Showing posts with label Bigotry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bigotry. Show all posts

Monday, April 20, 2026

IDF Soldier Desecrates Jesus Statue

Recent IDF Soldier Desecrates Jesus Statue in Lebanon: A Troubling Pattern of Anti-Christian Acts

On April 19, 2026, a photograph went viral showing an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldier in southern Lebanon using a sledgehammer to smash the head of a fallen statue of Jesus Christ in the Christian village of Debel. 

The image depicts the soldier striking the crucifix figure while operating in the area during Israel's military campaign against Hezbollah.

The IDF quickly confirmed the photo's authenticity, describing the act as a "serious breach of conduct" inconsistent with its values. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promised "appropriately harsh disciplinary action," and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar issued an apology to Christians, calling the damage "grave and disgraceful." The military stated it would investigate and assist the local community in restoring the statue.

While Israeli officials condemned the incident, it has sparked outrage among Christians worldwide, highlighting concerns over respect for religious symbols during conflict.


 A Broader History of Anti-Christian Incidents

This event does not stand in isolation. Christian leaders and reports have documented a pattern of vandalism, harassment, and attacks against Christian sites and clergy in Israel and the occupied territories, often attributed to Jewish extremists, settlers, or individuals.


- Vandalism of Churches and Statues: In February 2023, a Jewish tourist used a hammer to deface and topple a wooden statue of Jesus at the Church of the Flagellation in Jerusalem's Old City, shouting against "idols." Earlier incidents include anti-Christian graffiti on the Dormition Abbey reading messages like "Jesus is garbage" and threats of violence (2014–2016).


- Cemetery Desecrations: In January 2023, over 30 tombstones with crosses were smashed in the Protestant cemetery on Mount Zion in Jerusalem. Security footage showed men in kippahs damaging graves. Similar attacks have targeted Christian burial sites repeatedly.


- Spitting, Assaults, and Harassment: Christian clergy and pilgrims in Jerusalem's Old City have reported frequent spitting by ultra-Orthodox Jews, stone-throwing, and physical assaults. In 2023, church leaders issued joint statements denouncing a "systematic campaign" against Christians, including disruptions of prayers.


- Settler Attacks in the West Bank: Palestinian Christian villages like Taybeh have faced arson near churches and cemeteries by Israeli settlers. In 2026, settlers were filmed vandalizing a cross on a Christian activist family's property in al-Makhrour.


- Historical Pattern: Since at least 2010, UN and local reports have recorded dozens of attacks on churches, monasteries, and Christian property, including arson and graffiti. In 2023, the Rossing Center noted a "disturbing rise" in incidents ranging from vandalism to intimidation.



A video from 2024 is also circulating, which, according to Grok (X's AI software).  The video was filmed in November 2024 inside an Orthodox church in Deir Mimas, southern Lebanon. It shows IDF soldiers (identified as Golani Brigade in reports) breaking in at night, using flashlights, mimicking icons, and staging a mock wedding ceremony with microphones at the altar while laughing. The footage first circulated widely then and was condemned; IDF called the behavior inappropriate. Recent posts are resurfacing the old clip amid current Lebanon ops. (https://x.com/grok/status/2047049511520854479)

Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and Armenian leaders have repeatedly pleaded with Israeli authorities for stronger protection, noting low arrest and conviction rates for perpetrators compared to attacks on other groups.


 Context and Implications

Israel positions itself as a protector of religious freedom in the Holy Land, and many incidents involve extremists rather than official policy. However, critics argue that lax enforcement and inflammatory rhetoric from some far-right figures contribute to a hostile environment for the dwindling Christian population in the region.

The recent Lebanon incident, even if isolated, revives questions about cultural and religious sensitivity amid military operations. Christians—both local and global—deserve assurance that sacred symbols will not be casually desecrated.

True coexistence requires accountability, education, and respect across all sides. Desecrating the image of Jesus, central to over two billion Christians, undermines claims of shared Abrahamic values.


UPDATE: April 22, 2026:

On April 19, 2026, a photograph went viral showing an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldier in the Christian village of Debel in southern Lebanon using a sledgehammer to smash the head of a fallen statue of Jesus Christ during operations against Hezbollah. The IDF confirmed the image's authenticity, describing the act as a "serious breach of conduct" inconsistent with its values. Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, condemned the incident, with Netanyahu stating he was "stunned and saddened" and promising "appropriately harsh disciplinary action." Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar apologized to Christians worldwide, calling the damage "grave and disgraceful."

In response, the IDF removed the soldier who damaged the statue and the soldier who filmed the act from combat duty, sentencing both to 30 days in military prison. The military also vowed to assist the local community in restoring the statue to its place. While the incident has sparked outrage among Christians globally and highlighted broader concerns about respect for religious symbols in conflict zones, Israeli leaders and over 150 Jewish rabbis from various denominations have issued strong condemnations and apologies, emphasizing that such behavior does not align with Israel's values or its role in the Holy Land.


Sources and Links:

- New York Post: Netanyahu promises discipline for IDF soldier smashing Jesus statue - https://nypost.com/2026/04/20/us-news/netanyahu-promises-harsh-discipline-for-idf-soldier-caught-smashing-jesus-statue-in-lebanon/

- Times of Israel: IDF confirms image authentic - https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-says-image-of-soldier-destroying-jesus-statue-in-lebanon-is-real-vows-action/

- Wikipedia: Violence against Christians in Israel - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_Christians_in_Israel

- Jerusalem Story: Anti-Christian attacks rise - https://www.jerusalemstory.com/en/blog/anti-christian-attacks-jerusalem-rise-recent-months

- Additional reports from Al Jazeera, Jerusalem Post, and church statements document the ongoing pattern.


