Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
J
We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
wins in the end.
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/289471.html
Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
On Friday, these leaders released a 4,700-word document - called the "The
Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience."
The document was signed by leaders ranging from evangelical leader Chuck
Colson to two of the leading Catholic prelates in the U.S., Archbishop
Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. and Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York,
and calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
doctrines.
--
J Young
Jvis...@live.com
Lefty
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement, me and my KKK brothers.
> We didn't achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today and continue to be laughed at. Decency always
> wins in the end, and man, do I love a boy with a decent rear end!
> http://www.newsmax.com/rightwingturds/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian_rapist/2009/11/21/28...
Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Sodomy is Prosecuted
> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to stop enjoying the pleasures of pedophilic sodomy,
> which they insist is a key component of evangelical and Catholic doctrine and thus should be constitutionally protected.
> On Friday, these leaders released a 4,700-word document - called the "The
> Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience."
>
> The document was signed by leaders ranging from evangelical leader Chuck
> Colson to two of the leading Catholic prelates in the U.S., Archbishop
> Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. and Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York,
> and calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
> doctrines.
>
> --
> J Young
Mitchell Holman
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same
> today. Decency always wins in the end.
>
>
>
> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/2894
> 71.html
>
>
> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect
> Faith
>
Isn't that what witch burnings and inquisitions
were all about - "laws respecting faith"?
Ray Fischer
>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>wins in the end.
And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Nosterill
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> wins in the end.
>
>
> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>
> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
If the law forced anyone to have an abortion or forced them into a
same-sex marriage, then they might have a point - but we all know that
isn't true, don't we J? This is all about imposing their will on
others who don't accept their mythology.
This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
W.T.S.
news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
> Decency always wins in the end.
> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/289471.html
No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
they have to say.
Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
Dysperdis
obligation to follow laws protecting others.
http://www.idrewthis.org/d/20050418.html
--
Society, like water, needs to move and change to remain fresh. To keep
it from doing so is to allow it to become stagnant and malodorous. The
religious right would have us all living in a swamp to assuage their own
fears.
�The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye. The more light you
shine on it, the more it will contract.� �Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
"Never trust a man who puts his words in the mouth of god and says it's
absolute truth" -Voltaire, "/God Thinks/"
How to argue like a bigot: http://www.derailingfordummies.com/
anonymous
There is no suggestion that any person religous or not religious has to
accept abortion, same sex marriage or other ideas that betray their
religous beliefs, but having said that, those same organizations
sometimes have event halls, gambling in the form of bingo or something
more sophisticated and where liquor, and/or gambling are part of any
event in a building run by a religous organziation, they must obey the
law just like any group or private business and that often means that
discrimination can't take place. If you get a license to sell liquor
then homosexuals and blacks and jews would be able to attend the public
event or if it is a private event, the church would have to rent to jew,
homos and blacks. On the other hand, if no liquor was being served, and
no state, country or city laws were being broken then the church can say
to the people they want to say no to. It has be tested in the courts.
You can't descriminate when it comes to licencing issues issued at any
level of government.
Any busines or bar or bambling house or church can ban anyone from
attending because the person has cuased trouble or is causing trouble
but no business or church can say I won't rent to jews, black or
homosexuals. It is not about the freedom of religion but the privilege
of having a licence to make money can't be done at the expense of
certain segments of society being excluded as a group.
duke
No. Witches.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
duke
America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
Constitution.
duke
wrote:
>On Nov 23, 5:14�am, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>> wins in the end.
>>
>> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>>
>> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>>
>> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
>> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
>> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
>> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>
>If the law forced anyone to have an abortion or forced them into a
>same-sex marriage, then they might have a point - but we all know that
>isn't true, don't we J? This is all about imposing their will on
>others who don't accept their mythology.
Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
>This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
>about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
We don't deny your rights. You don't have the right to special rights.
duke
It's the religious voters that you must accept.
duke
>The religious leaders you speak of want legal protections without the
>obligation to follow laws protecting others.
Nope, you are subject to the religious voters that have the right to have their
beliefs represented.
duke
We do.
> If you get a license to sell liquor
>then homosexuals and blacks and jews would be able to attend the public
>event
They do.
> or if it is a private event, the church would have to rent to jew,
>homos and blacks.
Not for a queer ball.
> On the other hand, if no liquor was being served, and
>no state, country or city laws were being broken then the church can say
>to the people they want to say no to.
Yep.
> It has be tested in the courts.
>You can't descriminate when it comes to licencing issues issued at any
>level of government.
You sounds like you just woke up today.
duke
>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvis...@live.com> in
>alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f....@news.alt.net> wrote:
>
>>calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
>>doctrines.
>OK. The construction industry would enjoy building bigger prisons. We
>have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
Buckwheat's brothers and sisters didn't go to jail for civil disobedience.
