Home / Is it time for Christians to assassinate Pat Robertson?

Is it time for Christians to assassinate Pat Robertson?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

If I were a Christian like Pat Robertson, I would advocate having him assassinated. After all, it’s the new Christian doctrine. The Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt kill those that thou doth not liketh. Do I like Pat Robertson? Sure, I like him like I like ebola. But I’m not saying we should import those London bobbies who pumped nine bullets into an innocent subway taker’s head to do their thing here. I’m not a Christian, so I’d settle for Mr. Robertson choking on a BLT with an extra splooge of mayo.

How can a country call itself Christian if it tolerates Christians who advocate assassination as a political solution? Why do we have these Christian Radicals in our midst? In any other country, the Christian Radicals would be regarded as nutcases. Fucktards. Idiots. An odd crowd of crazies to amuse the children when we run out of zoos. They’d be in the freak show at Coney’s Island, next to the Bearded Lady.

But in the U.S., they’re taken seriously. Their concerns — teaching creationism or “intelligent” design in our science classes, reducing women’s rights by curtailing abortion, stopping gays from marrying, killing stem cell research — are on the national agenda, and widely debated in the media by serious people. They dominate news cycles more than shark attacks and Tom Cruise dancing on couches.

When did we as a nation check our brains at the door? Are we nuts? Are we terminally stupid? Aren’t there enough celebrity trials to amuse us? How many Paris Hiltons would it take to keep our Christian Taliban off the airwaves?

More to the point, when did our moderate Christians decide to lie down and sleep and let the Christian Radicals speak for them?

There’s an interesting analogy between the relative quiet from Islam about the radicals in their midst. It took the bombings in London for some moderate Islamic leaders to get on camera and become loud and vocal. Yet those are Islamic leaders from Western countries speaking. Elsewhere the silence from Islam is deafening.

The silence from our moderate religious leaders about the excesses of the Christian Radicals is as deafening as a rocket taking off in a baby’s ear. What will it take before our Christians start denouncing the Christian Radicals who are giving Christianity a bad name? Where are the sane Methodists and Lutherans and Episcopalians? Why don’t they say something? Why aren’t there moderate Christians who are as famous and oft-quoted as Pat “let’s-kill-for-Christ” Robertson? Or do they prefer to meekly bend over in sheep-like submission while Pat Robertson, James Dobson and others ream their religion from one Sunday to the next?

Wake up, Christians! There’s a cancer in your midst. There are un-Christian Christians among you who advocate murdering democratically elected foreign leaders. Where is your outrage? Where is your censure?

As long as the majority of our Christians keep quiet and remain sleeping on the job, the minority of Christian morons like Pat Robertson and James Dobson and their troglodyte ilk will continue to stigmatize all Christians as a bunch of intolerant, backward, un-Christian fucktards.

What would Pat Robertson have to say before Christians speak out against him? That the threat to the United States from activist judges is more serious than “a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings”? Well, he’s said that already. That 9/11 was God’s punishment for the feminists in our midst? Oops, he’s said that too. Here are two quotes from 1992. Yes, 1992 — when moderate Christians should’ve stepped in to abort this guy’s voice already.

“I think ‘one man, one vote,’ just unrestricted democracy, would not be wise. There needs to be some kind of protection for the minority which the white people represent now, a minority, and they need and have a right to demand a protection of their rights.” –Pat Robertson, “The 700 Club,” 3/18/92

“The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians.”
— Pat Robertson, fundraising letter, 1992

The man is crazy. He’s got a million people listening to his broadcast.

It’s time for Christians to speak out. It’s time they started protecting the million Christians hoodwinked by Pat.

Once upon a time, Jesus chased people who defiled religion out of the temple. Are our Christians too tolerant to follow His example? Or do they also believe that killing the leaders of other nations is Christian?

(Enjoyed this? More stuff like it at Adam Ash.)

Powered by

About Adam Ash

  • Maurice

    Their concerns — teaching creationism or “intelligent” design in our science classes, reducing women’s rights by curtailing abortion, stopping gays from marrying, killing stem cell research — are on the national agenda, and widely debated in the media by serious people.

