Right wing radio fire breather Mike Gallagher says we should have separate lines at airports for anyone with the name Ahmed, Abdul, or Mohammed.
Rep. Peter King (R-NY) says “100% of Islamic terrorists are Muslims.”
Oh, my aching head.
In other news, 100% of Popes are Catholic.
1 |
WaveriderCA Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:31:33pm |
I can't believe they let that Gallagher guy behind anything even resembling a microphone. Anything he says just sounds cheap, boorish, and uninformed. I'd say he should maybe switch to smashing watermelons but that might be more effort than intellectual carpet bombing.
| 2 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:31:34pm |
Can you say race baiting and bigotry... I knew you could... In other news, 100% of Nazis are white. Nearly 100% of crazed tea party losers, calling for the overthrow of our government are white Christians to boot.
Now leave it to the GOP to play the most vile bigoted cards. That is just their style these days. People wonder why they are hated by the educated.
| 4 |
recusancy Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:35:12pm |
Then he says "while we should not be profiling people because of their religion..."
| 5 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:35:53pm |
exactly the wrong approach...aside from clear discrimination, the bad guys would simply change their names and dilute themselves further into anonymity
| 8 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:37:25pm |
re: #7 Sharmuta
You mean they're not undercover Buddhists? Damn...
The central message of Buddhism is not every man for himself. That's a mistake. I looked it up.
| 9 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:38:08pm |
I understand that 100% of Islamic plumbers are also Muslims. It is pandemic to the Muslim world.
Also, 100% of Lutherans are Protestants. What does THAT tell you?
| 10 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:38:11pm |
re: #8 Girth
The London Underground is not a political movement.
| 12 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:38:13pm |
re: #8 Girth
The central message of Buddhism is not every man for himself. That's a mistake. I looked it up.
NO that's the central message of the GOP.
| 13 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:38:46pm |
re: #10 Sharmuta
The London Underground is not a political movement.
The Gettysburg Address is not where Lincoln lived.
| 14 |
Randall Gross Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:39:00pm |
Basically he flubbed a Robert Spencer line.
| 15 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:39:08pm |
re: #2 ludwigvanquixote
Can you say race baiting and bigotry... I knew you could... In other news, 100% of Nazis are white. Nearly 100% of crazed tea party losers, calling for the overthrow of our government are white Christians to boot.
Now leave it to the GOP to play the most vile bigoted cards. That is just their style these days. People wonder why they are hated by the educated.
who gives a fuck what the GOP thinks...it's a bipartisan security issue...the donks have fucked things over pretty good in the past too...fools playing politics
| 16 |
brookly red Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:39:28pm |
... and just when people were getting comfortable with the idea of naming the enemy. This was not good at all.
| 17 |
Jeff In Ohio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:39:29pm |
As my tween likes to say "Thank you, Capt. Obvious."
| 19 |
Ben Jhazi Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:40:35pm |
re: #18 krypto
But not 100% of Muslims are Islamic terrorists.
No, but 100% of Muslim terrorists are Islamic.
| 20 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:41:34pm |
| 22 |
brookly red Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:42:23pm |
re: #19 JasonA
No, but 100% of Muslim terrorists are Islamic.
it would be rather f'ed up if they start out sourcing.
| 24 |
freetoken Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:42:34pm |
re: #9 SanFranciscoZionist
Also, 100% of Lutherans are Protestants. What does THAT tell you?
Perhaps at the local Catholic Cathedral there should be a separate entrance for people named "Martin"?
| 25 |
Jeff In Ohio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:42:47pm |
| 26 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:43:03pm |
| 27 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:43:06pm |
re: #5 albusteve
exactly the wrong approach...aside from clear discrimination, the bad guys would simply change their names and dilute themselves further into anonymity
Not to mention that in my city, profiling men with Muslim given names will just get you a long line of exasperated African-American travellers, all busily dialling the NAACP on their cell phones. And rightly so.
/
| 28 |
Ben Jhazi Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:43:12pm |
re: #21 HelloDare
King's logic is 1,000% correct.
I guess it is a silver lining to hear a politician speak the absolute, undisputed truth.
| 29 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:43:37pm |
re: #8 Girth
The central message of Buddhism is not every man for himself. That's a mistake. I looked it up.
Aristotle was not Belgian.
The London Underground is not a political movement.
| 30 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:43:44pm |
| 31 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:43:58pm |
I'm OK with profiling.
Why do we punish 2 million Americans each and every day with all the extra security steps when we know who the terrorists are?
Why do we make a family of four going to Disney World take their shoes off in the airport? Its a waste of time and resources.
We have a list with 500,000 names on it. Focus on that.
| 32 |
Randall Gross Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:44:24pm |
The standard mantra at the hateblogger sites just a couple years ago went "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but 100 percent of terrorists are Muslims" Of course this is a flat out lie as even at that time I was posting things about Naxalites, Shining Path, Terai Separatists, Maoists, and Tamil Tigers at least once a week as links here.
| 33 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:44:44pm |
The quote in the OP is moronic, but on the other hand I am not going to be politically correct and allege that there isn't something fundamentally rotten within Islam.
| 34 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:44:52pm |
re: #27 SanFranciscoZionist
Not to mention that in my city, profiling men with Muslim given names will just get you a long line of exasperated African-American travellers, all busily dialling the NAACP on their cell phones. And rightly so.
/
No sarc tag needed.
| 36 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:45:27pm |
re: #27 SanFranciscoZionist
Not to mention that in my city, profiling men with Muslim given names will just get you a long line of exasperated African-American travellers, all busily dialling the NAACP on their cell phones. And rightly so.
/
it's third grade tripe...try to funnel them into a trap and they will scatter to the wind
| 37 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:45:36pm |
Karl Rove said we should be profiling those from the Middle East and other countries with majority Muslim populations. Checked the stats and Nigeria is split and it's not a majority Muslim country with 50% Muslim, 40% Christian and 10% other.
Specifically regarding the royal "we" that they employ and with regards to airport security it cannot apply to Flight 253 because the flight originated from Nigeria then Amsterdam.
| 40 |
recusancy Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:46:10pm |
re: #31 Racer X
I'm OK with profiling.
Why do we punish 2 million Americans each and every day with all the extra security steps when we know who the terrorists are?
Why do we make a family of four going to Disney World take their shoes off in the airport? Its a waste of time and resources.
We have a list with 500,000 names on it. Focus on that.
What if that family of four is named Ahmed, Abdul, Muhamed, and Azira?
| 41 |
HelloDare Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:46:50pm |
Relax everybody, help is on the way.
Kerry Reportedly Files Request to Visit Iran
Sen. John Kerry has filed a formal request to visit Iran, Iranian news agencies reported Tuesday -- news made public in the middle of the government's bloody crackdown on dissidents that has left more than a dozen dead.
While representatives for Kerry have so far not confirmed whether he intends to travel to Tehran, a spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry said the country's parliament is already considering the Massachusetts Democrat's official overture.
The trip would come at a challenging time for the administration, as President Obama on Monday expressed support for Iranian protestors and condemned the government's "iron fist of brutality."
Fierce clashes in Tehran have left several protesters dead, including the nephew of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi.
If Kerry goes, it would be the first such high-level visit since the 1979 Islamic revolution. Fars News Agency and WashingtonTV reported Tuesday that the senator formally made the request to travel.
"The legislative officials are studying the case and they are in charge for providing a response," Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast said, according to one account.
The White House appeared comfortable with the visit when it was floated last week, provided Kerry goes in his capacity as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
"This is the kind of trip that is appropriate for the chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee," a senior administration official told Fox News. "This is a Kerry initiative and not at the behest of the White House."
| 42 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:47:07pm |
| 43 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:47:16pm |
re: #30 Girth
Hah! That's the one I always forget. Well played.
"Shut up! We did not lose Vietnam! It was a tie!"
| 44 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:47:21pm |
| 45 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:47:37pm |
| 46 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:47:54pm |
| 47 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:48:21pm |
re: #32 Thanos
The standard mantra at the hateblogger sites just a couple years ago went "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but 100 percent of terrorists are Muslims" Of course this is a flat out lie as even at that time I was posting things about Naxalites, Shining Path, Terai Separatists, Maoists, and Tamil Tigers at least once a week as links here.
So, they've modified. In doing so, they have made themselves sound stupid, but hey! Truth in packaging!
| 48 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:48:30pm |
re: #39 Firstinla
Timothy McViegh, maybe?
He did not take down an airliner. We are talking airport security.
| 49 |
recusancy Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:48:35pm |
| 50 |
Nightlight Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:48:43pm |
does this qualify as temporary outrageous outrage?
ALBANY, N.Y. -- Sen. Chuck Schumer says, like a lot of Americans, he too was confused when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared on Sunday that "the system worked" despite an incident where a Nigerian student tried to blow up a jetliner over U.S. soil.
New York's senior senator says Homeland Security did not work and he felt better when, on Monday, Napolitano said her remarks were misconstrued.
[Link: www.wten.com...]
| 51 |
HelloDare Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:48:44pm |
re: #42 MandyManners
Who's in Grant's tomb?
This memorial to Ulysses S. Grant - victorious Union commander of the Civil War - includes the tombs of General Grant and his wife, Julia Dent Grant.
| 52 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:48:58pm |
re: #46 Racer X
J efen K needs to shut his piehole.
Don't hold your breath. He never shuts the hell up. Just keeps jamming his leg up to the knee into his throat.
| 53 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:49:01pm |
re: #40 recusancy
What if that family of four is named Ahmed, Abdul, Muhamed, and Azira?
They are clearly not terrorists. No need for a second look.
IMHO.
| 54 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:49:23pm |
re: #40 recusancy
What if that family of four is named Ahmed, Abdul, Muhamed, and Azira?
That family should be encouraged to question, if not to state publicly, that they need a reformation; soon.
| 55 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:49:48pm |
re: #33 Naso Tang
The quote in the OP is moronic, but on the other hand I am not going to be politically correct and allege that there isn't something fundamentally rotten within Islam.
Islam is in the middle of a hideous time. I think of it as being roughly analagous to what Christianity went through in the sixteenth through early eighteenth centuries. I really hope it ends well. And soon.
| 56 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:50:07pm |
re: #52 CapeCoddah
Don't hold your breath. He never shuts the hell up. Just keeps jamming his leg up to the knee into his throat.
You are so polite.
| 57 |
Randall Gross Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:50:15pm |
re: #47 SanFranciscoZionist
So, they've modified. In doing so, they have made themselves sound stupid, but hey! Truth in packaging!
What I'm getting at is that King probably reads and relies on those blogs for info if he's going to clumsily repeat their mantra.
| 58 |
HelloDare Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:50:27pm |
re: #51 HelloDare
This memorial to Ulysses S. Grant - victorious Union commander of the Civil War - includes the tombs of General Grant and his wife, Julia Dent Grant.
I wonder if Grant's wife was named Dent before that tragic buggy accident?
| 59 |
brookly red Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:50:33pm |
| 60 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:50:53pm |
re: #50 Nightlight
does this qualify as temporary outrageous outrage?
ALBANY, N.Y. -- Sen. Chuck Schumer says, like a lot of Americans, he too was confused when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared on Sunday that "the system worked" despite an incident where a Nigerian student tried to blow up a jetliner over U.S. soil.
New York's senior senator says Homeland Security did not work and he felt better when, on Monday, Napolitano said her remarks were misconstrued.[Link: www.wten.com...]
The system did work.
Much the same way the system worked immediately after Lockerbie.
| 61 |
ghazidor Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:57:21pm |
100% of Islamic terrorists are Muslims
In other news, 100% of Popes are Catholic
In a further news development a $10 million research study has established conclusively that 100% of male dogs lick their junk.
An additional grant of another $20 million is being requested for a new study to attempt to determine the cause of this behavior.
///duh
| 62 |
Stevemcg Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:58:44pm |
re: #40 recusancy
How about a couple of guys named Timothy and Terry?
| 63 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:59:03pm |
re: #2 ludwigvanquixote
Can you say race baiting and bigotry... I knew you could... In other news, 100% of Nazis are white.
We are not at war with the Nazis. When we were at war with the Nazis, we payed close attention to Germans and focused on monitoring and restricting their movements.
Nearly 100% of crazed tea party losers, calling for the overthrow of our government are white Christians to boot.
It is strange to make a post decrying the "race baiting and bigotry" and then race bait and show bigotry by demonising white Christians
Now leave it to the GOP to play the most vile bigoted cards. That is just their style these days. People wonder why they are hated by the educated.
It was a Radio Commentator and a single politician, not the "the GOP".
You allege the "educated" hate the GOP, which is more bigotry and most certainly false.
| 64 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:59:23pm |
re: #48 Racer X
He did not take down an airliner. We are talking airport security.
You want to bet the farm, or more precisely, the plane, that the next angry white guy will limit himself to ground operations.
| 65 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:59:57pm |
re: #54 Naso Tang
That family should be encouraged to question, if not to state publicly, that they need a reformation; soon.
By TSA?
| 66 |
Sheila Broflovski Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:00:33pm |
Somebody screwed the pooch in Amsterdam when they let this dude board a plane:
No passport
No luggage
One-way ticket
Paid with cash
Furthermore if they release the tape of the security screening (assuming it hasn't been overwritten by now) you will probably see 80-year-old woman in wheelchair getting a more stringent security check than the underpants bomber dude.
| 67 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:00:45pm |
re: #61 ausador
In a further news development a $10 million research study has established conclusively that 100% of male dogs lick their junk.
An additional grant of another $20 million is being requested for a new study to attempt to determine the cause of this behavior.
///duh
another junk junkie?....been used like 2500 times in three days all of a sudden...do women have junk?
| 68 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:00:46pm |
re: #55 SanFranciscoZionist
Islam is in the middle of a hideous time. I think of it as being roughly analagous to what Christianity went through in the sixteenth through early eighteenth centuries. I really hope it ends well. And soon.
That is a nice way of putting it. As I see it they have no option but to do what Jefferson once did to the bible and form a new religion that allows them to pray 5 times a day, to a different god.
| 69 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:01:05pm |
Now leave it to the GOP to play the most vile bigoted cards. That is just their style these days. People wonder why they are hated by the educated.
Both patently false statements.
1. It's established fact that leftists are more likely to be bigots and act upon their prejudices as was evidenced by the 100 million murders (conservative estimate) committed by leftists in the 20th century.
Additionally:
" Abraham Lincoln was a Republican
FDR's interning of Japanese Americans
George Wallace running for President as a Democrat as recently as 1976
Robert Byrd, a former leader in the KKK, still acting as the seniormost Democrat in the Senate, even to this day.
Strom Thurmond running for President on a segregationist platform as a Democrat, becoming a Republican only 16 years later.
The first two black Secretaries of State being appointed by George W. Bush
Clearly, a foreign visitor with no prior exposure would not possibly conclude that the Republican Party is somehow more racist than the Democrats." quoted from #8 [Link: www.singularity2050.com...]
2. GOP voters are on average higher income earners and average a higher level of education than do Democratic Party voters. [Link: www.singularity2050.com...]
.
| 70 |
Jeff In Ohio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:01:05pm |
re: #61 ausador
My father was the king. It would never fail at one of his and mom's parties, someone would let the family dog lick their face and he would exclaim - "You know dogs spend half their day licking their balls and the other half eating something dead?"
| 71 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:01:56pm |
re: #61 ausador
In a further news development a $10 million research study has established conclusively that 100% of male dogs lick their junk.
An additional grant of another $20 million is being requested for a new study to attempt to determine the cause of this behavior.
///duh
Not if they've been neutered.
| 72 |
ghazidor Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:02:45pm |
| 73 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:03:17pm |
re: #55 SanFranciscoZionist
Islam is in the middle of a hideous time. I think of it as being roughly analagous to what Christianity went through in the sixteenth through early eighteenth centuries. I really hope it ends well. And soon.
I think there is a huge theological difference. The theological backing for the churches ill-behavior was relatively week, and thus susceptible to reformation.
The theological backing for current islamic behavior is much stronger. How do you reform that?
| 74 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:03:25pm |
re: #68 Naso Tang
That is a nice way of putting it. As I see it they have no option but to do what Jefferson once did to the bible and form a new religion that allows them to pray 5 times a day, to a different god.
That's not at all how I see it. I do not feel the religion has an inherent directive toward violence, any more than Catholicism as practiced in seventeenth-century Spain did.
And God is God, no matter what horrible things we can think of to do in Her name.
But this is not the TSA's problem right now, except very, very indirectly.
| 75 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:03:54pm |
re: #63 Bagua
It was a Radio Commentator and a single politician, not the "the GOP".
You allege the "educated" hate the GOP, which is more bigotry and most certainly false.
my favorite part...can any statement be more brazenly elitist?
| 76 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:04:06pm |
re: #64 SanFranciscoZionist
You want to bet the farm, or more precisely, the plane, that the next angry white guy will limit himself to ground operations.
The odds are in my favor.
I'm not saying ignore everyone, but clearly there are people who do not fit the profile of someone wanting to take the plane down in a suicide run.
| 77 |
Jeff In Ohio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:05:13pm |
re: #67 albusteve
Yes. In their trunk.
My take is Ausador's use of junk was incorrect. Junk refers to the size of the thing, no the thing itself.
| 78 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:05:13pm |
re: #73 Gavriel
I think there is a huge theological difference. The theological backing for the churches ill-behavior was relatively week, and thus susceptible to reformation.
The theological backing for current islamic behavior is much stronger. How do you reform that?
I think theology is far less important than culture and history.
| 79 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:05:28pm |
re: #71 MandyManners
Not if they've been neutered.
I can say, with absolute certainty, that neutered male pooches absolutely DO that. I have a Bullmastiff that proves it!
| 80 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:05:36pm |
re: #76 Racer X
The odds are in my favor.
I'm not saying ignore everyone, but clearly there are people who do not fit the profile of someone wanting to take the plane down in a suicide run.
Yet.
| 81 |
freetoken Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:06:19pm |
Expanding on my #3...
We are seeing the political merchandising of a real problem (religious ideologically driven terrorists) for the express purpose of benefiting a few who lust for more power.
The market for fear is vast and probably inexhaustible. The polished demagogue can play in that market as readily as Warren Buffett can in equities.
Anyone, any person, can be influenced simply by hearing repeatedly words, phrases, claims...
No matter how idiotic Gallagher's idea may be, by simply repeating it often enough, to enough people, he will succeed in convincing a number of Americans to go along with him, at least to some degree.
This is a serious social problem brewing for our nation.
| 82 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:07:06pm |
re: #62 Stevemcg
How about a couple of guys named Timothy and Terry?
We are not at war with guys named Timothy and Terry. They appear to be notable exceptions.
Alternatively there have been many thousands of attacks and plots by the guys named Mohamed.
And one by guys named Timothy and Terry.
re: #64 SanFranciscoZionist
You want to bet the farm, or more precisely, the plane, that the next angry white guy will limit himself to ground operations.
Sounds scary. But not really. You are are talking about the extreme exceptions and the smallest fraction of terrorist threats.
One doesn't go to the desert, find a single blade of grass and conclude the desert is made of grass.
With that said, of course we should also focus attention on radical domestic groups, which we already do. Though it is never called "profiling" when we do.
| 83 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:08:06pm |
re: #77 Jeff In Ohio
Yes. In their trunk.
My take is Ausador's use of junk was incorrect. Junk refers to the size of the thing, no the thing itself.
everybody want's to get a junk post in...that's cool
| 84 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:08:36pm |
re: #65 SanFranciscoZionist
By TSA?
I have only so much patience with religious conventions. They work well for many who have the brains to interpret them in the context of human societies, but people change religions all the time because they disagree with one they have grown up with.
Virtually all religions today are monotheistic and claim to worship the same god. It doesn't take a genius to realize they can't all have the same genuine word from the same god, in every detail.
If they think they were given brains for a reason, then the choices they make are their responsibility. To the Muslims who don't support jihad against the infidels (everyone else) I say, become a Catholic (and we'll talk about birth control later).
| 85 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:08:47pm |
Well I have pretty much stayed out this conversation, but there seems to be something missing. What is missing from the discussion is the fact that this flight originated outside of the U.S.
TSA has no authority to tell another Nation what their security requirements will be. TSA didn't drop the ball here. In fact, our security wasn't breached. Security was breached in Amsterdam when they let him through without a passport, no luggage and a one way ticket paid for in cash.
| 86 |
Sheila Broflovski Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:08:57pm |
re: #76 Racer X
The odds are in my favor.
I'm not saying ignore everyone, but clearly there are people who do not fit the profile of someone wanting to take the plane down in a suicide run.
Women
Seniors
Japanese
Chinese
Korean
Hindus
Priests
Nuns
Rabbis
Children under 12
| 87 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:09:32pm |
re: #85 Bubblehead II
Well I have pretty much stayed out this conversation, but there seems to be something missing. What is missing from the discussion is the fact that this flight originated outside of the U.S.
TSA has no authority to tell another Nation what their security requirements will be. TSA didn't drop the ball here. In fact, our security wasn't breached. Security was breached in Amsterdam when they let him through without a passport, no luggage and a one way ticket paid for in cash.
I was wondering when that would be pointed out.
| 88 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:09:43pm |
re: #55 SanFranciscoZionist
Islam is in the middle of a hideous time. I think of it as being roughly analagous to what Christianity went through in the sixteenth through early eighteenth centuries. I really hope it ends well. And soon.
I've had similar thoughts. Islam needs to go through an Enlightenment. But that's only going to come from within Islam; no outside forces can bring that about.
Anybody who thinks "All Muslims are evil" doesn't have any contact with them. Come spend an afternoon with me in Dearborn, and then we'll talk.
Also, this sort of thing only amplifies what I've been saying all day about profiling: a good profiling system doesn't consider only one or two traits, it considers a multitude of traits. Being a Muslim would be one data point out of dozens in a properly designed protocol, and by itself wouldn't be sufficient even to raise an eyebrow.
| 89 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:10:33pm |
re: #74 SanFranciscoZionist
That's not at all how I see it. I do not feel the religion has an inherent directive toward violence, any more than Catholicism as practiced in seventeenth-century Spain did.
And God is God, no matter what horrible things we can think of to do in Her name.
But this is not the TSA's problem right now, except very, very indirectly.
Islam has as much directive towards violence as the Old Testament does. Jesus was supposed to correct that as I understand it. Why else is his testament called New?
| 90 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:10:55pm |
re: #63 Bagua
It was a Radio Commentator and a single politician, not the "the GOP".
You allege the "educated" hate the GOP, which is more bigotry and most certainly false.
You have once again managed to misread and misunderstand what I wrote. The point is that all white Christians are not evil and they should not be treated badly even though the Nazis and crazed revolutionaries are white and Christian. But nice try Bagua.
| 91 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:11:43pm |
re: #87 CapeCoddah
I was wondering when that would be pointed out.
I don't recall anyone blaming the TSA for this incident, how could they?...but in the ebb and flow of discussion it does get pointed out that the TSA is an ineffective hinderance...a joke
| 92 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:11:46pm |
re: #84 Naso Tang
If they think they were given brains for a reason, then the choices they make are their responsibility. To the Muslims who don't support jihad against the infidels (everyone else) I say, become a Catholic (and we'll talk about birth control later).
Why not all the Protestants become Muslims and reform the faith by sheer force of numbers?
/
| 93 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:12:10pm |
re: #74 SanFranciscoZionist
That's not at all how I see it. I do not feel the religion has an inherent directive toward violence, any more than Catholicism as practiced in seventeenth-century Spain did.And God is God, no matter what horrible things we can think of to do in Her name.
But this is not the TSA's problem right now, except very, very indirectly.
I think you are mistaken. There are many theological imperatives to violent conquest in islam.
Of course this is TSA's problem. Why do you think the islamic terrorists are trying to blow up planes?! I like the Isreali security answer of looking at the passenger in front of you and seeing that it all makes sense and letting those on quickly.
| 94 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:12:29pm |
re: #86 Alouette
Women
Seniors
Japanese
Chinese
Korean
Hindus
Priests
Nuns
Rabbis
Children under 12
Some of those could easily change, given motivation.
| 95 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:13:18pm |
re: #90 LudwigVanQuixote
Then stop making bigoted, race baiting statements about white Christians and Republicans. It's disgusting.
| 96 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:14:35pm |
re: #92 SanFranciscoZionist
Why not all the Protestants become Muslims and reform the faith by sheer force of numbers?
/
Nice thought, but I don't think the numbers add up aside from the fact that it is an oxymoron to call oneself a Muslim and simultaneously reject any part of the Koran.
| 97 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:15:29pm |
re: #82 Bagua
And one other thing... you can not be bigoted against a political party.
But if it makes you feel any better, I do clearly see the modern GOP as Anathema to most of the things I love about America. They are anti-intellectual, anti-personal freedom, anti-science, anti- reason and anti constitution.
Other than that they are mostly stupid, uneducated and arrogant to boot.
They are also massively fiscally irresponsible.
They have contempt for the average American's intelligence, by assuming we have no memory.
They are also to a greater or lesser degree, racist, sexist and homophobic.
Other than that... I just love their ignorant little heads to death.
| 98 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:15:39pm |
re: #90 LudwigVanQuixote
You have once again managed to misread and misunderstand what I wrote. The point is that all white Christians are not evil and they should not be treated badly even though the Nazis and crazed revolutionaries are white and Christian. But nice try Bagua.
you speak for educated people, all of which hate the GOP?....hahaha!...I shudder to think you may be a product of our higher education system...what a convoluted , stupid thing to imply....do all educated people therefor love the Democrats?...I mean that one statement is just so ridiculous in it's implications...
| 99 |
Achilles Tang Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:16:27pm |
I think I need to hit the sack, early, before this heads where it might, deity wise.
Good night lizards
| 100 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:16:40pm |
| 101 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:16:42pm |
re: #78 SanFranciscoZionist
I think theology is far less important than culture and history.
Then you are in big trouble here as well. Islamic (especially Arab) culture and history is steeped in violence.
| 102 |
ghazidor Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:17:12pm |
re: #77 Jeff In Ohio
Yes. In their trunk.
My take is Ausador's use of junk was incorrect. Junk refers to the size of the thing, no the thing itself.
People were calling a male dogs "package" his junk since before you or I were even born. I'm not responsible for any modern interpretations attempting to redefine the word.
| 103 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:17:12pm |
re: #89 Naso Tang
Islam has as much directive towards violence as the Old Testament does. Jesus was supposed to correct that as I understand it. Why else is his testament called New?
