home
RSS
The pastor who shaped Hillary Clinton's politics
Hillary Rodham Clinton with the Rev. Don Jones, a pastor who had a lasting influence on her politics.
April 25th, 2014
01:43 PM ET

The pastor who shaped Hillary Clinton's politics

By Dan Merica, CNN

Washington (CNN) - In the spring of 1962, Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the most controversial men in America. One night in Chicago's Orchestra Hall after delivering a stirring speech on civil rights and the future of America, he shook hands with a standout 15-year-old with conservative parents, Hillary Rodham.

More than 50 years later, the moment still resonates profoundly with Clinton, who has had an illustrious political career and could again seek to make history as the first woman president.

"Probably my great privilege as a young woman was going to hear Dr. Martin Luther King speak," Clinton said earlier this year at an event at the University of Miami. "I sat on the edge of my seat as this preacher challenged us to participate in the cause of justice, not to slumber while the world changed around us. And that made such an impression on me."

Clinton has traced much of her life in politics and activism to King's words that night. But there was another minister, not famous like King, who also influenced her views on social justice and stoked an intensity for action.

Don Jones was the Methodist youth pastor who organized the trip of like-minded teens to see King, and mentored her for the rest of his life.

"Don opened up a new world to me," Clinton said in 2009, the year he died, "and helped guide me on a spiritual, social and political journey of over 40 years."

FULL STORY

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Christianity • Hillary Clinton • Methodist • Politics

soundoff (205 Responses)
  1. Reality

    Seek knowledge and be free. Might want to review: http://www.webmd.com/se-x/features/se-x-drive-how-do-men-women-compare

    April 26, 2014 at 1:53 pm |
    • Akira

      So what? Do you think you're enlightening us on something everyone has always known?
      Man, you are master of the obvious. This pertains to HRC not at all.
      The lengths you go through to try and portray yourself as some sort if sex guru...

      April 26, 2014 at 7:02 pm |
  2. Doris

    Letting go of superstition

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yceHh5khkXo&w=640&h=360]

    Speakers in order of appearance:

    1. Lawrence Krauss, World-Renowned Physicist
    2. Robert Coleman Richardson, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    3. Richard Feynman, World-Renowned Physicist, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    4. Simon Blackburn, Cambridge Professor of Philosophy
    5. Colin Blakemore, World-Renowned Oxford Professor of Neuroscience
    6. Steven Pinker, World-Renowned Harvard Professor of Psychology
    7. Alan Guth, World-Renowned MIT Professor of Physics
    8. Noam Chomsky, World-Renowned MIT Professor of Linguistics
    9. Nicolaas Bloembergen, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    10. Peter Atkins, World-Renowned Oxford Professor of Chemistry
    11. Oliver Sacks, World-Renowned Neurologist, Columbia University
    12. Lord Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal
    13. Sir John Gurdon, Pioneering Developmental Biologist, Cambridge
    14. Sir Bertrand Russell, World-Renowned Philosopher, Nobel Laureate
    15. Stephen Hawking, World-Renowned Cambridge Theoretical Physicist
    16. Riccardo Giacconi, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    17. Ned Block, NYU Professor of Philosophy
    18. Gerard 't Hooft, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    19. Marcus du Sautoy, Oxford Professor of Mathematics
    20. James Watson, Co-discoverer of DNA, Nobel Laureate
    21. Colin McGinn, Professor of Philosophy, Miami University
    22. Sir Patrick Bateson, Cambridge Professor of Ethology
    23. Sir David Attenborough, World-Renowned Broadcaster and Naturalist
    24. Martinus Veltman, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    25. Pascal Boyer, Professor of Anthropology
    26. Partha Dasgupta, Cambridge Professor of Economics
    27. AC Grayling, Birkbeck Professor of Philosophy
    28. Ivar Giaever, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    29. John Searle, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
    30. Brian Cox, Particle Physicist (Large Hadron Collider, CERN)
    31. Herbert Kroemer, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    32. Rebecca Goldstein, Professor of Philosophy
    33. Michael Tooley, Professor of Philosophy, Colorado
    34. Sir Harold Kroto, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
    35. Leonard Susskind, Stanford Professor of Theoretical Physics
    36. Quentin Skinner, Professor of History (Cambridge)
    37. Theodor W. Hänsch, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    38. Mark Balaguer, CSU Professor of Philosophy
    39. Richard Ernst, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
    40. Alan Macfarlane, Cambridge Professor of Anthropology
    41. Professor Neil deGrasse Tyson, Princeton Research Scientist
    42. Douglas Osheroff, Nobel Laureate in Physics
    43. Hubert Dreyfus, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
    44. Lord Colin Renfrew, World-Renowned Archaeologist, Cambridge
    45. Carl Sagan, World-Renowned Astronomer
    46. Peter Singer, World-Renowned Bioethicist, Princeton
    47. Rudolph Marcus, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
    48. Robert Foley, Cambridge Professor of Human Evolution
    49. Daniel Dennett, Tufts Professor of Philosophy
    50. Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate in Physics