    These are all debatable topics – unlike assassination. I don’t think there are very many Christians that want to go down the assassination road with Pat.

  • The Theory

    yeah, abortion is definitely a moral grey area for everyone… not just extreme religious fanatics.

  • Nancy

    The unfortunate fact is that most Americans are somewhat religiously oriented, which means they have the mentality of sheep, & about as much intelligence, the same as religiously oriented populations in other countries who follow other religions. Christianity – or any religion, for that matter – does not tend to encourage either critical/original thinking or intelligence, but depends on the average human tendency to submissively follow when issued orders. Just like pre-WWII Germany.

  • OneMonkey’sUncle

    Wow, from God to Godwin in under five posts…

    Someone tell Rev’rund Pat that the next time he’s in London, the Christian way to gain entrance to the Tube is to jump over the turnstile. Ba-da-bing, ba-da-boom… problem solved. One more radical cleric collecting his six dozen virgins.

  • Maurice

    TT – is abortion okay after the baby is out of the womb?

    Nancy – now you are not only racially intolerant but intolerant of religion too?

  • Abortion may be a gray area, but curtailing women’s rights is not. The Supreme Court decided about abortion many years ago. So has the society at large. Nobody but the Christian Radicals want to criminalize abortion. So why is an argument the Christian Radicals have with themselves given credence by media exposure? I don’t get it. I fear our nation may have gone terminally stupid, from our President on down.

  • Nancy

    Goddamned right I am.

  • Maurice


    All Catholics are against abortion. Most people are against late term abortion. The question is not womens rights – a women does not have the right to kill her 1 minute old child. The question is when does life begin. For some it is at conception. For others it is in one of the trimesters. Hence my question, is abortion okay after the baby is out of the womb?

  • Jeez, Maurice: I don’t have to argue with you about your definition of a problem. You anti-women people always come up with these bizarre arguments. What are you saying — that doctors go around aborting fetuses a minute before they’re born? Grow up. This reminds me all too much of the arguments in the Terri Schiavo affair, or Bush’s latest reason for why we have to continue the war in Iraq (more soldiers should die because many soldiers have already died). I already got myself involved in a discussion about Intelligent Design on another thread; I’m not picking up on somebody’s else’s stupid bait again. See if you can hook someone else with your foolish illogic.

  • Maurice

    Sorry to annoy you Adam. I was originally just trying to show that assassination was not a debatable topic like the other topics you listed.

    Religious people (mainstream) will have varying opinions on the topics you listed but most will be against assassination.

  • Gee and I wonder why non-Christians think Chrisitans are advocating the killing of abortion doctors? From Pat’s perspective is there any difference?

  • Thanks, Maurice, and sorry I got so grumpy. My point is that I don’t think abortion is debatable as to whether it should be legal or not.
    We can talk about the fact that abortion is not a nice thing, and that women go through hell about it, and don’t feel good about it afterwards, but that’s not a debate, that’s something most people agree on. That’s a reality.
    What IS being debated is whether abortion should be legal. That debate was decided by our legal system decades ago. It’s over.
    Same with “intelligent” design: it’s an attempt to inject religion into science. Scientists don’t insist preachers mention evolution in their sermons. Same with stem cell research: even Nancy Reagan wants it.
    The only one of the points I mentioned that I think is still debatable is gay marriage, because the movement for it is new. All those other debates are about things that are done with, but kept artificially alive by the Christian Radicals.

  • Nancy, have you read The End of Faith?

  • Maurice

    I get your points about the legal aspects of these topics. I was about to abandon the abortion thing and move on to gay marriage but you beat me to it. Thanks for coming back.

    Coolness to all and don’t forget dietdoc.

  • Sylvia

    The World Evangelical Alliance Condemns Statement by Pat Robertson

    For Immediate Release
    August 24, 2005
    It is with great regret and deep concern that the World Evangelical Alliance totally condemns the recent speech by Dr. Pat Robertson calling for the U.S. government to assassinate President Chavez of Venezuela.