As someone who belongs to a faith that does not take the teachings of Jesus into accounts, I don't tend toward the interpretations that place him as the great reformer of a violence and hidebound faith. Certainly, historically, the track record of the faith he founded has not been so hot in a lot of times and places.
Also, I believe he said: "Think not that I have come to abolish the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfill them. For truly I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not one dot, not one iota, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished."
| 104 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:17:17pm |
re: #95 Bagua
Then stop making bigoted, race baiting statements about white Christians and Republicans. It's disgusting.
Oh stop it, there was no such thing and you should know better you moron. Right, the point yet again is that you don't do what he is saying because not all Whites are Nazis even though all Nazis were white.
| 105 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:18:02pm |
re: #69 Canadhimmis
Sorry, but you're changing your terms here. He's talking about the today's GOP and you've conveniently pivoted to not talk about Democrats, but all leftists around the world for the last 100 yrs. Then Strom Thurmond as a Democrat? Yeah, he was a leftist for sure. Please look up 'conflation'.
| 106 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:18:04pm |
re: #87 CapeCoddah
Thanks. No one seems to want to talk about that little fact. They seem more interested in bashing the TSA. What I would like to see/know is what Amsterdam is doing to rectify the problems at their end that allowed this man through.
| 107 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:18:23pm |
re: #31 Racer X
I'm OK with profiling.
Why do we punish 2 million Americans each and every day with all the extra security steps when we know who the terrorists are?
Why do we make a family of four going to Disney World take their shoes off in the airport? Its a waste of time and resources.
We have a list with 500,000 names on it. Focus on that.
Not all Muslims are from the Middle East, not all blacks are Muslim, not all that look like they are from the Middle East are Muslim, not all Muslims are terrorists, and on and on.
Profiling a radical religious group will just not work.
Changing ID is almost as easy as changing underwear. The list is a help, but can't be relied on.
| 108 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:18:35pm |
re: #91 albusteve
I don't recall anyone blaming the TSA for this incident, how could they?...but in the ebb and flow of discussion it does get pointed out that the TSA is an ineffective hinderance...a joke
TSA... Thousands standing around.
The TSA at Logan, whom I encounter pretty much daily are not an awe inspiring bunch, to put it politely.
| 109 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:19:18pm |
re: #93 Gavriel
I think you are mistaken. There are many theological imperatives to violent conquest in islam.
Of course this is TSA's problem. Why do you think the islamic terrorists are trying to blow up planes?! I like the Isreali security answer of looking at the passenger in front of you and seeing that it all makes sense and letting those on quickly.
I'm not interested in criticizing anyone's religion, unless their deeds warrant it. Their own deeds.
| 110 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:20:14pm |
re: #96 Naso Tang
Nice thought, but I don't think the numbers add up aside from the fact that it is an oxymoron to call oneself a Muslim and simultaneously reject any part of the Koran.
No, it wasn't a nice thought. I've been told I should become a Christian, and I don't like it. I don't like the idea of Muslims being told they should become Christians if they're good people either.
| 111 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:22:06pm |
re: #101 Gavriel
Then you are in big trouble here as well. Islamic (especially Arab) culture and history is steeped in violence.
So is Christian. So is Hindu. So is Shinto. So is, well, the history of the whole damn world.
| 112 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:22:24pm |
re: #97 LudwigVanQuixote
And one other thing... you can not be bigoted against a political party.
But if it makes you feel any better, I do clearly see the modern GOP as Anathema to most of the things I love about America. They are anti-intellectual, anti-personal freedom, anti-science, anti- reason and anti constitution.
Other than that they are mostly stupid, uneducated and arrogant to boot.
They are also massively fiscally irresponsible.
They have contempt for the average American's intelligence, by assuming we have no memory.
They are also to a greater or lesser degree, racist, sexist and homophobic.
Other than that... I just love their ignorant little heads to death.
You are a complete and utter asshole, and everything you just described hating yourself. Got a mirror, dickhead?
| 113 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:22:37pm |
re: #37 Gus 802
Karl Rove said we should be profiling those from the Middle East and other countries with majority Muslim populations. Checked the stats and Nigeria is split and it's not a majority Muslim country with 50% Muslim, 40% Christian and 10% other.
Specifically regarding the royal "we" that they employ and with regards to airport security it cannot apply to Flight 253 because the flight originated from Nigeria then Amsterdam.
Start profiling non-whites, and a white will be the terrorist who gets by and kills.
Profiling is a tactic used to give the population a false sense of security but is easily countered by the terrorist organizations.
| 114 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:22:48pm |
re: #106 Bubblehead II
Thanks. No one seems to want to talk about that little fact. They seem more interested in bashing the TSA. What I would like to see/know is what Amsterdam is doing to rectify the problems at their end that allowed this man through.
Yeah. It isn't clear what happened there. I assume there have been a number of tense conferences about it, however.
| 115 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:23:14pm |
re: #various SanFranciscoZionist
[…] That's not at all how I see it. I do not feel the religion has an inherent directive toward violence, any more than Catholicism as practiced in seventeenth-century Spain did. […]
There is a huge difference. The inquisition, horrendous as it was, was an exception in Catholicism, and confined to a short period, and there is little or nothing in the Christian bible to support it.
Muslim violence however, has raged since its founding for 14 centuries, and continues to this day. It appears the rule, not the exception, and there is much in the Koran to support it.
[…] Islam is in the middle of a hideous time […]
This is not a brief, troubling period for Islam, rather it is one of a vast number of violent periods that have occurred for 1,400 years in numerous regions of the globe.
| 116 |
Curt Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:23:25pm |
re: #81 freetoken
Expanding on my #3...
We are seeing the political merchandising of a real problem (religious ideologically driven terrorists) for the express purpose of benefiting a few who lust for more power.
The market for fear is vast and probably inexhaustible. The polished demagogue can play in that market as readily as Warren Buffett can in equities.
Anyone, any person, can be influenced simply by hearing repeatedly words, phrases, claims...
No matter how idiotic Gallagher's idea may be, by simply repeating it often enough, to enough people, he will succeed in convincing a number of Americans to go along with him, at least to some degree.
This is a serious social problem brewing for our nation.
So how does fitting in we have to pass TARP in a few days or the entire economy will collapse...and if we do we'll not go over 8% unemployment" fit in?
Between people telling us there are bodies stacked like cord wood in the gutters outside hospitals because the Republicans wouldn't vote for Universal Health care isn't using the fear card?
The political drama has come hot and heavy this year, beginning with TARP, then suggesting all the people at AIG were stealing from the people, and Wall Street...yeah, they are stealing your money, too...and the BANKS! Don't forget the evil bankers, who won't loan you any money!
At least put some perspective before launching on this issue as though it's just the right wing of the political spectrum at work.
| 117 |
albusteve Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:23:26pm |
re: #104 LudwigVanQuixote
Oh stop it, there was no such thing and you should know better you moron. Right, the point yet again is that you don't do what he is saying because not all Whites are Nazis even though all Nazis were white.
you remind me of an organ grinders monkey....why do you call people that disagree with you names?....you are overly insecure, but good for a few laughs
| 118 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:23:54pm |
re: #108 CapeCoddah
TSA... Thousands standing around.
The TSA at Logan, whom I encounter pretty much daily are not an awe inspiring bunch, to put it politely.
God. Logan. I used to fly through Logan. I remember the day, long before 9/11 when I tried to alert security at Logan to a possible problem.
LOGAN.
| 119 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:25:21pm |
re: #113 b_sharp
Start profiling non-whites, and a white will be the terrorist who gets by and kills.
Profiling is a tactic used to give the population a false sense of security but is easily countered by the terrorist organizations.
What would have happened if we'd gotten Lindh or Gadahn back as 'travelers'? This is not to say that there isn't a standard profile of a plane terrorist, but to say that it's recklessly dangerous not to be looking at everyone, all the time.
| 120 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:26:02pm |
re: #113 b_sharp
Start profiling non-whites, and a white will be the terrorist who gets by and kills.
Profiling is a tactic used to give the population a false sense of security but is easily countered by the terrorist organizations.
Correct. Also important to keep in mind is that religion is mutable while race is immutable.
| 121 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:26:16pm |
re: #48 Racer X
He did not take down an airliner. We are talking airport security.
You missed the point.
Someone like Timothy McViegh, a home grown, white, stand up for Mom's apple pie terrorist could take down an airliner.
| 122 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:26:16pm |
re: #112 CapeCoddah
Really, let's invective out and look at what I said dispassionately shall we?
Answer honestly:
The modern GOP:
Pro Darwin, Anti Darwin?
Understands Climate science, denies it?
Pro gay rights, anti gay rights?
Pro separation of Church and State, undermines it at every chance?
Above race baiting, not above race bating? - note the topic of this thread.
Fiscally responsible or responsible for the largest deficits in every GOP administration since Reagan?
You tell me buddy... Where was I lying?
Ohhh and extra credit:
Fear mongering or level headed?
| 123 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:26:37pm |
re: #115 Bagua
This is not a brief, troubling period for Islam, rather it is one of a vast number of violent periods that have occurred for 1,400 years in numerous regions of the globe.
I disagree. And I think it's interesting that you think you're a better theologian than the leaders of the Church for the bulk of the Common Era.
| 124 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:27:32pm |
re: #117 albusteve
you remind me of an organ grinders monkey...why do you call people that disagree with you names?...you are overly insecure, but good for a few laughs
Excuse me, he was pointedly trying to misrepresent what I said. When he failed the first time, he tried again. As to name calling, you have got to be kidding dude. No you just don't like it when I call idiots like you on your bullshit.
| 125 |
freetoken Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:27:33pm |
re: #116 Curt
I was simply expanding on the topic of the thread.
You seem to be one of those who think because they do it also, then we can do it too.
For all the political machinations around the stimulus bill, none of them IMO fell to the depths that Gallagher and company want to take us in their xenophobic fear.
| 126 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:27:55pm |
re: #115 Bagua
This is not a brief, troubling period for Islam, rather it is one of a vast number of violent periods that have occurred for 1,400 years in numerous regions of the globe.
The Inquisition, by the way, is merely one era in an extended period of horrific behavior justified by Christianity, not an anomalous moment in time. And it extended its tentacles worldwide. Much like some folks we could now name.
| 127 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:28:44pm |
re: #121 b_sharp
You missed the point.
Someone like Timothy McViegh, a home grown, white, stand up for Mom's apple pie terrorist could take down an airliner.
That crew may have had connections to Islamic extremists, no?
| 128 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:28:57pm |
re: #121 b_sharp
You missed the point.
Someone like Timothy McViegh, a home grown, white, stand up for Mom's apple pie terrorist could take down an airliner.
No, I did not miss the point. I am well aware that a white male could become a terrorist and detonate a bomb on a plane he was riding in. It is not very likely.
| 129 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:29:50pm |
re: #1 WaveriderCA
I can't believe they let that Gallagher guy behind anything even resembling a microphone. Anything he says just sounds cheap, boorish, and uninformed. I'd say he should maybe switch to smashing watermelons but that might be more effort than intellectual carpet bombing.
Mike Gallagher is actually one of the worst talk radio hosts I have ever heard. And that's saying a lot, I've heard some totally abominable talk hosts! He sorta sounds like Neil Boortz after a head injury.
| 130 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:30:06pm |
re: #119 SanFranciscoZionist
What would have happened if we'd gotten Lindh or Gadahn back as 'travelers'? This is not to say that there isn't a standard profile of a plane terrorist, but to say that it's recklessly dangerous not to be looking at everyone, all the time.
Neither would be profiled. Now consider Richard Reid who also kind of looks like another "hippie guy." The name certainly wouldn't raise any profiling response.
| 131 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:30:14pm |
re: #128 Racer X
No, I did not miss the point. I am well aware that a white male could become a terrorist and detonate a bomb on a plane he was riding in. It is not very likely.
Why not? If I were al-Qaeda HR, that's exactly who I would be looking for. Much more likely than that they go to women...unlike the al-Aqsa Brigades, they don't seem to tolerate female operatives.
| 132 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:30:49pm |
re: #130 Gus 802
Neither would be profiled. Now consider Richard Reid who also kind of looks like another "hippie guy." The name certainly wouldn't raise any profiling response.
Exactly. Which is why we need to be GOOD.
| 133 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:31:57pm |
re: #131 SanFranciscoZionist
Why not? If I were al-Qaeda HR, that's exactly who I would be looking for. Much more likely than that they go to women...unlike the al-Aqsa Brigades, they don't seem to tolerate female operatives.
I'm not sure where your line of reasoning is going. Spell it out for me. (I'm just a stupid white male).
| 134 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:32:13pm |
re: #106 Bubblehead II
Thanks. No one seems to want to talk about that little fact. They seem more interested in bashing the TSA. What I would like to see/know is what Amsterdam is doing to rectify the problems at their end that allowed this man through.
One problem, of course, is that what happens in Amsterdam is outside of our control, for the most part.
Although there are things we could do to prod them. A proposal made a few years ago to forward passenger lists to US entry authorities once a flight had boarded was shot down mostly by our European allies as overreaching US imperialism. Or some damn thing. We backed down, and went back to treating incoming foreign flights the way we always have, with customs on the ground once the plane had landed. A tricky jurisdictional issue, perhaps, but one that we might consider insisting on in the future. After all, this guy was on our watch list, on Britain's no-fly list, and now it appears that the CIA had internal reports on him, too, in addition to the information passed along to our embassies by his parents. It would seem that forwarding potential passenger lists ahead of time would be a good idea from Amsterdam's point of view, given that many on the plane would be their own citizens.
There are obvious problems with such procedures, but nothing insurmountable.
| 135 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:32:36pm |
re: #79 CapeCoddah
I can say, with absolute certainty, that neutered male pooches absolutely DO that. I have a Bullmastiff that proves it!
Can't lick your balls if you don't have any.
| 136 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:32:51pm |
re: #105 Girth
Sorry, but you're changing your terms here. He's talking about the today's GOP and you've conveniently pivoted to not talk about Democrats, but all leftists around the world for the last 100 yrs. Then Strom Thurmond as a Democrat? Yeah, he was a leftist for sure. Please look up 'conflation'.
I see that you're not bothering to dispute the point that Republican voters are on average higher income earners and average a higher level of education. That fact obviously demolishes LudwigVanQuixote's falsehood that the GOP supporters "are hated by the educated". And you cherry picked the one point of Storm Thurmond even though I acknowledged that he later switched political party.
In summary, LudwigVanQuixote's statement all the way back at comment # 2 is clearly one of bigotry and ignorance.
.
| 137 |
Stuart Leviton Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:33:35pm |
Paula Abdul is a terrorist.
They should add to their list anyone with the middle name Hussein, as in Barak Hussein.
Also, anyone with the last name Reed or Lindh as in Richard Reed or John Walker Lindh. And by induction anyone with an Anglo-Saxon name.
| 138 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:33:35pm |
re: #97 LudwigVanQuixote
And one other thing... you can not be bigoted against a political party.
[...]
Bigot:
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
It is certainly possible to be bigoted against groups including racial and ethnic ones. One can be bigoted against Gays, against Women, against the Police, against the Dutch, against the Young against the Old, almost any group.
You are bigoted against White Christian Republican. It is clear. You are also bigoted against people without university degree. You are an elitist, that is another sort of bigot.
Calling me names like "moron" and "idiot" does not diminish that. I am being truthful and supporting my claims, you resort to insult. I will not do that, I don't think you are a moron or an idiot, I respect you as a person, but your own words reveal to be a bigot.
| 139 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:33:46pm |
re: #76 Racer X
The odds are in my favor.
I'm not saying ignore everyone, but clearly there are people who do not fit the profile of someone wanting to take the plane down in a suicide run.
And how loud will you scream when a terrorist does not fit the profile?
| 140 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:33:55pm |
re: #133 Racer X
I'm not sure where your line of reasoning is going. Spell it out for me. (I'm just a stupid white male).
I don't know how much clearer I can be. If I were recruiting terrorists, I would be looking for people who did not fit the profile, to raise their chances of success.
| 141 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:34:10pm |
re: #137 Stuart Leviton
Paula Abdul is a terrorist.
They should add to their list anyone with the middle name Hussein, as in Barak Hussein.
Also, anyone with the last name Reed or Lindh as in Richard Reed or John Walker Lindh. And by induction anyone with an Anglo-Saxon name.
Ahmet Zappa
| 142 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:34:12pm |
re: #114 SanFranciscoZionist
I would hope so. But I fear that we will never hear about it as the Republicans/Right Wingnuts point fingers at this Administration and shout that it is all Obama's fault. It wasn't. The failure was in Amsterdam.
| 143 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:34:27pm |
re: #137 Stuart Leviton
Paula Abdul is a terrorist.
They should add to their list anyone with the middle name Hussein, as in Barak Hussein.
Also, anyone with the last name Reed or Lindh as in Richard Reed or John Walker Lindh. And by induction anyone with an Anglo-Saxon name.
I am so screwed.
| 144 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:35:41pm |
re: #101 Gavriel
Then you are in big trouble here as well. Islamic (especially Arab) culture and history is steeped in violence.
They also gave us modern mathematics, genius.
| 145 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:36:03pm |
re: #128 Racer X
Ummm Richard Ried aka the shoe bomber was white.
| 146 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:36:21pm |
re: #82 Bagua
Sounds scary. But not really. You are are talking about the extreme exceptions and the smallest fraction of terrorist threats.
No, we're talking about a group with intelligent enough planners to compensate for profiling. Assuming profiling will work beyond, oh say, next Tuesday, is naive.
| 147 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:37:05pm |
re: #142 Bubblehead II
I would hope so. But I fear that we will never hear about it as the Republicans/Right Wingnuts point fingers at this Administration and shout that it is all Obama's fault. It wasn't. The failure was in Amsterdam.
The wingnuts will blame Obama no matter what...but yes, we have been ignoring the fact that it wasn't our airline security that let this guy--who should have been standing out like a Roman candle, before he turned himself into one--on the plane.
| 148 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:37:10pm |
re: #126 SanFranciscoZionist
The Inquisition, by the way, is merely one era in an extended period of horrific behavior justified by Christianity, not an anomalous moment in time. And it extended its tentacles worldwide. Much like some folks we could now name.
You have a valid point. I do acknowledge a long, troubling history with Christianity, especially in its treatment of Jews and indigenous groups.
However, it is not the current crises, it is a matter of history.
| 149 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:37:50pm |
re: #144 WindUpBird
They also gave us modern mathematics, genius.
And love poetry--OK, maybe we could have done without the love poetry.
| 150 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:38:13pm |
re: #140 SanFranciscoZionist
I don't know how much clearer I can be. If I were recruiting terrorists, I would be looking for people who did not fit the profile, to raise their chances of success.
OK cool.
So far pretty much all terrorists attempting to take down an airplane in a suicide run have been Middle Eastern MEN. No women - yet (as you said).
I like to deal with what IS - not what IF. Spend our resources dealing with what we know, not what we think is possible (it is a waste of precious resources).
It is possible a 5 year old girl could jump on a plane carrying a bomb. Not very likely though.
| 151 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:38:15pm |
re: #122 LudwigVanQuixote
Really, let's invective out and look at what I said dispassionately shall we?
Answer honestly:
The modern GOP:
Pro Darwin, Anti Darwin?
Understands Climate science, denies it?
Pro gay rights, anti gay rights?
I am a conservative, just to the right of Attilla the Hun.
I am pro Darwin.
Still on the fence about AGW, I tend to believe it is the natural order of things, planet wise.
Gay rights... on this one, in MAssachusetts, the people were denied the right to vote on the issue, illegally and contrary to the Massachusetts CONSTITUTION, by LIBERALS. We were DENIED THE RIGHT TO VOTE on the issue. One of my very best friends and godfather to one of our daughters was outraged by this. A gay man. Don't talk to me about running fast and loose with the Constitution. The massive health care debacle is patently un constitutional, and will be proven so should it ever become law. You are still a complete asshole.Pro separation of Church and State, undermines it at every chance?
Above race baiting, not above race bating? - note the topic of this thread.
Fiscally responsible or responsible for the largest deficits in every GOP administration since Reagan?
You tell me buddy... Where was I lying?
Ohhh and extra credit:
Fear mongering or level headed?
| 152 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:38:40pm |
re: #145 Bubblehead II
Ummm Richard Ried aka the shoe bomber was white.
Black Jamaican and white Brit mixed, I think. Not someone who would fit the standard mold, much like the last guy.
| 153 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:39:27pm |
re: #95 Bagua
Then stop making bigoted, race baiting statements about white Christians and Republicans. It's disgusting.
ROTFLMAO
| 154 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:39:38pm |
re: #145 Bubblehead II
Ummm Richard Ried aka the shoe bomber was white.
I'm not advocating profiling based on just one characteristic. He fit several attributes of someone who needed additional scrutiny.
| 155 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:40:21pm |
re: #148 Bagua
You have a valid point. I do acknowledge a long, troubling history with Christianity, especially in its treatment of Jews and indigenous groups.
However, it is not the current crises, it is a matter of history.
Sure--which is why I have hope for Islam. There's a precedent of an international, multicultural faith largely resolving its issues with violence and xenophobia. It can be done!
| 156 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:40:26pm |
re: #144 WindUpBird
They also gave us modern mathematics, genius.
There is no question that good things have come from Muslims and many Muslims are good people. This is why profiling is such a distressing issue and is fraught with so many ugly connotations.
It is very wrong to demonise whole peoples and see no good in them.
| 157 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:40:27pm |
| 158 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:41:03pm |
Part of the problem is that the focus has been on IS. To be proactive one must also plan on the IF factor.
| 159 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:41:04pm |
re: #98 albusteve
you speak for educated people, all of which hate the GOP?...hahaha!...I shudder to think you may be a product of our higher education system...what a convoluted , stupid thing to imply...do all educated people therefor love the Democrats?...I mean that one statement is just so ridiculous in it's implications...
Reading for comprehension is a good thing.
| 160 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:41:36pm |
re: #138 Bagua
Bigot:
Calling me names like "moron" and "idiot" does not diminish that. I am being truthful and supporting my claims, you resort to insult. I will not do that, I don't think you are a moron or an idiot, I respect you as a person, but your own words reveal to be a bigot.
NO you are a moron and an idiot for clearly and knowingly misrepresenting what I said when you know better. It's a really base and crappy move and you are not fooling anyone.
As to being bigoted against the modern manifestation of the GOP. Why yeas, I do honestly hate pro torture, anti-constitution, anti-science, anti-reason, fear mongering race baiting homophobic uneducated people. I do. I admit it. They repulse me. They particularly repulse me when they tear down the things that make America great.
So yes by your definition I am bigoted against white Republicans who support the direction the party has gone in, but I also hate the brown and Asian ones too.
As to you, well you are once again trying to stir shit just for the sake of it. It makes you sad and pathetic. The fact that youa re doing so by twisting words to the opposite of their actual meaning makes you very modern GOP yourself. You have learned well from al the DI types and AGW denier types.
And yes you are an asshole.
| 161 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:41:59pm |
re: #150 Racer X
OK cool.
So far pretty much all terrorists attempting to take down an airplane in a suicide run have been Middle Eastern MEN. No women - yet (as you said).
I like to deal with what IS - not what IF. Spend our resources dealing with what we know, not what we think is possible (it is a waste of precious resources).
It is possible a 5 year old girl could jump on a plane carrying a bomb. Not very likely though.
Up until 9/11, no hijacker had ever deliberately used a plane a weapon.
That was then. This is now.
I agree that we have to work with what we know, but I would argue that we also have to be able to adapt fast, and plan ahead, knowing that the facts on the ground may change at any moment.
| 162 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:42:42pm |
re: #113 b_sharp
Start profiling non-whites, and a white will be the terrorist who gets by and kills.
Profiling is a tactic used to give the population a false sense of security but is easily countered by the terrorist organizations.
Hell, or just a guy with pretty good makeup! Let's face it, there's just no way to make a plane or an airport terrorist-proof. There's not enough security, there's not enough manpower, there's not enough technology.
| 163 |
Nightlight Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:43:19pm |
re: #154 Racer X
I'm not advocating profiling based on just one characteristic. He fit several attributes of someone who needed additional scrutiny.
Israel scrutinized him
...when Richard Reid (the future “shoe bomber”) decided to fly in July 2001 from Amsterdam to Israel, allegedly to check out terrorist targets, El Al security personnel selected him for profiling and subjected him to a full security check from head to toe (including an X-ray scan of his shoes) that showed he carried no bomb or weapon. Although Reid was allowed to board the plane, El Al remained suspicious and made sure he was sitting near an armed sky marshal, who was instructed to keep a close watch on him.37 American Airlines was not as careful, however, and allowed Reid to board a flight from Paris to Miami in December 2001. This time the al-Qaeda operative carried an explosive device, concealed in a shoe, and he attempted to detonate the explosive in mid-flight. Only timely intervention by the other passengers and crew prevented a major disaster.
[Link: www.homelandsecurity.org...]
| 164 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:43:34pm |
re: #134 SixDegrees
One thing we could do is require all inbound international flights do is land at a U.S. controlled airport and rescreen the passengers and baggage from countries that have lax security. If we find someone who is suspicious, we refuse them entry and send them back. Another thing we can do is deny entry to no U.S. personnel with one way tickets and fine any airline that allows them on a flight.
| 165 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:43:35pm |
re: #126 SanFranciscoZionist
The Inquisition, by the way, is merely one era in an extended period of horrific behavior justified by Christianity, not an anomalous moment in time. And it extended its tentacles worldwide. Much like some folks we could now name.
To be perfectly correct, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith exists to this day. Although their methods have changed, their mission - detection and correction of heresy within the Church - remains the same.
The violence associated with the Inquisition, in any case, was internally directed at lapsing Church members. For real, long-term, unequivocal evil directed against those who were not Catholic, one should look to the Crusades and to the grotesque atrocities committed during the age of exploration, especially in Central and South America, where genocide was practiced on a regular basis, in which the Catholics were joined by Protestant forces at various times as well. Or to the American doctrine of Manifest Destiny, it's precursors and follow-ons. Things got better following the Enlightenment, but not entirely.
| 166 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:43:43pm |
re: #162 WindUpBird
Hell, or just a guy with pretty good makeup! Let's face it, there's just no way to make a plane or an airport terrorist-proof. There's not enough security, there's not enough manpower, there's not enough technology.