UPDATED SOURCES April 22, 2026

  • Times of Israel: 2 troops dismissed, jailed for smashing statue of Jesus (details on arrests, jail time, and additional troops questioned)
  • Jerusalem Post: Soldiers removed from combat and given 30 days detention (includes IDF regret and deviation from values)
  • Times of Israel: IDF confirms image and vows action, including restoring the statue (early vow to help restore)
  • BBC: Outrage and IDF confirmation (background on the incident and condemnation)
  • NBC News: Netanyahu and Sa'ar statements (initial condemnations)
  • Tuesday, September 5, 2023

    Was Mother Teresa a Fraud? Was She Evil? Christopher Hitchens Lied

    Christopher Hitchens, the heavy-drinking, Oxford-educated writer known for attacking politicians with his pen, had a vitriolic campaign against the beloved Mother Teresa. But why did he have such a problem with a Nobel Peace Prize winner who devoted much of her life to helping the poor and is a canonized saint of the Catholic Church?

    At first glance, pitting Hitchens against Mother Teresa (both deceased) seems like an unfair fight. After all, how could the frail, pious nun who helped the poor with her hands be compared to the sharp-tongued writer who wielded his intellect as a weapon? But Hitchens; imagination saw through the image of an innocent do-gooder that surrounded Mother Teresa and launched a scathing critique of her life and work.

    The "Myth of Mother Teresa"

    Hitchens insisted that Mother Teresa was anything but the apolitical savior of the poor that she was known to be. Instead, he portrayed her as a willing political tool for the Vatican, a validator of corrupt right-wing political leaders, and even more surprisingly, a suppressor rather than a savior of the poor.

    One of Hitchens' main contentions was that Mother Teresa's image was incorrectly adored by the media. He quoted Mark Twain: “Give a man the reputation for being an early riser and that man can sleep until noon.” In other words, he believed that her reputation as an early riser—someone who tirelessly served the poor—was undeserved.

    The Political Side of Mother Teresa

    During her Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech in 1979, Mother Teresa made strong statements against abortion and contraceptives. She declared that abortion was the greatest threat to world peace and campaigned against birth control. Hitchens found this problematic because she worked in India—a country with hundreds of millions of people living in dire poverty. He argued that her family-planning policies were disturbing since they aligned with anti-abortion sentiments while ignoring the pressing needs of impoverished families.

    Furthermore, Hitchens hypothesized that Mother Teresa's use of her international fame to advocate for anti-abortion policies was due to her being a political tool for the Vatican. She allegedly urged political leaders worldwide to pass anti-abortion legislation—an issue crucial to the Catholic Church.

    Controversial Associations

    Mother Teresa's close alignment with controversial political figures also bothered Hitchens. She accepted awards from and praised leaders like Haiti's Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier (accused of killing tens of thousands during his rule) and former U.S. President Ronald Reagan (whose policies contributed to civil wars in Central America).

    In summary, Hitchens believed that Mother Teresa's idolization wasn't earned. He criticized her stark opposition to contraception and highlighted the horrid conditions in her hospice. For him, she represented not an angelic figure but rather a complex character entangled in politics and religious dogma.


    What are we to make of the claims Hitchens made which many online atheists still posit as factual?  Simply put, Christopher Hitchens was wrong about Mother Teresa. He accused her of being a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud who exploited the poor and promoted a cruel and dogmatic view of Catholicism.  Here he showed his bigotry and hate against Catholics. He just simply did not like religion and his commentaries showed it.  

    He also claimed that she accepted money from dictators and criminals, opposed contraception and abortion, and faked her miracles. However, his arguments were based on selective evidence, biased interpretation, and personal animosity.  No one on earth is perfect. We all have friends who have their secrets. 

    We have our own secrets as well as our own imperfections. Donors are no different. Just because someone donates to a GoFundMe and may be a Mafia member does not make the GoFundMe campaign part of the Mafia or an endorsement of it. Again, Hitchens was just showing his animosity and bias.  He ignored the testimonies of countless people who witnessed her compassion, humility, and generosity. He also failed to understand her spiritual vision of serving Christ in the poorest of the poor. This is different from the mission and view of a medical doctor who attempts to deal with the medical issues of his or her patient for monetary gain. 

    Hitchens made many claims against Mother Teresa including accusing her of running clinics with poor conditions where nurses reused needles on patients and even claimed Mother Teresa sought the best medical care for herself.  Hitchens also claimed Mother Teresa funneled millions to the Vatican. He mentions this in his books Hell's Angel and The Missionary Position. Note the titles of these books. They are satirical hooks to get people to buy the books. "Hell's Angel" is a reference to the biker gang while the "Missionary Position" is a reference to a sexual act implying Mother Teresa was F*%#ing the poor. It is a vulgar sexual innuendo meant to attack Mother Teresa and be comical at the same time.  The four-letter "F" word is sometimes used to indicate when someone is hurting others, taking advantage of them, and so on. 

    Mother Teresa did not exploit the Poor

    One of the most common charges that Hitchens leveled against Mother Teresa was that she exploited the poor and suffering people who came to her hospices, known as "Homes for the Dying". He claimed that she did not provide them with adequate medical care, pain relief, or hygiene, but rather let them die in agony and filth while telling them that their suffering was a gift from God and a way to salvation.

