Alabama outlaws dildos, prepares to elect dildo to supreme court
godbuster
jo...@thecodezone.com wrote:
> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
>
> >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
> >looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
> >to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
> >his christians-only view of law.
>
> Actually, the dildo-outlawing bill was recently shot down by the
> legislature.
>
The same legislature that proposed it? They must have too much time on
their hands!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
A. O'Reilly
Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended by
court order - however, another court has reversed it and the anti-dildo
law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with selling them though,
so feel free to drive across the state line. I've pretty much given up
on this state - it is populated primarily by Bible-humping-thumping
bigots who additionally happen to be, quite possibly, the worst drivers
in America. Around here, they see a turn signal as a sign of weakness.
Anyway... Alabama sucks. Wait, Alabama is an absolutely beautiful state
- the people suck.
godbuster
a...@harvard.edu (A. O'Reilly) wrote:
> In article <8ue1n3$hnh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, appl...@my-deja.com
says...
> > In article <8g54vsk4ohpaes8i4...@4ax.com>,
> > jo...@thecodezone.com wrote:
> > > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> > >
> > > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
> > > >looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
> > > >poised to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court
> > > >and impose his christians-only view of law.
> > >
repeatedly claiming the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion
does NOT mean freedom FROM religion, onbviously the dildo-banners and
commandment posters have the upper hand in the near future!
> > > Actually, the dildo-outlawing bill was recently shot down by the
> > > legislature.
> > >
> > The same legislature that proposed it? They must have too much time
> > on their hands!
>
> Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended
> by court order - however, another court has reversed it and the anti-
> dildo law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with selling
> them though, so feel free to drive across the state line. I've
> pretty much given up on this state -
It sounds like the legislature and courts are conducting a stupidity
test while thumbing their noses at the electorate! That they could
concern themselves with such frivolities reveals their utter contempt
for the voters. The state polulace should be up in arms. No doubt the
state police will now devote much of their time and resources to
trackiong down and arrest of dildo usersvand importers.
Has anyone pointed out to the courts and legislature that they also
need to ban ther importation of dildo-shaped bottles, cucumbers,
carrots, parsnips, flashlights, etc.?
> it is populated primarily by
> Bible-humping-thumping bigots who additionally happen to be, quite
> possibly, the worst drivers in America. Around here, they see a turn
> signal as a sign of weakness.
Yeah. The Falwells who see a homo lurking in every corner. Ban those TV
puppets! What we're seeing is a resurgance of Nazziism, with a new
target, and the same old agenda.
> Anyway... Alabama sucks. Wait, Alabama is an absolutely beautiful
> state - the people suck.
>
Actually, the inhuman race sucks - because of the people in it.
stoney
alt.atheism;
]>In article <8g54vsk4ohpaes8i4...@4ax.com>,
]> jo...@thecodezone.com wrote:
]>> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
]>>
]>> >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
]>> >looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
]>> >to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
]>> >his christians-only view of law.
]>>
]>> Actually, the dildo-outlawing bill was recently shot down by the
]>> legislature.
]>>
]>The same legislature that proposed it? They must have too much time on
]>their hands!
Huh? Their supreme court upheld the dildo law as being part of the legislation
of public morality.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
stoney
alt.atheism;
]>In article <8ue1n3$hnh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, appl...@my-deja.com says...
]>> In article <8g54vsk4ohpaes8i4...@4ax.com>,
]>> jo...@thecodezone.com wrote:
]>> > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
]>> >
]>> > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
]>> > >looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
]>> > >to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
]>> > >his christians-only view of law.
]>> >
]>> > Actually, the dildo-outlawing bill was recently shot down by the
]>> > legislature.
]>> >
]>> The same legislature that proposed it? They must have too much time on
]>> their hands!
]>
]>Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended by
]>court order - however, another court has reversed it and the anti-dildo
]>law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with selling them though,
]>so feel free to drive across the state line. I've pretty much given up
]>on this state - it is populated primarily by Bible-humping-thumping
]>bigots who additionally happen to be, quite possibly, the worst drivers
]>in America. Around here, they see a turn signal as a sign of weakness.