W.T.S.
news:uu0lg5poq0dt2ac61...@4ax.com...
> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>J <Jvis...@live.com> wrote:
>>>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>>>movement.
>>>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency
>>>always
>>>wins in the end.
>>And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
>>that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in
> the
> Constitution.
> The Dukester, American-American
> Pope Paul VI
World Trade Center and thousands of lives. Only the force of arms keeps
them at bay. Does our Constitution give them the right to their religious
beliefs? No. From the President to the individual, even a church and its
power structure must obey the law and the courts. A local religious leader
just got 175 years in prison for transporting minors across state lines for
the purposes for forced marriages and forced breeding, even though his
church "doctrine" called for such conduct. Your free exercise of religion
ends where the rights of others begin. That's why we're not living in the
dark ages anymore, the rule of law, not of some made up "bible".
Church, bad. Abortions, good.
W.T.S.
> Pope Paul VI
preach down or vote down basic human rights. You will not preach down or
vote down the Constitution. Even a voter must comply with the constitution.
During the civil rights movement, people, religious people, voted for
segregation and against basic civil rights. The Constitution was supreme,
and the voters and churches had to obey the Constitution. Today, all
churches must, and will, obey human rights. It may take one decade or five
decades, but the church and religious leaders will be brought to heal!
Churches, bad. Abortions, good.
W.T.S.
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:09:46 -0800, Dysperdis <dysp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>The religious leaders you speak of want legal protections without the
>>obligation to follow laws protecting others.
> Nope, you are subject to the religious voters that have the right to have
> their
> beliefs represented.
> The Dukester, American-American
> Pope Paul VI
allows him. The church only has rights that the Constitution allows it to
have. Beleive whatever you wish, but you will not be allowed to push your
sick, degenerate religion off onto the public. Churches shall be brought to
heal.
Churches, pure evil. Abortions, pure good.
W.T.S.
>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>>> movement.
>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency
>>> always
>>> wins in the end.
>>> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>>> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect
>>> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders
>>> are
>>> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority -
>>> and
>>> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept
>>> abortion,
>>> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>>If the law forced anyone to have an abortion or forced them into a
>>same-sex marriage, then they might have a point - but we all know that
>>isn't true, don't we J? This is all about imposing their will on
>>others who don't accept their mythology.
> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
>>This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
>>about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
> We don't deny your rights. You don't have the right to special rights.
> The Dukester, American-American
> Pope Paul VI
is a lie, Jesus is a lie, the bible is a lie, it's all lies designed to gain
money and power for the church and its leadership. There's nothing special
about basic human rights. All the minorities are asking for is the same
basic human rights majorities have. Churches must learn to obey the
Constitution. My bible says it all, "Church, bad. Abortions, good."
Jimbo
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> We achieved our goals then,
Only partially so. The Vietnam war was still going on until 1975, and
ended not so much because of civil disobediance, but the fact that the
general population had grown weary of 15 years worth of war. The one
thing that did come out of the 1960's and the protest movements was
that it brought a general awareness of the cost of the war in terms of
human life.
> Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> wins in the end.
>
Except you are not decent.
Jimbo
> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>wins in the end.
>
> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> Constitution.
>
It does not allow you to trample the rights of others in the process,
however.
W.T.S.
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:17:12 GMT, anonymous <anon...@anonymous.com>
> wrote:
>>J wrote:
>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>>> movement.
>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency
>>> always
>>> wins in the end.
>>> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/289471.html
>>> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect
>>> Faith
If it were any other way, we'd still have religious terror invading our
lives, just as the Catholic Church practiced during the Dark Ages.
Religion, bad. Abortion, good. Bible, bad. Sex, good.
Jimbo
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:49:15 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Nov 23, 5:14 am, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> wins in the end.
>
> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>
> >> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>
> >> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
> >> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> >> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
> >> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>
> >If the law forced anyone to have an abortion or forced them into a
> >same-sex marriage, then they might have a point - but we all know that
> >isn't true, don't we J? This is all about imposing their will on
> >others who don't accept their mythology.
>
> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
>
You have yet to prove that it is anything other than mythology. So,
since I have the absolute right to practice my freedom of religon,
which, by definition, includes no religion, I believe it to be
mythology.
Jimbo
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >"J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote in message
> >news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> >> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
> >> Decency always wins in the end.
> >"newsmax", We know how to lie to the max!
> >No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
> >they have to say.
> >Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
>
> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
>
Nope, there is nothing in the constitution regarding having to accept
religious voters.
W.T.S.
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:25:45 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvis...@live.com> in
>>alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f....@news.alt.net> wrote:
>>>calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
>>>doctrines.
>>OK. The construction industry would enjoy building bigger prisons. We
>>have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
> Buckwheat's brothers and sisters didn't go to jail for civil disobedience.
