iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Badges:
Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

Brittany Dennis's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
next
1 - 25
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 20:05:29 in Entertainment

“You STILL haven't provided any evidence to support your claims. This is not a hard concept to grasp. You want proof that the Nazis practiced gun control? Who had the guns? Nazis. Who didn't have guns? The people they executed. Why? Because the laws permitted the Nazis to  confiscate  peoples' guns. What is it called when a government dictates who can and cannot own a gun? *Gun control.* Your analysis of the Rwanda killings is dismal. You seriously think that the problem was that the common people were poor and that was an isolated factor? Um, no. They were poor and defenseless because those who had guns could take whatever they liked from those who did not have guns. They were not allowed to own guns due to the law of the land. Thus, gun control contributed to the environment that led to an abusive, bloodthirsty government.”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 19:05:51 in Entertainment

“Sorry about the double posts there. I am currently experiencing technical difficulties... XD”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 18:41:44 in Entertainment

“Perhaps you missed the bit where Nazis forced people to register their guns, then used that information to confiscate guns from the undesirables? The common Rwandans were starving because those who had guns (and therefore power) had the food. This isn't America we're talking about. Same goes for Soviet Russia. Never forget the words of Mao. "Political power comes out of the barrel of a gun."

I, individually, may not be able to take down military grade, remotely controlled weapons. A hundred thousand gun owners, on the other hand, certainly could overrun a tyrannical government, theoretically speaking. If you really don't believe that there are those who advocate total gun bans, you're living under a rock.”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 18:35:51 in Entertainment

“Perhaps you missed the bit where Nazis forced people to register their guns, then used that information to confiscate guns from the undesirables? The common Rwandans were starving because those who had guns (and therefore power) had the food. This isn't America we're talking about. Same goes for Soviet Russia. Never forget the words of Mao. "Political power comes out of the barrel of a gun."

I, individually, may not be able to take down military grade, remotely controlled weapons. A hundred thousand gun owners, on the other hand, certainly could overrun a tyrannical government, theoretically speaking. If you really don't believe that there are those who advocate total gun bans, you're living under a rock. And there are plenty of people who want us to start our way down slippery slopes, such as laws that are intended to limit magazine capacity.

You have yet to provide any evidence that I am inaccurate, by the way. Random assertions that were quite obviously not thought all the way through do not count as evidence.”

Tazzie on Mar 25, 2013 at 18:50:35

“As I said study the history in context and try and comprehend the analysis of historians based on people who were actually there.   However if you're living in fear that there is actually a vast communistSocialistFacist plot to impose a dictatorship I suspect you're not really willing to have your indoctrination challenged.”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 18:18:07 in Entertainment

“And what is lacking in my history? It would be greatly appreciated if you did not simply assert that I am wrong, and instead supplied laws and dates that indicate that I am indeed incorrect. I have already done so. Where are your "facts?" Making these comments with no supporting evidence makes and calling me ignorant incriminates you, not me.”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 18:15:51 in Entertainment

“While the 1928 law allowed Germans to own firearms again, it also put strict licensing into place, which recorded each individual's ethnicity and place of residence. Ever wonder how the Nazis knew who had the guns? The 1938 law stipulated that "...persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a (gun) permit." Of course, the government determined who was trustworthy and who was not. Guess who wasn't considered trustworthy? Jews, Gypsies, and political opponents. Shocker, huh?”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 18:01:15 in Entertainment

“Actually, no. You are not guaranteed police protection. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0

What you are essentially saying is that only those who can afford to hire a bodyguard have a right to protection.”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 17:54:34 in Entertainment

“Factual history? What was inaccurate in my comment?