    This accusation is based on a distorted and selective view of Mother Teresa's work and philosophy. First of all, it is important to understand that Mother Teresa's hospices were not hospitals or clinics, but places where people who had no one else to care for them could find shelter, comfort, and dignity in their last moments. They were not meant to cure diseases or prolong life, but to offer love, dignity, and respect to those who were rejected by society and abandoned by their families. As Mother Teresa herself said: "We are not here to solve all the problems of the world but to touch those whom we can with the love of Christ."

    Secondly, it is not true that Mother Teresa denied or neglected the medical needs of her patients. She had a team of doctors and nurses who visited her hospices regularly and provided basic medical care, such as antibiotics, bandages, vaccinations, and vitamins. She also referred some of her patients to hospitals or clinics when they needed more advanced treatment or surgery. She did not oppose modern medicine or science but rather used them as tools to serve the poor. She even accepted an honorary degree from Harvard Medical School in 1982, where she praised the achievements of medical science and urged the students to use their skills for the benefit of humanity.

    Thirdly, it is not true that Mother Teresa imposed her religious views on her patients or forced them to convert to Catholicism. She respected the faith and culture of each person she served, regardless of their religion or background. She did not baptize anyone without their consent or knowledge, as Hitchens falsely claimed. She only offered spiritual guidance and prayers to those who asked for them or expressed an interest in them. She also encouraged interfaith dialogue and cooperation among different religious groups. She once said: "There is only one God and He is God to all; therefore, it is important that everyone is seen as equal before God."

    Mother Teresa did not receive money from Dubious Sources

    Another accusation that Hitchens made against Mother Teresa was that she received millions of dollars in donations from corrupt or criminal sources, such as dictators, fraudsters, and arms dealers. He claimed that she accepted money from people like Charles Keating, Robert Maxwell, Jean-Claude Duvalier, and Enver Hoxha, without questioning their motives or morality. He also alleged that she used the money for dubious purposes, such as building convents or supporting anti-abortion campaigns, rather than helping the poor.

    This accusation is based on a distorted and selective view of Mother Teresa's finances and activities. First of all, it is important to understand that Mother Teresa did not personally handle or manage the money that was donated to her organization, known as the Missionaries of Charity. She had a team of accountants and auditors who were responsible for keeping track of the funds and ensuring their proper use. She also had a board of trustees who oversaw the financial affairs of the organization and made decisions about its projects and programs.

    Secondly, it is not true that Mother Teresa accepted money from anyone without checking their background or ethics. She had a policy of not accepting donations from sources that were involved in activities that contradicted her values or principles, such as violence, oppression, or injustice. She also returned or refused donations that came with strings attached or conditions that interfered with her mission or vision. She once said: "We do not accept money that has blood on it."

    Thirdly, it is not true that Mother Teresa used the money for dubious purposes or wasted it on unnecessary expenses. She used the money for various humanitarian and social causes, such as building and running schools, orphanages, leprosy clinics, AIDS centers, soup kitchens, shelters, and hospices around the world. She also supported various campaigns and initiatives that promoted human dignity and rights, such as the abolition of the death penalty, the protection of refugees, and the prevention of child trafficking. She was transparent and accountable about her spending and reporting and submitted annual reports to the Vatican and other authorities. Moreover, there is no way Christopher Hitchens could have known the finances of the Missionaries of Charity. So where did he get his information from?  He made it up!

    Mother Teresa was not a Friend of Dictators

    Another accusation that Hitchens made against Mother Teresa was that she was a friend of dictators and tyrants and that she praised or supported them in exchange for favors or recognition. He claimed that she endorsed or legitimized regimes that were responsible for atrocities, human rights violations, and oppression, such as those of Albania, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. He also alleged that she ignored or dismissed the suffering and grievances of the people who lived under those regimes and that she betrayed her own principles of peace and justice.

    This accusation is based on a distorted and selective view of Mother Teresa's diplomacy and politics. First of all, it is important to understand that Mother Teresa was not a politician or a diplomat, but a humanitarian and a religious leader. She did not have any political agenda or affiliation but rather followed her conscience and her faith. She did not seek or accept any political power or influence but rather used her moral authority and reputation to advocate for the poor and the oppressed.

    Secondly, it is not true that Mother Teresa praised or supported dictators or tyrants. She did not endorse or legitimize any regime or ideology but rather challenged them to respect human dignity and rights. She did not ignore or dismiss the suffering and grievances of the people who lived under those regimes, but rather spoke out for them and offered them assistance. She also criticized and condemned violence and injustice wherever she saw them, regardless of who committed them or why. She once said: "We are called upon not to be successful, but to be faithful."

    Thirdly, it is not true that Mother Teresa betrayed her own principles of peace and justice. She did not compromise or dilute her values or principles but rather lived them out in her words and actions. She did not avoid or evade conflict or controversy but rather faced them with courage and compassion. She also forgave and reconciled with those who wronged her or opposed her, regardless of their status or position. She once said: "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other."

    Conclusion

    On September 4, 2016, Mother Teresa was elevated to sainthood when Pope Francis canonized her at the Vatican. The late nun, already called the "Saint of the Gutters," is widely known for her decades spent caring for the poor and sick in Kolkata, India. Many Catholics and non-Catholics alike admire her.