    FEATURED MUSIC:

    Mozart – Requiem Mass In D Minor K 626 – 1. Introitus 00:03
    Massive Attack – Two Rocks And A Cup Of Water 02:28, 19:14
    Max Richter – Embers 05:13
    Ludovico Einaudi – Andare 09:27, 24:30, 26:31
    Ludovico Einaudi – Nuvole Bianche 13:13
    Max Richter – Vladimir's Blues 29:21
    Ludovico Einaudi – Eni 30 Percento (The Earth Prelude) 33:16

    April 26, 2014 at 1:28 pm |
  3. Doris

    David Wood destroyed by Bart Ehrman

    Bart Ehrman, from the video [regarding the Gospel of Mark]: "These lots and lots of copies are from many centuries after Mark was written. How could we know that these copies stemmed from a correct copy, instead of an errant copy? Our earliest ones are all highly errant."

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-IG05dQ88Y&w=640&h=360]
    Published 04-14-2014

    NT scholar Bart Ehrman holds a PhD from Princeton Theological Seminary (magna cum laude). He is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He currently serves as co-editor of the series New Testament Tools, Studies, and Documents (E. J. Brill), co-editor-in-chief for the journal Vigiliae Christianae, and on several other editorial boards for journals and monographs.

    April 26, 2014 at 1:27 pm |
  4. Salero21

    OK my dear frenemies atheists/evolutionists/idolaters here is a Quiz. Answer the best you can which of course is the Worst that mankind has to offer.

    How big is the Evidence of the Absolute, Complete and Total Stup..... I meant the NONSENSE of atheism?

    1) As big as Earth.
    2) As big as the Sun.
    3) As big as the Solar System.
    4) As big as the Galaxy.
    5) As big as the Universe.
    6) All of the Above.

    April 26, 2014 at 1:26 pm |
  5. Salero21

    The Absolute, Complete and Total Stup..... no wait I want to be nice and just say that the NONSENSE of atheism is Total.

    April 26, 2014 at 1:19 pm |
  6. Salero21

    As a principle the message of the prophet could apply here also. Is. 3:12 O My people! Their oppressors are children, and women rule over them.

    April 26, 2014 at 1:17 pm |
  7. Rainer Helmut Braendlein

    Rights for Gays and Lesbians (United Methodist Church):

    Regarding the denomination’s particular stance on ho-mo-se-xuality, the 2012 Book of Discipline states:

    “The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of ho-mo-se-xuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God’s grace is available to all. We will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, as Christ has loved and accepted us. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.”

    Unquote.

    This statement of the UMC indludes a "yes" and a "no" concerning the same issue. That is typical for modern theological texts. Imagine at a job interview the boss would ask you, if you had undergone higher education. You would answer: "yes, no." His reaction: "What now, yes or no?" If you would tell him again: "yes, no", he would certainly abandon the interview, and chu-ck you out.

    Ain't it very strange that theologians are allowed to do things, which no ordinary man is allowed to do?

    Bottom line the statement of the UMC is a "yes" to gay behaviour whereby the "yes" is hidden skilfully.