Rwanda: (Decree-Law No. 12, 1979.)
Paved the way for genocide in 1994
Nazi Germany: (Law on Firearms & Ammun., 1928; Weapon Law, March 18, 1938; Regulations against Jews, 1938)
Enabled the Holocaust.
Soviet Russia: (Resolutions, 1918; Decree, July 12, 1920; Art. 59 & 182, Pen. code, 1926)
Allowed the government to starve political opponents out by preventing rebellion
Turkey: (Art. 166, Pen. Code, 1866; 1911 Proclamation, 1915)
Allowed the government to track Armenian gun owners, leading to their disarmament and extermination
Guatemala: (Decree 36, Nov 25 ; Act of 1932; Decree 386, 1947; Decree 283, 1964)
Unarmed Mayans were systematically wiped out.
Cambodia: (Art. 322-328, Penal Code; Royal Ordinance 55, 1938)
The government kept records of who owned guns, allowing them to exterminate political opponents.
China: Nationalist- (Art. 205, Crim. Code, 1914; 186-87, Crim. Code, 1935)
Left citizens defenseless during the Rape of Nanking
Red- (Act of Feb. 20, 1951; Act of Oct. 22, 1957)
Allowed the government to imprison or kill political opponents.”

Tazzie on Mar 25, 2013 at 18:22:49

“Well done on the cut and paste Brit.  Now research some analysis and those things in context.    The Nazi thing has already been debunked.  Gun laws were actually relaxed under AH.   There were guns in the Polish ghettos.    How do you suppose those Rwandians and others living in poverty would have accessed guns when they couldn't afford food?  I have a family member who was in Rwanda in a military capacity at that time.   Lack of guns in the villages wasn't the problem.  What's more even if you have assault rifle do you really think you could fend off a drone attack if the mythical tyrannical government decides to go after you?  Cherry pick all you like but the NRA revisionist history just doesn't hold up under scrutiny if one is being intellectually honest.   By the way I go to the gun range so assuming all of us who support sensible regulation are looking to ban all guns is just absurd hyperbole.”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 17:37:53 in Entertainment

“From ASMDSS's "40 Reasons to Ban Guns."

"20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20."

Also, bear in mind what happens when a government is allowed to go too far with licensing laws. As I said before, let's not forget what happened in places like Rwanda, China, and Cambodia. Fooling ourselves into thinking that "it couldn't happen here" is the equivalent of a teenager convincing herself that unintended pregnancy couldn't possibly happen to her. All too often, people learn that they are not invincible and that the unthinkable can indeed happen to them.”
Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Jim Carrey: Gun Control Opponents Are 'Heartless Motherf--kers'

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 17:15:16 in Entertainment

“How about you read an opposing opinion from military members, rather than trying to insinuate that they support your position without evidence? Just an idea. :)

http://asmdss.com/topic/830-a-letter-from-the-special-forces-community-concerning-the-second-amendment/
Michelle Obama's WSJ Editorial Is At Odds With The Realities Of The Food Industry

Michelle Obama's WSJ Editorial Is At Odds With The Realities Of The Food Industry

Commented Mar 1, 2013 at 10:27:59 in Business

“Class and style.... Are we talking about the same individual here? The Michelle Obama I know doesn't have enough common sense to realize that informing the world that she was proud of her country for the first time after her husband gained power and status wasn't a good idea. The woman hugged the Queen of England! Bless the Queen's heart, I'm just glad that she took pity on our nation and was a good sport about it. (Although I think she already had an idea as to how inept the Presidential couple is, after the iPod incident.) She is the First Lady of the United States, not a hip hop star or actress. She does NOT belong at the Oscars. She does NOT belong on the Academy Awards. Running around appearing on every late-night show that would take her makes her look like a teenager who's desperate for attention. I may not have voted for her husband, but I still expect her to act her station and uphold the dignity of her post.”
Texas Students Wear Burqas During Geography Lesson, Prompting Parental Backlash And State Investigation

Texas Students Wear Burqas During Geography Lesson, Prompting Parental Backlash And State Investigation

Commented Feb 27, 2013 at 15:22:30 in Politics

“Notice how huffpo conveniently leaves out the allegation that the teacher instructed the students to refer to terrorists as "freedom fighters." Everyone reading this article needs to google CSCOPE before commenting on here, because most of you obviously have no clue about what's really going on.”