> The Dukester, American-American
> Pope Paul VI
Religion will be brought to heal, sooner or later. Religion will be kicked
out of the life of America.
IAAH
> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>> J<Jvis...@live.com> wrote:
>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>>> wins in the end.
>>
>> And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
>> that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> Constitution.
It doesn't allow the suppression of others' rights. Tough shit.
--
"I do not pretend to be able to prove that there is no God. I equally cannot
prove that Satan is a fiction. The Christian godmay exist; so may the
gods of
Olympus, or of ancient Egypt, or of Babylon. But no one of these
hypotheses is
more probable than any other: they lie outside the region of even probable
knowledge, and therefore there is no reason to consider any of them."
- Bertrand Russell
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <www.LayoffRemedy.com>
> This is the same strategy [that was] employed during the 60's civil rights
> movement...
...by EGALITARIANS. When it was JUSTIFIED.
NOW **you** are advocating that the ignorant and hateful BIGOTS
employ it. That's NO surprise, coming from a socially-retarded LOSER like
YOU, "IBen."
<parroted SWILL flushed>
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
��� Rest in Peace ���
��� George Richard Tiller, MD ���
��� A True American HERO! ���
��� August 8, 1941 � May 31, 2009 ���
��� Visit -- http://iamdrtiller.com ���
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
-- Craig Chilton <xana...@mchsi.com>
www.LayoffRemedy.com -- Unemployment Solution!
www.ChristianEgalitarian.com -- Fight the RRR Cult!
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Tactics: Defending Human Rights
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Exposing RRR Bigotry
www.shadowandillusion.com -- Learn "The LOPAQUA Secret!"
www.TravelForPay.org -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL!
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <www.LayoffRemedy.com>
"Jon Young"/"IBen Getiner" Seeks to WARP Civil Disobedience
by Advocating that Hateful BIGOTS do it!
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500,
"Jon Young"/"IBen Getiner" <Jvis...@live.com> spewed::
> This is the same strategy [that was] employed during the 60's civil rights
> movement...
...by EGALITARIANS. When it was honorable and JUSTIFIABLE.
LC
"J" <Jvis...@live.com> wrote in message
news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders
> are calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority -
> and even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept
> abortion, same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious
> beliefs.
Please do!
The sooner we can get rid of all religiously-based tax exemptions the
better.
Nosterill
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:49:15 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Nov 23, 5:14 am, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> wins in the end.
>
> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>
> >> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>
> >> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
> >> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> >> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
> >> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>
> >If the law forced anyone to have an abortion or forced them into a
> >same-sex marriage, then they might have a point - but we all know that
> >isn't true, don't we J? This is all about imposing their will on
> >others who don't accept their mythology.
>
> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
Of course it's mythology. What else can it be?
>
> >This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
> >about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
>
> We don't deny your rights.
Not yet - but you are trying. Abortion is a choice that is legally
protected and that shouldn't change just because a cross dressing Nazi
in a foreign country objects to it.
>You don't have the right to special rights.
Freedom from religiously imposed repression is not a special right -
it's a basic freedom.
Spartakus
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> wins in the end.
What do you mean "we", paleface?
> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>
> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>
> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
Back in the 1960s, people used civil disobedience as a tactic for
advancing human rights. The idea was to demonstrate the injustice of
a law by disobeying it and accepting the legal consequences.
What unjust laws are you all going to disobey? I think you will find
that people really don't want to go to jail for purposes of denying
other citizens their rights.
Ray Fischer
>>>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>>>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>>>wins in the end.
>>
>>that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
>America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs.
And you're opposed to such free exercise. You want everybody
to obey your cult's rules.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Syd M.
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> wins in the end.
>
You and your fellows in the RCC are not decent, Junkie Young; You do
not get to demand respect while denying others respect.
> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>
> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>
Citizens to RCC: Mind your own business, old man. This is not a civil
rights issue, and you know it.
Stop trying to force your faith on everyone else.
PDW
Syd M.
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:31:46 -0600, Mitchell Holman <noem...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >"J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote innews:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net:
>
> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> >> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same
> >> today. Decency always wins in the end.
>
> >> 71.html
>
> >> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect
> >> Faith
>
> >were all about - "laws respecting faith"?
>
> No. Witches.
>
>
Wrong yet again, Dork.
PDW
Syd M.
> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>wins in the end.
>
> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> Constitution.
>
>
But that's not what this is about, liar Webber. This is about forcing
your faith on others against their will.
PDW
VoiceOfReason
Any religious organization that acts as a Political Action Committee
should have its tax-exempt status revoked immediately.
Syd M.
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:49:15 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> wins in the end.
>
>
> >> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>
> >> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> >> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
> >> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>
> >same-sex marriage, then they might have a point - but we all know that
> >isn't true, don't we J? This is all about imposing their will on
> >others who don't accept their mythology.