    “This kind of statement, by this well known American Christian leader, is in complete contradiction to the teachings of Jesus Christ who evangelical Christians believe and seek to demonstrate,” says Geoff Tunnicliffe, WEA International Director. He goes on to add, “Robertson does not speak for evangelical Christians. We believe in justice and the protection of human rights of all people, including the life of President Chavez.”

    Rev. Sam Olson, veteran pastor of Las Acacias church in Caracas and president of the Venezuelan Evangelical Alliance (associated with WEA) has expressed deep concern for how this statement will negatively impact evangelical Christians in Latin America. He writes, “Robertson has placed our lives in jeopardy as he has completely misrepresented us and has given our government every reason to believe we would support such an action.

    The World Evangelical Alliance calls on Dr. Robertson to withdraw his statement and reconcile his views with the orthodox Christian faith. The WEA calls on all people, in particularly those of Venezuela, to show restraint in how they react to such a statement, knowing that it represents the opinion of one individual and not that of the hundreds of millions of evangelical Christians around the world.

    For more information or for an interview contact:

    Sylvia Soon, Communications Coordinator
    Website: http://worldevangelicalalliance.com
    E-mail: ssoon@worldevangelical.org

    World Evangelical Alliance is a global network of 123 nations who each have formed an evangelical church alliance. Nearly 3,000,000 local churches and 380 million Christians identify with these alliances.

  • mel

    If you read the bible, which is a good story, in Genesis it states Adam was not a living being until God breathed the breath of life into his lungs. Hence bringing him to life. Christians for some reason don’t like that passage because it states quite clearly when life begins – and I have heard the rhetoric of well its in the old testament, or, it was a one time thing with starting the human race — but hmmmm isn’t coming to life a one time thing for everyone?

    The whole point is the majority of X’tians follow hypocritically blindly to these kinds of goofballs. Very few X’tians actually try and follow the teachings of Jesus himself, and try and lead a good life.

    There is also the many versions of the bible out there, and which one do certain people subscribe to. One old version has Jesus walking by the water, but in the newer versions it has him walking on water…. And with the latest stupidity of 666 not being the devil’s number but it actually being 616 because someone translated it wrong – who knows what is the truth?!

    If true X’tianity comprised living a good life, trying to help your fellow man, etc the majority of X’tians out there would be struck down as heretics, leaving that handful of true X’tians out there. Maybe God has a sense of humour after all and is showing us pat pat the water rat for our amusement?

  • mel

    One last comment for fun
    Keep your Jesus off my Penis by Eric Schwartz

  • Maurice


    another thing to consider is most likely Adam did not have a belly button.

  • Brendan

    So now all catholics are against abortion thats news to me I happen to have many catholic friends who believe other wise

    “Religion is the opiate of the masses”

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    you are probably wrong, Brendan. What you have are friends that believe that it is a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion. That doesn’t imply that they actually themselves approve of it.

  • mel

    Maurice you have proven my point. X’tians love to draw their own inferences and conclusions from the Bible when in fact I’d like to see where it is written in the Bible that Adam doesn’t have a belly button and why God didn’t give him one…. I go on what is written down not the two bit inferences drawn from a story. Really someone reading that same passage could take it to mean that you are becomming one with God by breathing into a person called Adam … its stupid to sit and rave about the what ifs – start concentrating on the written word at face value.


  • mel

    Mark you have hit the nail on the head. Just because you believe in someone’s rights to make a choice, doesn’t mean you believe in both choices. It’s like a whole kaffufle in Canada over gay marriage. Just because you believe in the right to choose, doesn’t mean you agree with it or would go out and get one yourself.
    There has been much stupidity of long friendships breaking up because someone says they believe those who want it should be able to have a same-sex marriage if they want (why they want is no financial gain anyways in Canada as my husband and I as an opposite sex couple get dinged more for being married when it comes to taxes and even to the point where I cannot get disability because I am married and it is assumed the spouse should be supporting me instead of getting me financial help from the government).
    Choice is a beautiful right. But it always has seemed in historical terms that every supposedly moral opposition to something where its touted that the world will come to an end if such and such happens, has always come and gone without the world ending. (Women getting the right to vote, women working outside the homes, etc etc etc)

  • Joey

    My mom is old too, and she is always saying stupid shit.