Jt John on Feb 28, 2013 at 15:46:25

“Apparently, you have no clue either and it's in your own post. ALLEGATION.”

Operafaust on Feb 27, 2013 at 19:19:47

“Maybe because the allegation is without merit and cannot be corroborated by any eyewitnesses. There's a thought.”

think more do more on Feb 27, 2013 at 15:51:00

“Excellent point. Thank you.”
Japan Population Crisis: Country To Shrink By One-third By 2060, Seniors To Account For 40 Per Cent

Japan Population Crisis: Country To Shrink By One-third By 2060, Seniors To Account For 40 Per Cent

Commented Feb 19, 2013 at 21:59:38 in Canada Business

“"Our well-being depends upon the ratio of population to goods and services produced." Do you think before you type? Who exactly do you think is going to be acquiring, creating, and distributing these goods and services? In order for there to be economic growth, there must be a vibrant working population. Human capital is essential to any business or form of development. Too many old people coupled with too few young people will inevitably result in the abuse and neglect of the elderly, since having too few working-aged people will lead to limited resources. Let's face it- society is not kind to those deemed expendable. (Look at the way we treat the disabled and the unborn.) If resources are limited, they will go to the able-bodied first. It's really not a difficult concept.”
Pentagon Extends Benefits To Same-Sex Couples [UPDATE]

Pentagon Extends Benefits To Same-Sex Couples [UPDATE]

Commented Feb 11, 2013 at 13:49:04 in Politics

“Does that mean that if a minor is in "love" with an adult, society does not get to decide whether or not that love is acceptable? Just curious.”

klee1701 on Feb 11, 2013 at 14:00:10

“This is called a "red herring", it has nothing at all to do with what is being discussed.
BTW, not too long ago what you propose was perfectly acceptable. My mom and dad married in early 1959, she was 15, he was 31. I was born 14 months later.”
Pentagon Extends Benefits To Same-Sex Couples [UPDATE]

Pentagon Extends Benefits To Same-Sex Couples [UPDATE]

Commented Feb 11, 2013 at 13:42:58 in Politics

“Words mean things. "Marriage" has always been between members of the opposite sex. Even during the height of Rome's perversion when orgies and such were common, marriage was considered as the union between a man and a woman. In addition, marriage is, by nature, a religious institution in modern western society. ALL unions should be legally referred to as a civil union, for that very reason. Just because a heterosexual couple has gone to the courthouse does not mean that they are married, any more than a homosexual couple is married. Changing definitions to suit yourself or to make yourself feel better is sheer ignorance. Unfortunately, that ignorance is rather prevalent in today's society. For instance, consider the redefinition of the word "pregnant." There was no obvious reason for redefining the word, except to promote the birth control pill. Sometimes, I wonder if I fell through the rabbit hole.

"'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - - that's all.'"”

AJayne on Feb 11, 2013 at 14:18:20

“You're wrong. The word marriage applies to all civil marriages - soon to be equally applied across this great land.”
Chris Kyle Dead: Author Of 'American Sniper' Shot And Killed At Gun Range

Chris Kyle Dead: Author Of 'American Sniper' Shot And Killed At Gun Range

Commented Feb 3, 2013 at 13:35:41 in Crime

“When seconds count, the police are just minutes away. Ultimately, the person who is responsible for your safety is you. If you choose not to carry, that is your right. Do not attempt to deny me my right to defend myself.”

Michael Hallmark on Feb 3, 2013 at 14:34:55

“I would never attempt to deny you of anything. No one else is either unless you think an assault weapon is part of that right.

And i agree with you, that we are ultimately responsible for our own safety, which is why its important to understand that if you have a gun in your home, you are more likely to have it used on you or a loved one then you are to thwart an intruder with it. I know you think you are the acceptation that, but it's simply a statistical fact.”

maryt2054 on Feb 3, 2013 at 13:56:27

“Nobody is.”
Contraception Mandate Clarified To Accommodate Religious Groups, Obama Administration Announces

Contraception Mandate Clarified To Accommodate Religious Groups, Obama Administration Announces

Commented Feb 1, 2013 at 16:21:36 in Politics

“I have a right to drive; therefore, the taxpayers should be required to buy me a car.

