Title: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Danny on January 04, 2007, 11:22:01 PM Quote Everyone who's anyone in music is releasing albums in 2007. Even Guns N' Roses. By Stephen Humphries | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor It's the year in which the musical stars align. In the world of rock, releases are expected from titans U2, Coldplay, and Metallica. Top 40 radio is anticipating albums by Avril Lavigne, Britney Spears, and Kelly Clarkson. And hip-hop looks to rebound from a sluggish 2006 with records by 50 Cent, Usher, and Eminem. "This is going to be one of the most prolific release years in quite some time," says Jonathan Cohen, senior editor at Billboard magazine. But there's one album that will probably trump them all at the sales register: The soundtrack to High School Musical 2: Sing It All or Nothing! The sequel to the musical phenomenon airs this summer. Until then, expect the Disney Channel's other phenomenon, Hannah Montana, to vacuum up every 'tween's pocket money. But back to those also rans.... Fresh sounds January is a good month to launch new artists such as "American Idol" runner-up Katharine McPhee. Her self-titled album has been assembled from contributions by producer Babyface and songwriter Kara DioGuardi (Hilary Duff, Kelly Clarkson). "That should be a pretty good blend to suit multiple audiences. Stuff for the people who voted for her based on [her rendition of] 'Somewhere Over the Rainbow' on 'American Idol,' but also stuff that's a little bit more club friendly," says Mr. Cohen. Another rookie to look out for in January is Lily Allen, already a phenomenon in her native Britain. On her debut, "Alright, Still," Allen's swaggering pop tunes surf atop currents of reggae and hip-hop. It's joyous enough to bring a smile to an Easter Island statue. Also generating buzz: Scotland's The View. "They're punk pop but they write really good songs," says Jim Farber, pop critic for The New York Daily News. "The album is called 'Hats off to the Buskers.' They don't make any attempt to hide their Scottish brogue." Anticipated followups Given that the only Paris Hilton record the public was interested in was her police record, we don't imagine she'll release a sequel to last year's album. That should clear valuable shelf space for several highly anticipated follow-up records. The Arcade Fire, the indie group touted by David Bowie and U2, has recorded a sophomore effort titled "Neon Bible." March's slate also includes Air's "Pocket Symphony," which adds Japanese instrumentation to a slinky electro-pop mix. The same month, Good Charlotte - the punk-pop band who seemingly spend as much time in tattoo parlors as recording studios - gear up for "Good Morning Revival." "This record is going to be really big," says Cohen. "The songs are massive sounding." Until then, all eyes are on The Shins - the soft rockers famously endorsed by Natalie Portman's character in the movie "Garden State" - who return in late January with "Wincing The Night Away." "This record is really good but it doesn't, to my ears, have anything on it that will make them explode onto the mainstream," says Cohen. "I expect this one will sell better than the previous one, because so many more people know about them now." Norah Jones's albums are so mellow they should come packaged with eye pillows. If Jones's new single, "Thinking About You," is anything to go by, then third album "Not Too Late" will be dominated by the melodic hush she's best known for. "This is her first album where it's all original material - I don't think she does any covers this time - and it's also her first without [producer] Arif Mardin, who died last year," says Mr. Farber. Country star Gretchen Wilson is eager for a reappraisal. "Her second album was considered a bit of a disappointment, critically and certainly commercially," says Entertainment Weekly music writer Chris Willman. "It was perceived that she played 'the red neck card' a little too much on that album. I've heard that the third album is going to have more ballads ... and not so many party anthems." Unusual projects This is a year of several bold risks. For instance, Bryan Ferry has cut an album of Bob Dylan covers called "Dylanesque." News that Robert Plant is in Nashville making a country record may bring back bad memories of Led Zeppelin's "Hot Dog," a twangy pastiche that was one of the supergroup's rare missteps. (Well, that and the Stonehenge stage props.) Fear not. The singer is making a duets album with Alison Krauss. Moreover, the duo has hired producer T-Bone Burnett to conjure a haunting, rootsy sound. Sheryl Crow is also making a country record. "When I talked to her at the Country Music Awards, she said she's really going to go for it," says Mr. Willman. "She was due to go in and start recording it at her home studio in Nashville last month." Returning from a musical hiatus Among this year's comeback kids - well, maybe not kids - are Joni Mitchell, Rush, John Mellencamp, and America, all staples of classic rock who've not released albums in many years. Neo-soul singer Maxwell, AWOL since 2001, re-appers with "Black Summer's Night." The big voice of Toni Childs is back with "Keep the Faith," her first album in 13 years. Bluegrass legend Charlie Louvin's first disc in over a decade includes guest spots from Jeff Tweedy [of Wilco], Elvis Costello, and George Jones. New material is also due from two reformed bands: The Smashing Pumpkins and The (now three) Stooges. The latter's original members Iggy Pop (vocals), Scott Asheton (drums), and Ron Asheton (guitar) are joined on bass by fIREHOSE's Mike Watt. Finally, there's one comeback that everyone is eyeing. Guns N' Roses' much delayed "Chinese Democracy," the band's first album of original songs since 1991, is supposedly due March 6. But is the bloom off Axl Rose? No, says Billboard's Cohen. "Just based on how evergreen their greatest hits album has been in the past year, that's gotta be multiplatinum," he says. "It'll be pretty hard to miss." http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0105/p13s01-almp.html Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: The Legend on January 04, 2007, 11:27:33 PM Even with that competition, GN'R could very easily pull off the best selling album of the year.
Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: WhiteRose on January 04, 2007, 11:50:43 PM Thanks for posting the article. I thought it was very interesting, informative and well written. Also, it's nice to hear some industry optimism surrounding the release of CD. :yes:
Cheers, W.R. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: HMJACK707 on January 05, 2007, 12:17:08 PM Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all.
Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: bigbri on January 05, 2007, 12:30:08 PM Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all. Why? It's not like hordes of people are looking forward to it. The others are all big hitters. Contraband may have gone double platinum, but I think the overriding opinion of that CD is that is was not nearly as good as the hype surrounding it. Good article, in the Christian Science Monitor even! Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: BlowUpYourVideo on January 05, 2007, 12:32:41 PM Wasn't it Black Sabbath who used Stonehenge stage props??
Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: TAP on January 05, 2007, 01:00:18 PM Wasn't it Black Sabbath who used Stonehenge stage props?? And Spinal Tap. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: HMJACK707 on January 05, 2007, 01:09:42 PM Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all. Why? It's not like hordes of people are looking forward to it. The others are all big hitters. Contraband may have gone double platinum, but I think the overriding opinion of that CD is that is was not nearly as good as the hype surrounding it. Good article, in the Christian Science Monitor even! So? Take Faith No More for example. When Mike Joined, They were already basically done with "The Real Thing" and they just needed lyrics to go with the songs. So Mike decided to just throw down some lyrics to the songs. Thats why their next albums "Angel Dust" and "King For A Day, Fool For A Lifetime" sound so much different. So whos to say that the same thing is not happening with VR? Everyone already knows that every band member is very talented and has the musical history to back it up. So just because they made one good album that did not live up to hype does not mean that it was by any means bad and sure as hell does not mean that everyone should disregard them and not look forword to their second album. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Tyson on January 05, 2007, 01:13:31 PM Very positive mention. I think the Greatest Hits album has been greatly beneficial to GNR as a whole.
Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: The Legend on January 05, 2007, 02:10:28 PM Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all. No one's looking forward to it, except the VR fans themselves. They aren't heavy hitters. Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all. Why? It's not like hordes of people are looking forward to it. The others are all big hitters. Contraband may have gone double platinum, but I think the overriding opinion of that CD is that is was not nearly as good as the hype surrounding it. Good article, in the Christian Science Monitor even! Contraband was financially successful, but the album wasn't good, and was too commericial for alot of STP & GN'R fans. Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all. Why? It's not like hordes of people are looking forward to it. The others are all big hitters. Contraband may have gone double platinum, but I think the overriding opinion of that CD is that is was not nearly as good as the hype surrounding it. Good article, in the Christian Science Monitor even! So? Take Faith No More for example. When Mike Joined, They were already basically done with "The Real Thing" and they just needed lyrics to go with the songs. So Mike decided to just throw down some lyrics to the songs. Thats why their next albums "Angel Dust" and "King For A Day, Fool For A Lifetime" sound so much different. So whos to say that the same thing is not happening with VR? Everyone already knows that every band member is very talented and has the musical history to back it up. So just because they made one good album that did not live up to hype does not mean that it was by any means bad and sure as hell does not mean that everyone should disregard them and not look forword to their second album. Yeah, but I think that's kind of a stretch. Not that it's impossible, but I highly doubt VR are going to re-invent themselves with experimental sounds. They cut a 'commericialized' record, and it went double platinum. If they did something off the mark, it would almost guarantee financial disaster, and even though it might actually be a better album musically, they've got record exec's to please too. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: jarmo on January 05, 2007, 02:24:45 PM If you want to talk about other bands, please use the other sections of this board.