We can only do the best we can. For as long as we need to.
| 167 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:44:24pm |
re: #151 CapeCoddah
The people were denied the right to vote directly on the Civil Rights bill. Because we have a representative democracy.
Just a friendly reminder.
| 168 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:44:24pm |
re: #146 b_sharp
No, we're talking about a group with intelligent enough planners to compensate for profiling. Assuming profiling will work beyond, oh say, next Tuesday, is naive.
I don't assume profiling will work. It has been remarkably successful for the Israelis however.
I'm really not sure what sort of security, profiling or otherwise, can possibly give security when dealing with bombs so small their components can be concealed in underwear.
I suspect that if we have several successful attacks, we will see calls for things far more controversial and problematic that profiling.
| 169 |
Stuart Leviton Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:44:34pm |
re: #145 Bubblehead II
Ummm Richard Ried aka the shoe bomber was white.
Wasn't he just wearing white-face? You sure?
| 170 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:46:14pm |
re: #166 SanFranciscoZionist
We can only do the best we can. For as long as we need to.
pretty much!
Someone here was suggesting (possible as a joke, I don't know) that a great security idea would be to prevent any checked luggage from ever entering the US on a plane.
| 171 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:46:15pm |
re: #69 Canadhimmis
Now leave it to the GOP to play the most vile bigoted cards. That is just their style these days. People wonder why they are hated by the educated.
Both patently false statements.
1. It's established fact that leftists are more likely to be bigots and act upon their prejudices as was evidenced by the 100 million murders (conservative estimate) committed by leftists in the 20th century.
Additionally:
" Abraham Lincoln was a Republican
FDR's interning of Japanese Americans
George Wallace running for President as a Democrat as recently as 1976
Robert Byrd, a former leader in the KKK, still acting as the seniormost Democrat in the Senate, even to this day.
Strom Thurmond running for President on a segregationist platform as a Democrat, becoming a Republican only 16 years later.
The first two black Secretaries of State being appointed by George W. Bush
Clearly, a foreign visitor with no prior exposure would not possibly conclude that the Republican Party is somehow more racist than the Democrats." quoted from #8 [Link: www.singularity2050.com...]
2. GOP voters are on average higher income earners and average a higher level of education than do Democratic Party voters. [Link: www.singularity2050.com...]
.
Too many illogical, irrelevant and idiotic points on that blog to fisk.
| 172 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:46:19pm |
re: #158 Firstinla
Part of the problem is that the focus has been on IS. To be proactive one must also plan on the IF factor.
re: #66 Alouette
Somebody screwed the pooch in Amsterdam when they let this dude board a plane:
No passport
No luggage
One-way ticket
Paid with cashFurthermore if they release the tape of the security screening (assuming it hasn't been overwritten by now) you will probably see 80-year-old woman in wheelchair getting a more stringent security check than the underpants bomber dude.
No, we need to pay attention to what we know. In this case someone clearly dropped the ball. This was an American flight yes? Heading to America. We should be able to set rules as to who can board a flight then. Don't follow our rules - stay home.
I have no problem with Americans imposing strict rules for passengers heading in to our airspace. If it saves one plane from going down in a heap of flames it is worth it. Right?
| 173 |
goddamnedfrank Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:46:34pm |
re: #98 albusteve
you speak for educated people, all of which hate the GOP?...hahaha!...I shudder to think you may be a product of our higher education system...what a convoluted , stupid thing to imply...do all educated people therefor love the Democrats?...I mean that one statement is just so ridiculous in it's implications...
Inconvenient facts are inconvenient:
As evidence, Mr. Wolfe points to a new poll by Washington Post/ABC News that found that white people without a college degree favor John McCain, the Republican candidate, by 17 percentage points, while those with a college degree prefer Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate, by 9 percentage points.
| 174 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:47:15pm |
re: #165 SixDegrees
To be perfectly correct, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith exists to this day. Although their methods have changed, their mission - detection and correction of heresy within the Church - remains the same.
The violence associated with the Inquisition, in any case, was internally directed at lapsing Church members. For real, long-term, unequivocal evil directed against those who were not Catholic, one should look to the Crusades and to the grotesque atrocities committed during the age of exploration, especially in Central and South America, where genocide was practiced on a regular basis, in which the Catholics were joined by Protestant forces at various times as well. Or to the American doctrine of Manifest Destiny, it's precursors and follow-ons. Things got better following the Enlightenment, but not entirely.
Not to mention insane superstitious violence against people believed to be witches, the Geneva Theocracy, the condoning of judicial torture by the Church...oh, it gets messy, messy, messy.
But things did, gradually, get better.
| 175 |
Sheila Broflovski Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:47:28pm |
re: #37 Gus 802
Specifically regarding the royal "we" that they employ and with regards to airport security it cannot apply to Flight 253 because the flight originated from Nigeria then Amsterdam.
Flight 253 originated in Amsterdam, not Nigeria. the bomber flew on a completely different flight from Nigeria and then connected at Amsterdam, which is a major European hub.
| 176 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:47:35pm |
re: #161 SanFranciscoZionist
Up until 9/11, no hijacker had ever deliberately used a plane a weapon.
That was then. This is now.
I agree that we have to work with what we know, but I would argue that we also have to be able to adapt fast, and plan ahead, knowing that the facts on the ground may change at any moment.
Agreed.
But in this latest instance it seems to me several security measures were ignored.
| 177 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:48:50pm |
re: #175 Alouette
Flight 253 originated in Amsterdam, not Nigeria. the bomber flew on a completely different flight from Nigeria and then connected at Amsterdam, which is a major European hub.
Right, I meant his full excursion. I'm just calling it "Flight 253" as a title.
| 178 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:49:01pm |
re: #176 Racer X
Agreed.
But in this latest instance it seems to me several security measures were ignored.
Oh yeah. This guy should have stood WAY out.
| 179 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:49:05pm |
re: #164 Bubblehead II
One thing we could do is require all inbound international flights do is land at a U.S. controlled airport and rescreen the passengers and baggage from countries that have lax security. If we find someone who is suspicious, we refuse them entry and send them back. Another thing we can do is deny entry to NON U.S. personnel with one way tickets and fine any airline that allows them on a flight.
*pimf*
| 180 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:49:10pm |
re: #172 Racer X
No, we need to pay attention to what we know. In this case someone clearly dropped the ball. This was an American flight yes? Heading to America. We should be able to set rules as to who can board a flight then. Don't follow our rules - stay home.
I have no problem with Americans imposing strict rules for passengers heading in to our airspace. If it saves one plane from going down in a heap of flames it is worth it. Right?
if our security measures make it prohibitively difficult for US citizens to do business internationally, I don't think it is worth it. I don't want to harm our country's economy in the name of hyper-security. I don't want to head towards Britian's closed-circuit camera culture. I'm okay with a little risk in flying, terrorists or no, it's still far safer than driving.
(I just want more legroom and decent beer on the flight is all)
| 181 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:49:56pm |
re: #139 b_sharp
And how loud will you scream when a terrorist does not fit the profile?
It's important to remember that no system is perfect, whether it's profiling or intelligence gathering or electronic scanning. All have their strengths, and all have their weaknesses; none is 100% effective.
Therefore, it is best to employ several different techniques, since the areas where one is strong typically spans an area where others are weak.
Even then, some degree of random sampling is required to complete the picture.
And, even if that is done, there is still no such thing as zero risk. There will always be a non-zero chance that some terrorist attack will succeed, no matter how thorough and diligent the systems we put in place are.
| 182 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:49:58pm |
re: #160 LudwigVanQuixote
NO you are a moron and an idiot... sad and pathetic...very modern GOP yourself....DI types and AGW denier types....you are an asshole.
Did you leave anything out? LOL
I'll not reply to your uncivil comments, that is your department. It is sad you can not debate without resort to such behavior, as is well established.
| 183 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:50:10pm |
re: #167 WindUpBird
The people were denied the right to vote directly on the Civil Rights bill. Because we have a representative democracy.
Just a friendly reminder.
Federal bill vs. state bill. Apples and Oranges. Not a single other state that has addressed the issue prevented the citizens from voting. After the state SC here mandated the gay marriage law, the people petitioned the legislature with more than double the signatures needed to put it on the ballot per the Massachusetts Constitution. We were ignored. There is NO excuse for that.
| 184 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:52:16pm |
re: #182 Bagua
Did you leave anything out? LOL
I'll not reply to your uncivil comments, that is your department. It is sad you can not debate without resort to such behavior, as is well established.
It's sad you can't debate without lying. It's sad you forget how you came out with insults and invectives. But it is well established. And I did leave something out douchebagua, you whine like a child when called on it.
| 185 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:53:48pm |
re: #173 goddamnedfrank
re: #183 CapeCoddah
Federal bill vs. state bill. Apples and Oranges. Not a single other state that has addressed the issue prevented the citizens from voting. After the state SC here mandated the gay marriage law, the people petitioned the legislature with more than double the signatures needed to put it on the ballot per the Massachusetts Constitution. We were ignored. There is NO excuse for that.
Those people should have been ignored, and I'm glad they were.
Ballot initiatives have been the engine of craven bigots all over the country to deny rights to gay Americans, which is unconstitutional. All created equal? Remember? The federal constitution. Which beats the Massachussets constitution. Scissors cut paper, babe.
| 186 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:54:05pm |
Well, well. Is a smackdown at hand?
No not you guys arguing up there...
Officials: U.S., Yemen reviewing targets for possible strike
[Link: www.cnn.com...]
I bet we have an idea where the training camp is...
| 187 |
Bipartite Gnomenclature Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:54:24pm |
re: #128 Racer X
No, I did not miss the point. I am well aware that a white male could become a terrorist and detonate a bomb on a plane he was riding in. It is not very likely.
According to your comment, you did miss the point.
Why is it not very likely?
| 188 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:55:44pm |
re: #173 goddamnedfrank
However, the results only appear to link education with a particular candidate. They don't really say anything about party affiliation.
Just sayin'.
| 189 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:56:49pm |
re: #136 Canadhimmis
I see that you're not bothering to dispute the point that Republican voters are on average higher income earners and average a higher level of education. That fact obviously demolishes LudwigVanQuixote's falsehood that the GOP supporters "are hated by the educated". And you cherry picked the one point of Storm Thurmond even though I acknowledged that he later switched political party.
In summary, LudwigVanQuixote's statement all the way back at comment # 2 is clearly one of bigotry and ignorance.
.
Let's say I take your link and buy the income part. Makes sense. But as for education it depends on what your definition of average level of education is. I believe PhDs are much more likely to vote Democratic. Income does not equal education, so your argument is unsound.
Your entire post conflates Democrat with leftist in response to a statement about the GOP. That was the point of the Strom Thurmond reference. You go from arguing in support of the GOP to against leftists, citing not Democrats, but leftists around the world, then back to right-wing Democrats. Surely you see the difference.
| 190 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:57:02pm |
re: #169 Stuart Leviton
SFZ corrected me at #152
| 191 |
The Sanity Inspector Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:58:13pm |
re: #6 Girth
Tautologies are fun.
"Yields a falsehood when appended to its own quotation" yields a falsehood when appended to its own quotation.
Oops, that's a paradox, not a tautology.
| 192 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:58:21pm |
re: #184 LudwigVanQuixote
It's sad you can't debate without lying. It's sad you forget how you came out with insults and invectives. But it is well established. And I did leave something out douchebagua, you whine like a child when called on it.
You made the comments which I highlighted, not I. I certainly did not insult you. That is your department.
| 194 |
Charles Johnson Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:58:26pm |
Come on, please. Knock off the bickering. It's a real turn-off for people trying to read the comments.
| 195 |
Sheila Broflovski Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:59:43pm |
re: #177 Gus 802
Right, I meant his full excursion. I'm just calling it "Flight 253" as a title.
But that's not accurate. I mean, I have taken Flight 253 to Amsterdam but with a completely different final destination. The Detroit to Amsterdam route just happens to be a very cheap ticket to and from Europe. Although money was not an object to this dude.
| 197 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:01:44pm |
re: #185 WindUpBird
re: #183 CapeCoddah
Those people should have been ignored, and I'm glad they were.
Ballot initiatives have been the engine of craven bigots all over the country to deny rights to gay Americans, which is unconstitutional. All created equal? Remember? The federal constitution. Which beats the Massachussets constitution. Scissors cut paper, babe.
So you, as a liberal will scream about constitutional irregularities when it suits you, but not when it favors you? That makes you a hypocrite. Just for your info, the Massachusetts constitution is the oldest in the world, and the US Constitution was based on ours. Over 75,000 people should be ignored because you say so? Typical liberal. Ever hear of state sovereignty, Babe?/
| 198 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:02:13pm |
re: #136 Canadhimmis
In summary, LudwigVanQuixote's statement all the way back at comment # 2 is clearly one of bigotry and ignorance.
.
Let's get clear...
Pro torture, anti-constitution, anti-science, anti-reason, fear mongering race baiting, homophobic, uneducated people are anathema to the sane and educated.
Would you care to, in the face of the threads of this blog documenting the decline of the current GOP for over a year, dispute that this is the direction of the current GOP?
As to your odd stances in direction and word games, they are silly.
In order to win, you need to argue that this is not the trend of the non-rino GOP.
You can't do that.
| 199 |
Jeff In Ohio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:02:20pm |
re: #102 ausador
People were calling a male dogs "package" his junk since before you or I were even born. I'm not responsible for any modern interpretations attempting to redefine the word.
..........um, OK.
| 200 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:02:44pm |
re: #193 Canadhimmis
That first link you posted is to an anti-LGF site.
| 201 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:03:38pm |
re: #173 goddamnedfrank
LOL, shocka,,, approx 97% of college professors are moonbat libs who fail students who do not drink the kool aid.
| 202 |
sandbox Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:04:05pm |
Yes Mike Gallaghers comments are ridiculous. But so has been the administrations inability to acknowledge and say who are our enemy is in this war. The political correctness of Obama, Holder, and Napolitano encourages foolishness from the other side.
| 203 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:04:09pm |
re: #186 Rightwingconspirator
The U.S. and Yemen are now looking at fresh targets in Yemen for a potential retaliation strike, two senior U.S. officials told CNN Tuesday,
Good job assholes! Lets give them a heads up so they can evacuate their bases and avoid casualties.
DUMB FUCKING BASTARDS!
| 204 |
Charles Johnson Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:04:10pm |
Please do not link to that website -- it's an anti-Muslim hate site, and they're connected to all kinds of bad people.
| 205 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:05:00pm |
re: #185 WindUpBird
Those people should have been ignored, and I'm glad they were.Ballot initiatives have been the engine of craven bigots all over the country to deny rights to gay Americans, which is unconstitutional. All created equal? Remember? The federal constitution. Which beats the Massachussets constitution. Scissors cut paper, babe.
"created equal" means there is a "right" to gay marriage? I don't see that in the federal constitution.
You sound like a hater of people who see marriage as a male/female thing.
| 206 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:05:54pm |
re: #205 Gavriel
"created equal" means there is a "right" to gay marriage? I don't see that in the federal constitution.
You sound like a hater of people who see marriage as a male/female thing.
Is there a right to straight marriage?
| 207 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:06:00pm |
re: #172 Racer X
I think my computer had a seizure or something. Dont know what happened but I ended up in my email.
I think you are right. The United States should be able to set specific parameters for flight security and if those parameters are not met then the flight should not be allowed to land on U.S. territory.
| 208 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:06:39pm |
re: #66 Alouette
Somebody screwed the pooch in Amsterdam when they let this dude board a plane:
No passport
No luggage
One-way ticket
Paid with cashFurthermore if they release the tape of the security screening (assuming it hasn't been overwritten by now) you will probably see 80-year-old woman in wheelchair getting a more stringent security check than the underpants bomber dude.
Can anyone provide a link to a credible source affirming the absence of a passport?
| 209 |
Charles Johnson Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:06:45pm |
re: #205 Gavriel
"created equal" means there is a "right" to gay marriage? I don't see that in the federal constitution.
I don't see any reference to "straight" marriage in the US Constitution, either.
| 210 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:06:48pm |
re: #203 Bubblehead II
The U.S. and Yemen are now looking at fresh targets in Yemen for a potential retaliation strike, two senior U.S. officials told CNN Tuesday,
Good job assholes! Lets give them a heads up so they can evacuate their bases and avoid casualties.
DUMB FUCKING BASTARDS!
It has also come out that the CIA had a file on this guy, and never circulated the information outside the agency.
Between them and the State Department, I'd keep an eye out for potential CMA operations aimed at burying evidence and scattering witnesses that might prove embarrassing in the inevitable investigations and hearings to come.
| 211 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:07:19pm |
re: #198 LudwigVanQuixote
Let's get clear...
Pro torture, anti-constitution, anti-science, anti-reason, fear mongering race baiting, homophobic, uneducated people are anathema to the sane and educated.
Would you care to, in the face of the threads of this blog documenting the decline of the current GOP for over a year, dispute that this is the direction of the current GOP?
As to your odd stances in direction and word games, they are silly.
In order to win, you need to argue that this is not the trend of the non-rino GOP.
You can't do that.
Funnily enough, I was educated in that bastion of liberalism, Harvard. Not good enough for you, Ludwig?
| 212 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:08:06pm |
re: #209 Charles
I don't see any reference to "straight" marriage in the US Constitution, either.
That's too much logic.... shhhhh... it's elitist of you to oppress people that way.
| 213 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:08:09pm |
re: #203 Bubblehead II
Okay you are likely right.
But are we watching where they run to? Just maybe. Given good targets Obama can show his teeth and do some real damage to the bastards in Yemem responsible for the plots.
| 214 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:08:13pm |
re: #195 Alouette
But that's not accurate. I mean, I have taken Flight 253 to Amsterdam but with a completely different final destination. The Detroit to Amsterdam route just happens to be a very cheap ticket to and from Europe. Although money was not an object to this dude.
OK, I'll call it the Lagos-Amsterdam-Detroit incident or LAD for short.
| 215 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:08:54pm |
re: #206 SanFranciscoZionist
Is there a right to straight marriage?
There certainly is a historical and religious backing for it. The founders quoted God as the source of man's rights.
| 218 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:09:52pm |
re: #208 ryannon
Can anyone provide a link to a credible source affirming the absence of a passport?
They reported this on NPR this afternoon. I've heard it several other places as well, over the radio, but don't recall having read it anywhere yet.
It struck me as odd. You don't stand much of a chance of entering a country without a passport, so allowing someone to embark on such a journey knowing they would be turned back seems stupid, at best, and probably something worse than that in reality.
| 219 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:09:56pm |
re: #211 CapeCoddah
Funnily enough, I was educated in that bastion of liberalism, Harvard. Not good enough for you, Ludwig?
OK, so then use your Harvard debate skills. In order to win you need to show that
1. Most educated people do not hate the current anti-intellectual, anti-science, racist, homophobic and etc... trends of the GOP
2. The GOP is not actually long gone in that direction.
Good luck with that.
| 220 |
Charles Johnson Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:10:00pm |
re: #215 Gavriel
There certainly is a historical and religious backing for it. The founders quoted God as the source of man's rights.
How many times is the word "God" found in the US Constitution?
| 221 |
What, me worry? Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:10:13pm |
re: #215 Gavriel
There certainly is a historical and religious backing for it. The founders quoted God as the source of man's rights.
Where is that?
| 222 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:10:16pm |
The perfect solution: bring you own bomb to the plane. Statistically, the possibilities of two bombs in the same aircraft are very, very, very remote...
Just be sure it isn't an El Al aircraft or you will know first hand how Krav Maga works and how painful it is....
/Do I really need do put the sarc tag?
| 223 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:10:34pm |
re: #204 Charles
Please do not link to that website -- it's an anti-Muslim hate site, and they're connected to all kinds of bad people.
That's entirely a matter of opinion. From what I've read at the site I don't see how it can be characterized as a "hate site".
I will however respect your wishes in not linking to the site on your blog, Charles.
| 224 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:10:34pm |
re: #187 b_sharp
According to your comment, you did miss the point.
Why is it not very likely?
Because it is more likely that the next crop of terrorist attacks will be committed by radical Jihadists who are intent on committing suicide while murdering as many innocents as possible. The clear majority of radical Jihadists are not white.
It is possible that one or two may be white males (or even female), but it is not likely.
| 225 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:11:02pm |
re: #215 Gavriel
There certainly is a historical and religious backing for it. The founders quoted God as the source of man's rights.
OK so respectfully, what about that whole establishment clause thing?
| 226 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:12:03pm |
re: #208 ryannon
Can anyone provide a link to a credible source affirming the absence of a passport?
I can't. All the references I get searching for it are to things like NewWorldOrderReport.com and LearnTheTruth.org. I think it's BS.
| 227 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:12:27pm |
re: #210 SixDegrees
And this sort of crap has to stop. If Obama really wants to show he is serious about fixing the problems with our anti-terror efforts he can start by cleaning these two agencies up by firing the assholes who are not working for America, but for the "department"
| 228 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:12:38pm |
re: #220 Charles
How many times is the word "God" found in the US Constitution?
"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" - Declaration of Independence
| 229 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:13:11pm |
re: #209 Charles
I don't see any reference to "straight" marriage in the US Constitution, either.
My point has nothing to do with marriage at all. My point is the fact that liberal controlled Massachusetts refused to allow the citizenry of Massachusetts their constitutional right to put a question on the ballot, because it did not suit them. This is a huge problem.
| 230 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:13:19pm |
re: #215 Gavriel
There certainly is a historical and religious backing for it. The founders quoted God as the source of man's rights.
That's got jack to do with what's in the Constitution.
| 231 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:13:23pm |
There is no enumerated right to deny gays the right to marry.
| 232 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:14:03pm |
re: #215 Gavriel
There certainly is a historical and religious backing for it. The founders quoted God as the source of man's rights.
No, actually, they managed to leave that part about God out.
I sense that it's time for my presentation about the two completely different uses of the word 'marriage' again, and how this whole problem boils down to a semantic issue that could be easily solved by having the state issue civil contracts extending the rights and responsibilities of joint commitment to everyone, doing away with "marriage licenses" completely. Go to the church of your choice if you want a marriage, and if your church will allow your choice of partner. Many will not do so now. If you want the legal protections and responsibilities conferred by the state, go get your civil union documentation.
| 233 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:14:12pm |
re: #228 Gavriel
Two different documents; two different purposes.
| 234 |
Nightlight Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:14:33pm |
re: #208 ryannon
Can anyone provide a link to a credible source affirming the absence of a passport?
Dutch authorities dismissed claims that Mr Abdulmutallab boarded the flight in Amsterdam without a passport. A spokesman for its counter-terrorism office said: “He had a passport and a valid visa for the United States and KLM had clearance on the passenger list to carry him to the US.”
[Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]
| 235 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:14:36pm |
re: #215 Gavriel
Gay marriage will be a reality. Surely gay marriage was unimaginable as an issue at the time the founders met? This issue like many has to attachment to the founders. Its a modern dilemma to be solved fairly by a modern culture, quite apart from the culture of the late 1700's. I sometime folks need to quit trying to read Jeffersons mind and just read the constitution. Equal rights are as we decide.
But lets not forget equal has exception. Felons lose their vote for example.
| 236 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:14:37pm |
re: #229 CapeCoddah
My point is the fact that liberal controlled Massachusetts refused to allow the citizenry of Massachusetts their constitutional right to put a question on the ballot, because it did not suit them.
One cannot put to a vote that which is unconstitutional, which discrimination is. Just like no state can put to a vote slavery. Same thing.
| 237 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:14:44pm |
re: #218 SixDegrees
They reported this on NPR this afternoon. I've heard it several other places as well, over the radio, but don't recall having read it anywhere yet.
It struck me as odd. You don't stand much of a chance of entering a country without a passport, so allowing someone to embark on such a journey knowing they would be turned back seems stupid, at best, and probably something worse than that in reality.
I couldn't get on an Air France flight out of Paris to San Francisco with my U.S. passport - which had expired exactly two weeks earlier. I hadn't noticed the expiration until I was told that I couldn't board. No discussion about it. I was also told that the airline would be fined for allowing me to travel on an expired passport.
The Dutch are not total idiots: I simply can't imagine them letting anyone on a flight to the U.S. without a passport.
| 238 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:14:47pm |
| 239 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:15:20pm |
re: #228 Gavriel
"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" - Declaration of Independence
The Declaration of Independence is not a governing legal document nor does it contain statutes.
| 240 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:16:16pm |
re: #213 Rightwingconspirator
We can only hope that is what is happening. But as Sixdegrees has brought up in his 210, these (our own) agencies are not sharing info. G-d what a cluster f*ck.
| 241 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:16:53pm |
re: #226 SanFranciscoZionist
I can't. All the references I get searching for it are to things like NewWorldOrderReport.com and LearnTheTruth.org. I think it's BS.
Bingo.
Along with the tale of a 'well-dressed elderly Asian man' who negotiated his boarding on the flight.
| 242 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:17:19pm |
re: #216 Gus 802
You beat Charles by 10 seconds. :-)
| 243 |
Charles Johnson Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:17:36pm |
re: #228 Gavriel
"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" - Declaration of Independence
That's not what I asked you. The Declaration of Independence is not the US Constitution, and the Constitution contains language specifically setting up a wall of separation (in Thomas Jefferson's words) between church and state.
| 244 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:17:52pm |
....since wikipedia isn't considered (by Charles) to be a "hate site" I'll repost the information that I had quoted:
Ricardo García Cárcel has analyzed those of the tribunal of Valencia. These authors' investigations find that the Inquisition was most active in the period between 1480 and 1530, and that during this period the percentage condemned to death was much more significant than in the years studied by Henningsen and Contreras. Henry Kamen gives the number of about 2,000 executions in persona in the whole Spain up to 1530.
García Cárcel estimates that the total number processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000. Applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560-1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 put to death. Nevertheless, very probably this total should be raised keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively. It is likely that the total would be between 3,000 and 5,000 executed.[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
Clearly, Islamist terrorism of today is a much larger threat than the Inquisition of yesteryear.