    Millions, if not billions, of people around the world have long loved the woman who has become a symbol of service to the least fortunate. World leaders received and honored her, including Ronald Reagan, Indira Gandhi, Princess Diana, and the Dalai Lama. Mother Teresa received the Presidential Medal of Freedom and an honorary doctorate from the University of Cambridge. President Bill Clinton made Mother Teresa an honorary American citizen in 1996, saying she had demonstrated "how we can make real our dreams for a just and good society." She was even given a State Funeral by India, the highest form of salutation to a deceased person in the nation and which is reserved for prominent members of the nation or government. Logic dictates that if Mother Teresa was the evil fraud Hitchens claimed of her, she would not have garnered so much deference, adulation, admiration, and respect. To date, nothing bad has come out of her decades after her death.

    Born Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu in 1910, in what is now Macedonia, Mother Teresa joined the Loreto order of nuns in 1928. It was on a 1946 train trip through India that she was inspired to leave the Loreto order and found the Missionaries of Charity. The order was established four years later and has since opened more than 130 houses around the world to provide care for the sick and dying. Missionaries of Charity nuns must adhere to traditional vows of chastity, poverty, and obedience, as well as a fourth vow: to give "wholehearted free service to the poorest of the poor." Mother Teresa worked as head of Missionaries of Charity until six months before she died in 1997 at 86.

    In conclusion, I have shown that Christopher Hitchens was wrong about Mother Teresa and that his books were a biased and misleading attack on one of the most compassionate and selfless human beings who ever lived. I have examined some of the main accusations that Hitchens made against Mother Teresa, and shown why they are either false, exaggerated, or irrelevant. I have also presented some of the evidence that supports Mother Teresa's legacy as a genuine humanitarian and a faithful servant of God.

    It is interesting to note that Christopher Hitchens' books have no index, bibliography, or references. They are just small books, barely 100 pages, and are just his words. He offers no evidence, no primary, secondary, or even tertiary sources. Readers are left to simply take his word for it on his authority. This is ironic coming from the man who developed what atheists online call the "Hitchens' Razor" which is taken from a quote by Hitchens who writes in another book entitled "God IS NOT Great," "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.”  

    Ironically, he offers no evidence against Mother Teresa in his books, just conjecture and his personal animosity and bias.  On that ground, we can dismiss his books and comments because he asserted them without evidence so therefore, they can be dismissed without evidence.  Ironically, Hitchens was hired to be the devil's advocate in the cause of Mother Teresa.  His job was to show evidence of why should did not live an exemplary holy life. He failed miserably to convince the Vatican.  

    And to think that there are so-called atheists online who admire this guy and see him as some intellectual when he was a clumsy polemicist and gossip making a living via bigotry and slandering others.  We can question the intelligence and integrity of these so-called atheists easily based on their choice of idols. 

    Mother Teresa was not a fraud, a fanatic, or a friend of dictators. She was a saint, a hero, and a friend of the poor. She died with dignity and holiness. 

    Hitchens never lifted a finger to help anyone, just sat in his chair criticizing people who did help.  He promoted division bigotry and misinformation only tolerating those who had his narrow vision and intellect. Despite his writings, he never won the Nobel Peace Prize. He died from his own vices, alone, angry, and miserable.  

    His memorial or funeral service was attended by a few people - old pretentious wealthy White men who love to explain things for others- in comparison to Mother Teresa's with his brother ironically reading from the Bible, a reading from Philippians.  Mother Teresa's funeral was attended by millions and by people from all faiths and walks of life. Hitchens claimed to be a Humanist, but evidence and history show Mother Teresa was the true Humanist who focused on humans, especially the poorest of the poor.  St. Mother Teresa of Calcutta, pray for us!


    What do you think? Post your comment below on Disqus.  Be sure to follow the rules so your comment can go through.  


    Here are some references that challenge Hitchens' allegations and defend Mother Teresa's legacy:

    *Sources:*

    1. [The Atheist Vs. The Saint: Why Christopher Hitchens 'Hated' Mother Teresa](https://www.christianpost.com/news/the-atheist-vs-the-saint-why-christopher

    - [Mother Teresa: Beyond the Image](https://www.amazon.com/Mother-Teresa-Beyond-Image-Anniversary/dp/0385491370) by Anne Sebba. This book is a balanced and sympathetic biography of Mother Teresa that explores her motivations, challenges, and achievements.

    - [Unmasking Mother Teresa's Critics](https://www.amazon.com/Unmasking-Mother-Teresas-Critics-Bill/dp/1621640407) by Bill Donohue. This book is a rebuttal of Hitchens' book The Missionary Position and other critics of Mother Teresa. It exposes the flaws and fallacies of their arguments and provides factual evidence to support her sanctity.

    - [Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light](https://www.amazon.com/Mother-Teresa-Private-Writings-Calcutta/dp/0307589234) by Brian Kolodiejchuk. This book is a collection of Mother Teresa's personal letters that reveal her inner struggles, doubts, and joys. It shows her deep love for God and her desire to follow his will.

    - [Mother Teresa: The Case for The Cause](https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/common-misconceptions/mother-teresa-the-case-for-the-cause.html) by Fr. Brian Kolodiejchuk. This article is a summary of the process and evidence for Mother Teresa's beatification and canonization. It addresses some of the common objections and misconceptions about her life and work.

    Saturday, July 13, 2019

    Hate & Unfairness at The Fight on The Fence Facebook Group

    I run into many crazy people on and offline.  Because of this, I think it is necessary that I post warnings to my followers so that they will not have to face the same crazy people.  In this post, I will detail my experience with a Facebook group a young Greek man added me to.