>
> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
>
> >about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
>
>
>
To bad their not asking for 'special rights,' idiot liar Dork. The
only ones asking for 'special rights' are the RCC.
PDW
Syd M.
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> >> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
> >> Decency always wins in the end.
> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
> >No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
> >they have to say.
> >Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
>
> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
>
>
Not when they are intent on forcing their faith on the rest of us.
PDW
Syd M.
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:09:46 -0800, Dysperdis <dysper...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >The religious leaders you speak of want legal protections without the
> >obligation to follow laws protecting others.
>
> Nope, you are subject to the religious voters that have the right to have their
> beliefs represented.
>
>
Not when they attempt to force others to live under their faith,
Webber.
PDW
BOB
b516-984...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>
> Any religious organization that acts as a Political Action Committee
> should have its tax-exempt status revoked immediately.
All religious organizations should have their tax-exempt status revoked
irregardless of any PAC activities.
SkyEyes
> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>wins in the end.
>
> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> Constitution.
Anyone who paid *any* attention in high-school history (o course, that
excludes *you*, doesn't it, Puke?) knows that freedom of religion is
*not* an absolute right in this country. Ask any member of the
Native American Church, if you're wondering about that. Or any
Mormon. Or a Rastafarian. There are any number of religions that
have been either outlawed or kept on a very short leash by the U.S.
government.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
The Chief Instigator
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> wins in the end.
>
>
>
>
>
> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>
>
> Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience."
>
>
> The document was signed by leaders ranging from evangelical leader Chuck
> Colson to two of the leading Catholic prelates in the U.S., Archbishop
> Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. and Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York,
> and calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
> doctrines.
If they don't mind martyring themselves for an idiotic cause, what's the
problem? Fewer morons to push the mellennia-old scam of organized religion.
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2008-09 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Milwaukee 2, Houston 1 (OT, November 22)
NEXT GAME: Wednesday, November 25 at Hamilton, 6:05
The Chief Instigator
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:09:46 -0800, Dysperdis <dysp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>The religious leaders you speak of want legal protections without the
>>obligation to follow laws protecting others.
>
> Nope, you are subject to the religious voters that have the right to have their
> beliefs represented.
You and your Pope-fellaters will not get your bullshit enforced on anyone
who isn't of your psychosis passing as a religion. You want an American
Inquisition? You'll be among the first to be removed. The Constitution is
the fundament of law in this country, and you'll leave it alone. Period.
The Chief Instigator
He'd better extricate his head from his ass before he finds out the hard way
that we don't want religious civil wars.
The Chief Instigator
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:49:15 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <flad...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 23, 5:14?am, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>>> wins in the end.
>>>
>>>
>>> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>>>
>>> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
>>> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
>>> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
>>> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>>
>>same-sex marriage, then they might have a point - but we all know that
>>isn't true, don't we J? This is all about imposing their will on
>>others who don't accept their mythology.
>
> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
>
>>This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
>>about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
>
> We don't deny your rights. You don't have the right to special rights.
You're a damnable asshole who wants nothing but complete power for your
thundering fraud of a church. All you're doing is bringing the day closer
when "Bomb the Vatican" will be supported my more people than you can count.
(Be careful of what you wish for, because you might get it.)
The Chief Instigator
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvis...@live.com> in
> alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f....@news.alt.net> wrote:
>
>>doctrines.
>
>
> have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
Not the Dakotas...I've got more than a few in-laws and kin in both of them.
A remote uninhabited part of Alaska would be better suited.
The Chief Instigator
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m1...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>"J" <Jvis...@live.com> wrote in message
>>news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>>> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
>>> Decency always wins in the end.
>
>>"newsmax", We know how to lie to the max!
>>No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
>>they have to say.
>>Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
>
> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
The "religious" voters don't get to destroy the Constitution, F�hrer Weber.
Dan Listermann
"The Chief Instigator" <pat...@io.com> wrote in message
news:slrnhglso8....@eris.io.com...
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:25:45 -0500, Attila <> wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvis...@live.com> in
>> alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f....@news.alt.net> wrote:
>>
>>>calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
>>>doctrines.
>>
>>
>> OK. The construction industry would enjoy building bigger prisons. We
>> have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
>
> Not the Dakotas...I've got more than a few in-laws and kin in both of
> them.
> A remote uninhabited part of Alaska would be better suited.
>
The Chief Instigator
No arguments there...Agattu Island (a little west of 177�W) would be
perfect, being uninhabited.
The Chief Instigator
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:10:30 -0500, Attila <> wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2009 20:39:37 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> in
> alt.abortion with message-id <slrnhglso8....@eris.io.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:25:45 -0500, Attila <> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvis...@live.com> in
>>> alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f....@news.alt.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
>>>>doctrines.
