Which state?

[Pure]

What should be the state for the Christian exodus.? With the possibility of Romish influence after the election, a safe haven of Christian values is imperative.

ChristianExodus.org offers the opportunity to try a strategy not yet employed by Bible-believing Christians. Rather than spend resources in continued efforts to redirect the entire nation, we will redeem States one at a time. Millions of Christian conservatives exist, but we are geographically spread out and diluted at the national level. Therefore, we must concentrate our numbers in a geographical region with a sovereign government we can control through the electoral process.

ChristianExodus.org is orchestrating the move of 50,000 or more Christians to one of three States for the express purpose of dissolving that State's bond with the union. The three States under consideration are Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina. The exact destination will be chosen by vote of our membership. Our move will commence when the federal government forces sodomite marriages on our local communities or once we reach the 50,000-member mark, whichever comes first.

 

[cloudy]

Not here, please. Let them go somewhere else. We're way over our per capita limit already.

 

[fille]

I voted for Mississippi in hopes of having at least a one state buffer zone - also, there's not much there for them to work with.

 

[Pure]

There is a sentimental old-left tie to mississippi, but, on balance, alabama seems best to me, though the possibilities of a white, slave-holding nation is South Carolina should not be overlooked.

 

[cloudy]

There is a sentimental old-left tie to mississippi, but, on balance, alabama seems best to me, though the possibilities of a white, slave-holding nation is South Carolina should not be overlooked.

NOT ALABAMA.

I have a hard enough time being non-christian here as it is!

 

[cheerful_deviant]

So long... don't write!

Why don't we give them North Dakota? There's nothing there worth keeping anyway.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

The destination has still not been chosen, but according to unnamed sources the Christian Exodus is sponsored by Movers and Shakers Unlimited.

 

[Pure]

How predictable that 'virtual' picks a celibate community for the sodomitic bile and parody.
----

Reasons for the exodus.

http://www.christianexodus.org

The Problem
Christians have actively tried to return our entire land to its moral foundation for more than 20 years. We can categorically say that absolutely nothing has been achieved. If you disagree, consider this:

Abortion continues against the wishes of many States
Children may not pray in our schools*
The Bible is not welcome in schools except under strict FEDERAL guidelines

The 10 Commandments remain banned from public display
Sodomy is now legal AND celebrated as “diversity” rather than perversion

Preaching Christianity will soon be outlawed as “hate speech”¹²
Gay marriage will be foisted upon us in the very near future
All these atrocities continue in spite of the fact that we now have the “right” people in places of power. Indeed, the occupant of the White House is a professing Christian. The U.S. Attorney General is believed to be a devout Christian. “Conservatives” control both Houses of Congress, and Republican presidents appointed seven of the nine Supreme Court justices. Christian activists placed the right party in power, but are we now witnessing the return to moral and constitutional government that we have demanded for so long?

No, we are not, and we never will. More than fifty-three million people voted for pro-abortion, pro-gay candidates in the 2000 presidential election. That number will undoubtedly grow each year as Hollywood, MTv and universities turn out liberals faster than our churches can produce converts. Redemption of all 50 American States and their general government is totally impossible.

 

[Boota]

I'd be more interested in an island, somewhere far away from me. I can only imagine how horrible living in the State they would choose would be shortly after they arrived. LOL.

 

[minsue]

Re: So long... don't write!

Why don't we give them North Dakota? There's nothing there worth keeping anyway.

I'm pretty sure the libertarians are planning on taking North Dakota.

Edited to add: Never mind. It seems they've settled on New Hampshire.

 

[McKenna]

.

 

[catfish]

Please, we have enough assholes in Alabama.

 

[snooper]

My geography is poor, but whichever is the farthest from me.

Why do they want to take over a state with all the nuisance of people already living there?
Why don't they just colonise Antarctica?
After all they believe that the Lord will provide, and that way they won't have to kill everyone who doesn't believe in Christian loving kindness, like they always have done down the centuries.

 

[Guest]

erm...

sorry cloudy.. i voted for alabama.. but how about only the mid to lower part of the state.. thats where my ex' in-laws are...

however, i did state in one other thread..
why dont we make a shuttle named the mayflower2 and offer to send them off to mars.. they can start their own colony.. hey.. it worked once

 

[Guest]

How 'bout liquid? Or maybe semi-fluid?

Oh....

Wait...

You mean the UNITED States....


My apologies.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I vote for New York. Withthe exception of Cali, the most liberal state in the Union, with more screwed up laws than any state on the face of the earth.

