It’s obviously more hard fascism with a Microsoft face.

killing womb babies agencies will get more money to kill womb babies.

I am so glad we have the Pastor to spell these things out for us. and here I was thinking that the “killing womb babies agencies” were using their money to invent new types of pie.

Someone throw this guy some punctuation! Kaye Grogan, I am looking in your direction…

Gates and wife have been at the forefront of murdering children in females’ wombs.

I’m glad Bill Gates has that niche covered.

I think I’m going to make my name by murdereing the children in males’ wombs. I think it’s an underrepresented field.

Except that now, with all that Buffett money, they can afford to be killing womb babies agencies GLOBAL!!!!!!

killing womb babies agencies

I think he’s trying to create a new catchphrase here. Seems unlikely to work.

“Abortuaries” is kind of catchy, however.

Someone throw this guy some punctuation

killing womb babies’ “agencies” will get more money… to kill! Womb babies!!

In other words, more humans without self-defense will be discarded, their souls making their ways into the loving arms of Jesus.

This is one of them there paradoxes, ain’t it? If womb babies live, then Jesus may reject them, damning them to hellfire and whatever it is the kids are into these days, right?

Womb Babies? Well, at least the Test Tube Babies are safe from that evil Gates.

This sounds hilariously like:

“Where’s the fetus gonna gestate? In a box?”

“Don’t you oppress me!”

Let’s hear it for Box Babies!

(I wanna have a Jacuzzi Baby, myself).

“She must then have been inviting her husband to attend a theologically liberal church.”

But HIS jesus is better than theirs!

Rule: Bill Gates is evil.
Rule: Pastor Swank is evil.
Rule: Evil sides with evil.

Fact: Pastor Swank says Bill Gates is evil.

Dang it! Broke my prolog database.

their souls making their ways into the loving arms of Jesus.

Um, Pastor? Unbaptized souls don’t go into the loving arms of Jesus–the smiting arms, maybe, but certainly not the loving arms.

That’s actually one reason hard core Catholics freak out about abortion: you’re not just *murdering* your womb baby, you’re DAMNING IT TO HELL!

(Darn it! Jillian beat me to the “female’s wombs” punchline!)

killing womb babies agencies

A division of S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

Quick! With the anti-microsoft outrage this is sure to cause among the Swankster’s legions of disciples, this is bound to cause microsoft stock to plummet!

Anyone who fails to short some MS stock and pick up some Apple stock before it skyrockets will be kicking themselves! I’m calling my broker first thing in the morning!!!

Thank you, Reverend Swank!!

New windows Vista(tm), kills womb babies at 30 billion operations per second, that’s 9.3 babyhurtz.

Betcha Rush Limbaugh was hoping to knock off quite a few scrotum babies in the Dominican Republic before they took his Viagra away.

*sobbing* Will no one think of the ball babies?!!!

I just got an image of one of those moronic Apple-as-man vs. PC-as-Man commercials, save the dialogue was something along the the lines of “I murder X number of womb-babies upon purchase” vs “I don’t murder womb babies– I leave that funness to those Satan-worshiping atheo-muslamic libruls who buy me”.

Damn you, Swank!

Everybody knows “abortuaries” was Andy Warhol’s idea for a nightclub name. The 70s are over, Swank.

So every True Christianâ„¢ who has bought Microsoft Windows or a Windows-installed computer or any other Microsoft product, has given money to Gates and therefore bears moral responsibility for helping kill womb babies and therefore they’re all going to hell.

Sweeeeeet!

question: is it easier to unload a dumpster filled with bowling balls or a dumpster filled with womb babies. And no you can’t use a pitchfork.

Dorothy — Actually, what I remember from those long CCD classes (eeeeeeeeeeek!!!!) was that unbaptised babies & children (up to a certain age — I forget what it was) go to Limbo, where it’s not quite as good as Heaven, but more of a middle ground. Then, just recently, I read that this was no longer the case, and that they are going to go somewhere else instead (again, I don’t remember where; the drugs have just wiped me out).

That has always bothered me. The rules keep changing for the sake of convenience. I don’t remember Jesus H. Christ popping up and distributing a new rulebook to everyone, so where did this come from?

Hilarious. Swank has been missed.

Re: linus torvald inquiry as to whether it is easier to unload a dumpster filled with bowling balls or a dumpster filled with womb babies.

We’ve been kick’en this issue around at work for the last couple weeks and the consensus is – it’s easier to wink than nod, but don’t stick a fork up your ass.