Thank you. /jarmo Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: HMJACK707 on January 05, 2007, 02:39:02 PM ^ yeah... Sorry for hijacking the topic >_>
Back to GN'R, I think that no matter how excited people are and no matter how good the music is. It will not sell that well. Sure it will start out strong getting sales from a lot of people who have waited so long for it and just the general public that is interested. But I believe that after the original hype dies down the sales and its place on the charts will fall quickly. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: polluxlm on January 05, 2007, 02:54:44 PM ^ yeah... Sorry for hijacking the topic >_> Back to GN'R, I think that no matter how excited people are and no matter how good the music is. It will not sell that well. Sure it will start out strong getting sales from a lot of people who have waited so long for it and just the general public that is interested. But I believe that after the original hype dies down the sales and its place on the charts will fall quickly. Most likely, but if what has been said about the album is true I think we may be in for a surprise. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Tyson on January 05, 2007, 04:32:19 PM If Nickelback can sell 5 milllion copies of what amounts to a good, solid rock album, then GNR and Chinese Democracy, in my estimation, can sell very, very well. Maybe not 5 million, but atleast 3 million domestically, though probably more.
Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Jim Bob on January 05, 2007, 05:03:53 PM Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all. what the hell does that have to do with this? go find a VR board. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Six Strings on January 05, 2007, 05:14:04 PM Well, I think it's kinda strange that both albums (GN'R and VR) will come out nearly at the same time. Just my opinion though. Don't get too excited about it...
Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Buddha_Master on January 05, 2007, 06:42:24 PM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung.
So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: HMJACK707 on January 05, 2007, 07:40:31 PM Eh it kinda bothers me that Velvet Revolver was not mentioned at all. what the hell does that have to do with this?? go find a VR board. Well because if you like it or not. VR and GN'R are very much related so I did not think it was out of the question to leave a comment about VR on a GN'R fourm. Just like its not out of the question to leave a GN'R comment on a VR fourm. I was just kinda suprised that GN'R got mentioned and VR did not AT ALL. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: WhiteRose on January 05, 2007, 09:07:33 PM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Although I'm NOT a member of the Church of Christian Science.... I am bothered by the rather negative and hostile nature of your comments and rhetoric.? This forum (and more specifically this thread) is not an appropriate place for making disparaging remarks about any religion or faith based denomination.? :no:? If you're truly interested in learning more about their religious beliefs... I'm sure you'll find what you're looking for on the internet. Cheers, W.R.? Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: King Axl on January 05, 2007, 09:08:38 PM 'Chinese Democracy' will probably be one of the ten best selling albums of 2007, if the label markets it properly, and the band continues its' tour without too many disruptions.
Most critics will probably make note of this year being the 20th anniversary of 'Appetite', and therefore use 'CD' as an example of how much Axl and the GN'R sound has evolved since then. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Danny on January 05, 2007, 11:11:33 PM Lord. Ok. Here is a description of the CSM for anyone here who doesn't read anything but "Rolling Stone":
http://www.csmonitor.com/aboutus/about_the_monitor.html Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Krispy Kreme on January 05, 2007, 11:20:52 PM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. It is a highly respected national newspaper that is considered to be vastly superior to the drivel that appears in local markets. It is neither Christian nor Science. It can be read with great profit and is an intellectual delight, unlike USA Today or any of the other national tabloids that try to pass themselves off as newspapers. One would have thougth intelligent people would be familar with this reknowned paper. It has some of the best serious journalism around. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: The Legend on January 06, 2007, 12:15:51 AM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Man, you are seriously ignorant. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Buddha_Master on January 06, 2007, 12:26:25 AM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Man, you are seriously ignorant. Only in not knowing that Christian Science is serious journalism. But my comments that Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys is correct. Thats the facts jack. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: The Legend on January 06, 2007, 12:49:15 AM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Man, you are seriously ignorant. Only in not knowing that Christian Science is serious journalism. But my comments that Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys is correct. Thats the facts jack. I know that's the facts. Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. Come on man, don't you think that's a bit extreme? Only ignorant & bigoted-Christians (which is not all of them) believe that. That's like saying all Muslims are terrorists. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Buddha_Master on January 06, 2007, 01:11:16 AM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Man, you are seriously ignorant. Only in not knowing that Christian Science is serious journalism. But my comments that Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys is correct. Thats the facts jack. I know that's the facts. Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. Come on man, don't you think that's a bit extreme? Only ignorant & bigoted-Christians (which is not all of them) believe that. That's like saying all Muslims are terrorists. Alright the Bush part was unnecessary. True but unnecessary. Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys. A Christian can't argue this point. They have to believe that their God is right about all things. They can't pick and choose what things they want to believe from Jesus. Believe all of it. Becuase if they don't, then they are saying that maybe some things that God said are a little bullshit, which is really saying their god is not really infallible. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: freedom78 on January 06, 2007, 01:20:34 AM Alright the Bush part was unnecessary. True but unnecessary. Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys. A Christian can't argue this point. They have to believe that their God is right about all things. They can't pick and choose what things they want to believe from Jesus. Believe all of it. Becuase if they don't, then they are saying that maybe some things that God said are a little bullshit, which is really saying their god is not really infallible. I'm Christian. I don't believe that. So, I'm guessing that means your gross overgeneralization of 2 BILLION people missed its mark. : ok: Back on topic, I'd say I'm disppointed to see GNR mentioned in an article in which the word "tween" was used. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: The Legend on January 06, 2007, 02:27:36 AM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Man, you are seriously ignorant. Only in not knowing that Christian Science is serious journalism. But my comments that Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys is correct. Thats the facts jack. I know that's the facts. Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. Come on man, don't you think that's a bit extreme? Only ignorant & bigoted-Christians (which is not all of them) believe that. That's like saying all Muslims are terrorists. Alright the Bush part was unnecessary. True but unnecessary. Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys. A Christian can't argue this point. They have to believe that their God is right about all things. They can't pick and choose what things they want to believe from Jesus. Believe all of it. Becuase if they don't, then they are saying that maybe some things that God said are a little bullshit, which is really saying their god is not really infallible. I won't disagree with that. But the Bush thing is not true man. No one looks at that guy as the Pope. Personally, I think he's given a bad rap sometimes, but he's just like any other American president. He's got pros & cons. And just to add, this was a GN'R mention in the CSM mag, what we are talking about has nothing to do with any of this, lol. :hihi: Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: 2007what! on January 06, 2007, 02:39:39 AM album of the decade is more like it... 8)
2007 will be the best year ever!! :beer: Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: GNRfan2008 on January 06, 2007, 03:11:28 AM If Nickelback can sell 5 milllion copies of what amounts to a good, solid rock album, then GNR and Chinese Democracy, in my estimation, can sell very, very well. Maybe not 5 million, but atleast 3 million domestically, though probably more. Nickelback sucks. But, luckily for them so does the general public's taste in music these days. Title: Re: Nice little GNR mention in Christian Science Monitor Post by: Buddha_Master on January 06, 2007, 03:15:28 AM So, what the fuck is Christian Science? Aren't they opposites? Maybe its a joke or an irony or something. If you are Christian you think Science is propaganda and that Scientists are liars and shit right? Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. So what the fuck is Christian Science? Maybe its a typo and they left off the 3rd word. Should probably read Christian Science Fiction. Man, you are seriously ignorant. Only in not knowing that Christian Science is serious journalism. But my comments that Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys is correct. Thats the facts jack. I know that's the facts. Like, Christians believe the bible's content is actually factual, and that we didn't evolve from monkeys and that Adam and Eve lived the same time as the Dinosaurs or something moronic like that. Or that Bush is like the pope and jesus talks to him directly telling him shit like gay people are evil and should be hung. Come on man, don't you think that's a bit extreme? Only ignorant & bigoted-Christians (which is not all of them) believe that. That's like saying all Muslims are terrorists. Alright the Bush part was unnecessary. True but unnecessary. Christians believe that man and Dinosaurs were alive the same time, and that Christians believe in creationism and that man didn't evolve from monkeys. A Christian can't argue this point. They have to believe that their God is right about all things. They can't pick and choose what things they want to believe from Jesus. Believe all of it. Becuase if they don't, then they are saying that maybe some things that God said are a little bullshit, which is really saying their god is not really infallible. I won't disagree with that. But the Bush thing is not true man. No one looks at that guy as the Pope. Personally, I think he's given a bad rap sometimes, but he's just like any other American president. He's got pros & cons. And just to add, this was a GN'R mention in the CSM mag, what we are talking about has nothing to do with any of this, lol.? :hihi: Hahaaa yea, you are right. I just had a big WTF moment with the name CS. And I know no one looks at Bush as the Pope. I just meant he said God talks to him, which is like the Pope. And dude, he is like no other American President. There is a differences between lying about getting your dick sucked, and what Bush is doing. But yea this probably isnt the place. "Christian Science" is funny shit though. This name almost has the same kind of irony that the name "Chinese Democracy" has. |