    The group claims to be about discussions regarding theism and atheism. However, most of the content is hateful against religious people.  Administrations do not follow their own rules and side with trolls. The group is a cesspool of trollish behavior and bigotry against Christians.  They even targeted gay members with homophobia.

    Avoid and report this group https://www.facebook.com/groups/TFoTF to Facebook.  Facebook will remove it when it gets enough reports regarding its content.

    I was added to it by young Greek Orthodox amateur apologist George Argyris a few months ago and did not become active in it until recently. When I posted, accounts which claimed to be atheists attacked me. I ignored it and reported abuse to admins. Some were deleted, others not.

    Last week, someone accused me of turning off comments. I defended myself with civility and was met with more attacks. One member named Brian Ballard began to threaten me and cursed at me. I reported it to the admin. Jared replied and warned Brian.  Here is Brian Ballard






    However, Jared then began to target me. He also accused me of turning off comments and claimed they broke the rules.

    Moreover, I wrote that I would ask Facebook as to whether or not owners/admins can order members not use to turn off comments. He got upset and felt challenged and attacked me more. Eventually, he could not handle me and removed me from the group.

    Here is the exchange. The rules are here. NO such rule exists. See the exchange here and the rules themselves.  Note that no rule regarding comments exists. Jared lied:













    Here is a photo of the admin Jared M. Russell: https://www.facebook.com/jared.m.russell
    Jared appears to be a White supremacist posting images of the Confederate flag which is considered by many today as a symbol of hate and racism.


    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1218542948167485&set=picfp.100000353741094&type=3&theater



    We can see now why this individual is power-hungry. White supremacists are typically emotionally immature males who feel powerless and have a superiority complex.

    He is now lying to the owner and others stating that I said I would not follow the rules.  Notice in the above exchange that I never stated that I will not follow the rules.  Jared lied.

    An atheist friend in the group recently defended me and was also met with abuse and eventually removed as well. They even told him I was him!

    Again, no admin took action against the bullies. Instead, they just booted my atheist friend just for asking for fairness. The evidence is clear. I did nothing wrong and was removed for no reason other than I emasculated an admin by questioning.

    As a former atheist, I knew questioning is a principle of atheism. If an atheist cannot question, then atheism cannot exist. IF this group claims to allow the free speech of atheists and theists, then questioning is a must. A member cannot be booted just for questioning. It is clear that this group is just a playground for trolls. Also, note that Brian and others were never removed. They targeted me and got scot-free.

    It is clear that this group is created by trolls and for trolls who hate Christians. Facebook needs to ban this group as it violates its hate speech policies.

    Furthermore, I even messaged the owner of the group, Stacey Struckman.  She pretended to show concern and then made it clear that she would turn a blind eye to the situation and even wrote that she will "wash her hands."  She, in turn, blocked me. This demonstrates her lack of moral compass and lack of fairness.  Stacey has no interest in being objective or honest. She lied and accepted lies told to her as truth.  It seems to me that she may be mentally abused as well. When I tagged her with the evidence, she was concerned that her husband would see her name tagged on another male's account. This is extremely odd and indicative of someone in an unhealthy, controlling and abusive behavior.  We must pray for her and contact the police to do a wellness check on her.


    Here is her photo followed by the exchange I had with her: https://www.facebook.com/stacey.struckman

























    Lastly, I contacted another admin named Ajunte Burns who is African American and claims to be a Christian apologist. I was hoping he would be honest and fair, but he too failed in those areas. Like Stacey, he sided with the lying trolls and had no interest in being fair. He claims a vote was taken and the admins declared that they do not want me in the group. Well duh, this was my point. The admins are biased and unfair to Christians.  I did not need a vote to know this. That was my main concern, to begin with.

    However, instead of siding with honesty and truth, Ajunte simply accepted the majority and did not protest it.  A real Christian does not follow the majority when they are in the wrong.  Like Dr. King, who was African American, a Christian challenges the majority when they are in the wrong. As Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI stated, "Truth is not determined by a majority vote."















    Here is Ajunte Burns and our exchange:
    https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100010006955047





    Again, I warn all theists and atheists to avoid this group on Facebook and report it. It violates Facebook's policies and simply exists to harass and abuse Christians.


    Facebook is clear on what it considers hate. This group and its members are violating this policy, see:

    11. Hate Speech
    Policy Rationale
    We do not allow hate speech on Facebook because it creates an environment of intimidation and exclusion and in some cases may promote real-world violence.
    We define hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what we call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability. We also provide some protections for immigration status. We define attack as violent or dehumanizing speech, statements of inferiority, or calls for exclusion or segregation. We separate attacks into three tiers of severity, as described below.
    Sometimes people share content containing someone else’s hate speech for the purpose of raising awareness or educating others. In some cases, words or terms that might otherwise violate our standards are used self-referentially or in an empowering way. People sometimes express contempt in the context of a romantic break-up. Other times, they use gender-exclusive language to control membership in a health or positive support group, such as a breastfeeding group for women only. In all of these cases, we allow the content but expect people to clearly indicate their intent, which helps us better understand why they shared it. Where the intention is unclear, we may remove the content.
    We allow humor and social commentary related to these topics. In addition, we believe that people are more responsible when they share this kind of commentary using their authentic identity.
    Click here to read our Hard Questions Blog and learn more about our approach to hate speech.