That has always bothered me. The rules keep changing for the sake of convenience. I don’t remember Jesus H. Christ popping up and distributing a new rulebook to everyone, so where did this come from?
Theological consideration– logically, it is hard to determine a reason that the unborn must logically go to hell if they die prior to birth, but one must square it with the application of Original Sin to one’s soul at conception (when, according to Church teaching, one is ensouled), especially convoluted when the doctrine of Invincible Ignorance of The True Faith is applied (i.e. those who are unaware of The True Faith cannot be necessarily condemned to Hell, as they had no chance by geographical/physiological accident), thanks to Vatican I. Pre and Post Augustinian traditions on Limbo are being re-debated on scriptural and dogmatic grounds. I tend to fall into St. Ambrose’s school of thought, where Original Sin constitutes an tendancy towards evil (“that which is not Perfectly Good” rather than the more sensational connotations) rather than specific guilt, and therefore the sins an unborn child would be non-existant (though inevitable; but condemnation for such inevitable sin would fall under the Calvinist “predetermination”, which is rightly rejected as a denial of Free Will).
St. Thomas takes that view (though somewhat modified and expanded) in Summa, which posits the necessity of Limbus Infantium. He argues that any arguement that which would deny the unbaptized infant Heaven would also necessarily deny them the suffering of Hell. Limbo has become something of a theological “placeholder” which often is explained to various degrees of legitimacy and success; and is more, in my view a “worst case scenario”. The Augustinians, who deny the need of Limbus Infantium, are somewhat en vogue with the most reactionary elements of the Church, who hold a bit more political (if not necessarily purely theological) sway at the Vatican and amongst the louder groups. The Councils of Carthage and Florence, if I recall properly, decided in an Augustinian manner, and both councils are legitimate– though they cannot be considered necessarily Doctrine (esp. given the other Thomist traditions and the fact that Limbo has never actually been Doctrine). Indeed, when properly interpreted (i.e. as the denial of the Pelagian heresy, which denied Original Sin– and therefore the possibility of the unbaptized infants being damned to Hell), there is unlikely to be a legitimate doctrinal or scriptural case for denial, though as I mentioned previously, Limbo is only really a “placeholder”. Adding to the lay Catholic propensity to dismiss the theory as speculation, there isn’t a ton of widespread support.
So, the Church has dropped it– unsurprisingly. Still, there is no official statement on whether or not the unbaptized children are condemned to Hell– Catechism states that “the Church can only entrust [unbaptized children] to the mercy of God.”
How one interprets that is the basis for one’s fear– thus the Augustinians amongst hyper conservatives are paranoid that they will go to Hell, whereas many others believe that such a punishment would not be in accord with the precepts of Divine Justice (guess which camp I’m in?).

Forget the content, the prose is truly brilliant. Words jammed into poetically splintered sentences. I took the precaution of wearing protective googles when I compulsively reread it 14 times. There is definite Gertrude Stein influence, with perhaps a little of the Burroughs/Gysin cut-up technique. It is also possible, however remote, that he may be computer generated. This man is at the forefront of modern American prose. I only hope he will continue “to enhance all the more” my “enthusiasm to snuff out” the stale, outmoded forms of communications used by the English language sentence constructers of past eras.

My girlfriend hates microsoft and insists on i-bortions…more expensive but oh- so- white

I think we have a new theological conundrum. Never mind how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, how many murdered womb babies can fit in the loving arms of Jesus?

I use Linux; I hate M$’s crap software.

Pastor Swank is still a nutcase.

Guinness Guy:

You seem knowledgeable about this stuff… would it help if someone invented an abortion-suction device that had a little holy water squirtgun on the tip so that the physician performing the procedure could do a pre-abortion, in utero baptism?

Hell, that would be the best of all worlds for the womb baby… free ticket straight into the loving arms of god!

Of course, now you’ve got the problem of God carrying around armloads of fetuses…..

An egg that fails to implant in the uterus (which is what happens 50% of the time ) sends a soul to hell?

Nice.

No, no wafer for me, thanks. I’ve lost my appetite.

So who thinks Swanky, having the courage of his convictions, forswore Windows? And what does he use instead? Apple is too liberal, Linux too communofascistic… surely not THOTH or VULCAN… definitely not REALITY…

OS-2 Warp, if Swank has any sense of style at all.

Um, Pastor? Unbaptized souls don’t go into the loving arms of Jesus–the smiting arms, maybe, but certainly not the loving arms.

It’s Jesus we’re talking about, not Mecha Shiva.

Note to “pastor” Swank:

Warren Buffett’s name has two T’s. First Rule of Journalism: spell people’s names correctly.

No offense to GG, but discussing the ever-changing rules about where the “soul” of an unborn fetus ends up, or even when said fetus is “ensouled” is downright silly. The pastors, priests, and deacons don’t know. Hell, Pope Ratzi doesn’t fucking know. They’re all pulling this crap directly out of their stinking asses. None of them has ever provided a single, tiny shred of evidence that there actually is anything even slightly analogous to a human “soul.” Frankly, I’m not gonna waste any precious time worrying about mine or anybody else’s until it can be repeatedly demonstrated that there actually is one to worry about in the first place, and I’m not holding my breath waiting for proof or I’d end up in the loving arms of Jeebus a lot sooner than I’m planning on getting there.