    Pat Robertson is probably starting down the road of mental unsteadyness.

    Some of the traits he exhibits are character to mild parkenson’s, alzheimers, and dementia.

    It’s plaque related.

    So quite smoking and fix your cholesteral, or you will fall victim yourselves.

  • splat

    Comment 5 posted by Maurice on August 24, 2005 01:00 PM:

    TT – is abortion okay after the baby is out of the womb?

    Ask Mr Robertson. Hes living proof that an abortion can live.

  • Posh

    If El Presidente de Venezualea has any connection to the drug cartel. Fuckin shoot. Who cares, just another drug lord gonna bite the dust.


    amer.pat looks good on you typical american arrogant BULLSHIT!!!HE EVEN LOOKS LIKE BUSH ASSHOLE

  • WhiskeyRiver

    You have actually seen Bush’s asshole?

  • Nancy

    How can you miss it? It’s right in the middle of his face!

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    “How can you miss it? It’s right in the middle of his face!”

    The gloves are now off, nancy. What you’ve said is very disgusting about our President. You show no respect, so no respect will be shown for you.

  • Nancy

    I’ll faint after dinner….

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    I’m sure I’ll have you running to to the blog moderators in no time. I don’t intend to make these blogs my life’s work.

  • Nancy

    You’re not worth my attention. You’re juvenile as well as insane & very non-sensical. Just another nutcase. Ho hum.

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    Nancy, someone who makes such a vulgar remark about the President and expresses a latent hatred for Jews and Israelis isn’t worth my attention either.

    Lech tiezdayen!

  • Seriously: a goodly number of y’all need to cool out.


  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    nancy sez:

    “You’re juvenile as well”

    Pot/kettle, sweetie. Did you forget this little remark?

    Comment 28 posted by Nancy on August 25, 2005 07:04 PM:
    How can you miss it? It’s right in the middle of his face!

    As the response to this remark:

    “You have actually seen Bush’s asshole?”

    I rest my case, folks. Nancy is a hypocrite as well as an anti-Israeli vulgarian.

  • ms.indica

    When did Nancy anything anti-Israeli? And so what if she did, it’s not like Israel has a clean humanitarian record they are just as bad as their strongest ally, us.

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    Nancy the anti Israeli Jew hater was complaining about why the US supports that country with billions in aid. if she doesn’t know then she is a poor student of history, among other things. Israel does have a clean humanitarian record as it only kills Pally terrorists and those that offer them safe harbor and support. When Pallys kill Israelis by decree, Israelis kill Pallys as in self-defense. It’s that simple and it’s the way it should be. An eye for an eye is sound reasoning and good policy, no matter what the peacenik cowards in the world may think. Got that, ms. pothead, excuse me, indica?

  • ms.indica

    You scream like a god damn Zionist. You are so far right wing that it’s frightening, how can you honestly make such a terrible remark. Let me ask you something do believe the apartheid was right in South Africa, or the English occupation in Ireland was right, or the situation in Chechneya is right? I bet you do, because the situations are quite similar. To claim that every Palestinian killed is a terrorist is simply dead wrong and only a Zionist or a hard line evangelical Christian would make such an outlandish claim. When an extreme Zionist opened fire in a mosque in Israel they certainly weren’t terrorist, they were inocent muslims. I don’t even think most Israelis would agree with your opinion. Israel has a clean record my ass they do, you know damn well bulldozing houses with no warning, forcing 800,000 Palestinians to leave their homes, and the daily harassment they have endured does not count as a clean record. As for suicide bombers of course those actions are wrong and Hammas does terrible things to innocent civilians but so do the Israeli soldiers. Do you ever ask yourself why Hammas seems to attract new members? The same reason that IRA used to attract new members because if you grow up being told that you’re not citizens you have no rights, and you don’t belong here, but your family has lived there generations, that already creates a volatile situation then you factor in the death of loved ones. That built up aggression is going to come up out some how that’s why organizations like Hammas gain members preying upon lost jaded youth who have no direction. With Hammas they are someone they are going to get that respect and revenge for the suffering of their people, and to them the gun is the quickest way to get respect and revenge. Then of course you the Israeli soldiers who are fed propaganda by their own government and are pelted with stones and insults which flares up their aggression, so the back and fourth tension just gets worse with those tactics. Peace my insane Zionist friend is only way. So if you want to talk that an eye for eye crap all you end up with is grieving families and body counts on both sides. Got that you narrow minded, one sided FOX news loving, wierdo.