Correct. The ban is on the sale of them, and not possesion. Fine is 10,000 USD
and six months at hard labour.
]>Anyway... Alabama sucks. Wait, Alabama is an absolutely beautiful state
]>- the people suck.
You're right, the legislators suck.
As for worst drivers, I've been told that belongs to Boston.
johac
<sto...@stoneynet.net> wrote:
I used to live around there and believe it, it's true. BTW, I grew up in
NYC, and the Boston drivers are much worse.
>
>
> Stoney
> "Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
> and
> SCAMPERMEISTER!"
>
> When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
> When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
--
John Hachmann, aa #1782
It was the schoolboy who said: "Faith is believing what you know ain't so."
- Mark Twain (1835-1910).
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Servers In California, Texas And Virginia - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Mark Gerard Miller
wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
> his christians-only view of law.
>
> Merlyn LeRoy
Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only. They are
derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number of
laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall? They're all
included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway. What would
you put on the wall? A dildo?
Mark
--
\/ ___
/\ /\ / + \ |-+-/ .
_/ .\/ \_/ \o----|-|
\__/
Brian Westley
>In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
>> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
>> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
>> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
>> his christians-only view of law.
>Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only.
I didn't say they were; I said Moore would impose his Xian only view.
>They are
>derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number of
>laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
>uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
>cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
>What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall?
It's the state promoting religion - something it is prohibited
from doing. I certainly don't want the government to tell me
what religion I ought to follow, and I don't want to waste
gobs of time & money & court time as various pressure groups
try to get their particular religious propaganda on city
property.
>They're all
>included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway.
No they aren't. There are no codes against idolatry (and such
laws would be blatantly unconstitutional). There are no codes
requiring that you not covet (and advertisers wouldn't like laws
against such).
Why do you want the ten commandments on courtroom walls?
>What would
>you put on the wall? A dildo?
How about a landscape oil painting?
---
Merlyn LeRoy
Mark Gerard Miller
wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> writes:
> >In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
> > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> >> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
> >> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
> >> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
> >> his christians-only view of law.
>
> >Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only.
>
> I didn't say they were; I said Moore would impose his Xian only view.
Objection! The point I was making is that if this judge subscribes to
the Ten Commandments, he does not have a solely Christian viewpoint.
The Ten Commandments are universal truths and most are included in all
religions and all civil codes.
> >They are
> >derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number of
> >laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
> >uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
> >cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
>
> >What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall?
>
> It's the state promoting religion - something it is prohibited
> from doing. I certainly don't want the government to tell me
> what religion I ought to follow, and I don't want to waste
> gobs of time & money & court time as various pressure groups
> try to get their particular religious propaganda on city
> property.
> >They're all
> >included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway.
>
> No they aren't. There are no codes against idolatry (and such
> laws would be blatantly unconstitutional). There are no codes
> requiring that you not covet (and advertisers wouldn't like laws
> against such).
Objection sustained. I should have said most of them are included in
the nation's laws. My bad.
> Why do you want the ten commandments on courtroom walls?
I didn't say I wanted them on the wall. I just don't see a big problem
with it if some judge decides to put them up there. It's just not that
big of a deal to me. It doesn't mean he's going to launch into a fire
and brimstone sermon right in the middle of some dry testimony, though
that would make for a far more interesting experience than about 80
percent of what goes on in court.
> >What would
> >you put on the wall? A dildo?
>
> How about a landscape oil painting?
If it's a good American landscape oil painting and none of thisyere
communis pinko foreign hogwash done by some twinklytoed gay blade of an
arteest, it might be OK.
Michael El Rey
--
\/ ___
/\ /\ / + \ |-+-/ .
_/ .\/ \_/ \o----|-|
\__/
> ---
> Merlyn LeRoy
Joe_SixPack
Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> wrote:
> In article <H3LO5.7421$FU3.1...@ptah.visi.com>,
> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> > Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> writes:
> > >In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
> > > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> > >> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
> > >> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
poised
> > >> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and
impose
> > >> his christians-only view of law.