>>>
>>>
>>> OK. The construction industry would enjoy building bigger prisons. We
>>> have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
>>
>>Not the Dakotas...I've got more than a few in-laws and kin in both of them.
>>A remote uninhabited part of Alaska would be better suited.
>
> square mile or less.
True enough - five hours west on I-10 gets you out south of San Angelo.
The Chief Instigator
> On 23 Nov 2009 22:30:33 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> in
> alt.abortion with message-id <slrnhgm388....@eris.io.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:57:18 -0500, Dan Listermann <d...@listermann.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> "The Chief Instigator" <pat...@io.com> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnhglso8....@eris.io.com...
>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:25:45 -0500, Attila <> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvis...@live.com> in
>>>>> alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f....@news.alt.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
>>>>>>doctrines.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OK. The construction industry would enjoy building bigger prisons. We
>>>>> have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
>>>>
>>>> Not the Dakotas...I've got more than a few in-laws and kin in both of
>>>> them. A remote uninhabited part of Alaska would be better suited.
>>>>
>>> The Aleutian Islands would have interesting weather.
>>
>>perfect, being uninhabited.
>
> But is it big enough?
Probably not, but there are a number of Aleutian islands out there strung
out over about 1500 kilometers.
duke
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:uu0lg5poq0dt2ac61...@4ax.com...
>> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>J <Jvis...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>>>>movement.
>>>>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency
>>>>always
>>>>wins in the end.
>>>And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
>>>that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in
>> the
>> Constitution.
>> The Dukester, American-American
>> "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
>> Pope Paul VI
>The religious beliefs of certain persons called for the destruction of the
>World Trade Center and thousands of lives. Only the force of arms keeps
>them at bay. Does our Constitution give them the right to their religious
>beliefs?
They are not being prosecuted for their religious beliefs, which would violate
the Constitution, but for breaking the law.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
duke
>On Nov 23, 7:46�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
>> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>> >>wins in the end.
>>
>> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
>> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>>
>> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. �It's in the
>> Constitution.
>>
>
>It does not allow you to trample the rights of others in the process,
>however.
The Constitution prohibits you from interfering with the free exercise of my
religious beliefs.
duke
>duke wrote, On 09-11-23 7:46 AM:
>> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>> J<Jvis...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>>>> wins in the end.
>>>
>>> And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
>>> that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>>
>> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
>> Constitution.
>
>It doesn't allow the suppression of others' rights. Tough shit.
Then cut it out. I am protected by the Constitution.
duke
I vote.
Nosterill
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:39:14 -0500, IAAH <n...@email.exist> wrote:
> >duke wrote, On 09-11-23 7:46 AM:
> >>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>>> wins in the end.
>
> >>> And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >>> that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> >> Constitution.
>
> >It doesn't allow the suppression of others' rights. Tough shit.
>
> Then cut it out. I am protected by the Constitution.
And so are the people who don't share your beliefs.
duke
>On Nov 23, 5:46�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
>> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>> >>wins in the end.
>>
>> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
>> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>>
>> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. �It's in the
>> Constitution.
>
>Anyone who paid *any* attention in high-school history (o course, that
>excludes *you*, doesn't it, Puke?) knows that freedom of religion is
>*not* an absolute right in this country.
The First Amendment reads, in its entirety:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances."
Stay out of my life. Life and death are the only absolute rights, and they are
not controlled by the Constitution.
duke
>> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
>Of course it's mythology!
Why do you push the fable that God is a myth?
duke
wrote:
>On Nov 23, 1:47�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:49:15 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Nov 23, 5:14�am, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
>> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>> >> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>> >> wins in the end.
>>
>> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>> >This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
>> >about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
>> We don't deny your rights. �
>Not yet - but you are trying. Abortion is a choice that is legally
>protected and that shouldn't change just because a cross dressing Nazi
>in a foreign country objects to it.
God doesn't dress as a nazi. But he will be your final judge.
duke
>>>This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
>>>about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
>> We don't deny your rights. You don't have the right to special rights.
>You're a damnable asshole who wants nothing but complete power for your
>thundering fraud of a church.
Satan is the only one that wants complete power over you. And he's getting it.
duke
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:341lg5d11og1nsbk8...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m1...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>"J" <Jvis...@live.com> wrote in message
>>>news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
>>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>>>> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
>>>> Decency always wins in the end.
>>>> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/289471.html
>>>"newsmax", We know how to lie to the max!
>>>No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
>>>they have to say.
>>>Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
>> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
>You can be as religious as you want, and vote all you want, but you will not
>preach down or vote down basic human rights.
Quit interfering with my rights.
duke
>On Nov 23, 7:48�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >"J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote in message
>> >news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
>> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>> >> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
>> >> Decency always wins in the end.
>> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>> >"newsmax", We know how to lie to the max!
>> >No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
>> >they have to say.