    Better they had formulated as follows: "Our confessional docu-ments and the Bible actually prohibit gay behaviour, gay marriage, and gay church goers (church members). However, we don't want to resist the tenets of the UNO and the worldwide society, and therefore we welcome gay church members.

    That way they had told plainly and clearly what they mean.

    Yet, St. Paul says that fornicators are not allowed to be churchmembers.

    1 Cor. 5

    It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. 2 And ye are pu-ffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole l-ump? 7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lu-mp, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: 10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. 12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

    We have to distinguish between the general society and the church. Inside the church gay behaviour is not allowed at all.
    Outside the church a Christian shall love his gay neighbour (workmate, classmate, etc.) despite his or her sin. This love includes the communicaton of the gospel. The gay neighbour should become aware that his lifestyle doesn't please God, and that there is still time to repent. Even if somebody doesn't accept the gospel immediately, we are supposed to keep on loving him. Yet, if our neighbour wants to become a church member, he has to repent before.

    April 26, 2014 at 12:46 pm |
    • Rainer Helmut Braendlein

      The church is supposed to act according to God's will which we can find in the Bible. The church shall not conform herself to the world.

      The secular world is only an emergency system where the sinners can exist in an organized community up to the point of time when they may repent. Real life is available only in the church. The world should never presume to be more than an emergency system.

      Too much legalization of fornication will cause God's wrath. Why should anybody repent, if their is nothing more to repent?

      What about drought? Will anything grow without rain?

      April 26, 2014 at 1:04 pm |
      • Akira

        "Too much fornicatio will cause God's wrath."

        And may result in many more of God 's children being born.

        "What about drought? Will anything grow without rain?"

        Take a biology class. Fornication doesn't cause long term weather patterns.

        The rest of your post is intelligible.

        April 26, 2014 at 1:13 pm |
        • Akira

          As I told observer below, there isn't a church in existence that meet up to your standards. So your solution is to bash all of them. Your faux concern fools nobody.

          You should be honest. You are here to voice your disapproval over anyone not as pious as you imagine yourself to be.

          April 26, 2014 at 1:21 pm |
        • Akira

          Misfire. Apologies.

          April 26, 2014 at 1:26 pm |
      • sam stone

        poor old rainy. he is not getting laid, so he doesn't want anyone else to get laid

        he is like our own little corn pone, theo

        maybe he and theo should just rent a hotel room for the weekend and have a jeebus circle jerk

        rainy.....your god is impotent, and you are a bigoted punk

        April 26, 2014 at 5:50 pm |
    • Akira

      Oh, yay! The biggest bigot on the BB has turned his surly attention to the Methodists, and his favorite topic, the rights of gays and lesbians in a country he isn't from!

      Guess what, skippy. Your blather doesn't matter. Ain't that funny?

      April 26, 2014 at 1:09 pm |
      • Rainer Helmut Braendlein

        I am chiefly concerned about the churches. I care less about the general society.

        Any community which doesn't act according to the tenets of the Bible is no Christian Church.

        We should be honest.

        April 26, 2014 at 1:14 pm |
        • Akira

          As I told observer below, there isn’t a church in existence that meet up to your standards. So your solution is to bash all of them. Your faux concern fools nobody.

          You should be honest. You are here to voice your disapproval over anyone not as pious as you imagine yourself to be.

          April 26, 2014 at 1:22 pm |
        • Rainer Helmut Braendlein

          No, it is a formal question.

          I wish to find a church acting according to the tenets of the Bible – the correct form.

          I would be very glad, if they would welcome the little sinner, and help me to improve.

          April 26, 2014 at 1:26 pm |
        • Akira

          Found your own church since you feel every denomination and every other church is so lacking that you have to come here to slander and bash them every single day.
          Do that to shore up your beliefs instead of insulting other churches/denominations. Just think. You can become the next Charlie Manson. Or Warren Jeffs. Or David Koresh. Or whatever. You've got that zeal. That spark. That obsession that things must be done exactly. Your. Way.

          You don't need to constantly tear down those denominations you don't like. Just leave them alone. They won't mind.
          The problem may not lie with them...but with you.

