so biased that even the most conscientious referee or umpire can fall victim to it and help a team. I consider the 2006 Super Bowl a classic example.

The Big Story was that the Pittsburgh Steelers were returning to the Super Bowl. Even the NFL itself fanned that story. Little was said about it being the Seattle Seahawks going to their first Super Bowl. They were bit players. Pittsburgh was the story and was just supposed to win (not unlike Obama in 2008?). And I think that atmosphere affected the reffing and the outcome.

Of course, if a referee himself is biased, say, if he’s from Pittsburgh, the difficultly increases greatly.

The atmosphere and bias in the midst of the “mainstream” news media is so left of center, I think it is as difficult for them to do a fair poll as it is for someone from Pittsburgh to call a fair game when the Steelers are in the Super Bowl, even if they are trying their best to be fair. . . . And that’s a big “if” in the news media's case.

In any case, this poll is rigged indeed and a disservice to political discourse.

Housekeeping: I hope you did not miss me too much yesterday. My internet was down most of the day.

Monday, October 04, 2010

Lessons From *That* 10:10 Ad

It’s gone viral. So many of you are aware of a certain gory ad from environmentalists promoting 10:10, a UK campaign to cut carbon emissions by 10%.

I will post the ad here with the **STRONG WARNING** that it is both disturbed and disturbing. I made myself watch the whole thing just now, and . . . it is chilling.

The reason I find this so chilling, other than the disturbing imagery, is I know my history. The 20th Century was marked by regimes which slaughtered tens of millions for the common good, of course, because they would not go along with the regime’s group think . . . or simply would not go along well enough.

Regimes and ideologues of the Left were (and are) particularly prone to slaughter of non-supporters. Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, etc. To be blunt, Hitler (if he really was of the Right) and scattered Rightist tin pot dictators were far less prolific in slaughter than the Glorious People’s regimes. In the 20th Century, the Left demonstrated that it believes its causes and its power far more valuable that the lives of those who do not adequately support them.

And I see in this 10:10 ad the same mentality found in the mass murderers of the last century: an insufferable self-righteousness, overconfidence in the rightness of their cause and of their power that justifies virtually any means, and a callousness toward human life that even becomes casual. Note how easily the actors literally “liquidate” those who do not go along with politically correct groupthink. And how could those behind the ad produce it if they did not also have a low view of the lives of those who do not support them?

Hyperenvironmentalists are particularly prone to these qualities with their sometimes outspoken thinking that having too many polluting humans around is a bad thing.

(Disclaimer: I support conservation and environmental causes with donations of money and land no less. My beef is with environmental extremists and other brands of Leftists.)

In short, although I don’t think hyperenvionmentalistism=genocide or even that Leftism=genocide, this 10:10 ad quite literally displays the same sort of mindset that resulted in the genocide of tens of millions in the 20th century.

This is a good moment to get to the heart of why this blog took more of a turn toward the political in 2008, a turn I know many readers found unpleasant. I saw a rising danger from the Left. And events are proving me correct. And the danger from the Left is much more than matters of administration and economy, as important as those are. No, matters of freedom and slavery and of life and death are at stake. For the Left again and again and again has shown a profound disregard for human freedom . . . even the freedom to live.

The 10:10 ad may be only a small part of that history of profound disregard for freedom and life from the Left. But we ignore it at our own peril. History demonstrates that also all too well.

Friday, October 01, 2010

Abomination of the Week

This week’s abomination is not a particular offence, but a prevalent practice. In many uberlibchurches, “Hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches” is said after scripture lessons.

Now some readers may ask what is offensive about that? After all, that is taken straight from scripture itself, from the Revelation of John. And we should certainly be sensitive to what the Holy Spirit is saying.

What “Hear what the Spirit is saying . . . ” replaces gives a big clue to the problem. For untold centuries, the reader of the Epistle Lesson in the Mass concludes his reading with “the Word of the Lord.” Unless I’ve missed something, it has never been “Hear what the Spirit is saying” until recent and sordid decades.

So by using their alternative conclusion, libchurches intentionally avoid saying “This is the Word of the Lord.”

There is a reason for that in addition to disregard for tradition. Liberal “Christians” do not believe all scripture is the word of God. At best, they think scripture “contains” the word of God, which is another mealy-mouthed dodge.

On the other hand, they blame their own violations of the authority of scripture on the Holy Spirit. In their nonsensical view, the Holy Spirit happens to be oh-so-progressive like them and goes around guiding churches in a very different direction than scripture guides. Thus, saying “Hear what the Spirit is saying to the Churches” after scripture lessons is a pious, self-righteous, and if I may add, a treacly dodge of the authority of scripture.

It is part of their rejection of the authority of scripture. They might as well say, “Ignore some of the scripture I’ve just read if you like. But hear what the more progressive Holy Spirit is telling us.”

That they cloak this rejection of the authority of the Lord and of his word with a pseudo-pious abuse of the scripture from Revelation makes the stench in God’s nostrils (and in mine) that much worse. It thereby richly deserves being named the Abomination of the Week.