^Obama Logic”

michelestruck on Feb 1, 2013 at 16:28:54

“you're to stupid to post. use your computor to actually educate yourself on the issues. the taxpayer is NOT paying for it. now move on and start your education, you should be embarrassed.”

A level Head on Feb 1, 2013 at 16:27:08

“Actually there is no right to drive. It is considered a privledge which is why you are required to get a license, buy insurance, have a registration, and more.”

martpharbus on Feb 1, 2013 at 16:25:26

“That is not the same type of argument being made. Also, you don't have the right to drive.... what are you talking about Brittany Dennis.

^ This is what happens when you cut America's public school system”

BlueBird55 on Feb 1, 2013 at 16:25:23

“Not the brightest bulb in the chandelier, are you?

Insurance pays for all types of medicine, yet regressives don't want it to pay for contraceptive. Insurance companies have already built into their policies extra $$$ to cover women of child-bearing age because women give birth. It is actually cheaper for the insurance companies to provide BC coverage than to pay for the prenatal care, the delivery, and for the baby's healthcare needs.

Religions are simply doing all they can to prevent people from following their own own sense of what's right and wrong. You know, controlling women. Funny how they do that...”

runrunrun4fun on Feb 1, 2013 at 16:25:11

“Point of fact - you don't have the "right" to drive. You have the privilege.”

still hopeful at 55 on Feb 1, 2013 at 16:25:07

“actually it's bagger/tr oll logic.”

oafishcad on Feb 1, 2013 at 16:22:50

“Taxpayers pay for the roads and bridges.”
huffingtonpost entry

What We Talk About When We Talk About Steubenville

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 20:37:35 in Teen

“I have yet to find any reliable stats on rape during the Victorian era, actually. If you find any, do tell me! I think you need to keep in mind, however, that Victorian England is known for it's love affair with melodrama. For example: Jack the Ripper killed only five women, according to most forensic historians. Any murder that was unsolved could (and often would) be attributed to him without any evidence to support it. The reason so many of us have the impression that the Victorian period was so dangerous is because much of the literature produced at that time focused on crime, as it provided what I guess you might call "shock value." In conclusion, nobody is going to take your assertion seriously until you find hard numbers that support your claim.”

MarySkl on Mar 26, 2013 at 18:11:36

“For nearly 30 years of the Victorian era, America still had slavery.  In 1860, the population of Alabama had 500,000 whites and 450,000 slaves.  In Georgia, 590,000 whites were recorded on the census to 462,000 slaves.  The proportions are similar for most of the slave holding states.  MOST slave women experienced forced sex in their lifetime.  Marital rape was legal in the Victorian era.  Sharon Block's book, "Rape and Sexual Power in Early America" states that rape was both pervasive and invisible. 

However, since your original argument was that a hyper-sexualized society was responsible for much of the rape we see in current times, why then would the incidence of rape be DECREASING over the last 20 years?  Since 1995, rape has gone down to reach mid-1950 levels.  This time frame coincides with the advent of the internet and the increasing exposure to sex online. ”
huffingtonpost entry

What We Talk About When We Talk About Steubenville

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 20:26:09 in Teen

“Heaven forbid someone point out the fact that society has created an environment that encourages this kind of behavior! XD Yes, we have failed to live a certain way. And in doing so, we have failed to provide a safe environment for our daughters. It is OUR fault, just as it is India's fault for allowing the kind of nonsense that they do. It is India's fault that they make excuses for rapists. It is Afghanistan's fault that they do no punish rapists often and that when they do punish rapists, it is not nearly severe enough in most cases. And it is our fault that we bombard our children with graphic sexual  imagery that all but condones rape. It is our fault that we glorify sex outside of it's natural context. It is our fault that we do not teach our children self-control. Stop trying to side-step that fact.”
Online Threats Against Women Aren't Trivial and Don't Happen in a Vacuum