          April 26, 2014 at 2:29 pm |
    • observer

      Rainer Helmut Braendlein

      "The church is supposed to act according to God's will which we can find in the Bible."

      Fortunately, most churches don't act according to God's will. Few, if any, support slavery and the Pope seems to be cutting down on the discriminations commanded in the Bible.

      April 26, 2014 at 1:12 pm |
      • Rainer Helmut Braendlein

        Okay, but then they should no longer call themselves Christian churches.

        April 26, 2014 at 1:16 pm |
        • Akira

          They will call themselves Christian if they are followers of Christ. Who on earth are you to define what Christianity is?
          You may only define it for yourself.

          I know you fancy yourself a modern-day Bonhoffer, but you're not. You just interpret things in the way to harm as many people as possible while hiding behind your Bible to do so.

          April 26, 2014 at 1:25 pm |
        • Rainer Helmut Braendlein

          Who is a follower of Christ?

          Someone following his doctrine in word and deed.

          April 26, 2014 at 1:41 pm |
        • otoh2

          Rainer,

          "Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

          He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

          He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

          Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over."

          - Emo Philips

          April 26, 2014 at 1:48 pm |
        • Rainer Helmut Braendlein

          Read 1 Cor. 5!

          St. Paul required the Corinthians to exclude extreme and notorious sinners.

          Assumed, they had not been obedient to his instruction, he certainly had abandoned the community with them.

          Jesus said that a single sinning brother who is not ready to repent shall be treated like a pagan. If a whole church is not ready to repent, she has become a pagan association.

          April 26, 2014 at 2:02 pm |
        • observer

          Rainer Helmut Braendlein,

          So a GOOD CHRISTIAN CHURCH is one that will support slavery, right? Just like you do, right?

          April 26, 2014 at 2:16 pm |
        • Akira

          Chris·tian
          ˈkrisCHən/
          adjective
          1.
          of, relating to, or professing Christianity or its teachings.
          "the Christian Church"
          noun
          1.
          a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.

          Yes. They qualify. Some may fall short, as you repeatedly have stated you do.

          You are not qualified to comment on a number of things. Deciding what churches may call themselves is one of them.

          April 26, 2014 at 2:36 pm |
      • Akira

        Observer, you said the word that will cause Helmut to salvitate like one of Pavlov's dogs: "Pope."
        There isn't a church in existence that confirms to Helmut's made up religion.
        This way, he can discriminate against as many people as possible.

        April 26, 2014 at 1:17 pm |
  8. thefinisher1

    LOL....what's always shout how they can "question" things, but they don't question their own atheism! LOLZ. Classic stupidity!

    April 26, 2014 at 11:01 am |
    • thefinisher1

      •atheists

      April 26, 2014 at 11:02 am |
      • observer

        "what's always shout"

        Classic stupidity. Basic English failure.

        April 26, 2014 at 1:16 pm |
  9. flightfromfrostmtn

    lol ...... clergy and politicians, birds of a feather I guess....

    Now the powers behind the scenes shove forward their latest gimmick ...Here vote for a Woman!, you all haven't done that before!! She ll change everything! really – she will!!111.

    smoke and mirrors.

    April 26, 2014 at 6:20 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      you think voting for a woman is a gimmick? noice.

      April 26, 2014 at 9:54 am |
  10. Reality

    Presidential candidates PR!! They all have their favorite Christian ministers, dead or alive. The dead ones tend to be less controversial.

    April 25, 2014 at 11:52 pm |
  11. Harris

    A very nice article about Clinton's faith!

    April 25, 2014 at 6:33 pm |
  12. thefinisher1

    Since atheism is a man-made belief system, it's false. According to strict atheists, any man-made belief is false. 😄😃☺️😄😊😄

    April 25, 2014 at 3:18 pm |
    • Concert in an Egg

      troll, good afternoon.

      April 25, 2014 at 3:19 pm |
      • thefinisher1

        Eggie poo! How's preschool going?

        April 25, 2014 at 3:20 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          Fortunately that is no concern of mine. How is your work on definitions coming?

          April 25, 2014 at 3:23 pm |
        • thefinisher1

          Awww! He's trying to act like he's smart! You get an A-

          April 25, 2014 at 3:25 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          Get your KISS records out and Surrender.

