you HAVE to see this
chinewrde (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 11:13 GMT

http://www.divine-interventions.com/

un-fucking-believable!

Re: you HAVE to see this
MalB (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 11:19 GMT

No! Desparately trying not to laugh out loud in the office and then have to explain why.

Chine, you've excelled yourself.

Re: you HAVE to see this
Pezzer (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 11:21 GMT

Such a handy shape and size for carrying around too

Re: you HAVE to see this
h™ (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 11:43 GMT

Wonderful! bookmarked!

Re: you HAVE to see this
chinewrde (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 11:45 GMT

isn't it awful! have you seen the judas one? if he could fuck the son of god, imagine what he can do
to you!

Re: you HAVE to see this
Graham - from suffolk (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 14:25 GMT

Brilliant Chine., wherever do you find these?

Re: you HAVE to see this
Moloch (in Australia) 21 Dec 2000 at 14:37 GMT

I wonder what betty would do?

Re: you HAVE to see this
adl (in Canada) 21 Dec 2000 at 14:38 GMT

OMG, I just about spit my tea all over the computer! It's hysterical. Did you check out the haiku?

Re: you HAVE to see this
Rory (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 17:33 GMT

I have surfed thet web for quite a few years now and as a vaguely religious person I don't think I
have found anything as disturbing as this. I don't think its funny - maybe satanic...?

Re: you HAVE to see this
adl (in Canada) 21 Dec 2000 at 19:03 GMT

Here's where we may disagree Rory. I find the tele-evangelists - the Jim Bakkers, Jimmy Swaggarts,
Pat Roberston, that man in Lynchburg, Garner Ted Armstrong, Oral Roberts - as disturbing. And evil.
But that's the wonderful diversity of the world - something for everyone.

Blessings of the season to you and yours.

Re: you HAVE to see this
Pezzer (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 19:08 GMT

or...

Equally as blasphemous...

http://www.jesusdance.com

Re: you HAVE to see this
h™ (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 19:10 GMT

Amen to adl!

Re: you HAVE to see this
Graham - from suffolk (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 19:54 GMT

Bloody hell - if that is correct - is that Ted Armstrong still going. If I'm right he is the radio
preacher that used to interrupy the records we used to listen to back in the days of Radio
Luxembourg and the 'pirates' back in the '60's.He was so DULL.

Re: you HAVE to see this
adl (in Canada) 21 Dec 2000 at 20:00 GMT

Well, G, there's Ted Armstrong and his son, Garner Ted Armstrong. The son is also a radio/tv
preacher. I'm amazed by the hair of tv evangelists - they could stand in a hurricane and not have a
hair out of place.

The son lived quite an interesting life. At one point he had over 500 suits (albeit bad ones), flew
via private jet, was divorced (more than once I believe) and used to have "company" on his travels.
He could have given sailors lessons ...

Re: you HAVE to see this
Baroness Schraeder (in the United Kingdom) 21 Dec 2000 at 20:50 GMT

Sounds more sordid than interesting, adl! :-)

Re: you HAVE to see this
hardhat 21 Dec 2000 at 22:17 GMT

OMG...Excellent!!!!....I suppose that this is one way of getting to know God better....

Re: you HAVE to see this
random (in the United Kingdom) 22 Dec 2000 at 00:09 GMT

Fab... check out the haikus to see one from our favourite bitching Aussie as well!

I do find it a bit worrying that people actually buy those things though...

Re: you HAVE to see this
Baroness Schraeder (in the United Kingdom) 22 Dec 2000 at 02:59 GMT

When I first saw the site I laughed. I laughed especially at the "Baby Jesus Butt Plug". But then I
have to admit that a did a bit of thinking, and am a bit with Rory on this one.

I do find it all a bit disturbing. I know that might not be "PC" and I know I may get accused of not
having a "sense of humour". It certainly surpasses all boundaries of good taste, of *any* taste,
and anyone thinking otherwise really needs to have a think about it.

I suppose what I'm not doing is associating this with TV evangelists, and therefore poking fun at
them via these dildos. The link seems tenuous at best.

I have to ask, as this had no real gay significance, and with its contenious content, was it really
an appropriate posting to this board Mr Chinewrde? Not everybody shares your lack of respect. (That
said, I've quite enjoyed some of your other links!)

Ah well, just musing before bedtime!

Re: you HAVE to see this
adl (in Canada) 22 Dec 2000 at 04:14 GMT

As I have no religion, I do find the site amusing. Now, my own weakness is jokes about the Royal
Family. I have little sense of humour about that, given that HM represents The State. We all have
our beliefs and value systems which are shaped my many things. My father was not religious, nor my
grandfather, but my father was one of the first to enlist when war was declared as he said, 'For
King and Country'. He dropped the god part. I guess the best we can do is have polite discussions
about our values and beliefs. We won't agree on most things. Frankly, I took the site as no more
than a take off. It's an idolotry (sp?). The Pope makes a visit and you suddenly get shops selling
Papal flags, Pope-on-rope (soap), etc. Go to a religious site and they're selling bottles of holy
water. Churches charge for lighting candles ...

I think we have to accept that some of us have rough senses of humour. You won't change that, and I
won't change your beliefs in an all-seeing diety. The best we can do is both fine comfort in our
values and try not to hurt others.

Nite.

Re: you HAVE to see this
Baroness Schraeder (in the United Kingdom) 22 Dec 2000 at 12:05 GMT

Thanks for that adl, very well put. I do have to add that I don't actually have a religion myself,
either. It was just that I could see the site as being offensive to many people rather than funny,
in the same way as if the dildoes were of the Royal Family may offend your tastes.

I quite accept that most of us have a rough side to our sense of humour - it wouldn't *be* a sense
of humour otherwise, and I hope I didn't come across as wanting to change that. I suppose what my
point (if there was one! LOL) was that this site may not be the right place to put the link?

All fine lines, I know, and certainly open to discussion.

Night, dear, sleep well!

Re: you HAVE to see this
Pezzer (in the United Kingdom) 22 Dec 2000 at 15:05 GMT

I think if we didn't post things because they might offend a minority of people we might stop
posting altogether - I suppose it's about finding the line over which we should not cross - it's
going to be different for all of us though.

I found the site a bit distasteful and consequently spent about 2 seconds there but I'm not sorry
Chine told us where it was - I like to make my own mind up about what's funny for me.

Re: you HAVE to see this
Noel (in the United Kingdom) 22 Dec 2000 at 19:02 GMT

Me to Pezzer, I don't like it and spent about one minute there, but I wont deny it to others if they
find it amusing or reach any conclusions about them.

I didn't go to see 'The last temptation of Christ' for similar reasons.

Live & let live, Merry Christmas everybody.

Re: you HAVE to see this
Anonymous Person™ (in the United Kingdom) 23 Dec 2000 at 10:52 GMT

As a practising Christian I found it very funny and not in the least little bit offensive - I'm
secure in my faith and it doesn't get shaken by novelty dildos. I went to see 'The Last Temptation
of Christ' for similar reasons and found it both thought provoking and spiritually valid.

Live & let live, Noel. Merry Christmas everybody

Re: you HAVE to see this
Neep (in the United Kingdom) 23 Dec 2000 at 13:14 GMT

Merry Xmas to U too whoever u r