    Do not post:
    Tier 1 attacks, which target a person or group of people who share one of the above-listed characteristics or immigration status (including all subsets except those described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses), where attack is defined as
    Any violent speech or support in written or visual form
    Dehumanizing speech such as reference or comparison to:
    Insects
    Animals that are culturally perceived as intellectually or physically inferior
    Filth, bacteria, disease and feces
    Sexual predator
    Subhumanity
    Violent and sexual criminals
    Other criminals (including but not limited to “thieves,” “bank robbers,” or saying “all [protected characteristic or quasi-protected characteristic] are ‘criminals’”)
    Mocking the concept, events or victims of hate crimes even if no real person is depicted in an image
    Designated dehumanizing comparisons in both written and visual form
    Tier 2 attacks, which target a person or group of people who share any of the above-listed characteristics, where attack is defined as
    Statements of inferiority or an image implying a person's or a group's physical, mental, or moral deficiency
    Physical (including but not limited to “deformed,” “undeveloped,” “hideous,” “ugly”)
    Mental (including but not limited to “retarded,” “cretin,” “low IQ,” “stupid,” “idiot”)
    Moral (including but not limited to “slutty,” “fraud,” “cheap,” “free riders”)
    Expressions of contempt or their visual equivalent, including (but not limited to)
    "I hate"
    "I don't like"
    "X are the worst"
    Expressions of disgust or their visual equivalent, including (but not limited to)
    "Gross"
    "Vile"
    "Disgusting"
    Cursing at a person or group of people who share protected characteristics
    Tier 3 attacks, which are calls to exclude or segregate a person or group of people based on the above-listed characteristics, where exclusion is defined as:
    Explicit Exclusion which includes but is not limited to "expel" or "not allowed".
    Political Exclusion defined as denial of right to political participation.
    Economic Exclusion defined as denial of access to economic entitlements and limiting participation in the labour market,
    Social Exclusion defined as including but not limited to denial of opportunity to gain access to spaces (incl. online) and social services.
    We do allow criticism of immigration policies and arguments for restricting those policies.
    Content that describes or negatively targets people with slurs, where slurs are defined as words commonly used as insulting labels for the above-listed characteristics.
    https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/hate_speech

    Tuesday, December 26, 2017

    Atheism Has a Suicide Problem

    During the holidays, we tend to see atheists and atheist groups come out more strongly against religion. WHy is this? They are often quiet during the summer, fall and even during Easter. However, when Christmas approaches, we see caricature atheist groups like Freedom from Religion or American Atheists spend thousands of dollars carelessly on advertisements promoting religious bigotry. Instead of using the donations they receive from their sheep to help others, they waste it on hateful campaigns. The question remains: Why?  Why during this time?

    It is not news that people often get depressed during the holidays. Memories of the past come back due to cues we get from the senses. The holiday music, decorations, cold weather etc all bring back memories. Atheists seem to experience something deeper. Some believe the onset of atheistic beliefs bring about atheism. When someone seems to think God is imaginary, this may affect his or her happiness since God is an image of goodness and love. Perhaps the memories of when they were a religious believer start to come back and make them feel remorseful. Then there are those atheists who feel targeted by overzealous religious folks who condemn them. In any event, atheism has a big suicide problem.

    According to a study done in 2004, atheists and those unaffiliated with religion had the highest rates of depression and suicide. These individuals were young, unmarried, had no children, did not keep in contact with family and had no moral objections to suicide due to relativistic views. This makes sense. Atheists are often self-centered. They believe that they are somehow enlightened and others are not. To them, everyone else is indoctrinated with "delusions" and other ideas that are of the "iron age." However, then they realize that life without God and religion is meaningless, they begin to collapse psychologically. They become angry and bitter, easily triggered by anything good that is related to God. They become unhappy and want to spoil all the fun for everyone else. This is why we see them come out strongly during the holidays which is for many a time of great joy.

    Atheism does not offer anything to the atheist. It is just diatribe against God based on misconceptions and an insistence on adopting ignorance as a rule of life. To the atheist, there is no objective truth or morality. It is a no-holds-bar scenario. Because of this, everything is arbitrary. All hope is gone in the atheist's life. Nothing matters anymore because there is no God in heaven and no judgment. To quote one of my former philosophy professors Massimo Pigliucci, "No one is keeping score above." We are all hardwired to believe in God and the afterlife. Once we break off this important evolutionary trait, our sense of humanity begins to fade. We begin to de-evolve back to simple primates seeking to survive at the expense of others and even our own selves.

    Think about it. Which one is more hopeful:

    A). Believing in God and that we may reach a reward in heaven by being good.

    B). Not believing in God and believing that you die into oblivion.


    If you chose A, then you will be more hopeful. You will do good and care for others because you will receive a reward in heaven.  Not only will you receive a reward, but you will also feel good about doing good deeds. We all know it feels good to help others. When you feed someone who is hungry, give company to an elderly or sick person, or make someone who is suffering smile, it feels good. You feel the "warm and fuzzies," so to speak. Life is worth living. There is a purpose to it. Instead of just being an organism eating, sleeping and eliminating waste, we have more to live for.

    Now, if you chose B, you may still feel a sense of purpose and happiness. However, as you age and watch people die around you, your perspective changes. You start to wonder why even live. What is the point of waking up in the morning and engaging in societal rituals such as hygiene, nutrition, school or work? What is the point of having a family or even friends?  Why party? Why study?  If we are just going to die at any time and disappear into oblivion, what is the point?  Life becomes meaningless without God. It becomes hopeless. Despair sets in. An existential crisis arises when one is an atheist. I know this too well as a former atheist. I remember becoming a cold stoic adopting utilitarian point of view where choices in life were based on points or a calculus system. All that mattered was me. The homeless, uneducated, sick, unborn, elderly were meaningless to me because they were unfit. They failed natural selection and had to go so that the rest of us "fit" ones can survive.