          April 25, 2014 at 3:31 pm |
        • SeaVik

          Finisher, do you EVER say anything that's remotely correct? Atheism is neither a belief system nor is it man-made. Everyone is born an atheist so obviously it isn't man-made.

          April 25, 2014 at 3:46 pm |
        • thefinisher1

          If we are all born atheists, your atheism is the sole source of ALL the evil in this world! Thanks so much for the comedy!!!! 😄😊😄

          April 25, 2014 at 4:13 pm |
        • SeaVik

          You're quite an idiot. There is no "if" about it – no one is born with a belief in a god. And why exactly would the fact that we're all born atheist make atheism the sole source of evil? I could just as ilogically conclude that atheism is therefore the sole source of everything good. It merits repeating: You are quite an idiot.

          April 25, 2014 at 4:37 pm |
        • thefinisher1

          You aren't born knowing what god(s) to disbelieve in. So what you claim is based on your delusions. You are atheist for emotional reasons.

          April 25, 2014 at 4:41 pm |
        • Akira

          Finisher,
          This went unanswered on another page:
          Do you take the Bible literally, finisher? This is a direct question that has nothing to do with atheism. It is a yes or no question.
          Yes or no?

          April 25, 2014 at 4:44 pm |
        • thefinisher1

          Taking the bible literally means you are a trained zombie unable to think. Words change over time especially with the English language. Take the word "Jazz". It can mean music or it could mean something else. People can claim anything they want, such as "I understand the bible" but they are just lying to themselves to make them feel good inside. If anything, one must understand the way of life for Jews and others mentioned in the bible. It's a tradition for people to pick what they want, but that doesn't mean they are able to understand what everything means. Atheists also do this. You take one glance and say "Ut! This is evil! Ban this now!!!!!'". You take one part out of context EXACTLY like the people you mock for doing. Literally? Can't. If one studies it seriously, one will know more than the surface of it. Try to think before you respond, k?

          April 25, 2014 at 5:08 pm |
        • Akira

          Thanks for answering, finisher.

          April 25, 2014 at 6:47 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          finisher, why don't you write like that more often? (and drop the troll bit?)

          April 25, 2014 at 7:01 pm |
        • SeaVik

          "You aren't born knowing what god(s) to disbelieve in. So what you claim is based on your delusions. You are atheist for emotional reasons."

          Again, you're an idiot. Given that obvious fact, I would suggest you stop posting to avoid further embarrassment.

          Atheism is a non-belief in any gods. In order to believe in gods and not be an atheist, you would have to know about those gods. Babies don't know about gods and therefore, are atheists, by definition. Of course, if a god actually existed, babies probably WOULD know about him / it instinctively, but in reality, babies only end up believing in a god because other people convince them to do it via brain-washing.

          April 25, 2014 at 10:42 pm |
  13. Concert in an Egg

    The Clintons are the ultimate Power Couple. Bill and Hillary are real political players. She didn't just wake up and say I am going to run for The White House. And Bill didn't just happen. They have been a deliberate couple playing the political game of power since college. Bill wouldn't have made it to the White House without her and Hillary won't make it to the White House without Bill. A power couple they are, maybe the best we have ever seen. History will compare them with Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt.

    April 25, 2014 at 3:03 pm |
    • Vic

      I believe Hillary Rodham Clinton is a very intelligent woman of high caliber. The only thing she needs to do if she runs for president, IMHO, is to tone down her rhetoric, she comes across as a doctrinaire and a bit of an exaggerator. Other than that, I believe she would make a very good president.

      April 25, 2014 at 3:34 pm |
  14. Reality

    Hillary Clinton? She has and is still riding the coat tails (or is it Monica's tail?) of Billy "Boy". A strong woman would have divorced his "rosey" ass. She did not because she thought it would ruin her political ambitions. Her stint as Secretary of State was a disaster showing her true colors as a listless, weak leader.