  • WhiskeyRiver

    Speaking of assholes in the middle of someone’s face, did you all realize that lips are the same color as nipples and labia?

    That’s why prudy women wear lipstick… to keep one guessing.

    Somehow (and it’s early yet) that thought occurred to me when I read the string on Bush’s Asshole… that I started.

    Hey everyone…. seriously now.

    go to google and type in Faces on the Wall, it will bring you to a few hits on a web project in several states regarding Viet Nam losses and puts faces (high school senior class photo’s) to those faces, along with bio’s, obits, etc… It’s an amazing work by a number of people, very poignant considering the current events and our attempts to mitigate terrorist risk.

    Which it is. I’m not advocating the war, nor am I totally opposed to it. But the business approach to “mitigating risk” is rather striking in this era of global, corporate mindset.

    Wow, I need another cup of coffee.

    SeeYa and LoveYa

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    “And so what if she did, it’s not like Israel has a clean humanitarian record”

    Israel acts in self-defense, I guess you’re too clueless to figure that out. I guess you would prefer that they roll over and accept whatever punishment meted out by the bloodthirsty medieval savages from the PA or Hamas or Hezbollah that have pledged to wipe the State of Israel and all Jews from the face of the earth.

    That’s what you would do, right? Appease and capitulate like a good little libbie puke.

    “When an extreme Zionist opened fire in a mosque in Israel they certainly weren’t terrorist, they were inocent muslims.”

    It was a justifiable revenge for years of extreme Pallys suicide bombing innocent Israeli women and children in downtown Tel Aviv. You have to fight extremism with extremism. There’s no ther way.

    An eye for an eye, sweetie. You Pally supporters make me sick. How does it feel to be on the side of true evil in this world, sweetie?

  • What is this Pally business? Who are the Pallys? Have they got anything to do with PayPal?

  • WTF

    As I alluded to earlier on other subjects.. Where is the Gaza commentary? That’s BIG news, yet strangely silent reponses from the gallery.

    What is the undercurrent tone and thought regarding Israel?

    The media shift is apparant. Once Israel was the darling of the media, now… it’s evident.

    Once Yassar Arafat was the terrorist mastermind. He’s gone, but after 9/11 his face went white with unbelief as he realized his life’s work was just flushed by Bin Laden and his “messengers”

    It’s all so poignant yet deem irrelevant by the skillfully managed shift in public thought.

    I can safely make this statement.


    That’s deluded deduction, overshadowed by alligences and patterns of acceptability.

    It’s pretty clear. We’re all guilty, maybe down to the individual level.

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    “What is the undercurrent tone and thought regarding Israel?”

    On this website, it seems that most everyone is an anti-Israeli/pro-Pally in some form or another. I seem to be one of the very very few pro-Israelis, but that should be surprising. Jew hating is all the rage now in the world at levels not seen since WW2. Funny how it has coincided with the spread of Islam throughout the world.

    See the connection, libbies? Of course you won’t, because that would require MAKING A JUDGMENT.

  • On this website, it seems that most everyone is an anti-Israeli/pro-Pally in some form or another.

    Actually, Mark, it seems that way because unless someone is as pro-Israel as you are, then YOU define them as pro-Pally.

    In your mind, there are two types of people. Israel haters and Pally haters and there is no inbetween.

  • braindead elite #1 jewboy

    +since the first of recorded time jews have been in the midst of eliteist trouble!!????? check it out……

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    you’re correct, Steve S, I do not believe in gray areas. Egalitarianism is for fools. There is no advantage in life to considering both sides of an issue simply to curry favor with other people, to “go along to get along.”

  • What is this Pally business? Who are the Pallys?

    The term is just another slur for Palestinians. One can say ‘Pally’ just don’t say ‘heeb’.