> >
> > >Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only.
> >
> > I didn't say they were; I said Moore would impose his Xian only
view.
>
> the Ten Commandments, he does not have a solely Christian viewpoint.
> The Ten Commandments are universal truths and most are included in all
> religions and all civil codes.
I don't think that phrase - "universal truths" - means what you think
means. Alos, I think you should either read up on the Ten Commandmants,
or the civil codes of even the nation you live in. Let's just take a
look at those Ten Commandments (oh, and I mean the first set of ten
that Moses was given, not the second set).
1) No other gods before Yahweh.
Civil laws similar to this commandment would be a clear violation of
the First Ammendment and would be basically enforcing a theocracy.
Points: 0
2) Don't make any graven images of Yahweh.
Again, clear violation of the First Ammendment. Points: 0
3) Do not take Yahweh's name in vain.
Clear violation of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Points: 0
4) Observe the Sabbath
Again, clear violation of the First Ammendment. Points: 0
5) Honor you parents
No legal code enforcing such things anywhere I know of. Personally, I
give respect where respect is due and it just so happens that my
parents are due my respect because they have earned it. Points: 0
6) Do not kill
Clearly this is supported by civil laws. It is, however, not qualified
at all and contradicts many other passages in the text that directs
people to kill. Points: 1
7) Do not commit adultery
Only partially supported by civil law, because although adultery is a
civil crime in most areas, it is not enforced because it as a law could
probably be thrown out under a constitutional challenge. Points: 0.5
8) Do not steal.
Clearly supported by civil law, though, again unqualified. Points: 1
9) Do not bear false witness.
Fraud and perjury are illegal, but they have very strict legal
definitions. It is in fact not illegal to lie about someone. Points: 0.5
10) Do not covet.
Not supported by civil law and any law regarding such would be thought
control. Points: 0
Being generous the Ten Commandments only get a score of 3 or 30%. Not
too good. Their are many other moral codes by other religions that
would probably score higher.
> > >They are
> > >derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number
of
> > >laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
> > >uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
> > >cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
> >
> > >What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall?
> >
> > It's the state promoting religion - something it is prohibited
> > from doing. I certainly don't want the government to tell me
> > what religion I ought to follow, and I don't want to waste
> > gobs of time & money & court time as various pressure groups
> > try to get their particular religious propaganda on city
> > property.
>
> > >They're all
> > >included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway.
> >
> > No they aren't. There are no codes against idolatry (and such
> > laws would be blatantly unconstitutional). There are no codes
> > requiring that you not covet (and advertisers wouldn't like laws
> > against such).
>
> Objection sustained. I should have said most of them are included in
> the nation's laws. My bad.
You keep using that word (most) - I don't think it means what you think
it means.
Cheers
Mark Gerard Miller
my mouth. I should have said, "Four or five of the Ten Commandments are
codified in American law ..." I would award a full point for bearing
false witness.
What's your definition of universal truth?
Mark
In article <8uh3dq$264$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Joe_SixPack <nschi...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8uh1ik$g0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> wrote:
> > In article <H3LO5.7421$FU3.1...@ptah.visi.com>,
> > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> > > Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> writes:
> > > >In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
> > > > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> > > >> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
it
> > > >> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
> poised
> > > >> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and
> impose
> > > >> his christians-only view of law.
> > >
> > > >Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only.
> > >
> > > I didn't say they were; I said Moore would impose his Xian only
> view.
> >
> > > >They are
> > > >derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number
> of
> > > >laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't
as
> > > >uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
> > > >cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
> > >
> > > >What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall?
> > >
> > > It's the state promoting religion - something it is prohibited
> > > from doing. I certainly don't want the government to tell me
> > > what religion I ought to follow, and I don't want to waste
> > > gobs of time & money & court time as various pressure groups
> > > try to get their particular religious propaganda on city
> > > property.
> >
> > > >They're all
> > > >included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway.