    April 25, 2014 at 2:58 pm |
    • Concert in an Egg

      Hillary should not and cannot take blame for Bill's poor judgments. This will backfire on the Republicans. His sexual infidelities were his very own, and Hillary can't take on Bill's womanizing. It should not come up as a campaign issue. Hillary has to be judged exclusively on her own merit, not as a woman but most of all as a politician. Hillary will make history, as the first woman President of the United States. Her problem then, will be what to do with "First Husband."

      April 25, 2014 at 3:02 pm |
    • Akira

      Blaming the victim is cowardly. I am unsurprised you would stoop that low.

      April 25, 2014 at 4:07 pm |
      • Reality

        Maybe if HC did a bit more "stooping" in bed, Billy Boy wouldn't have been chasing other women and the country would have saved a lot of money and time on trials, impeachments et. al.

        April 25, 2014 at 5:30 pm |
        • Akira

          Maybe you should quit being such a secost pig and not blame the victim.

          April 25, 2014 at 6:49 pm |
        • Akira

          Sexist pig.
          DYAC.

          April 25, 2014 at 6:51 pm |
        • Reality

          Se-xist- discrimination on the basis of s-ex, esp the oppression of women by men

          Pig – an insensitive male, a male chauvinist

          An example of one of the all time "se-xist" pigs? Billy "Boy" Clinton !!!

          Is Reality one? No, as he has been and continues to be a faithful and respectful husband for 44 years.

          April 25, 2014 at 9:51 pm |
        • midwest rail

          Being a faithful husband is irrelevant to the accusation, which was justified.

          April 25, 2014 at 9:53 pm |
        • Reality

          How so? HC being a better bed partner? Might want to think that over considering all the pills and gels out there for improved se-x. Are the companies selling these products se-xist pigs??.

          April 25, 2014 at 11:56 pm |
        • midwest rail

          Idiocy. You may wish to rethink the original comment in which you blamed H.C. for Bill straying. knowledge which you cannot possibly have. Oink.

          April 26, 2014 at 7:40 am |
        • Reality

          Tis a guy thing and all active males have it. So I do know.

          April 26, 2014 at 8:58 am |
        • midwest rail

          No, you do not know. You only think you do. Oink.

          April 26, 2014 at 9:12 am |
        • Reality

          Seek knowledge and be free: http://www.webmd.com/s–ex/features/s–ex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare

          ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

          April 26, 2014 at 1:57 pm |
        • midwest rail

          Idiocy. A general study has no bearing on a specific relationship, especially since that specific relationship is not part of said study, nor do you have any personal knowledge of said relationship. Oink.

          April 26, 2014 at 2:11 pm |
        • Reality

          But by quantum theory, we know all about our fellow specific humans. For example, I can see you now erupting in a blood boil.

          April 26, 2014 at 3:29 pm |
        • Akira

          Being a guy definitely qualifies you to have male views that are sexist, misogynistic, anachronistic, and petty; blame the victim is a good ole boy strategy. The 50's called, piggy. Your presence is requested back. Your foray into the 21st century failed, as did your attempt to smear HRC because you don't like her politics.

          Grow up. This is childish behavior, old man.

          April 26, 2014 at 4:14 pm |
        • Akira

          Not denying he's an adulterer. If he were blaming HER for HIS inability to keep it zipped, I'd call him the same thing.
          If she had been cheating on him, you'd be still blaming her by calling her a slut. You know you would be.
          You are a seist pig. And your little WebMd link doesn't change that, nor justify it.

          April 26, 2014 at 4:28 pm |
        • Reality

          But where would HC be without that zipper-down Billy "Boy"? Just another hick lawyer from Arkansas !!! Time to cleanse Washington of all the Texas and Arkansas power-playing families !!!

          April 27, 2014 at 12:10 am |
        • midwest rail

          So you have no answer, you know your musings are just that, you have presented no facts, and then resort the last refuge of the defeated. Well done. And oink.

          April 27, 2014 at 1:16 am |
  15. Vic

    ♰♰♰ Jesus Christ Is Lord ♰♰♰

    The good ole de facto Christian USA.

    April 25, 2014 at 2:47 pm |
    • midwest rail

      Trolling for a reaction is beneath you, Vic – or should be.