.
| 245 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:18:11pm |
re: #219 LudwigVanQuixote
OK, so then use your Harvard debate skills. In order to win you need to show that
1. Most educated people do not hate the current anti-intellectual, anti-science, racist, homophobic and etc... trends of the GOP
2. The GOP is not actually long gone in that direction.
Good luck with that.
First, I am not a member of the GOP.
Second, I am getting the feeling that your definition of "educated" is whether you identify as a conservative or a liberal. Liberal solutions like the enormous tax hikes on the horizon show any clear thinking individual that hikes like that during recession deepen said recession. Educated folk learn from history. The liberals don't seem to understand simple things like that
| 246 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:18:35pm |
re: #228 Gavriel
"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" - Declaration of Independence
That's not law. Also, what are those right, m'dear?
| 247 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:18:36pm |
re: #228 Gavriel
"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights including life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" - Declaration of Independence
You really should gie the whole quote.
Ignoring the legal quibble of that not being the Constitution. I would submit that pursuit of happiness would include being able to choose your partner without having the state tell you no.
| 248 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:18:52pm |
My opinion on gay marriage: let them marry!
First: to marry, you need a state certificate (and you pay for it) entitling that you are legal to marry. That's in Portugal (I don't know if it is the same in the US). So, it's money coming in to the government.
Second: when you marry, you make a party. You spend money. Good thing to the economy.
Third: when you marry, you got a 50-50 chance to get a divorce. In Portugal, you have to pay to get a state certificate for the divorce. It costs the double of the marriage certificate. And other legal costs. You spend money. Good thing to the economy.
Four; After divorce, you will marry again. You don't learn....
| 249 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:19:12pm |
re: #227 Bubblehead II
And this sort of crap has to stop. If Obama really wants to show he is serious about fixing the problems with our anti-terror efforts he can start by cleaning these two agencies up by firing the assholes who are not working for America, but for the "department"
I agree. The whole point of HS was to "connect the dots" between intelligence agencies, an exercise which has obviously completely failed in this case. Obama today promised top-to-bottom investigations into an obviously broken system, and I am certainly hoping he keeps this promise.
Both State and the CIA have reputations as rogue agencies. Maybe they're culpable here. Maybe not. A real investigation will find out, and if true then I expect major reforms, not just slapping another layer of bureaucracy on top of disfunctional clusterfuck.
| 250 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:20:04pm |
re: #165 SixDegrees
The inquisition was NOT internally directed against errant Catholics. It was also used against the Jews, including my ancestors, culminating with the expulsion of Jews from Spain.
There were also several inquisitions, so Bagua is wrong to say that it only happened during a brief time period. The second inquisition in spain lasted from the 1400s to the mid 1700s. The first one targeted Jews too, especially in France.
Jewish Virtual Library link on the inquisitions
| 251 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:20:15pm |
Gay marriage certainly will be legal in Portugal in 2010. Our prime-minister told us so.
| 252 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:20:23pm |
re: #185 WindUpBird
I have real sympathy for your point about the anti gay marriage initiative here in Ca. But you are mixing issues. The initiative process is a fall back for legislative failures. Like any process it can go badly in a particular instance.
Keep this in mind-The same process could win a set of rights that mirrors marriage.
| 253 |
Sheila Broflovski Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:21:38pm |
re: #226 SanFranciscoZionist
I can't. All the references I get searching for it are to things like NewWorldOrderReport.com and LearnTheTruth.org. I think it's BS.
Two other passengers on Flight 253 reported seeing Abdulmutallab and an "Indian gentleman" approach the ticket counter and explain that he had no passport. This has not been officially confirmed.
| 254 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:22:02pm |
re: #245 CapeCoddah
First, I am not a member of the GOP.
Second, I am getting the feeling that your definition of "educated" is whether you identify as a conservative or a liberal. Liberal solutions like the enormous tax hikes on the horizon show any clear thinking individual that hikes like that during recession deepen said recession. Educated folk learn from history. The liberals don't seem to understand simple things like that
And that is not the topic or the point. I stsed a very narrow contention. It was...
There are certain things that sane and educated people abhor, like racism, anti-intellectualism, anti-science etc...
This is a true statement.
I then contended that the GOP has long gone in that direction. I think that is a pretty safe thing to say given that this blog has been documenting that sad fact for over a year with thousands of examples.
So once again, let's use that Harvard debate technique... for you to win, you must disprove one of those contentions.
Good luck with that.
| 255 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:22:31pm |
re: #250 Obdicut
That should be 'not just' in my first sentence, apologies.
| 256 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:23:26pm |
re: #206 SanFranciscoZionist
Hey I just thought of something. Marriage is NOT a right for anyone. If I need a license its not a right. My rights under the law come without any requirement for a license. Just my humanity.
| 257 |
Sheila Broflovski Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:23:30pm |
| 258 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:24:09pm |
re: #237 ryannon
I couldn't get on an Air France flight out of Paris to San Francisco with my U.S. passport - which had expired exactly two weeks earlier. I hadn't noticed the expiration until I was told that I couldn't board. No discussion about it. I was also told that the airline would be fined for allowing me to travel on an expired passport.
The Dutch are not total idiots: I simply can't imagine them letting anyone on a flight to the U.S. without a passport.
Like I said, it sounded weird to me, to. Could just be chaff churned out by the media. In fact, I hope that's true.
There was also a story about someone who intervened on the bomber's behalf in Amsterdam, who didn't board the flight but went with the bomber to a supervisor's office to "clear something up." I'm also taking this story with a grain of salt for the moment, but it wouldn't surprise me to hear that there's more to what took place.
| 259 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:25:06pm |
re: #256 Rightwingconspirator
Hey I just thought of something. Marriage is NOT a right for anyone. If I need a license its not a right. My rights under the law come without any requirement for a license. Just my humanity.
Marriage is a right. But nobody said that the State could not tax you in order to you get married.
| 260 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:25:25pm |
re: #236 allegro
One cannot put to a vote that which is unconstitutional, which discrimination is. Just like no state can put to a vote slavery. Same thing.
Not the same thing by a long shot. Say I want the right to be called Doctor. I have never been to medical school. I do not qualify to be addressed as Doctor. Shall I sue because I am being discriminated against? I actually don't care wether gays marry or not. I do care about our rights as a whole. Comparing gay marriage and slavery is utterly ridiculous. As my daughters godfather pointed out to me, (remember, he is gay) ... Mike said he has the right to marry. He just does not like girls sexually.
| 261 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:26:10pm |
re: #257 Alouette
Jasper Schuringa, incredibly hot Dutch hero, won't do any more interviews unless he gets paid.
He's got a point. After the first day or two, it's exactly like work. Might as well be paid for it.
| 262 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:27:34pm |
re: #259 marsl
How are you defining "right"? Some say we have the right to drive. We do not. We have permission as given by the state via the license.
| 263 |
Only The Lurker Knows Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:27:40pm |
Well I am now invoking the BHII rule. Have a good night and weet dreams.
| 264 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:27:50pm |
Liberals are smart and get laid.
Conservatives are dumb and don't.
| 265 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:27:57pm |
re: #258 SixDegrees
Like I said, it sounded weird to me, to. Could just be chaff churned out by the media. In fact, I hope that's true.
There was also a story about someone who intervened on the bomber's behalf in Amsterdam, who didn't board the flight but went with the bomber to a supervisor's office to "clear something up." I'm also taking this story with a grain of salt for the moment, but it wouldn't surprise me to hear that there's more to what took place.
Yeah, the mysterious 'well-dressed Asian'.
I'm surprised we're not hearing stories about how it was actually Osama himself.
| 266 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:28:41pm |
re: #260 CapeCoddah
As my daughters godfather pointed out to me, (remember, he is gay) ... Mike said he has the right to marry. He just does not like girls sexually.
You just remind me another thing I like in gays. It means we have more girls.... and it saddens me, because I can only have one.
/sarc
| 267 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:29:38pm |
re: #252 Rightwingconspirator
I have real sympathy for your point about the anti gay marriage initiative here in Ca. But you are mixing issues. The initiative process is a fall back for legislative failures. Like any process it can go badly in a particular instance.
Keep this in mind-The same process could win a set of rights that mirrors marriage.
That's one approach, but it's largely unacceptable. "Separate But Equal" just doesn't cut it for many.
See above for my idea: eliminating the word "marriage" from the state lexicon, and issuing everyone "civil unions" or some other neutrally-named document conferring the legal recognition of the union extended by the state. If you also want a marriage, go talk to your church. They may turn you down, but the state document confers all the legal protections and obligations gays are looking for. If they want to change church doctrine, that's a fight they'll have to conduct on their own, without government help.
| 268 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:29:41pm |
re: #260 CapeCoddah
Say I want the right to be called Doctor. I have never been to medical school. I do not qualify to be addressed as Doctor.
Then you would be a fraud. There are some laws dealing with that that have nothing to do with being discriminatory.
Comparing gay marriage and slavery is utterly ridiculous.
Discrimination of gays and lesbians has been held as unconstitutional by quite a number of Supreme Court decisions. Therefore, the comparison is entirely apt.
| 269 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:29:43pm |
re: #262 Rightwingconspirator
In Portuguese Constitution, is written that all citizens have the right to marry and to make a family.
| 270 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:30:32pm |
re: #244 Canadhimmis
I find comparing death tolls between religions pointless but you're forgetting the Crusades.
| 271 |
rwmofo Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:31:05pm |
re: #264 Racer X
Liberals are smart and get laid.
Conservatives are dumb and don't.
Heh. My girlfriend and I are not going to apologize for breaking your rules.
| 272 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:31:27pm |
re: #268 allegro
Discrimination of gays and lesbians has been held as unconstitutional by quite a number of Supreme Court decisions. Therefore, the comparison is entirely apt.
Yes, but if i WANT to be called Doctor, I should be allowed to , right, I want it so it is discriminatory to deny me the right to call myself Doctor. I said nothing about practicing medicine. I just want the perks.
| 273 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:31:49pm |
re: #254 LudwigVanQuixote
Also just to continue a little bit about educational biases and party affiliation... would you believe that less than 6% of scientists are GOP? Go figure...
[Link: people-press.org...]
| 274 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:32:20pm |
re: #272 CapeCoddah
Yes, but if i WANT to be called Doctor, I should be allowed to , right, I want it so it is discriminatory to deny me the right to call myself Doctor. I said nothing about practicing medicine. I just want the perks.
If you're not trying to practice medicine without a license, who's stopping you?
| 275 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:32:22pm |
re: #267 SixDegrees
That is a really interesting idea. I like it. Remove the burden of marriage and ensure the rights.
| 276 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:32:24pm |
re: #215 Gavriel
There certainly is a historical and religious backing for it.
Historical and religious backing for what, now? "Traditional Marriage"?
| 277 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:32:36pm |
Article 36 of the Portuguese Constitution
Article 36
(Family, marriage and filiation)
1. Everyone shall possess the right to found a family and to marry on terms of full equality.
2. The law shall regulate the requirements for and the effects of marriage and its dissolution by death or divorce, regardless of the form in which it was entered into.
[Link: app.parlamento.pt...]
| 278 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:32:41pm |
re: #268 allegro
Discrimination of gays and lesbians has been held as unconstitutional by quite a number of Supreme Court decisions. Therefore, the comparison is entirely apt.
And shot down by THE PEOPLE every time. Except in Massachusetts, where the people, as a whole were denied their rights in favor of a special interest group.
| 279 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:33:23pm |
re: #272 CapeCoddah
Yes, but if i WANT to be called Doctor, I should be allowed to , right, I want it so it is discriminatory to deny me the right to call myself Doctor. I said nothing about practicing medicine. I just want the perks.
I'm a Doctor of Journalism you swine!
/
| 280 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:34:46pm |
| 281 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:35:03pm |
re: #278 CapeCoddah
And shot down by THE PEOPLE every time.
Try to pay attention. There can be NO law passed that is unconstitutional, at least not one that will stick and longer than it being declared unconstitutional once it is argued before the Supreme Court. It doesn't matter is 98% of THE PEOPLE vote for it.
| 282 |
dr. luba Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:35:04pm |
re: #29 SanFranciscoZionist
Aristotle was not Belgian.
The London Underground is not a political movement.
Otto West: Apes don't read philosophy.
Wanda: Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it.
| 283 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:35:13pm |
re: #277 marsl
Article 36 of the Portuguese Constitution
Article 36
(Family, marriage and filiation)
1. Everyone shall possess the right to found a family and to marry on terms of full equality.
2. The law shall regulate the requirements for and the effects of marriage and its dissolution by death or divorce, regardless of the form in which it was entered into.[Link: app.parlamento.pt...]
Does the US Constitution have an article like this one? Just curious.
| 284 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:35:28pm |
re: #243 Charles
That's not what I asked you. The Declaration of Independence is not the US Constitution, and the Constitution contains language specifically setting up a wall of separation (in Thomas Jefferson's words) between church and state.
True, it's not what you asked me. I never said it was in the constitution, only that the founders said it (and they did). If rights are not from God, then they are only constructs of man. And men can be foolish. I also said (when asked) that there is religious and historical precedence for a right to male/female marriage.
Now out on a limb:
I think gay marriage as an institution would be destructive.
Completely aside from religious reasons.
And please no "what about rampant divorce, etc?".
Just because my car is having trouble starting doesn't grant license for it to be smashed with a hammer.
| 285 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:35:45pm |
re: #244 Canadhimmis
...since wikipedia isn't considered (by Charles) to be a "hate site" I'll repost the information that I had quoted:
Ricardo García Cárcel has analyzed those of the tribunal of Valencia. These authors' investigations find that the Inquisition was most active in the period between 1480 and 1530, and that during this period the percentage condemned to death was much more significant than in the years studied by Henningsen and Contreras. Henry Kamen gives the number of about 2,000 executions in persona in the whole Spain up to 1530.
García Cárcel estimates that the total number processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000. Applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560-1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 put to death. Nevertheless, very probably this total should be raised keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively. It is likely that the total would be between 3,000 and 5,000 executed.[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
Clearly, Islamist terrorism of today is a much larger threat than the Inquisition of yesteryear.
.
Fabulous. Now, tell me what you think about a culture in which the burning alive of heretics is considered to be a suitable court event, OK? In other words, address my actual point, rather than the one you've preciously narrowed it down to.
| 286 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:36:23pm |
re: #247 LudwigVanQuixote
You really should gie the whole quote.
Ignoring the legal quibble of that not being the Constitution. I would submit that pursuit of happiness would include being able to choose your partner without having the state tell you no.
I would definitely say so.
| 287 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:36:47pm |
re: #278 CapeCoddah
And shot down by THE PEOPLE every time. Except in Massachusetts, where the people, as a whole were denied their rights in favor of a special interest group.
It is not the right of the majority in a democracy to deny the rights of the minority.
| 288 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:37:48pm |
re: #275 Rightwingconspirator
That is a really interesting idea. I like it. Remove the burden of marriage and ensure the rights.
One of the more recent battles over this got the local Catholic diocese involved, who said they wouldn't back any gay marriage proposal, and then launched into an ecclesiastical discussion on the sacrament of marriage, etc., etc., obviously conflating the Church's ceremony and sacrament with the completely separate state-issued document conferring certain legal entanglements and also, confusingly, called a "marriage" license.
Lots of people have proposed granting "civil unions" to gays that extended all the same right, but was called something different. Gays have objected - rightly, I think - at the "separate but equal" condition this would create.
So kill both sides of the argument by granting civil unions to everyone. Problem solved.
| 289 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:38:01pm |
re: #264 Racer X
Liberals are smart and get laid.
Conservatives are dumb and don't.
No conservatives have lots of sex too... that is where all the little Republicans come from...
Liberals just don't feel guilty about liking it as much as they do :)
| 290 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:38:08pm |
re: #250 Obdicut
There were also several inquisitions, so Bagua is wrong to say that it only happened during a brief time period.
Apparently you missed my comment #148
You have a valid point. I do acknowledge a long, troubling history with Christianity, especially in its treatment of Jews and indigenous groups.
| 291 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:39:13pm |
re: #284 Gavriel
I think gay marriage as an institution would be destructive.
Destructive to whom?
(Or is it "who"? Seriously, I confuse those all the time.)
| 292 |
freetoken Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:39:22pm |
re: #283 marsl
Does the US Constitution have an article like this one? Just curious.
The US constitution does not specifically address marriage. Each state has different laws, but because marriages are contracts there is US constitutional enforcement of contracts across state boundaries.
| 293 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:39:26pm |
re: #278 CapeCoddah
And shot down by THE PEOPLE every time. Except in Massachusetts, where the people, as a whole were denied their rights in favor of a special interest group.
See "Tyranny of the Majority." One of the reasons the Founders despised the idea of a pure Democracy and did everything in their power to make sure one was never established in the United States.
| 294 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:39:31pm |
re: #250 Obdicut
The inquisition was NOT internally directed against errant Catholics. It was also used against the Jews, including my ancestors, culminating with the expulsion of Jews from Spain.
There were also several inquisitions, so Bagua is wrong to say that it only happened during a brief time period. The second inquisition in spain lasted from the 1400s to the mid 1700s. The first one targeted Jews too, especially in France.
Jewish Virtual Library link on the inquisitions
Hey, let's talk about the Albigensian Crusade! Low count says 200,000 died.
High count says 1,000,000.
| 295 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:39:43pm |
re: #281 allegro
Try to pay attention. There can be NO law passed that is unconstitutional, at least not one that will stick and longer than it being declared unconstitutional once it is argued before the Supreme Court. It doesn't matter is 98% of THE PEOPLE vote for it.
Really, tell that to California.... Where is SCOTUS... crickets. It is called state sovereignty.
Fact is, MOST of the American people are against gay marriage. They have a right to vote on that in each state. Massachusetts is the only state who has denied the citizens of the state their absolute constitutional right to vote on the issue. Every other state that has had the issue on the ballot has shot it down...Again, SCOTUS is where? It is not a federal issue.
| 296 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:41:15pm |
re: #290 Bagua
Why on earth did you think the Inquisition just happened for a brief period in time?
And given what the Catholic Chuch is doing in Africa and India against contraception and safe sex, they're still responsible for terrible, terrible things in the current moment.
| 297 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:41:31pm |
re: #253 Alouette
Two other passengers on Flight 253 reported seeing Abdulmutallab and an "Indian gentleman" approach the ticket counter and explain that he had no passport. This has not been officially confirmed.
We may learn more. That's the first time I've seen these two referred to in something not totally wingnutty, so maybe something to it, maybe not.
They could be telling the truth. They could also be the equivalent of the guy who claimed to have fought off the terrorists when he wasn't even on the plane.
| 298 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:41:44pm |
re: #291 Slumbering Behemoth
Destructive to whom?(Or is it "who"? Seriously, I confuse those all the time.)
Pretty sure it's "whom"
Damaging to the society and culture that sustains the contry.
| 299 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:42:30pm |
re: #284 Gavriel
All we have is of man. All that was written is from man. All moral texts and laws are written by men whether they are religious or secular.
| 300 |
CapeCoddah Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:42:30pm |
re: #287 Girth
It is not the right of the majority in a democracy to deny the rights of the minority.
In a Republic, which we are, not a democracy, Majority Rules. This is not an issue anywhere near the level of slavery. This is a special interest group wanting special rights, against the wishes of the vast majority.
| 301 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:42:32pm |
re: #289 LudwigVanQuixote
I like you LVQ. You are a smart and funny person. Can I give you just a little advice? Work on your influencing skills.
| 302 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:42:34pm |
re: #284 Gavriel
I think gay marriage as an institution would be destructive.
LOL. I'd love to see you explain how. I'm sure it's an amusing argument.
There's absolutely no difference between a gay person and a straight one except for the gender of the person they fall in love with. Gay marriage isn't going to destroy anything, much less society. Still, I'd love to read how it's such a threat to anyone.
| 303 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:42:36pm |
re: #298 Gavriel
That society and culture includes the work of homosexuals, you know. Lots of 'em!
| 304 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:42:44pm |
re: #265 ryannon
Yeah, the mysterious 'well-dressed Asian'.
I'm surprised we're not hearing stories about how it was actually Osama himself.
Isn't Osama six foot four? I think he would stand out.
| 305 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:43:10pm |
re: #289 LudwigVanQuixote
I think you're confusing "conservatives" with "republicans". Though I consider myself both, I have never once felt guilty for any of the casual sex I have had, and I have done some pretty freaky (consensual) stuff. ;p
| 306 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:43:25pm |
re: #291 Slumbering Behemoth
Destructive to whom?
This is where the logic of the argument always breaks down.
The potential harm is highly speculative.
| 307 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:43:30pm |
re: #294 SanFranciscoZionist
Hey, let's talk about the Albigensian Crusade! Low count says 200,000 died.
High count says 1,000,000.
Yes but they were all bad.
- Harry Tasker
| 308 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:43:52pm |
| 309 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:44:09pm |
re: #294 SanFranciscoZionist
Hey, let's talk about the Albigensian Crusade! Low count says 200,000 died.
High count says 1,000,000.
I saw a range of 1 to 5 million for all Crusades.
| 310 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:44:24pm |
The only thing odd in gay marriage it will be how the state representative will say "I pronounce you man and wife" and in the final "you may kiss the bride".
I guess they will not know who is the bride and who is the groom and who his the wife and who is the husband.
Apart this two remarks, just let them marry. Is not the job of the state or even our own to decide if two adult of the same sex can be happy together.
| 311 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:44:42pm |
re: #299 Gus 802
All we have is of man. All that was written is from man. All moral texts and laws are written by men whether they are religious or secular.
Now you know that's not the religous view of things. Picture Moses on the Mountain. God telling Moses what to write down, and God telling Moses what to say as a way of explanation to the Jewish people in the desert.
| 312 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:45:08pm |
re: #270 Gus 802
I find comparing death tolls between religions pointless but you're forgetting the Crusades.
No, not necessarily. Many historians consider the Crusades to have been a mostly a defensive measure in response to the Islamist expansion into Europe and the Balkans, a counter-attack.
And if you scroll back in the thread you'll see that it was SanFranciscoZionist that first made the attempt to draw equivalence between the death tolls of the two religions. It's largely a false equivalence, as is shown when the tolls of the Inquisition are actually compared to present day Islamist terrorism. Islamist terrorism killed as many on September 11th as the low estimate of 350 years of the Inquisition. There have been many, many more killed in the name of Islam since and before 9/11......
| 313 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:45:10pm |
re: #300 CapeCoddah
In a Republic, which we are, not a democracy, Majority Rules. This is not an issue anywhere near the level of slavery. This is a special interest group wanting special rights, against the wishes of the vast majority.
What special rights? I can go down to the courthouse with someone I just met and get married tomorrow. My cousin, who has been in a committed relationship for over 20 years, can't.
| 314 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:45:21pm |
re: #304 SanFranciscoZionist
Isn't Osama six foot four? I think he would stand out.
Not to mention his Kalashinkov.
| 315 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:45:33pm |
re: #270 Gus 802
I find comparing death tolls between religions pointless but you're forgetting the Crusades.
It is pointless. My only point is that Christianity's history is full of blood and gore, vicious bigotry and senseless strife, but things have gotten a lot better. It is bullSHIT to say that 'theologically' it's different, that Muslim history is more violent, or the Koran is more violent, or what have you. Historically, Christianity did all the things Islam is doing now, albeit slower and in smaller numbers, due to lack of planes and explosives.
And so, ladies and gentlemen, I have faith in the future of Islam. We can ride this out. It's always darkest before dawn. Know where your towel is!
| 316 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:45:59pm |
re: #296 Obdicut
Why on earth did you think the Inquisition just happened for a brief period in time?
Why on earth would you put those words in my mouth instead of acknowledging your mistake? I made it clear I acknowledged a long history.
And given what the Catholic Chuch is doing in Africa and India against contraception and safe sex, they're still responsible for terrible, terrible things in the current moment.
Dear me, you equate terrorist suicide bombings with Catholic missionary work? I'm speechless.
| 317 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:46:13pm |
re: #303 Obdicut
That society and culture includes the work of homosexuals, you know. Lots of 'em!
Of course.
| 318 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:46:15pm |
re: #309 Gus 802
I saw a range of 1 to 5 million for all Crusades.
Amateurs.
- Hitler
- Pol Pot
- Stalin
| 319 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:47:04pm |
re: #300 CapeCoddah
In a Republic, which we are, not a democracy, Majority Rules.
It's been a while since I checked, but I'm pretty sure you have that backwards.
| 320 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:47:21pm |
re: #271 rwmofo
Heh. My girlfriend and I are not going to apologize for breaking your rules.
Apropos of nothing, I am reminded of a birth control failure some ten years ago, the aftermath of which involved a call to my sweet German doctor. (The man was ancient. Trained in Berlin before the war. A cutie.)
"The thing is, we had sex this morning," I said, trying to explain the problem.
"That's GREAT!" says Dr. Einerman.
| 322 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:48:01pm |
re: #295 CapeCoddah
Really, tell that to California... Where is SCOTUS... crickets. It is called state sovereignty.
Fact is, MOST of the American people are against gay marriage. They have a right to vote on that in each state. Massachusetts is the only state who has denied the citizens of the state their absolute constitutional right to vote on the issue. Every other state that has had the issue on the ballot has shot it down...Again, SCOTUS is where? It is not a federal issue.
SCOTUS has nothing to rule on because DOMA separates marriages from state to state. This is entirely a state issue right now.
| 323 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:48:08pm |
re: #315 SanFranciscoZionist
It is pointless. My only point is that Christianity's history is full of blood and gore, vicious bigotry and senseless strife, but things have gotten a lot better. It is bullSHIT to say that 'theologically' it's different, that Muslim history is more violent, or the Koran is more violent, or what have you. Historically, Christianity did all the things Islam is doing now, albeit slower and in smaller numbers, due to lack of planes and explosives.
And so, ladies and gentlemen, I have faith in the future of Islam. We can ride this out. It's always darkest before dawn. Know where your towel is!
Can we add 'keep a stiff upper lip and a tight asshole' to that?
| 324 |
Jeff In Ohio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:48:21pm |
re: #291 Slumbering Behemoth
All those unfulfilled sperm and ovum. The gametes, please think of the gametes. Who is looking after the rights of the defenseless, unfulfilled gametes.
| 325 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:48:21pm |
re: #283 marsl
Does the US Constitution have an article like this one? Just curious.