> > >
> > > No they aren't. There are no codes against idolatry (and such
> > > laws would be blatantly unconstitutional). There are no codes
> > > requiring that you not covet (and advertisers wouldn't like laws
> > > against such).
> >
> > Objection sustained. I should have said most of them are included in
> > the nation's laws. My bad.
>
> You keep using that word (most) - I don't think it means what you
think
> it means.
>
> Cheers
Joe_SixPack
Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> wrote:
> Right. I guess I should have thought them through before shooting off
> my mouth. I should have said, "Four or five of the Ten Commandments
are
> codified in American law ..." I would award a full point for bearing
> false witness.
Maybe, but you still would only have a 3.5 because there is no way that
the adultery one should count as a full point.
> What's your definition of universal truth?
I was simply attempting to make a joke (i.e. think of the Princess
Bride). Wasn't a good one though. Sorry.
Cheers
>
> Mark
>
> In article <8uh3dq$264$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Joe_SixPack <nschi...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <8uh1ik$g0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> wrote:
> > > In article <H3LO5.7421$FU3.1...@ptah.visi.com>,
> > > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> > > > Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> writes:
> > > > >In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
> > > > > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
> > > > >> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
> it
> > > > >> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
> > poised
> > > > >> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and
> > impose
> > > > >> his christians-only view of law.
> > > >
> > > > >Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only.
> > > >
> > > > I didn't say they were; I said Moore would impose his Xian only
> > view.
> > >
> > > > >They are
> > > > >derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the
number
> > of
> > > > >laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians
aren't
> as
> > > > >uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
> > > > >cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
> > > >
> > > > >What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall?
> > > >
> > > > It's the state promoting religion - something it is prohibited
> > > > from doing. I certainly don't want the government to tell me
> > > > what religion I ought to follow, and I don't want to waste
> > > > gobs of time & money & court time as various pressure groups
> > > > try to get their particular religious propaganda on city
> > > > property.
> > >
> > > > >They're all
> > > > >included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway.
> > > >
> > > > No they aren't. There are no codes against idolatry (and such
> > > > laws would be blatantly unconstitutional). There are no codes
> > > > requiring that you not covet (and advertisers wouldn't like laws
> > > > against such).
> > >
> > > Objection sustained. I should have said most of them are included
in
> > > the nation's laws. My bad.
> >
> > You keep using that word (most) - I don't think it means what you
> think
> > it means.
> >
> > Cheers
Brian Westley
> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
>> Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> writes:
>> >In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
>> > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
>> >> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
>> >> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
>> >> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
>> >> his christians-only view of law.
>>
>> >Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only.
>>
>> I didn't say they were; I said Moore would impose his Xian only view.
>Objection! The point I was making is that if this judge subscribes to
>the Ten Commandments, he does not have a solely Christian viewpoint.
That's ridiculous. Your point is wrong.
>The Ten Commandments are universal truths and most are included in all
>religions and all civil codes.
No, they aren't.
>> >They are
>> >derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number of
>> >laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
>> >uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
>> >cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
>>
>> >What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall?
>>
>> It's the state promoting religion - something it is prohibited
>> from doing. I certainly don't want the government to tell me
>> what religion I ought to follow, and I don't want to waste
>> gobs of time & money & court time as various pressure groups
>> try to get their particular religious propaganda on city
>> property.
>> >They're all
>> >included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway.
>>
>> No they aren't. There are no codes against idolatry (and such
>> laws would be blatantly unconstitutional). There are no codes
>> requiring that you not covet (and advertisers wouldn't like laws
>> against such).
>Objection sustained. I should have said most of them are included in
>the nation's laws. My bad.
Most? I'd say barely half.
It's irrelevant anyway.
>> Why do you want the ten commandments on courtroom walls?
>I didn't say I wanted them on the wall. I just don't see a big problem
>with it if some judge decides to put them up there.
Well, I do.
>It's just not that
>big of a deal to me.
So you won't care if they're taken down, either.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
Mark Gerard Miller
True.
Michael El Rey
--
\/ ___
/\ /\ / + \ |-+-/ .