There are so many opportunites here for mission work. A day at the DMV and you could have an old school revival out back for all the people who would be willing to get saved...provided of course you can get them their liscence or tag any sooner or with less hassle

-Colly

 

[oggbashan]

South Georgia (part of the Falkland Island Dependencies).

It is uninhabited, apart from a few scientists, cold and breezy enough to make them think of the arrival of the Mayflower, and I am sure the UK would consider leasing it for a few billion dollars.

It is just the place to wait for the Second Coming because there will be nothing else to do.

Og

 

[cheerful_deviant]

Re: Re: So long... don't write!

I'm pretty sure the libertarians are planning on taking North Dakota.

Edited to add: Never mind. It seems they've settled on New Hampshire.

I know about the libertarian wackos moving into my back yard. They have been talking about it for years. Just what I needed.

I'm still trying to figure out how 20,000 people are going to take over a state with a population of about 1.5 million, but I'm only a engineer, what do I know about numbers.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

How predictable that 'virtual' picks a celibate community for the sodomitic bile and parody... <snip> ....

Dear Pure . . . (pure what?)


I did not pick it.

Their title, like the title of people dedicated to transporting stuff from place to place, was required in order for the joke to make sense.

Except that I was responding to an asshole question, there was nothing sodomitic about my double pun.

Or could that be your punishment for my not taking your post seriously enough?

Bile appears to be your humor, more than mine.

 

[Pure]

moi?

chillax, dude(tte) -as the kids around here say.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Re: Re: Re: So long... don't write!

I know about the libertarian wackos moving into my back yard. They have been talking about it for years. Just what I needed.

I'm still trying to figure out how 20,000 people are going to take over a state with a population of about 1.5 million, but I'm only a engineer, what do I know about numbers.

Actually, 50,000 was the number used but that is still not nearly enough. 50,000 crackpots would not be enough to noticeably change the policies of any of the three southrn states mentioned. One of the Dakotas or New Hampshire might work.

Boota and Og had the right idea. A remote island somewhere would be just the thing. The problem with South Georgia like Og mentions is that it is a British possession. The US has plenty of islands in the South Pacific, and maybe after the next election, if Bush loses and we are rid of Ashcroft, maybe he will still have enough clout to take over and lead these other crackpots to one of them. Everybody would benefit because the rest of us would be rid of this bunch of wackos and they would be rid of us. Another reason to vote against Bush!!

 

[oggbashan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: So long... don't write!

Actually, 50,000 was the number used but that is still not nearly enough. 50,000 crackpots would not be enough to noticeably change the policies of any of the three southrn states mentioned. One of the Dakotas or New Hampshire might work.

Boota and Og had the right idea. A remote island somewhere would be just the thing. The problem with South Georgia like Og mentions is that it is a British possession. The US has plenty of islands in the South Pacific, and maybe after the next election,m, if Bush loses and we are rid of Ashcroft, maybe he will still have enough clout to take over and lead these other crackpots to one of them. Everybody would benefit because the rest of us would be rid of this bunch of wackos and they would be rid of us. Another reason to vote against Bush!!

We tried that with the Puritans in the UK. Look where that got us.

One of my *real* ancestors, not an ancestor of my Lit persona, suggested that all the rogues and vagabonds should be transported from England to the Americas. He argued that the rogues and vagabonds would have to become honest because they would have no one to prey on but themselves; and England would be a better place without them. There was a flaw in his logic. Or was there?

Og

 

[Pure]

50,000 not enough?

The last Alabama governors race 2002 had about 1.3 million votes, and was decided for Riley, Republican, by about [correction] 3,000 according to the best figures I can find.

Further, of the 1.3 million voters in that election, figure 500,000 minimum are saved by the Blessed Lord; so that's the base of voters one starts from.

 

[oggbashan]

50,000 not enough?

The last Alabama governors race 2002 had about 1.3 million votes, and was decided by less than 7,000.

Further, of the 1.3 million voters in that election, figure 500,000 minimum are saved by the Blessed Lord; so that's the base of voters one starts from.

But are all those who are saved devoid of critical judgement or free will?

Og

 

[OldnotDead]

I agree on one of the South Pacific atolls - perhaps the one that they had to cap with concrete after testing nuclear devices on it?

Don't send them to Alabama. I still have relatives there. Most of whom I like. Plus, you're talking ROCKETS!!! Lots of rockets!

I would kind of like to keep Mississippi. I'm very partial to Natchez and would hate to need a passport to go visit. And they would probably close down the casinos in Biloxi which could make an awful lot of folks cranky.

South Carolina would not be fair to vacationers from the Northeast that travel south by car. Probably not very nice to Palmetto State natives either. Besides, do you really want 'fundies' to have a nuclear capability?