    Have they got anything to do with PayPal?

    Nope. Palestinians are the poor Arabs. They have no access to the riches reaped by oil. They are returning to an area that has literally been flattened to the ground. They’re as much an inconvenience to Saudis, Iraqis and Iranians as they are to Israel. On the other hand, I’ll bet you this morning’s bagel that there’s at least one non-gentile in management at PayPal.

  • I didn’t know it was a slur, apologies to anybody for using it, I was just repeating what was said earlier, actually I’ve never heard the word before this thread.

    So Mark, comment 46: You throw a lot of people who are undecided or who have no opinion, in with pro-Palestine supporters, by your own admission, then you wonder why it seems there are so many pro-Palestine supporters. Perhaps there are so many because you label so many that way.

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    Steve S: it’s all or nothing in regard to Israel. You must support its right to exist and defend itself from Muslim terrorists who have explicity denied its right to exist and have pledged to destroy it, based on 3000 years of its people being persecuted, tortured, and murdered. If you do not support Israel in this context then you are its enemy and hence, a pro-Pally creep. Any Jew that does not support Israel unconditionally is a self-hating Jew. Examples are Noam Chumpsky and Howard Zinn, to name two of the more prominent ones that the Left loves to slobber over. I have my suspicions about David R. Mark because he says he supports Israel but wouldn’t be willing to risk his life for it.

    This is about life or death, it’s not some pseudo-academic debate that can have a dozen different outcomes and everybody just gets along merrily in the process of debate. You can’t get away with it being that easy. This is not a debatable issue.

  • Mark, not everybody defines their politics by Israel/Palestine. Not everybody needs to pick a side. It’s a land dispute based on biblical history, not everybody cares. And by not caring, that doesn’t make them anti-one side.

    Some people see it as Israel was founded on land that was currently occupied by Palestine, so it’s the Palestinians who are fighting a takeover of their homeland.

    And your dismissal of that would be based on what exactly?

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    “And your dismissal of that would be based on what exactly?”

    A country of Palestine never officially existed. It was the invention of the Brits.

    “Not everybody needs to pick a side.”

    Tell that to the libbies that have jumped on the America hating bandwagon and routinely bash our leaders and their policies for no good reason without ever giving them positive credit for anything. Please note that they NEVER give thanks for the Patriot Act and the fact that since 9/11 this country has NOT BEEN ATTACKED. Will we ever hear a thank you from the libs for that? I think you know the answer. They are so pathetic they now bash the Presdident’s vacation schedule. What’s next?

  • No biggie, Steve S. I think the majority of us are intelligent enough by now to recognize the agenda of certain flamers.

  • Some people see it as Israel was founded on land that was currently occupied by Palestine, so it’s the Palestinians who are fighting a takeover of their homeland.

    I look at it that Israel has always been a nation but did not have the land to back it up until the global community stepped in during the middle of the 20th century. We have this notion that terra firma is what defines a nation. There are those who are so quick to criticize the creation of an ‘Islamic state’ yet continue to support the idea of a Jewish state or a Christian America. The establishment of a country and its government which is based on a religion is destined to implode.

    From a biological standpoint, I wonder just how different ‘Palestinians’ are from ‘Israelis’. Being that both tribes originated in the fertile crescenof the Middle East one would have to conclude that they share a common genetic bond. When taking the terrorist out of the Palestinian equation, it’s not hard to conclude that both groups have been victims of hate and prejudice. Imagine if they could come together and form some kind of political partnership. Such an event would have a cataclysmic political effect in the Arab world.

    Zionists and anti-Semites alike have been waging this religio-political war for 3,000 years. You would think that with all the technoligcal advances mankind has made that people could leave the past in its place and learn from the mistakes of history.

  • bully defence

    lesson #one to shut down warmachine follow INSTRUTION – insert balls in mouth drag through streets, yes we found the evil empire just below 49th……..we will teach our grandkids about this evil and the strugle will continue!!!!!!!

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    “There are those who are so quick to criticize the creation of an ‘Islamic state'”

    There already are Islamist states, Jordan, Syria, and Iran to name three. Where have you been?