Marriage is a state-by-state thing in the U.S.
| 326 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:48:53pm |
re: #301 Racer X
I like you LVQ. You are a smart and funny person. Can I give you just a little advice? Work on your influencing skills.
I was making a joke there. I'm sorry to have offended.
| 327 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:49:02pm |
| 328 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:50:13pm |
re: #284 Gavriel
True, it's not what you asked me. I never said it was in the constitution, only that the founders said it (and they did). If rights are not from God, then they are only constructs of man. And men can be foolish. I also said (when asked) that there is religious and historical precedence for a right to male/female marriage.
Now out on a limb:
I think gay marriage as an institution would be destructive.
Completely aside from religious reasons.
And please no "what about rampant divorce, etc?".
Just because my car is having trouble starting doesn't grant license for it to be smashed with a hammer.
There is historical and religious precedent for polygyny. Just sayin'.
And the gay marriages I've seen have looked--well--like marriages. There's a lot of dog-walking and dish-washing and kid-putting to bed involved. What's your concern.
| 329 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:50:36pm |
| 330 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:50:43pm |
re: #315 SanFranciscoZionist
Yeah, the Romans fed Christians to animals in the arena. Full of gore indeed. Full lions anyway.
Can we not forget the Crusades followed 400 years of conversion by the sword to Islam on a bloody trail from Saudi Arabia all the way to Europe please? Then the Crusades happened. of course the alternative of just surrendering was there then we could all be facing Mecca a few times a day.
I just do not see how the Crusades can be considered whilst setting that four century fact aside.
| 331 |
Racer X Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:51:04pm |
re: #326 LudwigVanQuixote
I was making a joke there. I'm sorry to have offended.
No, I was speaking in general. Not that post. You can make really good points, and then you get mad and just go off on people, and then your good points get lost. Just trying to help you out - feel free to ignore if you like.
| 332 |
Sheila Broflovski Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:51:14pm |
re: #314 ryannon
Not to mention his Kalashinkov.
And his dialysis machine (unless he's had a transplant).
| 333 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:51:31pm |
re: #291 Slumbering Behemoth
Destructive to whom?
(Or is it "who"? Seriously, I confuse those all the time.)
You were right the first time. Think of it like this: if you would use 'him', it should be 'whom'.
| 334 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:52:08pm |
re: #325 SanFranciscoZionist
That's confusing. State's rights and so on...
Example: I marry a 17-year girl in a state who permits it. If, after marriage, I go in honeymoon to another state, I can be arrested for sexual involvement with a minor, because in that state is not allowed marriages before 18-years-old? Just asking.
| 335 |
ryannon Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:52:52pm |
re: #332 Alouette
And his dialysis machine (unless he's had a transplant).
And the fact that he's probably dead, so it would have to be his ghost.
It all makes for a great story and I can't understand why someone isn't already spreading it all over the Net.
| 336 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:52:55pm |
re: #300 CapeCoddah
In a Republic, which we are, not a democracy, Majority Rules. This is not an issue anywhere near the level of slavery. This is a special interest group wanting special rights, against the wishes of the vast majority.
How is it wanting a special right to get the same as the majority?
| 337 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:53:12pm |
re: #311 Gavriel
Or picture Muhammad on the mountain, the Angel Gabriel telling him to spread the word of Allah. I think you can see my point.
| 338 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:53:49pm |
re: #312 Canadhimmis
No, not necessarily. Many historians consider the Crusades to have been a mostly a defensive measure in response to the Islamist expansion into Europe and the Balkans, a counter-attack.
Excuse me? The kind of historians who say that are the smae types who try to say that the INquistion wasn't all that bad, that slavery wan't all that bad ot hat the holocaust was inflated.
A simple and very basic thing to do might be to read Urban II's cal to crusade. He was pretty clear about why they were going, and I assure you it wan't for defensive reasons.
How anyone could make such a statement (as a scholar) without, oh I don't know, going to the primary sources and reading the damn history, is beyond me.
Why not look at the council of Clermont?
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
| 339 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:54:33pm |
re: #303 Obdicut
That society and culture includes the work of homosexuals, you know. Lots of 'em!
"If Michaelangelo had been straight, the Sistine Chapel would have been painted off-white with a roller."
I don't know who said that first, it's one of my mother's sayings.
Another is, when confronted with a jar that won't open: "This is why the good Lord, in Her infinite wisdom, created men."
| 340 |
freetoken Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:55:30pm |
re: #334 marsl
Under the US constitution, each state must recognize the validity of contracts made in other states.
| 341 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:55:55pm |
| 342 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:56:00pm |
re: #316 Bagua
Dear me, you equate terrorist suicide bombings with Catholic missionary work? I'm speechless.
What? You seem to be neglecting the hundreds of thousands killed by the Inquisition. Hw is it possible to see any difference between and "missionary work" done at sword point?
Your stance indefensible and frankly just short of the same psychology that goes into Holocaust denial. And yes. I am saying that clearly and accurately.
| 343 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:56:08pm |
re: #310 marsl
The only thing odd in gay marriage it will be how the state representative will say "I pronounce you man and wife" and in the final "you may kiss the bride".
I guess they will not know who is the bride and who is the groom and who his the wife and who is the husband.
Apart this two remarks, just let them marry. Is not the job of the state or even our own to decide if two adult of the same sex can be happy together.
I have heard people say at same-sex weddings, "I now pronounce you spouses for life", or "I now pronounce you a married couple", and then "You may now kiss one another".
| 344 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:57:26pm |
re: #312 Canadhimmis
No, not necessarily. Many historians consider the Crusades to have been a mostly a defensive measure in response to the Islamist expansion into Europe and the Balkans, a counter-attack.
Absolut Bullshit. Sorry. That's revisionism of the silliest kind.
| 345 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:57:56pm |
re: #340 freetoken
The Full Faith and Credit clause in the constitution. Eventually the SCOTUS is going to have to weigh in on this subject.
| 346 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:58:06pm |
re: #342 LudwigVanQuixote
PIMF
What? You seem to be neglecting the hundreds of thousands killed by the Inquisition. How is it possible to see any difference between jihad and "missionary work" done at sword point?
Your stance is utterly indefensible and frankly just short of the same psychology that goes into Holocaust denial. And yes. I am saying that clearly and accurately.
Further, it is actually offensive.
| 347 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:58:07pm |
re: #343 SanFranciscoZionist
I have heard people say at same-sex weddings, "I now pronounce you spouses for life", or "I now pronounce you a married couple", and then "You may now kiss one another".
We are not that advanced, so we don't have same-sex marriages in here. Yet...that will be a reality in this year. Our government needs cash...
| 348 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:58:22pm |
re: #342 LudwigVanQuixote
Your stance indefensible and frankly just short of the same psychology that goes into Holocaust denial. And yes. I am saying that clearly and accurately.
Ludwig Von Beck
| 349 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:59:23pm |
re: #334 marsl
Something like that has happened and it got the hubby in jail.
| 350 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:59:31pm |
re: #316 Bagua
Why on earth would you put those words in my mouth instead of acknowledging your mistake? I made it clear I acknowledged a long history.
re: #115 Bagua
The inquisition, horrendous as it was, was an exception in Catholicism, and confined to a short period,
That's not putting words in your mouth. You said that. You acknowledged there was a long troubling history in the Catholic Church later-- but I'm asking why you made the error in the first place-- it means you knew almost nothing about the inquisition, but were talking about it anyway. Why?
Dear me, you equate terrorist suicide bombings with Catholic missionary work? I'm speechless.
I don't really have many words for how evil I feel the Catholic church's anti-contraception policy is. I'm not equating the two-- they're not comparable. But I can say that what the Catholic Church is doing by opposing contraception and safe sex is a terrible, evil thing that will harm the world for generations.
| 351 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:59:38pm |
re: #284 Gavriel
If rights are not from God, then they are only constructs of man.
How are our Rights not a construct of our own making?
| 352 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:59:47pm |
re: #323 ryannon
Can we add 'keep a stiff upper lip and a tight asshole' to that?
Sure! The more cliches the merrier.
| 353 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:00:04pm |
Such a silly statement, nowhere did I "deny" the horrors of the Inquisition.
| 354 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:00:35pm |
I think I get the opposition to gay marriage now. Weddings are friggin' expensive, and I think straight couples "to be" just don't want to have to financially compete with fabulous weddings if gay marriage is legal.
/
| 355 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:00:43pm |
| 356 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:01:09pm |
re: #302 Lidane
I think gay marriage as an institution would be destructive.LOL. I'd love to see you explain how. I'm sure it's an amusing argument.
There's absolutely no difference between a gay person and a straight one except for the gender of the person they fall in love with. Gay marriage isn't going to destroy anything, much less society. Still, I'd love to read how it's such a threat to anyone.
I love my son, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with him. I might be sexually attracted to a female co-worker, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with her either.
I like what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject of how this is culturally destructive.
| 357 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:01:29pm |
re: #334 marsl
That's confusing. State's rights and so on...
Example: I marry a 17-year girl in a state who permits it. If, after marriage, I go in honeymoon to another state, I can be arrested for sexual involvement with a minor, because in that state is not allowed marriages before 18-years-old? Just asking.
States are bound by the US Constitution to honor contracts formed in other states. They are not required to offer such contracts themselves, however. So while the marriage in question here would be recognized as legal in every state, not every state would be required to extend the same age requirements when granting their own marriage licenses.
I'm too lazy to look up the Constitutional reference. Commerce clause? Someone will know.
I believe the DOMA explicitly exempts homosexual marriage from these provisions. I also believe it would be found unconstitutional if challenged.
| 358 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:02:03pm |
re: #330 Rightwingconspirator
Yeah, the Romans fed Christians to animals in the arena. Full of gore indeed. Full lions anyway.
Can we not forget the Crusades followed 400 years of conversion by the sword to Islam on a bloody trail from Saudi Arabia all the way to Europe please? Then the Crusades happened. of course the alternative of just surrendering was there then we could all be facing Mecca a few times a day.
I just do not see how the Crusades can be considered whilst setting that four century fact aside.
Do you understand the basic point I'm trying to make here? Because we can lay out massacres all night--I haven't even brought up Magdeburg yet--but that's not exactly where I was going with all this.
| 359 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:02:26pm |
re: #348 Bagua
Ludwig Von Beck
No, Actually, I'm not going to let you bait me here.
I'm going to stick to the facts.
You seem to be arguing that the Crusades and the Inquisitioin weren't that bad. That bnot that many people died.
You seem to be trying to distinguish them from jihad.
The reality is that far more died in the Crusades and the Inquisition. And yes denying the horrors of that history or trying to white wash it is no different from any other sort of historical denial or false revisionism.
So defend you case. Stick to the facts, and no, you are not allowed to weasel out.
| 360 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:02:37pm |
re: #332 Alouette
And his dialysis machine (unless he's had a transplant).
Six foot four man with a Kalash and a dialysis machine. Not low profile, anyway.
| 361 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:02:41pm |
re: #344 SanFranciscoZionist
How so? Islam came to Europe at the point of the sword. That is a fact.
| 362 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:03:27pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
Equating gay marriage with having sex with your son is absolutely the lowest thing I've ever heard.
| 363 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:03:45pm |
re: #357 SixDegrees
States are bound by the US Constitution to honor contracts formed in other states. They are not required to offer such contracts themselves, however. So while the marriage in question here would be recognized as legal in every state, not every state would be required to extend the same age requirements when granting their own marriage licenses.
I'm too lazy to look up the Constitutional reference. Commerce clause? Someone will know.
I believe the DOMA explicitly exempts homosexual marriage from these provisions. I also believe it would be found unconstitutional if challenged.
The Fourth Article establishes the full faith and credit clause.
| 364 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:03:55pm |
re: #334 marsl
That's confusing. State's rights and so on...
Example: I marry a 17-year girl in a state who permits it. If, after marriage, I go in honeymoon to another state, I can be arrested for sexual involvement with a minor, because in that state is not allowed marriages before 18-years-old? Just asking.
There's a concept of 'full faith and credit' between the states, protecting, among other things, marriages in one state being recognized by other states.
This has sometimes run into issues, though.
| 366 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:04:22pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
I love my son, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with him. I might be sexually attracted to a female co-worker, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with her either.
I like what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject of how this is culturally destructive.
Are you out of your mind?
| 367 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:05:09pm |
re: #361 Rightwingconspirator
How so? Islam came to Europe at the point of the sword. That is a fact.
Persecution of Jews in the First Crusade
The preaching of the First Crusade inspired an outbreak of anti-Semitism. In parts of France and Germany, Jews were perceived as just as much an enemy as Muslims: they were thought to be responsible for the crucifixion, and they were more immediately visible than the distant Muslims. Many people wondered why they should travel thousands of miles to fight non-believers when there were already non-believers closer to home.
...
| 368 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:05:14pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
I love my son, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with him. I might be sexually attracted to a female co-worker, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with her either.
I like what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject of how this is culturally destructive.
"Anyone who advocates marriage between a man and a woman will be morally regarded the same as racist. And soon it will be a hate crime."
This is just ridiculous. No one is going to take away Dennis Prager's right to
advocate marriage between a man and a woman.
| 369 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:05:59pm |
Bagua, where are you? No names, no nonsense, you've actually said some completely false and offensive crap. So how about you stand up for yourself and clarify it?
Try.
| 370 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:06:23pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
So basically, you can't offer any real objections to gay marriage of your own and have to point at someone else's words to make an argument for you? Pathetic. At least try to think for yourself rather than just mindlessly pointing to what someone else says.
Also, your first two statements are irrelevant. Gay marriage has nothing to do with incest or with sexual relationships with co-workers. Try again.
| 371 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:06:23pm |
re: #360 SanFranciscoZionist
Six foot four man with a Kalash and a dialysis machine. Not low profile, anyway.
According to new aviation rules, Kalashnikov assault rifles and dialys machines will be stored in the bagage compartment of the aircraft. When exiting the plane (in the US), they will be restitued to you. Then you can sell your Kalashnikov to a street gang and start a new life in America with that money...
| 372 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:06:30pm |
re: #367 Gus 802
Some history that Bagua ignored.
| 373 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:06:31pm |
re: #330 Rightwingconspirator
Yeah, the Romans fed Christians to animals in the arena. Full of gore indeed. Full lions anyway.
Can we not forget the Crusades followed 400 years of conversion by the sword to Islam on a bloody trail from Saudi Arabia all the way to Europe please? Then the Crusades happened. of course the alternative of just surrendering was there then we could all be facing Mecca a few times a day.
I just do not see how the Crusades can be considered whilst setting that four century fact aside.
Muslims, likewise, are prone to excuse many of their tactics with the claim that they are defending themselves against external attack. This defense lies at the core of Wahabism, in fact, which views the West as evil not so much because of their heretical beliefs, but because of what is viewed as the existential threat Western lifestyles and conduct poses to Muslim culture and religion.
Also, Islamic misbehavior does not begin to excuse the wretched, evil excesses committed by both Catholic and Protestant churches throughout the New World, with whole races driven to near extinction, nor the horrors that Manifest Destiny brought to aboriginal North America.
| 374 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:06:44pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
I love my son, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with him. I might be sexually attracted to a female co-worker, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with her either.
A complete non sequitor, which has nothing to do with the topic of gay marriage.
And Prager's article is full of nothing but fallacies and straw men.
| 375 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:07:19pm |
re: #350 Obdicut
That's not putting words in your mouth. You said that. You acknowledged there was a long troubling history in the Catholic Church later-- but I'm asking why you made the error in the first place-- it means you knew almost nothing about the inquisition, but were talking about it anyway. Why?
What error, and since you refuse to correct your mistake please make clear what statement of mine you consider "in error" and knowing "almost nothing about the inquisition"?
I don't really have many words for how evil I feel the Catholic church's anti-contraception policy is. I'm not equating the two-- they're not comparable. But I can say that what the Catholic Church is doing by opposing contraception and safe sex is a terrible, evil thing that will harm the world for generations.
Fine, so you hate the Catholic church. Why tell me, I'm an outspoken critic of the Catholic Church on this forum.
| 376 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:07:22pm |
re: #337 Slumbering Behemoth
Or picture Muhammad on the mountain, the Angel Gabriel telling him to spread the word of Allah. I think you can see my point.
From a religious Jewish perspective, Mo is a false prophet (God instructing Moses who instructed the Jewish people on how to detect a false prophet).
[But I do see your point]
| 377 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:07:26pm |
re: #353 Bagua
Such a silly statement, nowhere did I "deny" the horrors of the Inquisition.
I don't think he did. The new guy is...
| 378 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:08:10pm |
re: #354 Slumbering Behemoth
I think I get the opposition to gay marriage now. Weddings are friggin' expensive, and I think straight couples "to be" just don't want to have to financially compete with fabulous weddings if gay marriage is legal.
/
Why do people who are against gay marriage hate caterers?
| 379 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:08:27pm |
re: #362 Girth
I've heard worse, but yeah, that one ranks pretty low.
| 380 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:08:34pm |
re: #358 SanFranciscoZionist
I guess my point is we are faced with an ancient continuum of violent conversion coupled to nationhood. Treating the crusades as some unprovoked invasion is just wrong in my view. The early Christian church really took a big hit during those 4 centuries. In the end Christian Europe had a fight for survival on its hands, and tragically returned the favor.
| 381 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:08:42pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
I love my son, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with him. I might be sexually attracted to a female co-worker, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with her either.
I like what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject of how this is culturally destructive.
I woudn't even grant this statement the status of an argument. It is simply ludicrous and nonsensical. Unless you're claiming to have had sex with your daughter and believe that this is common. Otherwise, it is a complete non sequitur.
| 382 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:09:10pm |
re: #338 LudwigVanQuixote
Excuse me? The kind of historians who say that are the smae types who try to say that the INquistion wasn't all that bad, that slavery wan't all that bad ot hat the holocaust was inflated.
A simple and very basic thing to do might be to read Urban II's cal to crusade. He was pretty clear about why they were going, and I assure you it wan't for defensive reasons.
How anyone could make such a statement (as a scholar) without, oh I don't know, going to the primary sources and reading the damn history, is beyond me.
Why not look at the council of Clermont?
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
Why not, indeed !
Did you even bother to read the wikipedia link that you provided? The link proves my point that it was considered (by the church as well as historians) as a counter-attack, a defensive measure.
from the wikipedia link you provided:
Urban does not mention Jerusalem at all. Urban does however cite the need of the eastern Byzantine Empire for aid against Muslim attack:
" For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. "
==================
Given that you don't even bother to read the information you link to it's not very surprizing that you were able to make such an ignorant and bigotted statement as you did in comment # 2.
| 383 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:09:16pm |
re: #350 Obdicut
That's the way he rolls. He says something untrue and then tries to redefine everything away. The truth or accurate reporting of what even he himself said is never an obstacle. When that fails, he get's mock offended and pretends he's reasonable.
Don't expect much by way of actual facts from him.
| 384 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:09:19pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
I love my son, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with him. I might be sexually attracted to a female co-worker, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with her either.
I like what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject of how this is culturally destructive.
I love all kinds of people. But I'm having a sexual relationship with only one, my husband. We got married so we could have a life together. Many gay men would like to do likewise.
| 385 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:09:52pm |
re: #367 Gus 802
Again, the sins of the crusades followed the necessity of them happening at all.
| 387 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:10:35pm |
re: #356 Gavriel
I love my son, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with him. I might be sexually attracted to a female co-worker, but I'm not having a sexual relationship with her either.
I like what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject of how this is culturally destructive.
And most of what Prager says will result from gay marriage in that column is simply not real.
| 388 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:10:54pm |
re: #375 Bagua
Fine, so you hate the Catholic church. Why tell me, I'm an outspoken critic of the Catholic Church on this forum.
How about you stop trying to change the topic? The weasly way that you do that is endlessly old. Explain your rhetoric that minimizes the Crusades and the Inquisition.
| 389 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:11:31pm |
re: #351 Sharmuta
How are our Rights not a construct of our own making?
There are issues with man made rights. Remember the joke "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner"? If Howard wants to kill Bill, why does Bill's right to not be killed supercede Howards right to kill him?
| 390 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:11:45pm |
re: #385 Rightwingconspirator
Again, the sins of the crusades followed the necessity of them happening at all.
I'm still reading here and there:
Jews fought side-by-side with Muslim soldiers to defend Jerusalem against the Crusaders. Saint Louis University Professor Thomas Madden, author of A Concise History of the Crusades, claims the "Jewish Defenders" of the city knew the rules of warfare and retreated to their synagogue to "prepare for death" since the Crusaders had breached the outer walls. According to the Muslim chronicle of Ibn al-Qalanisi, "The Jews assembled in their synagogue, and the Franks burned it over their heads." One modern day source even claims the Crusaders "[circled] the screaming, flame-tortured humanity singing 'Christ We Adore Thee!' with their Crusader crosses held high." On the contrary, a late 11th century Jewish communication does not corroborate the report that Jews were actually inside of the Synagogue when it was set on fire. This letter was discovered among the Cairo Geniza collection in 1975 by historian Shelomo Dov Goitein. Historians believe that it was written just two weeks after the siege, making it "the earliest account on the conquest in any language." However, all sources agree that a synagogue was indeed burned during the siege.
Ransoming
Following the siege, Jews captured from the dome of the rock, along with native Christians, were made to clean the city of the slain. Tancred took some Jews as prisoners of war and deported them to Apuleia in southern Italy. Several of these Jews did not make it to their final destination as “Many of them were […] thrown into the sea or beheaded on the way.” Numerous Jews and their holy books (including the Aleppo Codex) were held ransom by Raymond of Toulouse. The Karaite Jewish community of Ashkelon (Ascalon) reached out to their coreligionists in Alexandria to first pay for the holy books and then rescued pockets of Jews over several months. All that could be ransomed were liberated by the summer of 1100. The few who could not be rescued were either converted to Christianity or murdered.
| 391 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:12:24pm |
re: #361 Rightwingconspirator
How so? Islam came to Europe at the point of the sword. That is a fact.
It's stark revisionism to say that the Crusades were called for that reason.
| 392 |
Daniel Ballard Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:12:56pm |
re: #391 SanFranciscoZionist
What about the timeline?
| 393 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:13:38pm |
re: #384 SanFranciscoZionist
Wrong. They want to steal your husbands penis, and use it to destroy American society. Here's a simple outline of the agenda:
1: Legalize Gay Marriage
2: ???
3: Society Destroyed
///
| 394 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:14:11pm |
re: #375 Bagua
This error, Bagua:
The inquisition, horrendous as it was, was an exception in Catholicism, and confined to a short period,
"It" was neither an exception, nor confined to a short period. That's knowledge that anyone who knows anything about the subjection should know. "The" Inquisition, furthermore, normally refers to the Spanish Inquisition, which was the longest-lasting one-- several hundred years-- so I have no clue why, even if that's all you knew of the inquisition, would say that it was confined to a short period.
Furthermore, the actual incidents of the inquisition-- torturing people on matters of faith and heresy, burning Jews alive, all that kind of good stuff-- were typical, rather than atypical, of Christianity in Europe up until the modern era. Even short of the many wars fought between Catholics and Protestants-- and the massacres of populations of Protestants in France, England, etc-- the persecution of Jews and the purging of heretics was endemic to Christianity in many other ways as well, so saying that it was an Exception in Catholicism is also bafflingly silly.
| 395 |
marsl Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:14:32pm |
re: #364 SanFranciscoZionist
There's a concept of 'full faith and credit' between the states, protecting, among other things, marriages in one state being recognized by other states.
This has sometimes run into issues, though.
So, one guy can marry legally in one state and go to jail if he go to another state because of that same marriage... sometime I wonder how you guys became a superpower and number 1 country in this world... and I tough that we (Portugal) are a confusion. I guess that politicians do that to all countries....
| 396 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:14:39pm |
re: #376 Gavriel
From a religious Jewish perspective, Mo is a false prophet (God instructing Moses who instructed the Jewish people on how to detect a false prophet).
[But I do see your point]
The United States of America does not run on a religious Jewish perspective.
| 397 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:15:55pm |
re: #351 Sharmuta
How are our Rights not a construct of our own making?
re: #389 Gavriel
There are issues with man made rights. Remember the joke "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner"? If Howard wants to kill Bill, why does Bill's right to not be killed supercede Howards right to kill him?
I'm sorry, Gav. Your answer/rebuttal makes absolutely no sense.
| 398 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:16:05pm |
re: #359 LudwigVanQuixote
You seem to be arguing that the Crusades and the Inquisitioin weren't that bad. That bnot that many people died.
Nope, I never said any such thing. That is pure fantasy on your part. I condemn the horrors of the past like the Inquisition.
You seem to be trying to distinguish them from jihad.
Again, false. I am trying to distinquise the Catholic Church's current activities in their African missions and Church from Jihad.
However, I'll not debate with you further as you are obviously looking for argument and are in your insult mode.
| 399 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:17:07pm |
re: #380 Rightwingconspirator
I guess my point is we are faced with an ancient continuum of violent conversion coupled to nationhood. Treating the crusades as some unprovoked invasion is just wrong in my view. The early Christian church really took a big hit during those 4 centuries. In the end Christian Europe had a fight for survival on its hands, and tragically returned the favor.
As far as I'm concerned, treating the Crusades as part of history rewritten as a struggle to the death between Islam and everyone else is revisionist and silly.
| 400 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:17:58pm |
re: #368 jaunte
"Anyone who advocates marriage between a man and a woman will be morally regarded the same as racist. And soon it will be a hate crime."
This is just ridiculous. No one is going to take away Dennis Prager's right to
advocate marriage between a man and a woman.
There are already instances where quoting biblical texts describing homosexuality were procecuted
| 402 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:19:19pm |
re: #389 Gavriel
If Howard wants to kill Bill, why does Bill's right to not be killed supercede Howards right to kill him?
Because Howard's rights end where Bill's rights begin. That's how.
| 403 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:20:07pm |
re: #382 Canadhimmis
Why not, indeed !
Did you even bother to read the wikipedia link that you provided? The link proves my point that it was considered (by the church as well as historians) as a counter-attack, a defensive measure.from the wikipedia link you provided:
NO that wasn't in the link I provided. That would be a lie.
Given that you don't even bother to read the information you link to it's not very surprizing that you were able to make such an ignorant and bigotted statement as you did in comment # 2.
Oh wow, I really can't believe you are going there.