Good to know us womyn are all just wombs to people like this guy.

In other words, more humans without self-defense will be discarded, their souls making their ways into the loving arms of Jesus.

Curse you, Warren Buffet! I wanted those womb babies to be born so I could tempt them into sin with secular humanism, evolutionary theory, and socialized medicine! Instead they get a free pass automatic to Jesusland? WTF?

Reading the exegesis on “limbo” above, it’s easy to see why it’s also a dance in which one bends over backwards. The theologians sure do that dance.

I think the missing punctuation is a hyphen between womb and babies thus differentiating them from babies who have successfully navigated the birth canal. But what do I know, right? I’m just a womb-an and as such, wholly possessed by the man in my life so that my reproductive organs can bring greater glory to God. Or something.

More Swank! More Swank! More Swank!

Sorry, couldn’t resist. But I just love this guy.

As usual – SWANKTASTIC!

But – what about the blastyo-babies? Won’t somebody think of them? Or are we still calling them “Snowflakes”?(retch – ‘scuse me while I get my insulin shot to counter the ungodly sweetness of that name.)

I’m pretty sure Pastor Swank (DAMN but that’s a GREAT name!!) is not a native english speaker. Beyond his utter lack of understanding english punctuation, he seems to scatter his modifiers all the hell over the place. I think it’s at least possible (*GASP*) that he was born a frenchman and learned his english from a wino somewhere. Someone really should help him understand the english grammar standard usage of modifiers, as they go BEFORE that which they modify, rather than just wherever the hell he wants to put them.

And what’s this “Womb Badies” thing. Umm, does he know that’s where unborn babies tend to be found? Or is he like bush looking for WMDs, looking for unborn babies under the desk and behind the sofa? Jeez, dood, what other kind of babies ARE there? And for that matter, why is it only wrong to kill the womb babies?? These C Level wingnuts are kind of, well, ODD, to put it nicely…

mikey

9.3 babyhurtz, i-bortions and womb-an all in one post.

What a funny day this is turning out to be!

I am particularly fond of womb-an, it’s the kind of thing that’s so funny because it’s true, that’s really all women are to these freaks. I seriously think the religious right should adopt that term as their counter to womyn. At least they’d be being honest with themselves for once.

He’s gonna set me up with the spirit in the sky
(womb baby)
It’s where I’m gonna go when I die
(womb baby)
When I die, and they lay me to rest
(womb baby)
I’m going to the place that’s the best!

We’ve been kick’en this issue around at work for the last couple weeks and the consensus is – it’s easier to wink than nod, but don’t stick a fork up your ass.

Funny, I thought it was, “You can lead a horse to water, but I’d rather you fucked him in the ass.”

Besides his terrifying misuse of grammar and made-up terms, his idiotic assertion that Planned Parenthood “ethusiastically” kills babies. He makes it sound like they fight over each woman who comes into an abortion clinic: “No, you bitch, you got to acid-scald the last fetus, it’s my turn with the Infant Skull Scissors!”

What I object to is the mis-use of the subjunctive:

t is imperative that the world knows this theological liberalism behind the Gates philanthropy.

As I was saying: It should read “It is imperative that the world know this theological,” etc. So, really, how “swank” is he?

GG,

The “Limbo: Real or Not” discussion brings up an interesting point: to the man on the street, it honestly doesn’t matter what the current trends on theology are, because very few of these trickle down to the average practictioner.

My parents were of the “Vatican II was the worst thing to happen to the church!” variety (I guess you would call them Augustinian paranoids). To them, anyone not baptised in the Catholic church is going to hell (Protestants included). Heck, if you happened to die right after a sin without getting a chance to confess, too bad: your lifetime of good works and devotion are wiped out because you happened to get hit by a car on your way out of your friend’s bachelor party (because you know, watching a stripper–i.e., “lusting after a woman in your heart”–is just the same as commiting adultry!).

The scariest thing about all of this is that I am still capable of thinking that Pastor Swank is over the edge.

killing womb babies agencies will get

This is a bizarre string of nouns. Especially the last one:

Main Entry: 2get
Pronunciation: ‘get
Function: noun
1 a : something begotten: (1) : OFFSPRING (2) : the entire progeny of a male animal b : LINEAGE

Perhaps it’s meant to be read in pairs? That gives us :

killing womb + babies agencies + will get

‘Killing womb’ is probably an all-girl punk band. ‘Babies agencies’ is obviously a reference to the popular ‘Spy Kids’ franchise. ‘Will get’ is a little strange. Offspring of something obviously, but does he mean will as in ‘last will and testament’ or ‘the triumph of the will’? Only his hairdresser knows for sure.

