Text 5151, 146 rader
Skriven 2009-04-23 17:06:29 av Ed Hulett (1:123/789.0)
   Kommentar till text 5096 av Ross Sauer (1:123/789.0)
Ärende: COGNITIVE DIFFICULTY.....
=================================
Ross Sauer -> Ed Hulett wrote:
 RS> "Ed Hulett -> Ross Sauer" <1:123/789.0> wrote in
 RS> news:9204$HOLYSMOKE@JamNNTPd:

 EH>>>> Only because the extreme left is trying to eradicate religion
 EH>>   from the EH>> social conscience.

 RS>>> The "extreme left" is groups like the communist party.
 RS>>> Nothing less.

 EH>> That is a lie. The extreme left is comprised of people like you.

 RS> BULL-SHIT.

You are in denial.

 RS>>> As to "eradicating religion," among progressives, that's a damn
 EH>>   lie.

 EH>> Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!

 EH>> Have you read some of the atheist sites on the web?

 RS> Fine. Show me.

Just read some of the atheist sites.

 RS>>> It's the theocratic right-wing Christians that want our
 EH>>   government to keep RS> on shoving mandatory Christian rites among
 EH>>   everyone.

 EH>> That is nonsense.

 RS> Again, BULL-SHIT.

Just like the rest of the extreme left, you think that including alternatives
to the theory of evolution is "shoving Christian mandatory rites among
everyone" (sic).

 RS>>> One example: Mandating the Pledge of Allegiance in schools, as
 EH>>   it is now. RS> With that "under God" in it, that was stuck into it
 EH>>   during McCarthyism in RS> 1954.

 EH>> Blah blah blah...

 RS> Is this a fact, or not?

No one is mandating the pledge. "[U]nder Gad" is a part of the pledge now and
will remain so. It makes you look foolish to continue whining about it.

 RS>>> Don't forget groups that continue to try to shove their
 EH>>   religious dogma RS> into science classrooms, even though they have
 EH>>   jack shit to actually back RS> up their suppositions.

 EH>> Like I said, you people want to eradicate religion from society. You
 EH>> keep pointing to Jefferson's comment in a letter to a Baptist minister
 EH>> where he talked of a "wall of separation" between church and state as
 EH>> if it was stated as such in the Bill of Rights.

 RS> Fine. *WHICH* religion you want in our government, which is what
 RS> Jefferson was addressing in that letter?

Good grief, you do go on about some silly things. I support the First Amendment
-- "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise there of;..."

 RS> If the loudest religion in government pushers had their way, *YOUR*
 RS> religion would be illegal.

You don't know what you are talking about. No religion, other than Islam, wants
theocratic control of government.

 EH>> What you people keep ignoring is that the real language in the First
 EH>> Amendment states something entirely different. "Congress shall make
 EH>> not law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
 EH>> free exercise thereof;...

 RS> And this means as the Supreme Court keeps stating, over and over and
 RS> over is that our government is *NEUTRAL* regarding religion.

Exactly!

 EH>> You people want to prohibit the free exercise of religion wherever you
 EH>> find it.

 RS> That is simply a damn lie, pushed by theocrats.

No, it is not. It's the truth.

 RS> Tell you what.
 RS> You have a public park you walk/drive past on a regular basis?

Yes.

 RS> Suppose one day you see a monument having been erected there, glorifying
 RS> Islam, complete with loudspeakers gving a call to prayer several times a
 RS> day.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!

Do they have mosques in Wisconsin that have loud speakers giving the call to
prayer? To my knowledge that only happens in majority Muslim countries.

The closest Islamic congregational building from here is about 4 miles away.
It's also very small. Your example would never happen here. Never.

 RS> Would you just ignore it? Fat chance.

A loud speaker calling to prayer is different than an innocuous Ten
Commandments on display in a court of law.

No Christian, Jewish, or any other religion that I know of has public loud
speakers blaring their call to prayer.

 RS> So why should you ditwit "Christian" theocrats be allowed to stick your
 RS> Christian crap in any public area?

Why shouldn't we? What bother is it to you to have to walk by a display of the
"Ten Commandments" on your way into court?

 RS> Look up Roy Moore, then get back to me.

Why should I? You want to make a point, make it!

 RS> And no stupid excuses.

You keep using that line like you are somehow the arbiter of what is a stupid
excuse. Let me set you straight on this folly of yours. You don't have the
upper hand in this thread or in any thread you try to act intelligent in.

Ed

-- 
"Wise politicians will be cautious about fettering the government with
restrictions that cannot be observed, because they know that every
break of the fundamental laws, though dictated by necessity, impairs
that sacred reverence which ought to be maintained in the breast of
rulers towards the constitution of a country."

--Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 25, 21 December 1787

Linux User #416016
Linux Machine #385030

--- Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318)
 * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)