So, let's clarify the history just a little and then look into why you are a case in point for the typical ignorant and boorish revisionist creep that infests the modern right.
First off here is Urban's full speech. Why not avoid cherry picking? And of course he mentions Jerusalem.
[Link: www.fordham.edu...]
Now some other questions...
Do you know what the Erdmann Hypothesis was?
Of course you don't.
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
Now when this is done, can you explain the role pf Peter the Hermit in all of this? Then can you explain the nature of the founding of the Kingdom of Jerusalem?
After you do that, you can stop blathering and possible learn something.
| 404 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:20:10pm |
re: #396 SanFranciscoZionist
The United States of America does not run on a religious Jewish perspective.
Much more than you would think. But that wasn't my point at all.
| 405 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:20:53pm |
re: #394 Obdicut
Yes, correct. Short period of time was not the best wording which is while I later clarified by saying "I do acknowledge a long, troubling history with Christianity, especially in its treatment of Jews and indigenous groups." Shortly after.
200 comments later you are still carrying on about something I clarified. That is simply being argumentative.
| 406 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:21:07pm |
re: #396 SanFranciscoZionist
The United States of America does not run on a religious Jewish perspective.
And as a religious Jew, I have to concur with that fact.
| 407 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:21:14pm |
re: #404 Gavriel
Much more than you would think. But that wasn't my point at all.
What's that supposed to mean?
| 408 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:22:19pm |
re: #404 Gavriel
Much more than you would think.
In what way is the USA run on a religious, Jewish perspective, to the extent that it would be "much more than you would think"? Please be specific.
| 409 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:22:54pm |
| 410 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:23:26pm |
re: #400 Gavriel
There are already instances where quoting biblical texts describing homosexuality were procecuted
This was not in America where the First Amendment would prohibit such prosecutions.
| 411 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:23:38pm |
re: #400 Gavriel
Prager may have a complaint with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, but Canadian bureacracies don't determine law in the U.S.
| 412 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:23:53pm |
re: #382 Canadhimmis
Why not, indeed !
Did you even bother to read the wikipedia link that you provided? The link proves my point that it was considered (by the church as well as historians) as a counter-attack, a defensive measure.from the wikipedia link you provided:
Urban does not mention Jerusalem at all. Urban does however cite the need of the eastern Byzantine Empire for aid against Muslim attack:
" For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. "
===
Given that you don't even bother to read the information you link to it's not very surprizing that you were able to make such an ignorant and bigotted statement as you did in comment # 2.
You simply don't know enough about the period. I'm sorry. You've accepted a politically palatable interpretation that doesn't take the actual world of the Crusdaes much into account.
| 413 |
Vambo Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:24:12pm |
re: #400 Gavriel
There are already instances where quoting biblical texts describing homosexuality were procecuted
On June 30, 1997, Owens placed the ad in the StarPhoenix to coincide with Gay Pride Week. His intention, as a committed Christian, was to draw people's attention to the Biblical teachings on homosexuality. The ad gave four Bible passages from Romans, Leviticus, and First Corinthians, which condemn homosexuality. The list was followed by a mathematical equal sign, which was followed by two stick-figure men holding hands. This drawing was contained within the universal prohibition symbol (circle with a slash across it). Viewed in its entirety, the purpose of the ad was to indicate that the Bible says no to homosexual behavior.
That's pretty rotten if you ask me. Deserving of a lawsuit? - don't know, don't care, I have no sympathy for the guy.
| 414 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:24:15pm |
re: #398 Bagua
No, I'm not going to let you weasel away. You said:
The inquisition, horrendous as it was, was an exception in Catholicism, and confined to a short period,
That is a totally false statement. Actually two false statements. Also given the context was very revisionist, how about you not try to slink away, and rather try to clarify yourself?
I really don't care how you characterize my questions Bagua. I am calling you on your revisionism and I am not going to let you change the subject. There is no insult in what I said. There is no harsh tone - other than I am not going to let you slink away.
| 415 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:24:37pm |
re: #402 Lidane
Because Howard's rights end where Bill's rights begin. That's how.
But Bill is soooo dang annoying.
But seriously. You just declared a principle about where Howard's rights end. First, there are all sorts of places where rights conflict and your simple declaration is insuficient. Second, your declared principle can be described as a man made prejudice. Just because you think its right, doesn't give it any weight. And Howard might disagree.
| 416 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:24:55pm |
re: #410 MandyManners
This was not in America where the First Amendment would prohibit such prosecutions.
How dare you bring facts and logic to an argument.
| 417 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:24:59pm |
re: #389 Gavriel
If Howard wants to kill Bill, why does Bill's right to not be killed supercede Howards right to kill him?
How does this answer my question?
| 418 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:25:03pm |
re: #400 Gavriel
There are already instances where quoting biblical texts describing homosexuality were procecuted
That irrelevant. Hugh Owens would have the right to make a fool of himself in the United States.
| 419 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:25:11pm |
re: #410 MandyManners
This was not in America where the First Amendment would prohibit such prosecutions.
I believe this has also been overturned, after much abuse of Canada's Human Rights Council.
| 420 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:25:45pm |
re: #400 Gavriel
There can be no resolution on this issue when one person sees it only from a theological/religious perspective and others see it as a social justice issue. Just sayin'.
| 421 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:26:31pm |
| 422 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:26:50pm |
re: #405 Bagua
My point was that you said an absolutely and completely backwardly wrong statement. It was the opposite of the truth, and to me it indicates you have absolutely no knowledge of the subject, and yet you're talking about it.
There was nothing about that summation of yours that was right, and lots about it that was wrong. Furthermore, that you said it was an exception means that you really have no knowledge of the history of the Church at all, outside of the inquisition.
| 423 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:26:55pm |
re: #419 SixDegrees
I believe this has also been overturned, after much abuse of Canada's Human Rights Council.
I would hope so.
| 424 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:27:49pm |
re: #422 Obdicut
My point was that you said an absolutely and completely backwardly wrong statement. It was the opposite of the truth, and to me it indicates you have absolutely no knowledge of the subject, and yet you're talking about it.
There was nothing about that summation of yours that was right, and lots about it that was wrong. Furthermore, that you said it was an exception means that you really have no knowledge of the history of the Church at all, outside of the inquisition.
Of course he did, he is now going to flop around and try to continually redefine his indefensible stance.
| 425 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:27:50pm |
NO that wasn't in the link I provided. That would be a lie.
Yup. It was from the link that YOU provided:
here:
Why not look at the council of Clermont?
[L[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
I'm guessing that you owe an apology for calling me a liar?
Given your bigotry and ignorance as quoted in comment # 2 , I won't stay up late waiting.......
| 426 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:28:05pm |
re: #392 Rightwingconspirator
What about the timeline?
Christianity and Islam butted up against one another, and fought over pockets of land, yes. I'm hardly denying that. But if you look at the actual patterns of the Crusades, the Christian motivations tended to be internal, theological and economic. These were not wars of survival, they generally follow the patterns of warfare among both Christian and Muslim states with one another.
| 427 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:28:20pm |
re: #415 Gavriel
But Bill is sooo dang annoying.
But seriously. You just declared a principle about where Howard's rights end. First, there are all sorts of places where rights conflict and your simple declaration is insuficient. Second, your declared principle can be described as a man made prejudice. Just because you think its right, doesn't give it any weight. And Howard might disagree.
WTF are you trying to argue here? People disagree, so therefore we can't have rights?
| 428 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:28:28pm |
re: #413 Vambo
On June 30, 1997, Owens placed the ad in the StarPhoenix to coincide with Gay Pride Week. His intention, as a committed Christian, was to draw people's attention to the Biblical teachings on homosexuality. The ad gave four Bible passages from Romans, Leviticus, and First Corinthians, which condemn homosexuality. The list was followed by a mathematical equal sign, which was followed by two stick-figure men holding hands. This drawing was contained within the universal prohibition symbol (circle with a slash across it). Viewed in its entirety, the purpose of the ad was to indicate that the Bible says no to homosexual behavior.That's pretty rotten if you ask me. Deserving of a lawsuit? - don't know, don't care, I have no sympathy for the guy.
The government prosecuted him.
And yes, it was in Canada, not the US.
Just pointing out that Prager's worry is not a ridiculous straw man.
| 429 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:28:30pm |
re: #419 SixDegrees
I believe this has also been overturned, after much abuse of Canada's Human Rights Council.
Looks like it:
In June 1997, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal held that Hugh Owens had breached the Human Rights Code by placing in a newspaper an advertisement that gave citations for passages in the Bible. The passages condemn homosexual behaviour. Owens appealed. The Court of Queen's Bench agreed with the Tribunal. Owens appealed. In 2006, the Court of Appeal reversed the Tribunal's decision.
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
| 430 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:28:41pm |
re: #393 Slumbering Behemoth
Wrong. They want to steal your husbands penis, and use it to destroy American society. Here's a simple outline of the agenda:
1: Legalize Gay Marriage
2: ???
3: Society Destroyed
///
Well, they can't have it. He's very attached to it. So am I, although less literally.
| 431 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:28:48pm |
re: #423 MandyManners
I would hope so.
Past my bedtime, and this newfangled ginger ale I bought totally sucks. So I'm pouring what's left down the drain and hittin' the sack, after rinsing my mouth out.
| 432 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:29:06pm |
re: #428 Gavriel
The government prosecuted him.
And yes, it was in Canada, not the US.
Just pointing out that Prager's worry is not a ridiculous straw man.
It was over-turned.
| 433 |
MandyManners Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:29:24pm |
re: #431 SixDegrees
Past my bedtime, and this newfangled ginger ale I bought totally sucks. So I'm pouring what's left down the drain and hittin' the sack, after rinsing my mouth out.
Sweet dreams!
| 434 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:29:39pm |
re: #428 Gavriel
Just pointing out that Prager's worry is not a ridiculous straw man.
Yeah, it is. You think this is indicative of the end of society?
| 435 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:29:57pm |
re: #415 Gavriel
But seriously. You just declared a principle about where Howard's rights end. First, there are all sorts of places where rights conflict and your simple declaration is insuficient. Second, your declared principle can be described as a man made prejudice. Just because you think its right, doesn't give it any weight. And Howard might disagree.
It doesn't matter what Howard thinks. He doesn't have the right to kill Bill, no matter how annoying the guy may be.
I have a constitutional right to own a gun. I DON'T have the right, however, to kill someone with that gun just because I feel like it. That's why we have laws, for crying out loud. What you're talking about is all out anarchy, where there are no limits and no rules in place.
| 436 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:30:33pm |
re: #414 LudwigVanQuixote
No, I'm not going to let you weasel away. You said:
That is a totally false statement. Actually two false statements. Also given the context was very revisionist, how about you not try to slink away, and rather try to clarify yourself?
I really don't care how you characterize my questions Bagua. I am calling you on your revisionism and I am not going to let you change the subject. There is no insult in what I said. There is no harsh tone - other than I am not going to let you slink away.
Ludwig, I have clarified that statement several times already. In fact the approximately 355 year duration of the Spanish inquisition is a "short" part of the 2,000 year history of the Catholic Church or the some 1,400 years during which there have been Islamic war. Or it is a "long" time when compared to duration of the world wars.
I most certainly do not make any excuses for the evils of the Inquisition. It is wrong to continue to insist that I did.
| 437 |
SixDegrees Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:31:23pm |
| 438 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:33:16pm |
This is one hell of a thread, people!
| 439 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:33:49pm |
re: #427 Girth
WTF are you trying to argue here? People disagree, so therefore we can't have rights?
The question is "are rights inherent?" If they are, where are they from?
In some places and times, rights were defined by what the king said they were. If Howard was the king's favorite and Bill was out of favor then Howard had a "right" to kill bill.
I like that the founders described rights as coming from God. It makes them inherent, and not at the whim of man.
| 440 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:34:02pm |
re: #422 Obdicut
My point was that you said an absolutely and completely backwardly wrong statement. It was the opposite of the truth, and to me it indicates you have absolutely no knowledge of the subject, and yet you're talking about it.
[...]
It is silly to keep yammering away like that over one sentence which I have repeatedly explained. You are simply on attack as usual. Talk to your self.
| 441 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:34:18pm |
re: #425 Canadhimmis
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
Where is that in that link?
Anyway, how about you not shift the topic and look to the actual points. The only one who is a bigot is you.
Why...
Becuase in the course of calling the Crusades defensive against Muslims, you neglect all the Jews slaughtered along the way, that Saladin made a deal with the Crusaders and that oh yes - the whole rationale for the war as provided by the very words of Urban II coupled with the desire to gain new Kingdoms for second sons.
Now you are right. I am very bigoted against stupid revisionist hacks like you. The Crusades were not defensive. They were also not all directed at Muslims. Ever hear of the Northern Crusade into Russia? Do you know who Alexander Nevsky was?
Or perhaps the Albigensians?
No. Your points are false and trying to call me bigot does not seperate from your lies or your distortions. And for the record I do hate idiots. So I am happy to say that I have great prejudice against historical revisionists like you.
| 442 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:34:34pm |
re: #436 Bagua
Ludwig, I have clarified that statement several times already. In fact the approximately 355 year duration of the Spanish inquisition is a "short" part of the 2,000 year history of the Catholic Church/blockquote>
What the fuck? How is 355/2000-- or 17.75%-- of the Catholic Church's history a short period of time?
or the some 1,400 years during which there have been Islamic war.Why compare the Inquisition to Islamic war, and not the many religious wars that happened in Europe? Wouldn't that be a better comparison?
I most certainly do not make any excuses for the evils of the Inquisition. It is wrong to continue to insist that I did.
You claimed it was an exception to the normal practice of the Catholic Church. It was not an exception. It was a more opulent display of something constantly there throughout the history of the Church.
| 443 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:34:50pm |
| 444 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:37:00pm |
Ludwig, I have clarified that statement several times already. In fact the approximately 355 year duration of the Spanish inquisition is a "short" part of the 2,000 year history of the Catholic Church or the some 1,400 years during which there have been Islamic war. Or it is a "long" time when compared to duration of the world wars.
I most certainly do not make any excuses for the evils of the Inquisition. It is wrong to continue to insist that I did.
Bagua,
It's not worth arguing with him/her. Ludwig called me a liar for quoting the very same link that he/she provided. And Ludwig has insulted you numerous times without your provacation (or reciprocation.)
.........not worth it.
| 445 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:37:16pm |
re: #443 Gavriel
Then what are your problems with same sex marriage?
| 446 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:37:50pm |
re: #442 Obdicut
Bah. Messed up my quoting, apologies. I think it's obvious where my voice begins, though.
| 447 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:37:52pm |
re: #442 Obdicut
When you get exited Obdicut you forget that preview is your friend.
Less than a fifth of the time is a "short" time. I'll not respond to you further as you are being argumentative.
| 448 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:38:10pm |
re: #439 Gavriel
The question is "are rights inherent?" If they are, where are they from?
In some places and times, rights were defined by what the king said they were. If Howard was the king's favorite and Bill was out of favor then Howard had a "right" to kill bill.
I like that the founders described rights as coming from God. It makes them inherent, and not at the whim of man.
Rights are a bi-product of human sociocultural evolution. Effectively they arise because it is for the betterment of society (groups, band, cultures, etc.) and promotes the survival of the species. For example, we are good to our neighbors because it benefits each separately and the sum of the two.
| 449 |
Right Handed Neutrino Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:38:49pm |
re: #439 Gavriel
The question is "are rights inherent?" If they are, where are they from?
In some places and times, rights were defined by what the king said they were. If Howard was the king's favorite and Bill was out of favor then Howard had a "right" to kill bill.
I like that the founders described rights as coming from God. It makes them inherent, and not at the whim of man.
But the question of where the rights come from is only a philosophical, or religious, question. Pragmatically, laws are put in place and enforced by governments, who are of course made of people. So I would argue that no matter where rights "come from", if they do indeed come from somewhere, or if there even is such a thing as an inherent right, men and women are the one who end up defining them and enforcing them, so all laws are what wikipedia tells me are "positive laws".
(Sorry to butt in, but this is a subject I'm pretty interested in.)
| 450 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:39:27pm |
re: #439 Gavriel
The question is "are rights inherent?" If they are, where are they from?
In some places and times, rights were defined by what the king said they were. If Howard was the king's favorite and Bill was out of favor then Howard had a "right" to kill bill.
I like that the founders described rights as coming from God. It makes them inherent, and not at the whim of man.
I'll buy that, but then what are rights and what are privileges and who decides?
| 451 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:39:37pm |
re: #444 Canadhimmis
Bagua,
It's not worth arguing with him/her. Ludwig called me a liar for quoting the very same link that he/she provided. And Ludwig has insulted you numerous times without your provacation (or reciprocation.)
...not worth it.
Thank you for noticing.
| 452 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:39:41pm |
re: #439 Gavriel
The question is "are rights inherent?" If they are, where are they from?
In some places and times, rights were defined by what the king said they were. If Howard was the king's favorite and Bill was out of favor then Howard had a "right" to kill bill.
I like that the founders described rights as coming from God. It makes them inherent, and not at the whim of man.
This is hopeless. You're arguing for rights given by God--OK, how do we as a society decide what rights are given by God, and which are not? Jefferson said life, liberty and the pursuit of happeness were, which I tend to agree with him on, but does God give me the right to a speedy trial? TO legal representation? To freedom of speech? How can we tell?
Americans derive rights from our founding documents, and our body of law.
| 453 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:39:55pm |
re: #435 Lidane
It doesn't matter what Howard thinks. He doesn't have the right to kill Bill, no matter how annoying the guy may be.I have a constitutional right to own a gun. I DON'T have the right, however, to kill someone with that gun just because I feel like it. That's why we have laws, for crying out loud. What you're talking about is all out anarchy, where there are no limits and no rules in place.
I'm VERY happy about the truth of what you said! I'd hate anarchy.
I'm trying to have a philosophical discussion of what makes your rights exist. The founders indicated a divine source for those rights, making them very powerful.
| 454 |
Right Handed Neutrino Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:39:57pm |
Woops, sorry about that, don't know how that happened. Is there any way to delete that superfluous second post?
| 455 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:41:32pm |
re: #436 Bagua
Ludwig, I have clarified that statement several times already. In fact the approximately 355 year duration of the Spanish inquisition is a "short" part of the 2,000 year history of the Catholic Church or the some 1,400 years during which there have been Islamic war. Or it is a "long" time when compared to duration of the world wars.
I most certainly do not make any excuses for the evils of the Inquisition. It is wrong to continue to insist that I did.
Well it's revisionism for forgetting things likr the Crusades or all of the Christian wars if you put it in that context. Ever hear of the Thirty Years War?
No Bagua, you are not going to be allowed to flop around... or perhaps more interestingly, please continue to flop around, because by changing your stance yet again, you opened yourself up for the whole history of Christian conflict...
I guess no blood was shed in the Crusades, the Norther Crusade or the Albegensian Crusade... It was nothing like a jihad eh? What about the Reformation... Real peaceful that....
Bagua, what entertains me the most about your flopping around is that you don't even get it when you have flopped into the fire.
The whole two thousand year history of the Church has a lot more deaths than the Muslims do. The best you can say is that the Muslims have not mellowed out as much as the Christians have in the last few hundred years.
| 456 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:41:54pm |
re: #453 Gavriel
I'm trying to have a philosophical discussion of what makes your rights exist. The founders indicated a divine source for those rights, making them very powerful.
If human rights come from a divine source, why don't all humans have them?
| 457 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:42:03pm |
re: #447 Bagua
You won't respond to me any more as you've displayed a gross ignorance about a subject you're trying to talk about.
A fifth of something is not a small portion. If you send a man to prison for a fifth of his life, it is not small. For the inquisition(s) to last a fifth of the catholic church's history is not a small amount of time.
Furthermore, as I said, that you claim it's an exception to the Catholic Chruch, that the inquisitions were in some way extraordinary, overlooks all of the non-inquisitional times the Catholic Church, or Catholic sovereigns, executed people for heresy, made war on others due to their religion, or once again, rounded up, stole from, burned alive, confiscated the property of, or forced conversions on, the Jews.
All it takes is a textbook of European history. The modern form of Christianity is, as SanFranciscoZionist said, proof that a religion that was steeped in blood can wash itself much cleaner. The Enlightenment-- which was a great diminishing of power for the churches-- was they key to that path.
| 458 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:42:12pm |
re: #439 Gavriel
I like that the founders described rights as coming from God. It makes them inherent, and not at the whim of man.
Not exactly. The preamble to The Bill of Rights:
THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institutionRESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.:
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
You'll notice no mention of these enumerated rights being described as coming from God.
| 459 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:42:38pm |
re: #454 Right Handed Neutrino
Woops, sorry about that, don't know how that happened. Is there any way to delete that superfluous second post?
No, you're fired, get out.
/
| 460 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:43:13pm |
re: #444 Canadhimmis
Ludwig, I have clarified that statement several times already. In fact the approximately 355 year duration of the Spanish inquisition is a "short" part of the 2,000 year history of the Catholic Church or the some 1,400 years during which there have been Islamic war. Or it is a "long" time when compared to duration of the world wars.
I most certainly do not make any excuses for the evils of the Inquisition. It is wrong to continue to insist that I did.
Bagua,
It's not worth arguing with him/her. Ludwig called me a liar for quoting the very same link that he/she provided. And Ludwig has insulted you numerous times without your provacation (or reciprocation.)
...not worth it.
Which means that you will never look at the facts of the actual history. How convenient for you. Ignorant and proud to stay that way.
| 461 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:43:38pm |
re: #455 LudwigVanQuixote
That's the stupidest post of the week.
| 462 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:44:09pm |
re: #453 Gavriel
I'm VERY happy about the truth of what you said! I'd hate anarchy.
I'm trying to have a philosophical discussion of what makes your rights exist. The founders indicated a divine source for those rights, making them very powerful.
More specifically, Thomas Jefferson, aged thirty-six, used that language, common rhetoric of the day, to suggest fundamental human rights which would not be at the whim of an earthly king. This is still not an argument against same-sex marriage.
| 463 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:44:18pm |
re: #447 Bagua
Oh please Bagua, you start out argumentative and get called on it. Then you whine when called out on little things like facts or reason.
| 464 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:44:28pm |
re: #457 Obdicut
A fifth of something is not a small portion.
A fifth of scotch gets me pretty f'ed up.
| 465 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:44:36pm |
re: #415 Gavriel
But Bill is sooo dang annoying.
But seriously. You just declared a principle about where Howard's rights end. First, there are all sorts of places where rights conflict and your simple declaration is insuficient. Second, your declared principle can be described as a man made prejudice. Just because you think its right, doesn't give it any weight. And Howard might disagree.
WTF? Are Howard's rights somehow different under the Constitution if they came from God instead of coming from Man or vice versa?
| 466 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:46:16pm |
re: #465 Sharmuta
WTF? Are Howard's rights somehow different under the Constitution if they came from God instead of coming from Man or vice versa?
That depends. Is he a threat to our traditions?
| 467 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:46:26pm |
re: #452 SanFranciscoZionist
This is hopeless. You're arguing for rights given by God--OK, how do we as a society decide what rights are given by God, and which are not? Jefferson said life, liberty and the pursuit of happeness were, which I tend to agree with him on, but does God give me the right to a speedy trial? TO legal representation? To freedom of speech? How can we tell?
Americans derive rights from our founding documents, and our body of law.
Not to mention that Jefferson stole this from Locke, who listed Life, Liberty and Property as his rights.
| 468 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:46:56pm |
re: #462 SanFranciscoZionist
This is still not an argument against same-sex marriage.
That's because there aren't any arguments against same sex marriage except ones that boil down to religious objections or personal discomfort with homosexuality.
Arguing about the origin of rights is just a dodge.
re: #456 allegro
If human rights come from a divine source, why don't all humans have them?
Good question. I'd love to find out the answer.
| 469 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:47:02pm |
re: #461 cliffster
That's the stupidest post of the week.
What? Should I suggest that the Crusades of all stripes and the Reformation and the Thrity years war were peaceful?
Cliffster... don't tar yourself with Bagua's stupidity or Canadhimmis's extreme ignorance. You are smarter than that.
| 471 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:48:08pm |
Declaring independence from England is one thing; defining the governance of a new nation is something completely. I think the writers of the Constitution provides explicit instuctions about keeping God out of the discussion.
| 472 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:48:17pm |
re: #453 Gavriel
I'm trying to have a philosophical discussion of what makes your rights exist. The founders indicated a divine source for those rights, making them very powerful.
The Founders also noted that these rights had to be fought for and won by the blood and toil of men, later to be secured by the same.
| 473 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:48:26pm |
re: #467 Girth
Not to mention that Jefferson stole this from Locke, who listed Life, Liberty and Property as his rights.
I think there's actually another link in there--someone writing in Virginia. The text is all over the place.
| 474 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:48:28pm |
re: #453 Gavriel
I'm VERY happy about the truth of what you said! I'd hate anarchy.
I'm trying to have a philosophical discussion of what makes your rights exist. The founders indicated a divine source for those rights, making them very powerful.
The founders speak generically. They mention no specific religion nor religious text. In fact it includes the opposites in modern terms with the phrases Laws of Nature juxtaposed against and of Nature's God. The Laws of Nature implies the secular scientific world and as I mentioned previously that those rights were formed in large part for our evolutionary survival.
| 475 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:48:40pm |
re: #457 Obdicut
You won't respond to me any more as you've displayed a gross ignorance about a subject you're trying to talk about.
[...]
You are truly a silly boy Obdicut, you just go on and on on the same worn out theme. I said over and over that the Inquisition was evil. Now you want to make a capital case over the meaning of the word "short"?
You are posting nonsense in your desire to discredit me, something you do on every thread we interact on. It is tiresome, boring, and obvious to anyone who is paying attention.
Even Ludwig and I agree on some things, probably most things with a few notable exceptions.
You however can never see my little words as other than the most horrible, outrageous things you have ever seen. Grow up. You look ridiculous.
I am through responding to your rants.
| 476 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:49:38pm |
re: #466 jaunte
That depends. Is he a threat to our traditions?
Which traditions? Our easily demonstrable pagan traditions? Or our vague, not as easily demonstrable, judeo-christian traditions?
| 477 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:49:52pm |
re: #471 Firstinla
Declaring independence from England is one thing; defining the governance of a new nation is something completely. I think the writers of the Constitution provides explicit instuctions about keeping God out of the discussion.