The “Limbo: Real or Not� discussion brings up an interesting point: to the man on the street, it honestly doesn’t matter what the current trends on theology are, because very few of these trickle down to the average practictioner.

Quite– Vaticans I and II were generally positive moves toward a more ecumenical approach; well, at least widening the range of what constitutes “acceptable” anyway. That stuff has trickled down because it’s teh bihg stUfF, whereas the minutae of doctrinal debates are not– partly because there is not even 65% agreement amongst priests most of the time (radical borderline heretics, liberal, moderate, conservative, reactionary borderline heretics– the Big Vat puts out stuff that pisses them all off), and partly because it’s pretty boring and requires a ton of reading to understand exactly what the evolution of the debate entails. Limbo used to have a ton of acceptance (save for certain Augustinian reactionaries) among priests, and therefore that is what has been taught, but as priestly acceptance declines, so does the lay acceptance of things– they don’t know why it does, of course, but the trickle down tends to lose informational volume the lower it gets. If and when I get Deaconized (gots to get married first… not so much luck on that front), I’ll be sure to leave pamphlets out for interested parties, though I daresay such debates are too terribly boring for most people.
Personally, I’m interested in what will happen with the definition of Invincable Ignorance, especially in the context of developmental psychology and the like– but such points are quite mindnumbing for your average parishioner (though I suppose they’ll appriciate the consequences if and when that sort of decision comes down, even if the version they hear is intellectually watered down).
And, with due respect to Marq– the Vatican must consider and deal with such matters because of their priori (existance of Divine and therefore Soul, etc.) say they must. There is little point debating the base existance of God or the soul, especially using wholly empirical means, with a Catholic theologian– it is already assumed to be fact (albeit acknowledged as the child of belief) so that they might get along with their work. If one lacks that priori, certainly then the debate seems to be entirely pointless, or at least premature (as is the very nature of priori). As direct scriptural evidence is lacking, the debate must come out of only tangential scriptural evidence towards the conclusion (hence the debate’s existence).
You are entirely free to do as you will, of course– I won’t stop you; that’s the beauty of free will (God-given or not).

If you say the post title fast enough it sounds dirty, You guys’re going to hell for sure.

Funny; I’d somehow have thought that the Paulites (these people are *not* followers of Jesus Christ, that’s for sure) would have *liked* the Microsoft authoritarian rule. Linux is socialistic, right, and that’s just the same thing as being a dirty Commie, after all…

You folks somehow missed Swank-the Cranks’ column from 6/28 wherein he claims to know the mind of God! He is truly an amazing piece of work.

This just gives Gates the opportunity to crank out the latest version of womb-baby killing software. He likes to call it the “e-bortion.”

In the extremely unlikely event that I’m ever the frontliner for a goth-rock band, I’m totally calling it the Abortuaries.

Don’t blame Pastor Swank for mis-spelling Warren Buffet. I’m sure he was just thinking about lunch.

A lunch of delicious womb-babies, just like Hillary Clinton eats every day.

So, really, how “swank� is he?

THAT’S what I’m saying. I mean, fuckers got this great name, “Pastor Swank ” he should be a righteous stud, I mean vince neil with good coke, and just LOOK at him!! Read what he has to say!! His name should be Pastor Dank fer cryin out loud (ok, pastor nutjob didn’t rhyme)…

mikey

Killing Womb was my favorite Echo & The Bunnymen song.

killing womb babies agencies

I think he’s trying to create a new catchphrase here. Seems unlikely to work.

Too unwieldy.

What’s a wombaby, anyway? Is it like a wombat?

I’m not even sure what a wombat is like.

Great, another program I have to go buy and install … Windows RU-486.

So, do you think that Swank’s okay with killing tube-babies? That would be fallopian tubes, not test tubes. Surely there must be a way to save those ectopic babies…maybe an operation that carefully removes them and places them in a woman who is not as defective. Just a thought.

And whats with these folks thinking it’s okay to create “life” and freeze it forever and hope that there is never a loss of power in the place where said “life” is frozen? I mean, I know you get a catchy nickname for the little blasto-cicles, but someone ought to be speaking out against the warehousing of possible humans when there are plenty of empty wombs that could house them, willing or not. Swank should be all over this. Fucking slacker.

‘theologically liberal’. he makes that sound like nazis or something.

shouldn’t he be glad these heathens attend church at all?

his kind of filth claims that catholics aren’t true christians, and looks down on anyone who doesn’t have the mental incapacity to blindly accept fairy tales as reality.

Plus, he stole his name from the best porn mag ever, Swank

Chat with live girls for free

Biggest dating portal in the world, come meet women tonight!…

…

Hi, just wanted to mention, I loved this blog post. It was funny. Keep on posting!

What’s up, just wanted to mention, I enjoyed this article. It was funny. Keep on posting!