_/ .\/ \_/ \o----|-|
\__/
> ---
> Merlyn LeRoy
Dore's Favourite Demon
wrote:
>In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
>> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
>> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
>> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
>> his christians-only view of law.
>>
>> ---
>> Merlyn LeRoy
>
>Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only. They are
>derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number of
>laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
>uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
>cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
>
>What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall? They're all
>included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway. What would
>you put on the wall? A dildo?
Why not? It would be appropriate on Roy Moore's courtroom wall since
it would symbolise what would happen to you if you found yourself
there on charges.
Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
BAAWA Knight | "The Truth against the World."
| -- Bardic Motto
======
Remove god to respond.
stoney
alt.atheism;
]>In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
]> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
]>> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
]>> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
]>> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
]>> his christians-only view of law.
]>>
]>> ---
]>> Merlyn LeRoy
]>
]>Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only. They are
]>derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number of
]>laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
]>uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
]>cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
]>
]>What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall? They're all
]>included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway. What would
]>you put on the wall? A dildo?
Mark, such promotes one brand of superstition over another. You have no problem
with the 10 C's, that Christians ignore anyway, but I'd bet you wouldn't say
"What does it hurt" if it was Satanism, or Voodoo on the wall.
]>Mark
stoney
alt.atheism;
]>In article <H3LO5.7421$FU3.1...@ptah.visi.com>,
]> wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
]>> Mark Gerard Miller <mg...@msn.com> writes:
]>> >In article <yqoI5.2764$FU3.6...@ptah.visi.com>,
]>> > wes...@visi.com (Brian Westley) wrote:
]>> >> Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now it
]>> >> looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is poised
]>> >> to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme court and impose
]>> >> his christians-only view of law.
]>>
]>> >Well, actually, the Ten Commandments are not Christian only.
]>>
]>> I didn't say they were; I said Moore would impose his Xian only view.
]>
]>Objection! The point I was making is that if this judge subscribes to
]>the Ten Commandments, he does not have a solely Christian viewpoint.
]>The Ten Commandments are universal truths and most are included in all
]>religions and all civil codes.
Rubbish. They are neither universal nor truths.
]>> >They are
]>> >derived from Judaic law. They don't even come close to the number of
]>> >laws -- 613 -- in the Pentateuch, but then the Christians aren't as
]>> >uptight as the Jews were when it came to rules about pork and
]>> >cleanliness and stoning people and whatnot.
]>>
]>> >What does it hurt to have the Ten Commandments on the wall?
]>>
]>> It's the state promoting religion - something it is prohibited
]>> from doing. I certainly don't want the government to tell me
]>> what religion I ought to follow, and I don't want to waste
]>> gobs of time & money & court time as various pressure groups
]>> try to get their particular religious propaganda on city
]>> property.
]>
]>> >They're all
]>> >included in the civil or criminal codes or case law anyway.
]>>
]>> No they aren't. There are no codes against idolatry (and such
]>> laws would be blatantly unconstitutional). There are no codes
]>> requiring that you not covet (and advertisers wouldn't like laws
]>> against such).
]>
]>Objection sustained. I should have said most of them are included in
]>the nation's laws. My bad.
( chuckling ) That bites us all from time to time...
]>> Why do you want the ten commandments on courtroom walls?
]>
]>I didn't say I wanted them on the wall. I just don't see a big problem
]>with it if some judge decides to put them up there. It's just not that
]>big of a deal to me. It doesn't mean he's going to launch into a fire
]>and brimstone sermon right in the middle of some dry testimony, though
]>that would make for a far more interesting experience than about 80
]>percent of what goes on in court.
Once again, such promotes one superstition over another.
]>> >What would
]>> >you put on the wall? A dildo?
]>>
]>> How about a landscape oil painting?
]>
]>If it's a good American landscape oil painting and none of thisyere
]>communis pinko foreign hogwash done by some twinklytoed gay blade of an
]>arteest, it might be OK.
Hmmm...Was Turner American?