Online Threats Against Women Aren't Trivial and Don't Happen in a Vacuum

Commented Mar 25, 2013 at 20:08:17 in Technology

“Look at it this way. If you were an employer and you had to applicants for a position, one male and one female of comparable capabilities, would you be more likely to hire the male or the female after this incident? Would you be worried that a female might start similar drama, thus tarnishing your company's image? Would you see the male as the "safer" choice?”

enhancedvibes on Apr 12, 2013 at 11:57:24

“???? Hmmm let us think about that. Would I really wonder that about a prospective female candidate when this is a situation that rarely happens? You are just perpetuating stereotypes of women as emotional and unstable. wtf smh”

giftsthatpurr on Mar 25, 2013 at 20:47:39

“After reading the article in Mother Jones, and seeing the comments from what MJ called "testosterone fueled boneheads" I wold be much more comfortable with the woman.  Cyber violence does not make me feel safe.”
Online Threats Against Women Aren't Trivial and Don't Happen in a Vacuum

Online Threats Against Women Aren't Trivial and Don't Happen in a Vacuum

Commented Mar 24, 2013 at 15:41:50 in Technology

“Nobody was stroking their genitals, Heather. A pun was made involving hardware. A pun that shouldn't have phased Richards a bit, judging by this tweet: https://twitter.com/PlayDangerously/status/314460796488925187/photo/1

Any violent threats made against her were uncalled for, to be sure. But, don't attempt to turn her into a martyr. Women like her, who obviously have a chip on their shoulder and are out to start trouble, are actually making it more difficult for girls to enter male-dominated career fields.”

Heather Bowles on Mar 25, 2013 at 19:45:00

“I'm fully aware of that. It was a play on words regarding their fragile male egos. Do try to keep up.

Maybe you like being harassed while you are at work in a "male dominated field", but reasonable women consider it unacceptable.”

giftsthatpurr on Mar 24, 2013 at 22:48:13

“Hmm - so the "girls" will be punished by the "boys" just because of disagreement with one woman. Interesting.”
huffingtonpost entry

What We Talk About When We Talk About Steubenville

Commented Mar 21, 2013 at 03:36:25 in Teen

“What else did you expect to come out of a culture that is hyper-sexualized, that has taught young girls from an early age to put themselves in dangerous situations, that persecutes those who would protect themselves, and that has attempted to divorce sex from it's biological purpose? No offense, but our society's problem with rape is a fairly predictable outcome of the perfect storm that we have created.”

MarySkl on Mar 23, 2013 at 01:21:52

“Actually incidences of rape are decreasing. Do you think that in Victorian times when morality was at its height in society, that we can blame the much higher incidence of rape on a hyper-sexualized culture??? Rape has been around since time began and is a by-product of a society that dehumanizes women.”

AzDeci on Mar 21, 2013 at 12:38:09

“Just by saying that "rape is a fairly predictable outcome", subtly endorses it. Pretty much the same as saying we all "deserve it", because we (as in, all human beings) have failed to live in a certain way.

Your argument might have a slight point, if rape had only come into existence, recently. Unfortunately, rape of the powerless, male and female, young and old, has existed though out history, as a tool of intimidation and humiliation. Rape minimizes and marginalizes the victim and establishes a position of power for the rapist. It has absolutely nothing to do with procreation or recreation.

Rape will continue to thrive as long as anyone makes excuses for it's existence, or suggests that someone earned it, i.e., like posting that some 'bad' person will be justifiably raped in prison, (a common statement on message boards). Or that someone deserves it for putting themselves in a vulnerable position, for example, the Indian Police suggesting the Swedish couple brought it on themselves, by camping in a "bad" district. Even resigned or fatalistic statements of the risk of rape under certain circumstances, actually gives passive approval for rape in those situations.

