Author: Jimmy Akin
Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live." View all posts by Jimmy Akin
long live monthy python’s influence!
I didn’t know Crystalina Evert was running for the Delaware senate.
What’s that? That’s not Crystalina Evert? You’re kidding.
Seriously, granted that I’ve never met either woman in person, from what I can see in their pictures they are *almost* convincing as twins.
So what’s with the media, O’Donnell, and the witch comment?
With all the love and approbation lavished on witches nowadays, I find it strange that this would be a controversy at all. If anything I’d expect they’d be critical of her current implicit disapproval of witchcraft.
Maybe I’ve just been to the Salem Witch Museum too many times (that would be once, which is too many, half of it is a peon to witches), and maybe knowing a former witch biases me, but I just don’t see the big deal. People dabble in all sorts of stuff they later regret.
A WITCH!!!!!!!!!
Eric E, I am with you. It turns out the tolerant Left is only tolerant of witchcraft if it’s practiced by a liberal. If you’re a conservative witch (or ex-witch), forget it.
Almost like the tolerant Left is only supportive of a woman or a minority so long as such a person is not a conservative.
I suspect that a number of Tea Party supporters will not forgive Christine O’Donnell’s youthful, repented, experiment with witchcraft.
More important, is her lack of scientific knowledge eg regarding evolution and her ignorance of the First Amendment. She might disagree with that Amendment or how it has been interpreted, but her apparent ignorance of it is another matter. video
Sure, that’s what they all say.
Her ignorance of the First Amendment? You mean that, unlike her opponent and the ignoramouses at that law school, she knows that the words “separation of church and state” are nowhere to be found in the First Amendment, or anywhere else in the U.S. Constitution*, for that matter? And you accuse HER of ignorance?
*(Of course, the words “separation of church and state DID occur in the Constitution of the U.S.S.R.)
Actually, having a “conversion story” will probably please more Tea Party folks than it will displease. Being a repentant sinner or a returned straying sheep is a darned good asset, in politics or other public fields.
Bill912,
perhaps you have studied law more than those ‘ignoramouses'(sic) at Widener University School of Law.
As I said, she might disagree with that Amendment or how it has been subsequently interpreted by the judges of the Supreme Court. But from the video clip she did not seem to be aware of the text of the First Amendment or that was where the “separation of church and state” has been derived from. Her denial of evolution is also disturbing.
“Bill912, perhaps you have studied law more than those ‘(sic)ignoramouses'(sic)(sic) at Widener University School of Law”.
Possibly, but I certainly do know how to read and have actually read the First Amendment. BTW, you gave us a splendid example of an ad hominem attack, while not even attempting to address what I wrote. (Which I completely understand, as doing so would require you admit your ignorance of the First Amendment).
“…she did not seem to be aware of the text of the First Amendment…”
You can’t make this stuff up.