    So as you can see, atheism does nothing good for the mind. It is a disease that leads to empty hearts and minds. Once empty, depression and possibly suicide will follow. Life without God is meaningless. Instead of being sons and daughters of God, we become just mere atoms animated in space and time. 



    Source:

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/atheism-has-a-suicide-problem_us_5a2a902ee4b022ec613b812b

    https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.161.12.2303




    Wednesday, November 29, 2017

    'Gaytivity' Scenes Mocking Jesus & Holy Family

    Recently on Twitter, some LGBTQ proponents have been posting offensive photos depicting religious hate against Christians.  These photos contain what has been coined as a "Gaytivity scene" or a display of a same-sex Holy Family with a transgender or queer baby Jesus. It mocks the traditional Christmas Nativity scene which is believed to have been first created by St. Francis of Assisi.

    The photos have brought about disgust and anger from Catholic bishop of Providence Rhode Island, Thomas Tobin and other clergy. He wrote on his Facebook page:

    A Gay Nativity?
    Just came across this photo of a “gay nativity” scene — two Josephs dressed in pink watching over the Christ Child. How sad that someone believes it’s okay (or funny or cool) to impose their own agenda on the holy Birth of Jesus. Pray for those who did so, for their change of heart, and that Jesus will forgive this sacrilege, this attack on the Christian Faith.



    Here are the original tweets with the offensive photos:





    Many are upset over the images.  Others have voiced support for them in the name of "inclusion." To date, I have not seen Fr. James Martin SJ comment on this display. It would be interesting to see his take on it.  As many of you know, Fr. Martin has been under fire for what has been described as a form of misguided compassion for members of the LGBTQ community which has watered down the Church's teachings on homosexuality.

    The scene is indeed offensive and makes me wonder the mental state of those creating these displays. They are clearly demonic in nature. Only Satan resorts to mockery because he has no rational arguments against God.  I am hoping that this disgusting display does not become a trend. There will be those who will create them on purpose just to bait Christians.  I advise Twitter users to report these accounts who posted the images and anyone else who posts them so they can get suspended. They are clearly examples of religious hate and intolerance.  Twitter has suspended profiles for petty reasons, they have to suspend these accounts for their hate against Christians.

    Pray for these souls who are deceived by the devil.





    Source:

    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/11/27/twitter-users-celebrate-gay-joseph-christmas-nativity-scene/

    https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/catholic-bishop-freaks-out-after-viewing-viral-gay-nativity-scene-with-two-josephs/

    https://paper.li/Sacerdotus/1316057495#/

    Wednesday, November 8, 2017

    Atheist Vandalizes NJ Catholic Parish

     In a world where atheists are getting more empowered via anonymous online accounts, we are starting to see them become more active in public.

    Just last week, an atheist attacked a Baptist community in Texas killing 27, many of them children.  Days before, an atheist vandalized a Catholic Church in Monmouth Beach, New Jersey.  The parish of the Precious Blood has been targeted by an atheist for the past several months.

     In a recent attack, a window was broken, a statue damaged, fecal matter left on the stairway and a marker was used to write "God is FAKE" on the exterior steps of the parish building.

    Parishioners are concerned that this is going on. Their worries are even more validated after the attack on the Baptist community by atheist Devin Kelley. All Catholics must be on the lookout in their respective parishes for these demented souls looking to publicly display their diatribe against God and religion in any form.

    If you live in Monmouth Beach, NJ and know anything, please contact detective Peter Rechtman at 732-229-1313 or at prechtman@monmouthbeach.org.

    We must get this lunatic off of the street and in jail, so he or she can get the help he or she needs.








    Source:

    https://patch.com/new-jersey/redbank/god-fake-vandal-writes-monmouth-beach-church-police

    http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2017/11/07/community-on-edge-after-beloved-monmouth-county-catholic-church-vandalized/


    Monday, November 6, 2017

    Atheists Distancing Themselves From Militant Atheist Mass Shooter

    I have always stated that Atheism is a stupid idea that spouts hate and bigotry. This has been exasperated with the so-called "New Atheism" movement which is more of a trolls anonymous convention rather than real atheists. One just has to see their online content and behavior to see that there is definitely some mental illness going on in their brains.

    No sane person, more less someone who claims to be intelligent and rational would spew the nonsense and vitriol that these folks spew.  As we know from the past, the content found online has radicalized many people. These people have become violent in their communities and have engaged in mass shootings or other terroristic acts. Atheism is no different. It is built upon hate against God and those who believe in Him. 

    As expected, internet atheists are being blacmed for a mass shooting in Texas.  Devin Patrick Kelley shot and killed at least 26 people at the Sutherlands Springs worship center.  The police investigating claim that the attack was not religiously or racially motivated, however, we have reason to think otherwise based on Kelly's online history.  Why attack a religious community of all places?  A place that speaks of God, the Gospel, and love of neighbor?  Kelley had a Facebook page that "liked" four different atheism accounts.  Among these pages he "liked" were that of Hemant Mehta who runs the Friendly Atheist page and whose content is anything but friendly.  Now he and other atheists are distancing themselves from this mass shooting despite their rhetoric possibily feuling Kelley's anger and hate. 