The last thing the Founders wanted was to establish a government that would resemble those which their ancestors had fled.
| 478 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:50:18pm |
re: #471 Firstinla
Declaring independence from England is one thing; defining the governance of a new nation is something completely. I think the writers of the Constitution provides explicit instuctions about keeping God out of the discussion.
Remember, this is a new country that, even if it looks a bit monotone to us has some rather deep religious divisions.
| 479 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:50:20pm |
re: #475 Bagua
No actually, I like Obdicut. I think he or she is straight forward and honest. You on the other hand come out with distortions and then always try to weasel out of them. I find you frankly repellent.
| 480 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:51:05pm |
re: #467 Girth
Not to mention that Jefferson stole this from Locke, who listed Life, Liberty and Property as his rights.
Damn right wingers. ///
| 481 |
oldegeezr Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:51:15pm |
The most honored and revered holders of the "goat’s cheese" are being challenged by zealots in their own tribal tents. The mullahs holding the moolah are now threatening the ultimate revenge...!
Under Iran's Islamic sharia law the sentence for "mohareb" is execution.
The statement coincided with rallies by tens of thousands of government supporters calling for opposition leaders to be punished for fomenting unrest after June's disputed presidential election, state media said.
"...slowly they turned...and step by step...they crushed the despicable serpent’s head...!”
Viva...La revolution!
| 482 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:52:53pm |
re: #469 LudwigVanQuixote
I'll thank you for the compliment, at the same time saying I have no beef with the people to whom you hung an insult on that compliment.
Anyways, Crusades et al, no, not peaceful. Also, not by any means the level of violence to mankind as made out to be. And no comparison with the destruction done by any of the war mongering peoples since 1850.
| 483 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:53:28pm |
The Crusades were not defensive. They were also not all directed at Muslims. Ever hear of the Northern Crusade into Russia? Do you know who Alexander Nevsky was?
Or perhaps the Albigensians?
I'm aware of the varied history of multiple Crusades. That why I chose to qualify my statement back at # 312. Here's my statement:
" Many historians consider the Crusades to have been a mostly a defensive measure in response to the Islamist expansion into Europe and the Balkans, a counter-attack."
===========================
LudwigVanQuixote,
I think you're more than a little sore that your very own link was used to buttress my earlier assertions. .....your hate filled rant at # 441 might be even worse than # 2, especially given the personal nature of your stated hatred toward me. A person you don't even know, a stranger on the internet......
.
| 484 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:54:08pm |
re: #480 Sharmuta
Damn right wingers. ///
See? Despite what you'd they would have you believe, the Founders were actually progressives!
/kinda
| 485 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:54:18pm |
re: #480 Sharmuta
Damn right wingers. ///
I wouldn't mind, except that American wingnuts sometimes try to tell you that 'happiness' is an eighteenth century euphemism for 'property'
| 486 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:56:01pm |
re: #485 SanFranciscoZionist
It's a bitch when the county and state raise my "happiness" taxes over and over and over.
| 487 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:56:08pm |
re: #362 Girth
Equating gay marriage with having sex with your son is absolutely the lowest thing I've ever heard.
[note, my son is 25]
I was responding to:
re: #302 Lidane
There's absolutely no difference between a gay person and a straight one except for the gender of the person they fall in love with. Gay marriage isn't going to destroy anything, much less society. Still, I'd love to read how it's such a threat to anyone.
where "love" became the overriding driver of marriage. I love someone therefor if I'm not alowed to marry them I'm being denied. I've also heard that "sexual attraction" should be a driver of who one should be able to marry. I gave two counter examples. I'm sorry I used my son (just an example of someone I truely love).
I was not trying to make the "equating" you spoke of.
| 488 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:56:16pm |
re: #483 Canadhimmis
NO I am sore because it is a false revisionist claim made by someone who doesn't know history and is trying to whitewash the truth.
I am sore because you are neglecting the deaths of millions.
I am sore because the only motive of "historians" who write such rubbish is to promote further bloodshed.
| 489 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:57:21pm |
re: #479 LudwigVanQuixote
I find you frankly repellent.
You have made, what, a dozen or so personal insults in this one thread alone. I think your hatreds are quite well known to readers on this forum.
You hate me, you hate the Catholic church, you hate white Christians, you hate people you think have less education than you, the list goes on and on.
For my part, I've tried to debate you in a respectful manner. I'll leave the readers to draw their own conclusions you to wallow in your hatred.
| 490 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:57:22pm |
| 491 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:57:26pm |
Come to think of it, the wording is right there in the Declaration of Independence:
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
...The separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...
So we have two equal stations:
1. Laws of Nature.
2. Nature's God.
Again, they're not specific in the wording of God and Nature's God reflects a Deistic interpretation.
| 492 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:57:37pm |
re: #472 Sharmuta
The Founders also noted that these rights had to be fought for and won by the blood and toil of men, later to be secured by the same.
Of course. I don't see a contradiction.
| 493 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:59:03pm |
re: #487 Gavriel
Then you've intentionally misrepresented the meaning of 'love' as it was used and you know it, unless you think that father/son love is the same as person/significant other love.
| 495 |
Firstinla Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:01:23pm |
So how many homosexuals will have to toil and shed their blood to get the "right" to marry?
| 496 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:01:33pm |
re: #475 Bagua
I'm not through correcting you when you say things that are the diametric opposite of the truth, as you did in this thread.
You're free to respond or not when I do it, I really don't care.
| 497 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:02:06pm |
re: #492 Gavriel
re: #472 Sharmuta
The Founders also noted that these rights had to be fought for and won by the blood and toil of men, later to be secured by the same.
re: #492 Gavriel
Of course. I don't see a contradiction.
God couldn't just say so? The cognitive dissonance is giving me a headache.
| 498 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:02:10pm |
This is one of those very rare times when the call of television could pull me away from LGF. This is on right now, for those in the pacific timezone.
Later Lizards.
| 499 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:02:57pm |
re: #489 Bagua
You hate me
Yes because of your lies, distortions and smears. That and your insulting way of trying to weasel out of your own words.
you hate the Catholic church,
That would be one of those lies I hate you for spreading.
you hate white Christians,
If the first lie wasn't big enough, go for a bigger one. NO I hate Nazis. It is true though that they were white, and once again, the whole reason not to be evil White Christians is that not all of them were Nazis.
you hate people you think have less education than you,
No I hate ignorant people who refuse to reason and then mess up my life by doing things like preventing meaningful legislation on AGW.
the list goes on and on.
Not really, but I do despise you for your lies and smears.
For my part, I've tried to debate you in a respectful manner.
Another lie.
| 500 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:03:48pm |
re: #495 Firstinla
So how many homosexuals will have to toil and shed their blood to get the "right" to marry?
Depends on how many and how long people who claim to know the mind of God remain in their way.
| 501 |
lucky dog Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:04:23pm |
re: #85 Bubblehead II
That's not completely true. The manifest (list of passengers) is always sent to us prior to the flight leaving the foreign land. We review it here on this end and BEFORE the plane can take off for the US we have to give the go-ahead.
| 502 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:04:26pm |
re: #494 cliffster
Millions?
Yes millions. Add it up. Seriously, what do you think the death toll from the Northern Crusade was, or the Albigensian Crusade - what do you think the death tolls from the Crusades everyone thinks of when they say Crusades were?
| 503 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:04:33pm |
re: #487 Gavriel
That's a very poor interpretation of what I said.
You either missed the point, or you're deliberately obscuring the issue in order to try and make some sort of argument about rights that has yet to provide any real argument against same sex marriage.
| 504 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:05:00pm |
re: #495 Firstinla
So how many homosexuals will have to toil and shed their blood to get the "right" to marry?
What does that mean - the right to marry? What does Marrying mean? From where does one get the right to do this marrying?
| 505 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:06:03pm |
re: #502 LudwigVanQuixote
Yes millions. Add it up. Seriously, what do you think the death toll from the Northern Crusade was, or the Albigensian Crusade - what do you think the death tolls from the Crusades everyone thinks of when they say Crusades were?
Then, get into Central and South America...oh, and Magdeburg!
| 506 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:06:21pm |
re: #489 Bagua
You have made, what, a dozen or so personal insults in this one thread alone. I think your hatreds are quite well known to readers on this forum.
You hate me, you hate the Catholic church, you hate white Christians, you hate people you think have less education than you, the list goes on and on.
For my part, I've tried to debate you in a respectful manner. I'll leave the readers to draw their own conclusions you to wallow in your hatred.
You forgot to specifically include me, Bagua. I feel left out.......
His nibs also includes me in the vast array of those that he hates.
| 507 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:07:07pm |
re: #504 cliffster
What does that mean - the right to marry? What does Marrying mean? From where does one get the right to do this marrying?
I got mine from City Hall in Oakland.
| 509 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:07:53pm |
re: #493 Girth
Then you've intentionally misrepresented the meaning of 'love' as it was used and you know it, unless you think that father/son love is the same as person/significant other love.
I would say that love, prior to a sexual relationship and/or affirming them as your significant other, is very similar. I've loved various people of both genders without a sexual relationship. And one of my loves turned into marriage. And that does make things different.
I'm arguing against the "I love this person and therefor should have a right to marry them" meme.
| 510 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:07:55pm |
re: #496 Obdicut
I'm not through correcting you when you say things that are the diametric opposite of the truth, as you did in this thread.
You're free to respond or not when I do it, I really don't care.
What you are not through with is making the same incorrect and exaggerated point over and over again and making over the top insults based upon it. I repeatedly corrected your mistake but you continue unabated.
You have found your perfect role model in Ludwig. Enjoy.
| 512 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:09:13pm |
re: #506 Canadhimmis
You forgot to specifically include me, Bagua. I feel left out...
His nibs also includes me in the vast array of those that he hates.
Correct. When Ludwig goes off like this he often lashes out in several directions at once, including at those who may be on his side on the issue.
| 513 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:09:32pm |
re: #510 Bagua
What you are not through with is making the same incorrect and exaggerated point over and over again and making over the top insults based upon it.
Project much?
| 514 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:10:06pm |
re: #502 LudwigVanQuixote
Yes millions. Add it up. Seriously, what do you think the death toll from the Northern Crusade was, or the Albigensian Crusade - what do you think the death tolls from the Crusades everyone thinks of when they say Crusades were?
Probably not anywhere near seven digits, but I'm interested in seeing your numbers. If "millions" was just a descriptive word for "a lot", I get that too.
| 515 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:10:42pm |
re: #509 Gavriel
And one of my loves turned into marriage. And that does make things different.
And you had the choice of marriage that you would deny others.
I'm arguing against the "I love this person and therefor should have a right to marry them" meme.
You just argued against your own reason for marriage.
| 516 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:10:56pm |
re: #512 Bagua
Correct. When Ludwig goes off like this he often lashes out in several directions at once, including at those who may be on his side on the issue.
No I've been pretty focused on the lie that my comment was in any way directed against Catholics or Christians. It was not. But that will not stop you from trying to repeat it. That's ok though. You've found a perfect role model in a historical revisionist.
| 517 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:11:16pm |
re: #507 SanFranciscoZionist
I got mine from City Hall in Oakland.
Point taken, but I'm looking for scope of the word "marriage", and also where one goes about defining it as a right.
| 518 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:11:35pm |
re: #514 cliffster
Probably not anywhere near seven digits, but I'm interested in seeing your numbers. If "millions" was just a descriptive word for "a lot", I get that too.
No actual millions. The Albigensian Crusade alone was between 500,000 and a million.
| 519 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:12:08pm |
re: #509 Gavriel
I would say that love, prior to a sexual relationship and/or affirming them as your significant other, is very similar. I've loved various people of both genders without a sexual relationship. And one of my loves turned into marriage. And that does make things different.
I'm arguing against the "I love this person and therefor should have a right to marry them" meme.
And what does it matter of what gender this person that you married was?
| 520 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:13:34pm |
re: #515 allegro
You just argued against your own reason for marriage.
Nope, I just pointed out the various people I didn't marry. Who I didn't marry is pretty important.
| 521 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:14:56pm |
re: #509 Gavriel
I'm arguing against the "I love this person and therefor should have a right to marry them" meme.
Why? If two men or two women can marry, how is it hurting your ability to marry someone of the opposite sex?
| 522 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:15:20pm |
re: #509 Gavriel
I'm arguing against the "I love this person and therefor should have a right to marry them" meme.
Except that was never the meme being used, so your argument is pointless.
Gay marriage is an issue of legal equity. Because there is no difference between a gay person and a straight one under the law, why treat gays differently when it comes to marriage? Where is the harm in giving them the same legal rights and benefits that straights get when they get married? I've yet to see a real, legitimate argument that answers the question. All the arguments against gay marriage boil down to religious objections or personal discomfort. No one has ever offered a cogent legal argument for why gays should be denied.
| 523 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:15:24pm |
re: #520 Gavriel
Nope, I just pointed out the various people I didn't marry. Who I didn't marry is pretty important.
So, again. What's your problem with same sex marriage? You think who one marries isn't important to everyone?
| 524 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:15:47pm |
When Ludwig goes off like this he often lashes out in several directions at once, including at those who may be on his side on the issue.
So this isn't a one time meltdown for Ludwig?
/sheesh
Just to clarify, I don't think that I can be included as being "on his side on the issue". I guess what you're saying is that (eventually) Ludwig will also turn on the Obdicut character who also opposes your viewpoint?
| 525 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:15:47pm |
re: #521 Sharmuta
Why? If two men or two women can marry, how is it hurting your ability to marry someone of the opposite sex?
That will provoke a secret recruitment argument.
| 526 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:16:47pm |
re: #524 Canadhimmis
When Ludwig goes off like this he often lashes out in several directions at once, including at those who may be on his side on the issue.
So this isn't a one time meltdown for Ludwig?
/sheesh
Just to clarify, I don't think that I can be included as being "on his side on the issue". I guess what you're saying is that (eventually) Ludwig will also turn on the Obdicut character who also opposes your viewpoint?
NO... how droll...
Now how about we go back to talking actual history... Convenient for you to drop it :)
| 527 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:17:55pm |
re: #518 LudwigVanQuixote
No actual millions. The Albigensian Crusade alone was between 500,000 and a million.
I'm skeptical of that number, and also of what you're choosing to include in the body count caused by Christians, which would necessarily exclude the body count caused by struggles for political power.
| 528 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:18:08pm |
re: #503 Lidane
That's a very poor interpretation of what I said.You either missed the point, or you're deliberately obscuring the issue in order to try and make some sort of argument about rights that has yet to provide any real argument against same sex marriage.
It sounded like "falling in love" -> "right to marry". If that wasn't your intent then I'm sorry.
As far as arguments against same sex marriage, I agree with what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject. (I linked earlier).
| 529 |
Cineaste Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:19:25pm |
re: #300 CapeCoddah
In a Republic, which we are, not a democracy, Majority Rules. This is not an issue anywhere near the level of slavery. This is a special interest group wanting special rights, against the wishes of the vast majority.
They want equal rights. Are your rights special?
| 530 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:21:01pm |
Before we start saying that "everyone has a right to marry whoever they want", can we define what said marriage entails?
| 531 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:21:23pm |
re: #529 Cineaste
They want equal rights. Are your rights special?
Equal rights to marry someone of the oposite sex? Vs. special rights to marry someone of the same sex?
| 532 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:21:50pm |
re: #523 allegro
So, again. What's your problem with same sex marriage? You think who one marries isn't important to everyone?
I agree with what Dennis Prager has to say on the subject (I linked ealier).
I have to go now.
Good night all.
| 533 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:22:06pm |
re: #514 cliffster
Probably not anywhere near seven digits, but I'm interested in seeing your numbers. If "millions" was just a descriptive word for "a lot", I get that too.
Per Wiki, the Thirty Years War has a low count of 3 million. (Not Crusade related, just mentioning)
Can't find a good count for the Crusades as a total, probably impossible to do a really good one, but the siege and sack of Jerusalem in 1099 is suggested to have about 40,000 deaths.
I'm sure the count for the Fourth Crusade, which included the sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders went well over a million.
| 534 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:22:14pm |
re: #530 cliffster
Before we start saying that "everyone has a right to marry whoever they want", can we define what said marriage entails?
Two adults entering into a legal agreement to share lives and fortune, with all of the rights of said partnership afforded by the government and its entities.
| 535 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:22:19pm |
re: #499 LudwigVanQuixote
Another lie.
Let’s see, you used the word Lie 5 times, Nazis twice and of course called me “ignorant”. You are such a pleasant guy Ludwig. The self appointed Academic Elitist.
There is no point to responding to such posts as they indicate that you are off your meds again and here to have another meltdown.
| 536 |
Cineaste Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:22:33pm |
re: #531 Gavriel
Equal rights to marry someone of the oposite sex? Vs. special rights to marry someone of the same sex?
Equal rights to marry another human being. What other rights are differentiated by gender? None...
| 537 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:22:59pm |
re: #527 cliffster
I'm skeptical of that number, and also of what you're choosing to include in the body count caused by Christians, which would necessarily exclude the body count caused by struggles for political power.
No. Not really. It is impossible to remove politics from religion in the Middle Ages. So yes of course that is always part of it. One could be cynical and say it was all of it. I am not interested in that debate.
I am specifically referring to those wars whose primary propaganda and justification was religious.
I was careful to list Crusades, the Reformation and the Thirty Years War. I did not list the 100 years war or the Wars of the Roses. THis was brought up not to excoriate Christians. Rather it was brought up to debunk the really stupid notion that the Crusades were defensive or that somehow the Christian history is less violent than Muslim History.
That does not excuse modern day Muslim atrocities (or anyones) either. That is not my point.
My point is only that some line about Christianity being historically more peaceful than Islam is a load of crap.
| 538 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:23:21pm |
re: #527 cliffster
Do you feel that we should likewise exclude most of the Muslim wars death total due to their nature as political, as well as religious, warfare?
| 539 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:23:41pm |
Now how about we go back to talking actual history... Convenient for you to drop it :)
You mean the part where I used the link you provided to buttress my argument? That "actual history"?
........oh yeah.....that's right. You called me a liar for using that link, that it wasn't from the link you provided.....
sigh/ It does appear that apologizing for calling me a liar is far beyond your capabilities.
| 540 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:24:09pm |
I said it upthread, I'll expand it now. I (a heterosexual male) can find a willing female and get married tomorrow at the courthouse. My cousin (a lesbian) who has been in a committed relationship for 20 years, cannot do the same. If she were to be in a coma or similarly incapacitated her partner would not have the same rights and privileges as I would with my theoretical spouse. Her partner would not be entitled to the same insurance benefits, etc.
As far as I'm concerned, the status quo is indefensible.
| 541 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:24:23pm |
re: #527 cliffster
I'm skeptical of that number, and also of what you're choosing to include in the body count caused by Christians, which would necessarily exclude the body count caused by struggles for political power.
The lowest body count I've found for the Albigensian Crusade is 200,000. That's rock-bottom.
| 542 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:24:27pm |
re: #535 Bagua
Let’s see, you used the word Lie 5 times, Nazis twice and of course called me “ignorant”. You are such a pleasant guy Ludwig. The self appointed Academic Elitist.
There is no point to responding to such posts as they indicate that you are off your meds again and here to have another meltdown.
But those were lies and the Nazi thing was from the original post and not related to you at all. Mentioning it in that context, as if it was, would be yet another lie on your part.
You really have a problem with honesty Bagua.
| 543 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:25:11pm |
re: #531 Gavriel
Equal rights to marry someone of the oposite sex? Vs. special rights to marry someone of the same sex?
How are those rights special? Everyone will have the same rights.
| 544 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:25:54pm |
| 545 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:26:22pm |
re: #542 LudwigVanQuixote
But those were lies and the Nazi thing was from the original post and not related to you at all. Mentioning it in that context, as if it was, would be yet another lie on your part.
You really have a problem with honesty Bagua.
Give it a rest Ludwig. I have no problem with honesty, I never lie, but you sir have once again revealed your true nature on this thread.
| 546 |
Gavriel Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:26:24pm |
re: #543 SanFranciscoZionist
How are those rights special? Everyone will have the same rights.
Everyone already has the same rights.
To marry someone of the oposite sex.
Now I really really have to go.
| 547 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:26:36pm |
I have brothers who are gay, and sisters who are strict southern baptists. One of my brothers is married to his partner in the eyes of the New Jersey Episcopal Church. Nothing my southern baptist sisters can do about that, and nothing the churches they attend can do.
But that means "married" in the eyes of their church. Is that what we're looking for here? Or are we actually saying that the Southern Baptist church should be required to recognize the marriage of two men or two women?
| 548 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:27:21pm |
re: #539 Canadhimmis
Now how about we go back to talking actual history... Convenient for you to drop it :)
You mean the part where I used the link you provided to buttress my argument? That "actual history"?
...oh yeah...that's right. You called me a liar for using that link, that it wasn't from the link you provided...sigh/ It does appear that apologizing for calling me a liar is far beyond your capabilities.
Ummm you lied about the pope not mentioning Jerusalem. You lied that the primary cause of the Crusades was defensive. You are a liar. Whining about the history you distorted by attempting to take mock affront does not change the fact that yes indeed you really actually were lying about the history. Further, while yes the Wiki I gave makes mention to the embassy of the Byzantines, the article goes on to be quite clear that was not the cause of the crusade. Your claim that it was, was the lie. Your claim that somehow that article supports your lies is yet another lie.
| 549 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:28:23pm |
re: #543 SanFranciscoZionist
How are those rights special? Everyone will have the same rights.
Special rights is usual a dog whistle from people that think certain minorities should have no rights. That is, they think to extend equal protection under the law amounts to special rights. They would have no special rights if granted the ability to legally marry. It would be the same secular contractual arrangement as granted to heterosexual couples.
| 550 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:29:11pm |
re: #547 cliffster
I have brothers who are gay, and sisters who are strict southern baptists. One of my brothers is married to his partner in the eyes of the New Jersey Episcopal Church. Nothing my southern baptist sisters can do about that, and nothing the churches they attend can do.
But that means "married" in the eyes of their church. Is that what we're looking for here? Or are we actually saying that the Southern Baptist church should be required to recognize the marriage of two men or two women?
This has nothing to do with the church. The government affords certain rights and benefits to married couples, and it hurts no one to extend these to married gay couples.
Churches can do whatever the hell they want.
| 551 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:29:34pm |
re: #537 LudwigVanQuixote
No. Not really. It is impossible to remove politics from religion in the Middle Ages. So yes of course that is always part of it. One could be cynical and say it was all of it. I am not interested in that debate.
I am specifically referring to those wars whose primary propaganda and justification was religious.
I was careful to list Crusades, the Reformation and the Thirty Years War. I did not list the 100 years war or the Wars of the Roses. THis was brought up not to excoriate Christians. Rather it was brought up to debunk the really stupid notion that the Crusades were defensive or that somehow the Christian history is less violent than Muslim History.
That does not excuse modern day Muslim atrocities (or anyones) either. That is not my point.
My point is only that some line about Christianity being historically more peaceful than Islam is a load of crap.
Precisely. And please, no one get the idea that I want to trash either Christianity or European history. I LOVE this stuff. The medieval world, Muslim and Christian (and Jewish) is one of my favorite things. I majored in it. I write fiction set in medieval and Renaissance Europe. But I cannot pretend that it wasn't ugly as hell a lot of the time.
| 552 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:29:57pm |
re: #545 Bagua
Give it a rest Ludwig. I have no problem with honesty, I never lie, but you sir have once again revealed your true nature on this thread.
What that I honestly detest you for being a weasley mealy mouthed liar? Well I do.
| 553 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:30:16pm |
| 554 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:30:38pm |
re: #553 SanFranciscoZionist
I found his arguments unconvincing.
| 555 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:30:40pm |
re: #546 Gavriel
Everyone already has the same rights.
To marry someone of the oposite sex.Now I really really have to go.
Aaaaaaaaghhh!
| 556 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:31:04pm |
re: #534 allegro
Two adults entering into a legal agreement to share lives and fortune, with all of the rights of said partnership afforded by the government and its entities.
Exactly.
If two straight adults are allowed to enter into that legal agreement, then why not let two gay adults? I don't see why they should be denied. It makes less than no sense.
Religion has nothing to do with it. It's about secular equity under the law. Either give gays and straights the same legal rights and benefits under the law, or deny them to everyone equally.
| 557 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:31:15pm |
re: #537 LudwigVanQuixote
As you indicated, I don't think we have the information or context today to know what was done for religious reasons and what for political reasons. I do appreciate you clarifying that you are not trying to demonize Christians, although I disagree with the comparison of "peacefulness" between Christians and Muslims. I understand that many here will disagree with me.
| 558 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:31:16pm |
re: #551 SanFranciscoZionist
Precisely. And please, no one get the idea that I want to trash either Christianity or European history. I LOVE this stuff. The medieval world, Muslim and Christian (and Jewish) is one of my favorite things. I majored in it. I write fiction set in medieval and Renaissance Europe. But I cannot pretend that it wasn't ugly as hell a lot of the time.
Be careful or Bagua will try to say you are an anti-white-Christian bigot too.
| 559 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:31:43pm |
re: #538 Obdicut
No. I think the religious component is much more clear there.
| 560 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:31:46pm |
re: #547 cliffster
I have brothers who are gay, and sisters who are strict southern baptists. One of my brothers is married to his partner in the eyes of the New Jersey Episcopal Church. Nothing my southern baptist sisters can do about that, and nothing the churches they attend can do.
But that means "married" in the eyes of their church. Is that what we're looking for here? Or are we actually saying that the Southern Baptist church should be required to recognize the marriage of two men or two women?
Religiously? No. Just as the Catholic Church cannot be made to recognize as sacramental a remarriage after divorce.
| 561 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:32:30pm |
re: #547 cliffster
I have brothers who are gay, and sisters who are strict southern baptists. One of my brothers is married to his partner in the eyes of the New Jersey Episcopal Church. Nothing my southern baptist sisters can do about that, and nothing the churches they attend can do.
But that means "married" in the eyes of their church. Is that what we're looking for here? Or are we actually saying that the Southern Baptist church should be required to recognize the marriage of two men or two women?