>> >Church, sick, evil, degenerate. �Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
>>
>> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
>>
>
>Nope, there is nothing in the constitution regarding having to accept
>religious voters.
Gobble, gobble, gobble.
duke
>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:48:32 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m1...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"J" <Jvis...@live.com> wrote in message
>>>news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
>>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
>>>> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
>>>> Decency always wins in the end.
>>>> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/289471.html
>>
>>>"newsmax", We know how to lie to the max!
>>>No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
>>>they have to say.
>>>Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
>>
>> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
>
>The "religious" voters don't get to destroy the Constitution, F�hrer Weber.
Neither do satan's minions like you.
duke
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:o51lg551d9dap02oa...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:09:46 -0800, Dysperdis <dysp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>The religious leaders you speak of want legal protections without the
>>>obligation to follow laws protecting others.
>> Nope, you are subject to the religious voters that have the right to have
>> their
>> beliefs represented.
>The religious voter has a right to nothing except what the Constitution
>allows him. The church only has rights that the Constitution allows it to
>have.
Neither do you satan minions.
duke
>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:49:34 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:09:46 -0800, Dysperdis <dysp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>The religious leaders you speak of want legal protections without the
>>>obligation to follow laws protecting others.
>>
>> Nope, you are subject to the religious voters that have the right to have their
>> beliefs represented.
>The Constitution is
>the fundament of law in this country, and you'll leave it alone. Period.
That's why you're stuck with us.
duke
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:lc1lg59dobeoqa0ob...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:25:45 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvis...@live.com> in
>>>alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f....@news.alt.net> wrote:
>>>>calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
>>>>doctrines.
>>>OK. The construction industry would enjoy building bigger prisons. We
>>>have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
>> Buckwheat's brothers and sisters didn't go to jail for civil disobedience.
>"Buckwheat"? What a quaint term of bigotry.
What's bigoted about it?
>Religion will be brought to heal, sooner or later. Religion will be kicked
>out of the life of America.
Atheists will die off first. We already outnumber you 25:1.
duke
>
>"J" <Jvis...@live.com> wrote in message
>news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
>
>> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders
>> are calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority -
>> and even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept
>> abortion, same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious
>> beliefs.
>
>Please do!
>The sooner we can get rid of all religiously-based tax exemptions the
>better.
All charity donations will then disappear.
duke
wrote:
>"J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
>
>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>> wins in the end.
>
>What do you mean "we", paleface?
>
>> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>>
>> Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don't Respect Faith
>>
>> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
>> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
>> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
>> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>
>Back in the 1960s, people used civil disobedience as a tactic for
>advancing human rights. The idea was to demonstrate the injustice of
>a law by disobeying it and accepting the legal consequences.
You mean like your trying to hinder my religious freedoms?
Nosterill
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:28:42 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Nov 23, 1:47 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:49:15 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Nov 23, 5:14 am, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> >> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> >> wins in the end.
>
> >> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
> >> >This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
> >> >about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
> >> We don't deny your rights.
> >Not yet - but you are trying. Abortion is a choice that is legally
> >protected and that shouldn't change just because a cross dressing Nazi
> >in a foreign country objects to it.
>
> God doesn't dress as a nazi. But he will be your final judge.
There really is no point in threatening me with that. Think about how
you see all the non-abrahamic religions, past and present: Ancient
Greek and Roman, ancient Egyptian, Aztec, Mayan, Hindu, Zoroastrian,
Celtic and a multitude of others. How do they look, and what do they
mean to you? That is just how Christianity looks from the outside. It
only has reality for it's believers. Trying to frighten us with your
bogeymen just makes you look childish.
MarkA
> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> wins in the end.
>
> http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
>
>
> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are
> calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority - and
> even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept abortion,
> same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
>
> Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience."
>
> The document was signed by leaders ranging from evangelical leader Chuck
> Colson to two of the leading Catholic prelates in the U.S., Archbishop
> Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. and Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York,
> and calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
> doctrines.
>
> --
> J Young
> Jvisi...@live.com
I must have missed the part where the laws force people to have
abortions and to marry homosexuals. As opposed to letting other
Americans, whom the government is also supposed to serve, exercise
these rights electively.
Fucktard.
haiku jones
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:56:18 -0800 (PST), SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 5:46 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> >>wins in the end.
>
> >> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> >> Constitution.
>
> >Anyone who paid *any* attention in high-school history (o course, that
> >excludes *you*, doesn't it, Puke?) knows that freedom of religion is
> >*not* an absolute right in this country.
>
> The First Amendment reads, in its entirety:
> "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
> prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
> the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
> Government for a redress of grievances."
>
> Stay out of my life. Life and death are the only absolute rights,
Death is an "absolute right"?
I did not know that.
So, I can forfeit my absolute right to die?
Cool! In fact, you're welcome to my
death if you'd like.
Haiku Jones
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:26:36 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 7:46 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> >>wins in the end.