      April 25, 2014 at 2:50 pm |
      • snuffleupagus

        +1, midwest!

        April 25, 2014 at 3:00 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—"
      – Treaty of Tripoli, 1797

      April 25, 2014 at 2:55 pm |
      • toleranceofall

        "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."
        –The Trumpet Voice of Freedom: Patrick Henry of Virginia, p. iii.

        April 25, 2014 at 4:39 pm |
        • Akira

          He also opposed the US Constitution.
          Huh. Wonder why?

          April 25, 2014 at 5:05 pm |
        • toleranceofall

          It's so hard to tell what the founding fathers actually thought and believed – there are so many conflicting items.

          For instance, Thomas Jefferson is known for not being religious. He writes

          "In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the consti.tution independent of the powers of the general government. I have therefore undertaken, on no occasion, to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it; but have left them, as the const.itution found them, under the direction and discipline of state or church authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies."

          However, he also writes:

          "I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ."
          –The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, p. 385.

          April 25, 2014 at 5:22 pm |
        • Akira

          Sure Jefferson was a complex man...that's why he edited the Bible to delete all of the supernatural aspects of Jesus's tenure on Earth, and just left the very good teachings.
          Jefferson was conflicted; much like all people are.

          But of course this nation was founded as a secular nation. That was clearly intended by the FF when they wrote the Constitution.

          April 25, 2014 at 6:56 pm |
  16. Sungrazer

    We are awash in articles today.

    April 25, 2014 at 2:41 pm |
  17. Concert in an Egg

    America is ready for the leadership of a Hillary Clinton. A new history will be made when she becomes the leader of the free world. The world of women everywhere will change. America is ready for Hillary as President and Hillary is ready to be President, like no other.

    April 25, 2014 at 2:24 pm |
    • Salero21

      Yup! Unfortunately like it happened to Israel when it went astray from the Lord. The Prophet Isaiah said of them: Is. 3:12 O My people! Their oppressors are children, and women rule over them.

      April 25, 2014 at 2:38 pm |
      • Concert in an Egg

        •Hillary is a smart politician. When you look at her singularly on her merit she is ready and able to step into the hot seat. She is prepared. She brings skill, wisdom, experience and a unique view of the White House to the table. She has been First Lady, She has been Secretary of State. She has served in the United States Senate. She has been up close and personal. No other candidate can make the claim. She has not political peer.

        April 25, 2014 at 2:41 pm |
        • joey3467

          In my opinion anyone who wants to be president should automatically be removed from consideration.

          April 25, 2014 at 2:51 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          I can't disagree, but that is not reality.

          April 25, 2014 at 2:54 pm |
        • Salero21

          And yet again, though is not the same, because the US is NOT Israel, neither replaces Israel. The similarity for me is obvious.Is. 3:12 O My people! Their oppressors are children, and women rule over them.

          April 25, 2014 at 2:55 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          I will feel safer with her on the fence.

          April 25, 2014 at 3:00 pm |
        • snuffleupagus

          Concert, riding the fence is her best altenative...no man would have her.

          April 25, 2014 at 3:03 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          Who says she wants any man to want her?

          April 25, 2014 at 3:05 pm |
        • Sungrazer

          joey3467,

          Reminds me of this passage from "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe":

          "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."

          April 25, 2014 at 4:10 pm |
        • Akira

          How odd that one would base their vote on the candidate's...er...'desirability'.
          One would think one votes with one's pennis.

          April 25, 2014 at 4:12 pm |
        • Akira

          Of course I meant penis.

          April 25, 2014 at 4:14 pm |
  18. Alias

    Prime political babble right there.
    Way to get those minority votes you missed last time!

    April 25, 2014 at 2:21 pm |
  19. Salero21

    WHAAAT, more Evidence on top of a mountain range of Evidence of the Absolute, Complete and Total Stupi... no wait.... I'll be nice this time!! Absolute, Complete and Total NON-SENSE or as the GRAMMAR GESTAPO OF THE INTERNET prefers nonsense of atheism.

    April 25, 2014 at 2:16 pm |
    • Concert in an Egg

      troll, please list what is wrong with atheism. thx.