]>Michael El Rey
godbuster
stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net> wrote:
> ]>> > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
> ]>> > >it looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
> ]>> > >poised to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme
> ]>> > >court and impose his christians-only view of law.
> ]>> >
> ]>Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended
> ]>by court order - however, another court has reversed it and the
> ]>anti-dildo law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with ,
> ]>selling them though so feel free to drive across the state line.
[...]
> Correct. The ban is on the sale of them, and not possesion. Fine is
> 10,000 USD and six months at hard labour.
>
Is it illeagal to give them away free? If not, then the state should be
flooded with them as a protest against retarded puritan legislators!
Each member of the legislator should be sent a HUGE black dildo.
godbuster
And a gallon of KY.
Michelle Malkin
But... they might LIKE that!
Michelle Malkin (Mickey)
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
aa #1 ULC #3 EAC Bible Thumper Thumper
BAAWA Knight Who Says SPONG!
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
http://www.50megs.com/www2/questioner
http://www2.50megs.com/questioner/
http://www.thehungersite.com
stoney
alt.atheism;
]>In article <vmel0tk662kp8i6ie...@4ax.com>,
]> stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net> wrote:
]>
]>> ]>> > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
]>> ]>> > >it looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
]>> ]>> > >poised to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme
]>> ]>> > >court and impose his christians-only view of law.
]>> ]>> >
]>> ]>Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended
]>> ]>by court order - however, another court has reversed it and the
]>> ]>anti-dildo law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with ,
]>> ]>selling them though so feel free to drive across the state line.
]>[...]
]>> Correct. The ban is on the sale of them, and not possesion. Fine is
]>> 10,000 USD and six months at hard labour.
]>>
]>Is it illeagal to give them away free? If not, then the state should be
]>flooded with them as a protest against retarded puritan legislators!
]>Each member of the legislator should be sent a HUGE black dildo.
]>And a gallon of KY.
KY's too good for them assholes. They can use them dry.
stoney
alt.atheism;
]>In article <vmel0tk662kp8i6ie...@4ax.com>,
]> stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net> wrote:
]>
]>> ]>> > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
]>> ]>> > >it looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
]>> ]>> > >poised to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme
]>> ]>> > >court and impose his christians-only view of law.
]>> ]>> >
]>> ]>Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended
]>> ]>by court order - however, another court has reversed it and the
]>> ]>anti-dildo law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with ,
]>> ]>selling them though so feel free to drive across the state line.
]>[...]
]>> Correct. The ban is on the sale of them, and not possesion. Fine is
]>> 10,000 USD and six months at hard labour.
]>>
]>Is it illeagal to give them away free? If not, then the state should be
]>flooded with them as a protest against retarded puritan legislators!
]>Each member of the legislator should be sent a HUGE black dildo.
Just the sale of, as far as I'm aware.
What else can you expect from Alabama? The legislature and the courts are suck
in the Dark Ages, and sounds like a good chunk of the populace as well.... :\
Skypher's Favourite Asshole
wrote:
>On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:59:42 GMT, godbuster <appl...@my-deja.com> wrote in
>alt.atheism;
>
>]>In article <vmel0tk662kp8i6ie...@4ax.com>,
>]> stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net> wrote:
>]>
>]>> ]>> > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
>]>> ]>> > >it looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
>]>> ]>> > >poised to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme
>]>> ]>> > >court and impose his christians-only view of law.
>]>> ]>> >
>]>> ]>Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended
>]>> ]>by court order - however, another court has reversed it and the
>]>> ]>anti-dildo law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with ,
>]>> ]>selling them though so feel free to drive across the state line.
>]>[...]
>]>> Correct. The ban is on the sale of them, and not possesion. Fine is
>]>> 10,000 USD and six months at hard labour.
>]>>
>]>Is it illeagal to give them away free? If not, then the state should be
>]>flooded with them as a protest against retarded puritan legislators!
>]>Each member of the legislator should be sent a HUGE black dildo.
>]>And a gallon of KY.