>
> >> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> >> Constitution.
>
> >It does not allow you to trample the rights of others in the process,
> >however.
>
> The Constitution prohibits you from interfering with the free exercise of my
> religious beliefs.
It most certainly does if you are using your religious beliefs to
trample the rights of others, or to engage in criminal behavior.
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:39:14 -0500, IAAH <n...@email.exist> wrote:
> >duke wrote, On 09-11-23 7:46 AM:
> >>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>>> wins in the end.
>
> >>> And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >>> that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> >> Constitution.
>
> >It doesn't allow the suppression of others' rights. Tough shit.
>
> Then cut it out. I am protected by the Constitution.
>
Not if you are suppressing the rights of others.
Jimbo
> >>>>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >>>>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>>>wins in the end.
>
> >>>And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >>>that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >>America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs.
>
> >And you're opposed to such free exercise. You want everybody
> >to obey your cult's rules.
>
> I vote.
>
Not good enough where civil rights are concerned.
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:56:18 -0800 (PST), SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 5:46 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> >>wins in the end.
>
> >> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> >> Constitution.
>
> >Anyone who paid *any* attention in high-school history (o course, that
> >excludes *you*, doesn't it, Puke?) knows that freedom of religion is
> >*not* an absolute right in this country.
>
> The First Amendment reads, in its entirety:
> "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
> prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
> the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
> Government for a redress of grievances."
>
> Stay out of my life.
Not as long as you and your vicious religious cult refuses to stay out
of other people's lives. The 1st Amendment does not give you or your
pedophile organization the right to trample the rights of others.
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:20:58 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
> >Of course it's mythology!
>
> Why do you push the fable that God is a myth?
>
Since you cannot prove that he isn't a myth, then he must be a myth.
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:28:42 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Nov 23, 1:47 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:49:15 -0800 (PST), Nosterill <fladg...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Nov 23, 5:14 am, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> >> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> >> wins in the end.
>
> >> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
> >> >This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
> >> >about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
> >> We don't deny your rights.
> >Not yet - but you are trying. Abortion is a choice that is legally
> >protected and that shouldn't change just because a cross dressing Nazi
> >in a foreign country objects to it.
>
> God doesn't dress as a nazi. But he will be your final judge.
Many of his followers certainly did. Your church supported,
monetarilly and politically, Hitler and his regime.
Jimbo
> On 23 Nov 2009 20:35:22 GMT, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>
> >>>This is completely different from the civil rights movement which was
> >>>about gaining equal rights: This is all about denying rights.
> >> We don't deny your rights. You don't have the right to special rights.
> >You're a damnable asshole who wants nothing but complete power for your
> >thundering fraud of a church.
>
> Satan is the only one that wants complete power over you.
You have yet to prove that this satan thing actually exists, liar
pedophile earl.
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:06:58 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >"duke" <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:341lg5d11og1nsbk8...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>"J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
> >>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> >>>> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
> >>>> Decency always wins in the end.
> >>>"newsmax", We know how to lie to the max!
> >>>No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
> >>>they have to say.
> >>>Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
> >> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
> >You can be as religious as you want, and vote all you want, but you will not
> >preach down or vote down basic human rights.
>
> Quit interfering with my rights.
>
Quit fucking those altar boys up the ass, pedophile earl.
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:28:38 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 7:48 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:51:23 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >"J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
> >> >> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> >> >> movement. We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today.
> >> >> Decency always wins in the end.
> >> >>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/wuerl_colson_christian/2009/11/21/28...
> >> >"newsmax", We know how to lie to the max!
> >> >No one elected our religious "leaders" to anything, so we reject anything
> >> >they have to say.
> >> >Church, sick, evil, degenerate. Abortion, good, decent, wholesome.
>
> >> It's the religious voters that you must accept.
>
> >Nope, there is nothing in the constitution regarding having to accept
> >religious voters.
>
> Gobble, gobble, gobble.
>
Is that what you make those altar boys say, pedophile earl?
Jimbo
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:31:44 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >"duke" <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:lc1lg59dobeoqa0ob...@4ax.com...
> >> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:25:45 -0500, Attila <<procho...@here.now> wrote:
> >>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:14:54 -0500, "J" <Jvisi...@live.com> in
> >>>alt.abortion with message-id <3a9r9f.du5.1...@news.alt.net> wrote:
> >>>>calls on Christians to engage in civil disobedience to defend their
> >>>>doctrines.
> >>>OK. The construction industry would enjoy building bigger prisons. We
> >>>have plenty of unused space out west in Montana and the Dakotas.
> >> Buckwheat's brothers and sisters didn't go to jail for civil disobedience.
> >"Buckwheat"? What a quaint term of bigotry.
>
> What's bigoted about it?
>
> >Religion will be brought to heal, sooner or later. Religion will be kicked
> >out of the life of America.