      April 25, 2014 at 2:20 pm |
      • Salero21

        One word sill suffice, EVERYTHING!! If the Evidence for the Total Stupi... er I meant NONSENSE of atheism was a liquid, it could replace all the water of all the Oceans, lakes, rivers and well in the whole planet earth and beyond.

        April 25, 2014 at 2:32 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          I don't need everything. Could you please list ONE thing that is wrong with atheism? thx again.

          April 25, 2014 at 2:37 pm |
        • gulliblenomore

          Egg....I'm not sure if you know it or not, but Salero is one of the bat sh-it crazy lunatics that we have here on these blogs that never, ever has anything intelligent to say.

          April 25, 2014 at 3:54 pm |
    • TruthPrevails1

      Please try to keep up...the article is about a Christian woman, not an Atheist. Now run along and find your nurse, when the 'Salero' personality comes out we know that your meds are wearing off... take your anti-psychotics like the good little loon you are.

      April 25, 2014 at 4:09 pm |
    • Akira

      An article about HRC and the the men of God who influenced her is evidence of atheism?

      Explain.

      April 25, 2014 at 4:25 pm |
  20. snuffleupagus

    No doubt that she is a good xtian, she lies about everything, doesn't take reponsibility for what happens on her watch as State, defends her philandering husband, and dislikes our men and women in uniform. This woman is nothing if not super ambitous, and doesn't care how she reaches the top of the ladder. To paraphrase her: "What does it matter that our people died in Bengazhi?"

    April 25, 2014 at 1:58 pm |
    • Concert in an Egg

      I will vote for her. She would be an excellent president.

      April 25, 2014 at 2:10 pm |
      • snuffleupagus

        Concert, that surely is your right. A a veteran I still defend that right. But I do disagree with you on her bieng an excellent presiden. I find it hard to look up to anyone who doesn't understand the terms "illegal, and "interprets" the Consti.tution. I think it speaks quite clearly of her character when they were in Arkansas and had their little to-do in real-estate, etc.

        April 25, 2014 at 2:25 pm |
        • snuffleupagus

          Should read "president". Sorry for typos.

          April 25, 2014 at 2:26 pm |
        • Concert in an Egg

          She would be terrifying which is just what we need.

          April 25, 2014 at 2:35 pm |
        • Akira

          What was the result of Kenneth Starr's extensive, extremely costly investigation?

          April 25, 2014 at 4:30 pm |
    • Salero21

      Or as W would say: "What does it matter that our people died in Afghanistan, Iraq the twin towers?"

      April 25, 2014 at 2:18 pm |
    • workingcopy12

      I'm trying to figure out if your jab that "she is a good xtian" is evidenced by the list that follows that statement (as it seems to imply). If so: "dislikes our men and women in uniform"??? Are you suggesting that Christians in this country are against the military? What vodka infused facts are you relying upon?

      April 25, 2014 at 2:19 pm |
      • snuffleupagus

        workin, work on your reading comprehension "she" doesn't like the our military. Understand now, azzhat?

        April 25, 2014 at 2:28 pm |
        • Salero21

          Or as GW would say: "What does it matter that because I was asleep at the wheel our people died in Afghanistan, Iraq the twin towers?"

          April 25, 2014 at 2:50 pm |
        • workingcopy12

          My reading comprehension is just fine–its your ambiguous writing that I'm addressing. You start with the phrase "No doubt..." you then follow with a list of other charges against her which seem to exist only to substantiate and evidence the "no doubt' claim. In other words, your post reads: "no doubt that she is a "good xtian" (because) "she dislikes our men and women in uniform." That charge, therefore, is a jab at Christians generally. Had you not used the "no doubt" introduction, this would not have been an issue, and I would have read your post as nothing more than the childish list (starting with "good xtian") that it is.

          April 25, 2014 at 3:08 pm |
    • Akira

      I'm glad you paraphrased that to fit with your own meaning, because that isn't what she said. Therefore , it's really you that thinks that way, and not Mrs. Clinton.

      April 25, 2014 at 4:17 pm |
1 2
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.