I shouldn't think he'd be a very good lay.
Thanks, James, for the "Mission Congo" link. I'm going to have to watch that and see more about Pat Robertson and his diamond mines. I knew about this some time ago and others thought I was crazy, but I just never saw the movie.
Remember that if we cannot trust Hagee here, we can always trust Pat Robertson. His idea of the "ring thing" with gay men can losely be translated to mean "never shake hands with a gay person." So much for the thoughts of a religious person. Maybe we should give people a written test before we shake hands in the first place. Robertson is probably wearing one of those rings.
Hagee isn't so bad here except for his remark that you can exercise your right to "leave the country." Just why you would be wanting to leave the country because of prayers or manger scenes is beyond me. His ideas that we are "a christian nation" and remarks of "one nation under god" should be "self-studied" a bit more before said. (Remember recently when Obama got in trouble for omitting "under god" but the phrase was not even there? Obama said it correctly.)
My biggest problem with backwards Hagee here is that he says "Merry Christmas is a christian prayer." Since when? I thought it was a greeting.
Hagee, Robertson, Osteen, Rick Warren, the late Paul Crouch, and their ilk are all cut from the same cloth. And, while I may catch some shit for this, I'm personally of the opinion they're all relatively intelligent - OK, Hagee may be an exception. They are all amoral individuals who have found a way to bilk the lowest common denominator in our society out their retirement, social security, and government assistance money which should be used for utilities and prescription medicines.
And, how do you set the treble hook into the gaping mouths of the uneducated and gullible? JAYSUS KEY-RIST! (In America, it also helps if you wave the rebel flag while swearing undying allegiance to the USA). Pretend that all non-Christians are your enemy (because, you HAVE to have an enemy - real or imagined - to rouse the mob). Convince them that the only way you can pursue your "crusade" to save them is by contributing "love offerings." Then, laugh all your way to the Cayman Islands bank account in your new Lear Jet. It's one of the oldest cons in the book. The Catholic Church has been doing it for 1,000+ years. The upstarts and newbies like Hagee, Robertson, Olsteen and the like are now using modern technology just like the RCC did back during the medieval period. Impress the peasants with cathedrals, gregorian chant, and stained glass windows. Now, impress them with mega-churches, jumbo-trons, and Super-Bowl-like entertainment.
Keep those love offerings flowing.
I only disagree with your assessment insofar as you say these pricks are "amoral." Amorality is a justifiable stance since morality is situational and having no set position is living like the Taoist "superior man." These people are IMMORAL. They know deep down that their Jebus is a total myth, never lived, never existed. They are using myth to make money. That, to me, is immoral, not amoral. (Well, Joseph Campbell and Elaine Pagels use myth to make money, too, but that is another story.)
Here's the definition of amoral I was using.
"Lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something."
If feigning morality will get them what they want, they'll use it. On the other hand, if immorality gets them to their goal, they'll use that also. It is situational, but in their case I'm going with the first phrase of the definition - lacking a moral sense. They have none.
They do not lack morality in their own eyes. Anything that backs up their buybull is accepted. Even Martin Luther said that telling a lie was OK if it furthered a belief in god. So, it appears to me that these people will do anything to advance their own beliefs while claiming you decrepid, decieved, and immoral.
Certainly, they don't lack for morality in their own eyes, because they wear the bible like a badge of honor and declare it to be the sole, absolute and only valid morality there is or can be.
And therein lies the problem.
Doesn't Hagee know that "holiday" comes from "holy" and "day?"