>
> Atheists will die off first.
LOL! Not likely. The religionists around the world are busy
destroying themselves.
haiku jones
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:25:17 -0600, "LC" <LC__...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"J" <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote in message
> >news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
>
> >> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders
> >> are calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority -
> >> and even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept
> >> abortion, same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious
> >> beliefs.
>
> >Please do!
> >The sooner we can get rid of all religiously-based tax exemptions the
> >better.
>
> All charity donations will then disappear.
So, you'd only give if it got you a tax break?
Not me. I give to charities, and don't
even bother with the tax breaks. And
giving gift cards to friends who in turn
can give them to the charity of their
own choosing makes for lovely
Christman gifts.
So, how about you? What charities
will you be giving to this season, to
honor your Lord's commandments?
Haiku Jones
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <www.LayoffRemedy.com>
Earl Weber ("duke") <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> "LC" <LC_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Jon Young"/"IBen Getiner" <Jvis...@live.com> wrote:
>>> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders
>>> are calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority -
>>> and even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept
>>> abortion, same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious
>>> beliefs.
>> Please do!
>>
>> The sooner we can get rid of all religiously-based tax exemptions
>> the better.
> All charity donations will then disappear.
Bullcrap!! It takes a LOT of money being donated for a person
to QUALIFY for a tax break, and the vast majority of donors don't
even come close to making it there.
LC
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:25:17 -0600, "LC" <LC_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>"J" <Jvis...@live.com> wrote in message
>>news:3a9r9f....@news.alt.net...
>>> A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders
>>> are calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular
>>> authority -
>>> and even engage in civil disobedience - if laws force them to accept
>>> abortion, same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious
>>> beliefs.
>>Please do!
>>The sooner we can get rid of all religiously-based tax exemptions the
>>better.
> All charity donations will then disappear.
Quit lying, d00k.
Gwen Bennet
streets,.
Ray Fischer
>On 23 Nov 2009 18:05:59 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>J <Jvis...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
>>>>>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
>>>>>wins in the end.
>>>>
>>>>that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>>>
>>>America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs.
>>
>>to obey your cult's rules.
>
>I vote.
That's no excuse for being a Jesus-hating America-hating racist bigot.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
Syd
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:00:55 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >"duke" <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >>>J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >>>>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights
> >>>>movement.
> >>>>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency
> >>>>always
> >>>>wins in the end.
> >>>that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
> >> the
> >> Constitution.
> >> "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
> >> Pope Paul VI
> >World Trade Center and thousands of lives. Only the force of arms keeps
> >them at bay. Does our Constitution give them the right to their religious
> >beliefs?
>
> They are not being prosecuted for their religious beliefs, which would violate
> the Constitution, but for breaking the law.
>
Another lie.
PDW
Syd
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:26:36 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 7:46 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> >>wins in the end.
>
> >> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> >> Constitution.
>
> >however.
>
> The Constitution prohibits you from interfering with the free exercise of my
> religious beliefs.
>
>
And you from trying to force yours on us, asshole Dork.
PDW
Syd
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:39:14 -0500, IAAH <n...@email.exist> wrote:
> >duke wrote, On 09-11-23 7:46 AM:
>
> >>> J<Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >>>> This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >>>> We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>>> wins in the end.
>
> >>> And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >>> that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs. It's in the
> >> Constitution.
>
>
> Then cut it out. I am protected by the Constitution.
>
>
No.
Forcing your faith on others is NOT protected by the Constitution,
Dork.
PDW
Syd
>
> >duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >>>J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >>>>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >>>>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >>>>wins in the end.
>
> >>>And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >>>that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >>America stands for the free exercise of our religious beliefs.
>
> >to obey your cult's rules.
>
> I vote.
>
>
Big deal.
So do the people who don't want to live under your rules.
PDW
Syd
> >On Nov 23, 5:46 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On 23 Nov 2009 05:35:55 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >> >J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >>This is the same strategy we employed during the 60's civil rights movement.
> >> >>We achieved our goals then, Christians can do the same today. Decency always
> >> >>wins in the end.
>
> >> >And so once again we see that thr religious rightards hate everything
> >> >that America stands for and want instead a theocratic dictatorship.
>
> >> Constitution.
>
> >excludes *you*, doesn't it, Puke?) knows that freedom of religion is
> >*not* an absolute right in this country.
>
> The First Amendment reads, in its entirety:
> "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
> prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
> the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
> Government for a redress of grievances."
>
> Stay out of my life.
You stay out of ours.
PDW
Syd
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:20:58 -0600, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> Then it's a good thing it's not mythology, isn't it.
> >Of course it's mythology!
>
> Why do you push the fable that God is a myth?
>
>
...Perhaps because there is still no real shred of evidence for the
thing?
PDW