Last I checked, the Southern Bapist Church wasn't the government. I don't care what they recognize, they have zero power over me. They're as irrelevant to me as Scientologists and beauty pageants.
| 562 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:33:24pm |
re: #550 Girth
This has nothing to do with the church. The government affords certain rights and benefits to married couples, and it hurts no one to extend these to married gay couples.
Churches can do whatever the hell they want.
My point exactly. If those rights and benefits are extended, but we still do not have the State willing to put the word Marriage on it, does it make a difference?
| 563 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:34:01pm |
re: #552 LudwigVanQuixote
What that I honestly detest you for being a weasley mealy mouthed liar? Well I do.
LOL, you called canadadhimmis liar 7 times in one post, and then spew more hatred at me. And this is meant to pass as sensible discussion.
This forum is a sewer when you are on your drink Ludwig or whatever it is you do.
| 564 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:34:25pm |
re: #561 WindUpBird
Last I checked, the Southern Bapist Church wasn't the government. I don't care what they recognize, they have zero power over me. They're as irrelevant to me as Scientologists and beauty pageants.
That was pertinent.. how?
| 565 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:34:40pm |
| 566 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:34:43pm |
re: #562 cliffster
My point exactly. If those rights and benefits are extended, but we still do not have the State willing to put the word Marriage on it, does it make a difference?
The Supreme Court struck down separate but equal about 50 years ago.
| 567 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:35:04pm |
re: #562 cliffster
If those rights and benefits are extended, but we still do not have the State willing to put the word Marriage on it, does it make a difference?
I'd prefer the word "marriage" be eliminated all together. Call them all civil unions and be done with it.
| 568 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:35:24pm |
re: #567 allegro
I'd prefer the word "marriage" be eliminated all together. Call them all civil unions and be done with it.
I'll buy that.
| 569 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:36:00pm |
re: #540 Girth
I said it upthread, I'll expand it now. I (a heterosexual male) can find a willing female and get married tomorrow at the courthouse. My cousin (a lesbian) who has been in a committed relationship for 20 years, cannot do the same. If she were to be in a coma or similarly incapacitated her partner would not have the same rights and privileges as I would with my theoretical spouse. Her partner would not be entitled to the same insurance benefits, etc.
As far as I'm concerned, the status quo is indefensible.
Not only that but if I'm not mistaken any old 60 something man on the street can get married with a 16 year old girl in many states within days and all it takes in some states is a notarized consent. Of course he doesn't have to be 60 something.
| 570 |
Lidane Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:36:12pm |
re: #562 cliffster
My point exactly. If those rights and benefits are extended, but we still do not have the State willing to put the word Marriage on it, does it make a difference?
Personally, I'd get the state out of the marriage business entirely, for both gays AND straights. Call them all civil unions under the law, give everyone the same rights equally, and reserve "marriage" for the various religious denominations, who can make their own individual rules about which unions they'll bless and which ones they won't. Problem solved.
| 571 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:36:23pm |
re: #563 Bagua
LOL, you called canadadhimmis liar 7 times in one post, and then spew more hatred at me. And this is meant to pass as sensible discussion.
This forum is a sewer when you are on your drink Ludwig or whatever it is you do.
NO. I took affront at the lie that I hate Christians. It's a dirty smear. I took affront at the lies here about history. In their own ways those are dirty smears too, but they really are also lies. The definition of a lie is stating something that is untrue or willfully misleading.
I am not on my drink Bagua. I really don't drink. I do however take offense at lies - even yours.
| 572 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:36:48pm |
re: #567 allegro
I'd prefer the word "marriage" be eliminated all together. Call them all civil unions and be done with it.
In the UK one calls one's husband or wife "partner" quite commonly now.
| 573 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:36:54pm |
re: #559 cliffster
No. I think the religious component is much more clear there.
Why? The name of God was invoked in every war in Christendom, repeatedly. The Divine Right of Kings meant the actions of every sovereign was blessed by God. So why are their actions clearly political, while the Muslims were clearly religious?
| 574 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:37:13pm |
re: #562 cliffster
My point exactly. If those rights and benefits are extended, but we still do not have the State willing to put the word Marriage on it, does it make a difference?
It doesn't to me!
The problem is the word "marriage" is a legal term, not just a religious term. Religions may claim ownership over it, but they don't get to control how it is employed as a legal distinction. And that's one of the many prybars the religious right uses against gay people, the word "marriage", and how they blur the lines between individual religious distinctions about marriage (which is their right to determine) and legal distinctions of marriage. (which is not)
| 575 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:38:43pm |
re: #567 allegro
I'd prefer the word "marriage" be eliminated all together. Call them all civil unions and be done with it.
I'd be thrilled with this. Unfortuantely, any national politician who proposed it would be called a witch and they'd get a tsunami of death threats by Dominionist boogerheads.
| 576 |
Cineaste Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:38:54pm |
re: #547 cliffster
I have brothers who are gay, and sisters who are strict southern baptists. One of my brothers is married to his partner in the eyes of the New Jersey Episcopal Church. Nothing my southern baptist sisters can do about that, and nothing the churches they attend can do.
But that means "married" in the eyes of their church. Is that what we're looking for here? Or are we actually saying that the Southern Baptist church should be required to recognize the marriage of two men or two women?
Neither. The government affords specific legal and financial benefits to members of married couples that are only available to people who will marry someone of the opposite sex. If you are gay then you cannot receive any of those benefits. Churches are welcome to marry or not marry anyone they choose. I'm Jewish, my brother married a Christian. There are almost no rabbis that will marry an interfaith couple. There is nothing problematic about that in the law.
| 577 |
erraticsphinx Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:39:55pm |
I love reading this thread. It's fascinating.
| 578 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:40:25pm |
re: #574 WindUpBird
It doesn't to me!
The problem is the word "marriage" is a legal term, not just a religious term. Religions may claim ownership over it, but they don't get to control how it is employed as a legal distinction. And that's one of the many prybars the religious right uses against gay people, the word "marriage", and how they blur the lines between individual religious distinctions about marriage (which is their right to determine) and legal distinctions of marriage. (which is not)
Examples? Do you deny that there are many Republicans that have stated that there should be legal partnerships that have the same rules and treatment of marriage, but we would not call it "marriage"?
| 579 |
erraticsphinx Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:41:06pm |
re: #546 Gavriel
If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that idiotic argument.
| 580 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:41:18pm |
The world will always welcome lovers, as time goes by...
| 581 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:41:31pm |
re: #578 cliffster
Do you deny that there are many Republicans that have stated that there should be legal partnerships that have the same rules and treatment of marriage, but we would not call it "marriage"?
The same ones who deny equal rights over semantics?
| 582 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:41:55pm |
I'm willing to bet that at the rate we're going that the only nations that won't allow gay marriage will be all Muslim nations the United States. With the USA being ahead of Turkey by one notch just like it is with creationism.
| 583 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:41:59pm |
It's tempting to conclude a general law of human nature: that nothing sweetens a tradition like being able to deny it to an outsider.
| 584 |
Cineaste Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:42:11pm |
re: #562 cliffster
My point exactly. If those rights and benefits are extended, but we still do not have the State willing to put the word Marriage on it, does it make a difference?
It makes a huge difference. The government cannot deny benefits it offers to one group to some other group because of sexual orientation.
| 585 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:42:36pm |
re: #582 Gus 802
I'm willing to bet that at the rate we're going that the only nations that won't allow gay marriage will be all Muslim nations and the United States. With the USA being ahead of Turkey by one notch just like it is with creationism.
PIMF -- not that it would matter much.
| 586 |
Cineaste Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:43:06pm |
re: #567 allegro
I'd prefer the word "marriage" be eliminated all together. Call them all civil unions and be done with it.
Amen to that. Let Churches deal with marriage and allow any adult to forma civil union one other consenting adult.
| 587 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:43:51pm |
re: #583 jaunte
It's tempting to conclude a general law of human nature: that nothing sweetens a tradition like being able to deny it to an outsider.
Now that is profound.
| 588 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:44:38pm |
re: #583 jaunte
It's tempting to conclude a general law of human nature: that nothing sweetens a tradition like being able to deny it to an outsider.
That is one of the more brilliant things I've read here in a while.
| 589 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:44:42pm |
re: #578 cliffster
Examples? Do you deny that there are many Republicans that have stated that there should be legal partnerships that have the same rules and treatment of marriage, but we would not call it "marriage"?
Civil unions with federal recognition? Who?
| 590 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:45:26pm |
re: #571 LudwigVanQuixote
Ludwig, you just used the word "lie" again 5 times in a single post, while trying to come across as reasonable.
You see, that sort of talk is very polarising and makes civil debate quite impossible. When your opponents are called "ignorant" and "moron" and "stupid" and "Liar" and so on by you, this poisons the discussion and makes civil debate unlikely.
When you are not like this you are quite reasonable and interesting to chat with. It is not that you are unable to support your points with reason and rhetoric, you are; which makes the added content of anger and hatred so damaging to your position. It unbalances you and you really should learn to control this. I say this as an online friend, not an opponent.
| 591 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:45:35pm |
re: #589 SanFranciscoZionist
Civil unions with federal recognition? Who?
What kind of union gets federal recognition right now?
| 592 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:45:51pm |
re: #583 jaunte
It's tempting to conclude a general law of human nature: that nothing sweetens a tradition like being able to deny it to an outsider.
I don't know about a law, but it's definitely at least a theorem.
| 593 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:46:39pm |
re: #591 cliffster
What kind of union gets federal recognition right now?
Who gives a widow her late husband's social security benefits?
| 594 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:46:43pm |
re: #591 cliffster
What kind of union gets federal recognition right now?
That would be all heterosexual marriages licensed by the law in any state.
| 595 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:49:02pm |
re: #593 SanFranciscoZionist
Who gives a widow her late husband's social security benefits?
Marriage is granted at the state level. Your example would certainly qualify as an indirect recognition. But then again, the conversation was about homosexual couples being given the same treatment as heterosexual.
| 596 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:49:57pm |
re: #575 WindUpBird
I for one can not understand why people will not allow Gays to marry under the law. It is obviously discriminatory when one considers the legal and financial disadvantages that this causes. I do suspect that it is primarily anti-gay bigotry motivating this.
| 597 |
windsagio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:49:58pm |
re: #595 cliffster
If a gay man's partner dies, do they get SS benefits?
Seems like different treatment to me.
| 598 |
SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:50:40pm |
re: #595 cliffster
Marriage is granted at the state level. Your example would certainly qualify as an indirect recognition. But then again, the conversation was about homosexual couples being given the same treatment as heterosexual.
Until Joe can collect Bob's SSI, and have their marriage be recongized in any state in the union, they do not have the same treatment.
| 599 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:51:06pm |
re: #582 Gus 802
I'm willing to bet that at the rate we're going that the only nations that won't allow gay marriage will be all Muslim nations the United States. With the USA being ahead of Turkey by one notch just like it is with creationism.
If someone wants to take a religious perspective on Gay civil unions, I think the only sensible one would be to ask how is it that we have messed up heterosexual marriage so badly?
The notion that gay unions are a threat to hetero marriages is just insane.
Does a husband who is about to cheat think, "I better police up my act, because gay people can't get married and therefore my vows to my wife are holy?"
Does a wife who is about to cheat think "I should work it out with him because gay people can't get married and therefore my vows to my wife are holy?"
Do couples spend more quality time listening to each other and working things out because they realize that since gay people can't get married, they should have extra responsibility to work things out like adults?
Of course not.
If there is anything at all that the phenomenon of gay marriage says to heteros it should be, wow, "how is it that they the only ones who are loudly clamoring for marriage?"
Homophobia, like all irrational fears leads to thinking silly things.
| 600 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:51:08pm |
Just to throw another wrench in... why aren't we discussing why marriage grants special rights over being single?
| 601 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:51:24pm |
Your claim that it was, was the lie. Your claim that somehow that article supports your lies is yet another lie.
LudwigVanQuixote,
Any reasonable person reading the thread has to be just a little embarrassed for you. You not only move goalposts continuously, but your goalposts appear to be on wheels.
Here is the the regression of your comments:
from # 403:
NO that wasn't in the link I provided. That would be a lie.
to # 441:
Where is that in that link?
Anyway, how about you not shift the topic and look to the actual points.
and then finally in # 548:
Further, while yes the Wiki I gave makes mention to the embassy of the Byzantines, the article goes on to be quite clear that was not the cause of the crusade. Your claim that it was, was the lie. Your claim that somehow that article supports your lies is yet another lie.
.........changing from outright calling me a liar to questioning where in the link (you provided) did I found the quote.......and on and on with copious remarks of hatred thrown in by you for good measure, the progression leading up to this latest (where you've admitted the link source was your own) but have attempted to show that I've supposedly purposefully distorted the history.
| 603 |
Sharmuta Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:51:56pm |
re: #577 erraticsphinx
I love reading this thread. It's fascinating.
I could only read about half of it. The rest gave me a headache.
| 604 |
cliffster Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:52:37pm |
re: #598 SanFranciscoZionist
Until Joe can collect Bob's SSI, and have their marriage be recongized in any state in the union, they do not have the same treatment.
You left out power of attorney.
| 605 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:52:54pm |
re: #600 allegro
Just to throw another wrench in... why aren't we discussing why marriage grants special rights over being single?
OVERLOAD!!!!
| 606 |
jaunte Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:52:55pm |
re: #598 SanFranciscoZionist
Until Joe can collect Bob's SSI, and have their marriage be recongized in any state in the union, they do not have the same treatment.
What about Dennis Prager's right not to feel icky?
| 607 |
windsagio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:54:21pm |
People are really throwing out zingers tonight!
| 609 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:55:38pm |
re: #599 LudwigVanQuixote
Good points. America needs to bite the bullet and pass a Constitutional amendment legalizing same sex marriages in all states making it a basic right.
| 610 |
Girth Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:56:10pm |
re: #600 allegro
Just to throw another wrench in... why aren't we discussing why marriage grants special rights over being single?
No, seriously, I would argue against certain things that are granted by marriage, but that's for another day.
Back later, or maybe not.
Peace.
| 611 |
windsagio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:56:34pm |
re: #609 Gus 802
sadly, there are alot of things we NEED to do (*cough*singlepayer*cough*) that we won't see in your lifetime OR mine.
| 612 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:56:41pm |
re: #601 Canadhimmis
Oh for crying out loud.. It was context. Yes it it is true that the line you mentioned was there. However, the article did not say what you claimed it said. What is wrong with you? OK. That is the lie. Where did it say that the Crusades were defensive as you claimed?
Look I get the game you are playing. It is all very easy to divert with semantics. It doesn't change the fact that you came out with a load of lies in context. You claimed that the article I brought supported your thesis and got really indignant about it. You even called me a bigot, just like your buddy Bagua tried to multiple times.
So again, because you really are in his mold - the same mealy mouthed prevarications and shifting of points, let's review...
You lied about the pope not mentioning Jerusalem. You lied that the primary cause of the Crusades was defensive. You are a liar. Whining about the history you distorted by attempting to take mock affront does not change the fact that yes indeed you really actually were lying about the history. Further, while yes the Wiki I gave makes mention to the embassy of the Byzantines, the article goes on to be quite clear that was not the cause of the crusade. Your claim that it was, was the lie. Your claim that somehow that article supports your lies is yet another lie.
| 613 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:57:25pm |
re: #602 LudwigVanQuixote
Then don't lie.
I never lie Ludwig. Never. Despite your alleging his falsely a couple dozen times in this one thread.
You should try letting go of your hatred and need to label people. We are a small group of people who discuss things on this forum, there really is no need for all this hostility, anger and derogatory labelling.
| 614 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:57:56pm |
re: #599 LudwigVanQuixote
PIMF
If someone wants to take a religious perspective on Gay civil unions, I think the only sensible one would be to ask how is it that we have messed up heterosexual marriage so badly?
The notion that gay unions are a threat to hetero marriages is just insane.
Does a husband who is about to cheat think, "I better police up my act, because gay people can't get married and therefore my vows to my wife are holy?"
Does a wife who is about to cheat think "I should work it out with him because gay people can't get married and therefore my vows to my husband are holy?"
Do couples spend more quality time listening to each other and working things out because they realize that since gay people can't get married, they should have extra responsibility to work things out like adults?
Of course not.
If there is anything at all that the phenomenon of gay marriage says to heteros it should be, wow, "how is it that they the only ones who are loudly clamoring for marriage?"
Homophobia, like all irrational fears leads to thinking silly things.
| 615 |
windsagio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:58:11pm |
re: #609 Gus 802
on the other hand, what do you think of Washington States "All the listed and unlisted rights of marriage" civil unions law? How important should the word be?
| 616 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 8:58:41pm |
re: #609 Gus 802
Good points. America needs to bite the bullet and pass a Constitutional amendment legalizing same sex marriages in all states making it a basic right.
I agree fully. Or at the very least, the supreme court could rule that a State could not deny a civil union.
| 617 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:00:04pm |
re: #615 windsagio
on the other hand, what do you think of Washington States "All the listed and unlisted rights of marriage" civil unions law? How important should the word be?
Granting the same rights as marriage with civil unions? I'm not familiar with this. Unlisted rights sounds a little vague.
| 618 |
windsagio Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:01:53pm |
re: #617 Gus 802
I'll get the official law once I find it. Unlisted I threw in, essentially it says 'all these rights plus any we missed in writing this'. The idea is that it covers everything.
| 619 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:02:27pm |
re: #613 Bagua
I never lie Ludwig. Never. Despite your alleging his falsely a couple dozen times in this one thread.
You should try letting go of your hatred and need to label people. We are a small group of people who discuss things on this forum, there really is no need for all this hostility, anger and derogatory labelling.
You lied that I hate Christians. You lied that I hate Catholics. You lied that the Inquisition was a small thing.
You lied about lying.
You lied by attempting to paint yourself as reasonable.
You also lied that I agree with you on most things when you were insulting Obdicut. You have lied in the past about the science of AGW. You have lied about what science is. You have lied about what is proven or disproven. You are a liar.
What is most obnoxious about it is that you don't have to courage of your convictions. IF coming out with mock affront doesn't get you the response you want, you whimper and try to front as if you are somehow reasonable, or above the fight yous tarted. Dude, you really are just a liar. Own it.
| 620 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:02:46pm |
re: #616 LudwigVanQuixote
I agree fully. Or at the very least, the supreme court could rule that a State could not deny a civil union.
That would work too. That is to force interstate marriage rights while at the same time allowing states to decide whether they can perform same sex marriages or civil unions? Thus a gay couple could get married in Iowa yet live in Nebraska where gay marriages couldn't be performed but Nebraska would have to accept the marriage contract from Iowa. Like that?
| 621 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:03:26pm |
re: #620 Gus 802
That would work too. That is to force interstate marriage rights while at the same time allowing states to decide whether they can perform same sex marriages or civil unions? Thus a gay couple could get married in Iowa yet live in Nebraska where gay marriages couldn't be performed but Nebraska would have to accept the marriage contract from Iowa. Like that?
Exactly. That would be the neatest solution.
| 623 |
allegro Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:05:05pm |
re: #621 LudwigVanQuixote
Exactly. That would be the neatest solution.
I disagree. Either everyone has equal rights or they don't.
| 624 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:06:13pm |
Wowser.
The comment at # 612 is straight out of the twilight zone. LudwigVanQuixote manages to call me a liar 8 times in the process of saying that I was truthful.
from # 612:
"Yes it it is true that the line you mentioned was there."
| 625 |
Gus Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:06:24pm |
re: #622 windsagio
Right. Essentially it's the same as marriage. I always thought that strategically that should have been the first goal. Domestic partnerships or civil unions first, then, as society evolves, transitioning into same sex marriage.
| 626 |
Obdicut Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:14:21pm |
re: #625 Gus 802
I used to fight that as an unnecessary concession to the religious right, but it was tactically stupid of me. After talking with my gay friends, they would all prefer the rights to the word. Some of them even made the point that as we move past this ugly point in our history, changing the word makes sense, dispensing with a tainted older form and taking on a better one.
| 627 |
Canadhimmis Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:14:37pm |
LudwigVanQuixote appears to be participating in both "discussions" in this thread.
I hereby wager that LudwigVanQuixote will eventually call several people liars on several occassions, sometimes even managing the feat numerous times in one comment.
The wager is two (unopened) cans of Starkist Tuna.
,......any takers?
.
| 628 |
Bagua Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:16:57pm |
re: #619 LudwigVanQuixote
You are hostile man Ludwig. No one else on this forum acts like you or talks like you. You have now called me a liar about 30 times or more in one thread, and others as well. Based entirely on flawed reasoning and exaggerated allegations.
This is entirely childish behaviour and name calling. It is to your shame. It is also thuggish behaviour, the belief that you can win by shouting down and demeaning your opponents.
Carry on calling all your opponents morons, ignorant and liars. You drag the forum down with this sort of behaviour. I'm not sure why it's repeatedly tolerated.
| 629 |
Vambo Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:18:17pm |
re: #428 Gavriel
The government prosecuted him.
And yes, it was in Canada, not the US.
Just pointing out that Prager's worry is not a ridiculous straw man.
I think it is. Exhibit "W" for Westboro Baptist Church.
| 630 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:21:25pm |
re: #628 Bagua
NO Bagua, coming out and claiming I hate Catholics or Christians was a lie.
It just was.
Claiming that the Inquisition was a mall thing and promoting the general notion that the Church had a nonviolent history compared to the Muslims was a lie.
Whining as if you didn't lie, is another lie.
You are called a liar because you have lied and been caught n them. The same goes for your little protoge as well.
| 631 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:22:49pm |
re: #628 Bagua
And while we are at it, who would not respond harshly to being called a bigot and having their words twisted? Sorry bagsy, it gets tolerated, because other people know you are lying too. :)
| 632 |
Almost Killed by Space Hookers Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:25:08pm |
re: #623 allegro
I disagree. Either everyone has equal rights or they don't.
I hear that. In a perfect world, there would jut be civil union laws. However, in the real world, we will never get an amendment supporting gay marriage passed. It just simply will not happen.
The best that can be hoped for in the near term is having the states forced to recognize other state's unions via the court.
| 633 |
simoom Tue, Dec 29, 2009 11:10:58pm |
re: #69 Canadhimmis
2. GOP voters are on average higher income earners and average a higher level of education than do Democratic Party voters.
See the the 2008 exit polling:
[Link: www.cnn.com...]
[Link: election.cbsnews.com...]
[Link: elections.nytimes.com...]
What you'll find is that Obama led among voters regardless of education, though especially voters with the most (post-grad) and the least (no high school). But, you'll also see, as soon as race is added to the equation, the patterns change (for example, among white voters, the less educated, the more likely they voted for McCain).
Income presents a muddier picture. Obama lead among voters who earned the least, but when you look at all earners above 50K or all above 100K, the two candidates split that vote. Also, the wealthiest (top 6% of earners) were somewhat more likely to have voted for Obama.
| 634 |
Canadhimmis Wed, Dec 30, 2009 2:10:47am |
simoom,
The stats I provided earlier in the thread were from the 2004 election. Obviously the results you've linked to (2008) differ from that result. The original point was made to dismantle LudwigVanQuixote comment at # 2 as not being based in fact. My personal belief is that neither GOP or Dem supporters are more intelligent than the other.
| 635 |
jordash1212 Wed, Dec 30, 2009 3:57:07am |
It certainly begs the question how these people are elected to office. I still can't get over the fact how my homestate, Minnesota, voted in Bachman and Ellison, let alone Franken.
| 636 |
jeffm70 Wed, Dec 30, 2009 6:00:22am |
100% of black cats are black. King's logic applies to all kinds of scenarios where things that are are 100% of what they are.
| 637 |
metrolibertarian Wed, Dec 30, 2009 6:35:39am |
Funny to hear Peter King decrying terrorism, considering he was all for Irish Republican Army terrorism (that is, until they opposed the invasion of Iraq, because, you know, principles). Though I guess if the terrorists are Catholics they aren't really terrorists.
| 638 |
Wozza Matter? Wed, Dec 30, 2009 7:47:53am |
this follows a grand tradition of Republican common sense on the issue of Islam. Only Virgil Goode has the answers - limit Muslim immigration so that American born congressmen don't reach the House......
[Link: www.foxnews.com...]
| 639 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Wed, Dec 30, 2009 8:35:24am |
King used to chair the House Homeland Security Committee.
If that doesn't give you confidence in the competence of our national security apparatus, I don't know what will.
| 640 |
erraticsphinx Wed, Dec 30, 2009 12:38:15pm |
re: #637 metrolibertarian
Yeah, I remember that. Peter King's relationship with the IRA should be pointed out more often, not that he isn't a bastard already.
| 642 |
S.D. Wed, Dec 30, 2009 3:14:07pm |
It's seriously disturbing. Don't they know what OTHER group in the 1930's targeted a Specific religion? Do they really want to emulate that practice?
Yes, people screwed up here.
No, targeting a religion or ethnicity won't help simply (among other reasons) because once they do that, the terrorists will simply change tactics and disguises.
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Alone in a Bathroom: The Fear and Uncertainty of a Post-Roe Medication Abortion Angel tucked two white pills into each side of her mouth, bracing herself as they began to dissolve. Her deepest fears and anxieties took over. Angel had wanted to talk to a doctor before she took the pills to ... Cheechako
They Were Desperate to Get Pregnant. Then IVF Gave Them Extra Embryos. One morning last spring, Ashley Harrolle put her 1-year-old daughter down for a nap and went to the kitchen. She pulled up her fertility clinic’s contact information. It was time to make the call. In a freezer several hundred ... CheechakoJoe Bacon ✅
March FavoritesYou've seen these all already but looking back, just because. These are my favorite shots of this last month. That 1937 Zeiss Sonnar is such a gloriously wonderful bit of glass. Thanks for looking.
William Lewis
Russia’s New Combat Robots Blown Up by Drones Near Avdiivka When we landed on the moon, I thought about how science fiction had become real. Now, the robot wars have begun. It's more poignant somehow on the ground than in the missile wars we have in the air as ...
Rightwingconspirator
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ... CheechakoKGxvi
Abortions Outside Medical System Increased Sharply After Roe Fell, Study Finds The number of women using abortion pills to end their pregnancies on their own without the direct involvement of a U.S.-based medical provider rose sharply in the months after the Supreme Court eliminated a constitutional right to abortion, according ... Cheechako
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ... Cheechako
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ... Cheechako