>
>KY's too good for them assholes. They can use them dry.
Hell, they'd probably get thier rocks off even harder. Which could
mean they could rethink thier position on dildoes: [1] "This is
great, let's legalise them (again)", or [2] "This is great, let's keep
them illegal and have all the fun for ourselves."
stoney
wrote in alt.atheism;
]>On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:58:50 GMT, godbuster
]><appl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
]>
]>>In article <vmel0tk662kp8i6ie...@4ax.com>,
]>> stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net> wrote:
]>>
]>>> ]>> > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
]>>> ]>> > >it looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
]>>> ]>> > >poised to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme
]>>> ]>> > >court and impose his christians-only view of law.
]>>> ]>> >
]>>> ]>Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended
]>>> ]>by court order - however, another court has reversed it and the
]>>> ]>anti-dildo law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with ,
]>>> ]>selling them though so feel free to drive across the state line.
]>>[...]
]>>> Correct. The ban is on the sale of them, and not possesion. Fine is
]>>> 10,000 USD and six months at hard labour.
]>>>
]>>Is it illeagal to give them away free? If not, then the state should be
]>>flooded with them as a protest against retarded puritan legislators!
]>>Each member of the legislator should be sent a HUGE black dildo.
]>>
]>>
]>But... they might LIKE that!
Well, it's called 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', Since
they shafted the rest of the state the ladies in the rest of the state can put
strap-ons on and shaft the legislators. Without lube.
]>Michelle Malkin (Mickey)
stoney
Asshole") wrote in alt.atheism;
]>On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:32:21 -0800, stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net>
]>wrote:
]>
]>>On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:59:42 GMT, godbuster <appl...@my-deja.com> wrote in
]>>alt.atheism;
]>>
]>>]>In article <vmel0tk662kp8i6ie...@4ax.com>,
]>>]> stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net> wrote:
]>>]>
]>>]>> ]>> > >Is this state completely insane? They outlaw dildos, and now
]>>]>> ]>> > >it looks like the (10 commandments) hangin' judge Roy Moore is
]>>]>> ]>> > >poised to be elected chief justice of the Alabama supreme
]>>]>> ]>> > >court and impose his christians-only view of law.
]>>]>> ]>> >
]>>]>> ]>Last I heard is that it was challenged in court - and was suspended
]>>]>> ]>by court order - however, another court has reversed it and the
]>>]>> ]>anti-dildo law is back in effect. I believe it only deals with ,
]>>]>> ]>selling them though so feel free to drive across the state line.
]>>]>[...]
]>>]>> Correct. The ban is on the sale of them, and not possesion. Fine is
]>>]>> 10,000 USD and six months at hard labour.
]>>]>>
]>>]>Is it illeagal to give them away free? If not, then the state should be
]>>]>flooded with them as a protest against retarded puritan legislators!
]>>]>Each member of the legislator should be sent a HUGE black dildo.
]>>]>And a gallon of KY.
]>>
]>>KY's too good for them assholes. They can use them dry.
]>
]>Hell, they'd probably get thier rocks off even harder. Which could
]>mean they could rethink thier position on dildoes: [1] "This is
]>great, let's legalise them (again)", or [2] "This is great, let's keep
]>them illegal and have all the fun for ourselves."
After they pull a train from all the ladies in the state?
Skypher's Favourite Asshole
wrote:
Call it job training for when they get kicked out of office.
godbuster
ew...@lexi.athghost7038suus.net (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
>
> (Hmm...is "dildo" even mentioned in the Bible?)
>
Not a problem as the Bible is a wonderful book that can be made to say
anything.
There has to be a "translation error" somewhere in there
which "scholars" have now found actually originally meant "dildo", and
several verses which, taken in context of some other verse clearly meant
"pisseth against the wall" to be a reference to a dildo.
stoney
Asshole") wrote in alt.atheism;
]>On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:27:52 -0800, stoney <sto...@stoneynet.net>
I wouldn't be that optimistic the individuals would be kicked out of office.
Recall the hefty theistic brainwashing on the female.