The basic problem, is a common human trait, that needs to humiliate someone else, in order to 'win'. Personally, I think the aggressive, demeaning language of sports and politics, are more at fault for encouraging this attitude, than anything to do with sex or morality.”
Pope Francis Celebrates First Mass With Cardinals In Sistine Chapel (VIDEO)

Pope Francis Celebrates First Mass With Cardinals In Sistine Chapel (VIDEO)

Commented Mar 14, 2013 at 23:06:13 in Religion

“Wrong again, edmarlysa. From the King James version, which happens to be the version that the majority of protestants use. "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." What kind of logic leads you to conclude that Peter said that Christ was the rock? Even if your interpretation did stand, that does not change the fact that Christ left the organization of his Church to Peter after he died. If Christ is the big rock and Peter is the small stone, that still gives Peter authority over the other apostles after Christ's death.

Of course Peter was never in Rome! What difference does that make? lol. The Vatican was not the papal residence until the 5th century. Pope Francis could take up residency anywhere in the world and he would still be the pope. And, no. Catholicism was not started by Constantine. Do you really think that Constantine created brand new dogma all by himself, then forced all the Christians of the day to subscribe to it? xD The teachings of the original Christians are still present in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, which were originally one. This single church was referred to merely as the Christian Church. After theological and political differences caused the Great Schism in 1054, they were differentiated from each other. They are still considered to be in Communion with one another, however.”
Pope Francis Celebrates First Mass With Cardinals In Sistine Chapel (VIDEO)

Pope Francis Celebrates First Mass With Cardinals In Sistine Chapel (VIDEO)

Commented Mar 14, 2013 at 22:23:17 in Religion

“Actually, there is a small possibility that priests could be allowed to be married. It's not likely, but it is possible. It is actually possible for a married man to enter the priesthood today, though it does not happen often. For example, if a married orthodox priest or protestant minister converts, they may be allowed to join the priesthood. No, women will never be ordained as priests. Ever. That violates dogma.”
Pope Francis Celebrates First Mass With Cardinals In Sistine Chapel (VIDEO)

Pope Francis Celebrates First Mass With Cardinals In Sistine Chapel (VIDEO)

Commented Mar 14, 2013 at 22:14:37 in Religion

“The fact that he was married in no way means that Saint Peter was not the first pope. Priests were allowed to marry in the early church. Orthodox priests are still able to marry, for that matter. Celibacy within the priesthood is discipline, not dogma.

If you are Christian, you should recognize the Confession of Peter. "You are Peter, and on this rock I shall build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it..." This is the passage that Catholics cite as proof that Peter was the first pope.”

Brittany Dennis on Mar 14, 2013 at 23:06:13

“Wrong again, edmarlysa. From the King James version, which happens to be the version that the majority of protestants use. "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." What kind of logic leads you to conclude that Peter said that Christ was the rock? Even if your interpretation did stand, that does not change the fact that Christ left the organization of his Church to Peter after he died. If Christ is the big rock and Peter is the small stone, that still gives Peter authority over the other apostles after Christ's death.

Of course Peter was never in Rome! What difference does that make? lol. The Vatican was not the papal residence until the 5th century. Pope Francis could take up residency anywhere in the world and he would still be the pope. And, no. Catholicism was not started by Constantine. Do you really think that Constantine created brand new dogma all by himself, then forced all the Christians of the day to subscribe to it? xD The teachings of the original Christians are still present in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, which were originally one. This single church was referred to merely as the Christian Church. After theological and political differences caused the Great Schism in 1054, they were differentiated from each other. They are still considered to be in Communion with one another, however.”

edmarlysa on Mar 14, 2013 at 22:47:05

“The 'rock' of Matthew 16:18 is not the Apostle Peter, but his statement to Christ, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."; making Christ the rock, and not Peter. Peter means small stone. All through the Bible Christ is referred to as the Rock. I'm not contending with you, but there is no historical proof that Peter was ever in Rome. He died by being crucified upside down in approximately 80 A.D. The Roman Catholic church was started in 313 A.D. by Constantine in that he established Christianity into a state religion by baptism and not regeneration by the shed blood of Christ.”
next
1 - 25