    Online atheist rhetoric fosters a lot of anger and hate. The discussion on God's existence is pretty much replaced by hate and trolling against theists. It becomes a sort of hunting game online where these trolls seek out theists and attack them for no reason even when the theist never began the engagement.  Humans are very impressionable, especially young ones and those with mental illness. Hateful and vitriolic rhetoric found online will have an affect on these humans. Many times these effects will be negative.  It is okay to disagree, but the disagreement should be logically sound not geared towards hate and dehumanizing groups you disagree with. 

    New reports show that Devin Kelley was mentally ill, had a history of domestic violence and animal cruelty. He had a deep hatred for religion, in particular, Christianity and was a militant atheist.  The Daily Mail reports:

    “He was the first atheist I met. He went Air Force after high school, got discharged but I don't know why,” Patrick Boyce, who attended New Braunfels High School with Mr Kelley, told the Daily Mail. But Courtney Kleiber, who was close with Mr Kelley from middle school through high school, said “he was heavily involved in the church at one point and did believe in God earlier on in his life.”

    “I had always known there was something off about him,” she wrote on Facebook. “But he wasn't always a ‘psychopath’ though. He use to be happy at one point, normal, your average kid. We had a lot of good times together. Over the years we all saw him change into something that he wasn't. To be completely honest, I'm really not surprised this happened, and I don't think anyone who knew him is very surprised either. My heart goes out to all of the victims that should've never been.”

    Former classmate Nina Rose Vaca told the Dallas Morning News: “He was a little strange but it was high school. Everyone was strange in their own way,”

    In another source, the Washington Times reports:

    Devin Patrick Kelley, the 26-year-old who stormed First Baptist Church in Texas and shot and killed 26 and wounded scores more, was described by former school classmates as an “outcast” and atheist who used social media to mock Christianity.

    Too bad for the mainstream media, which no doubt would’ve loved to make the case that Kelley was a card-carrying Christian, a Bible-thumping Republican, a tea party type conservative to the core.

    Turns out: He’s reportedly a wicked atheist with no moral compass. Hey — that’s rather like many of the left now, isn’t it? Can you say antifa, anyone?

    The mainstream media did not cover this story much and obviously because it did not fit their narrative. To them, a mass shooter is a second-amendment, bible thumping Christian from the south.  Atheists, liberals and others are not supposed to do mass shootings, per the media.  Nevertheless, we know the facts that Kelley was a militant atheist radicalized by Hemant Mehta and other online so-called atheists who use the guise of atheism to make money, troll and vent their hate.  

    More needs to be done.  If you see hateful atheists, please report them to social media and local authorities. Nothing good comes from atheism.  




     





    Source:


    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/texas-shooting-devin-patrick-kelley-atheist-atheism-facebook-online-internet-friendly-a8040866.html


    Sacerdotus TV LIveStream

    Labels

    Catholic Church (1580) Jesus (736) God (725) Bible (601) Atheism (399) Jesus Christ (378) Pope Francis (343) Liturgy of the Word (317) Atheist (279) Apologetics (265) Science (237) Christianity (198) LGBT (148) Theology (143) Liturgy (137) Blessed Virgin Mary (122) Abortion (97) Prayer (96) Gay (95) Philosophy (92) Pope Benedict XVI (91) Rosa Rubicondior (82) Traditionalists (81) Physics (74) Psychology (74) Vatican (74) Christmas (64) Holy Eucharist (61) Christian (60) New York City (59) President Obama (59) Protestant (53) Vatican II (50) Biology (48) Health (47) Politics (46) Women (44) Gospel (42) Racism (40) Supreme Court (35) Baseball (34) Illegal Immigrants (32) Pope John Paul II (32) priests (32) Death (31) NYPD (31) Priesthood (28) Space (28) Astrophysics (27) Jewish (27) Morality (27) Religious Freedom (27) Eucharist (26) Evangelization (25) Donald Trump (24) Christ (22) Evil (22) First Amendment (21) Pro Abortion (19) Child Abuse (17) Divine Mercy (17) Marriage (17) Pedophilia (17) Pro Choice (17) Easter Sunday (16) Holy Trinity (16) Police (16) Autism (14) Gender Theory (14) Pentecostals (14) Sacraments (14) Angels (13) Poverty (13) September 11 (13) Blog (12) CUNY (12) Cognitive Psychology (12) Muslims (12) academia (12) Hispanics (11) Pope Paul VI (11) Massimo Pigliucci (10) Evidence (9) Hell (9) Personhood (9) Podcast (9) Barack Obama (8) Big Bang Theory (8) Evangelicals (8) Human Rights (8) Humanism (8) Condoms (7) David Viviano (7) Eastern Orthodox (7) Ellif_dwulfe (7) NY Yankees (7) Spiritual Life (7) Encyclical (6) Gender Dysphoria Disorder (6) Babies (5) Baby Jesus (5) Catholic Bloggers (5) Cyber Bullying (5) Donations (5) Pope Pius XII (5) The Walking Dead (5) Ephebophilia (4) Plenary Indulgence (4) Pluto (4) Pope John XXIII (4) Death penalty (3) Founding Fathers (3) Dan Arel (2) Freeatheism (2) Oxfam (2) Penn Jillette (2) Pew Research Center (2) Cursillo (1) Dan Savage (1) Divine Providence (1) Fear The Walking Dead (1) Pentecostales (1)