Johnny wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1128895700.900200.46480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1128881883.851377.256610@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1128877476.955046.203050@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128817945_124265@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
Johnny wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
news:1128775729_123705@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
Johnny wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bncjxup.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"This year a group identifying themselves as "Anti-Racist
Action"
posted a
press release on their website, stating that they would "stop
Repent
America
from disrupting the National Coming Out Day Block Party by
any
means
necessary!"
"We do not believe that this is an empty threat of potential
violence
because members of Anti-Racist Action have previously
attacked
those
in our
ministry and destroyed our property.""
This Sunday, October 9, 2005 in Philadelphia what shall we
see?
You whining, because someone you don't approve of dared to
disobey
your
toothless edicts.
I am observing.
Like that's going to make a HUGE difference.
If the rights of the gays to practice their religion
Name the religion they are practicing.........
Irrelevant.
Wrong.
You are the one that is wrong,, Johnny. Their parade/event has
nothing
to do with religion. Therefore, they are not practicing any
religion.
Why do they seek to infringe the free exercise of religion rights of
Repent
America then?
They don't. But Reject America seeks to infringe on the free exercise
of religion rights of the marchers.
What religion are the marchers exercising?
None.
It is Reject America that is
trying to impose their religious beliefs on others forcibly, not the
other way around.
Reject America? Who is that?
Another name for "Repent America" which is more descriptive of their
philosophy.
There is a group out there called Reject
America, ACLU?
ACLU embraces the American ideals. It does not reject them.
, that is forcing their secularistic religion on the people of
the USA?
There is no such thing as a "secularistic religion". As you have been
shown before, "secularism" is the rejection of religion in the
government.
Rejection of religion in government isn't mandated in the Constitution.
It is in the public sector. That is what the First Amendment means
with respect to the government.
Respecting 'an' establishment of religion is prohibited, but rejecting
religion itself is not prescribed by the Constitution.
It is with respect to the government and the laws it passes. No
religion may be given preferential treatment. That means that there
must be a secular government.
And Repent America, i.e. Reject America, is trying to force their
religious views on others, in contradiction of the American ideals.
That is why they could also be called "Reject America", because they
reject those ideals that make America great.
There's probably several different faiths, as there always is in
a
large
crowd, but NONE of them can be forced to be exposed to other
faiths.
Wrong. Which religion are they practicing or being forced to
practice
in
this parade?
None. The parade has nothing to do with religion.
However, the people of "Repent America" (aka Reject America) do want
to
force their religious beliefs on the participants in the parade, and
oppress and harm the homosexuals that are participating.
The Free Exercise of Religion right allows Repent America to preach.
But it does not allow then to disrupt a peaceful assembly, or force
their religious beliefs on others.
The Free Exercise of Religion right is not to be infringed.
And forcing your religious beliefs on other people in infringing on
their right to freely exercise their religious beliefs.
How so? How is a public venue a place that any one religion would be granted
exercise rights above another?
You tell me. That is what you want to have happen.
How would disallowing free exercise of religion on public property not
infringe the people's right to free exercise of their religion?
Simple. It protects everyone else from having their right to free
exercise of their religions infringed upon. Also, allowing one
religious group or viewpoint to have their say and having laws passed
that favor, but disallowing others to have their say them shows
favoritism to that one viewpoint.
You keep forgetting that you cannot infringe on other people's rights.
Your right to exercise your religion STOPS where it starts to infringe
on other people's right to exercise their religions.
Are you telling
me that the marchers are practicing a religion and therefore are entitled
to
free exercise of their religion without interruption from others?
No. They are practicing their rights to freedom of speech and
assembly. Reject America, by trying to force their religious beliefs
on others, is trying to infringe on the marcher's religious beliefs, as
well as their rights to free speech and peaceful assembly.
What religious beliefs is Repent America trying to infringe on?
The ones of the marchers that say that there is nothing wrong with
homosexuality. And that includes Christian beliefs.
You must have a religion to extol religious beliefs.
Or no religion at all. You cannot force your beliefs on ANYONE.
Reject
America is doing that by saying that the marchers' beliefs are all
wrong, and only Reject America is right.
But you say that the marchers are not exercising any religion.
Correct.
What religious beliefs of the marchers are being infringed?
The various religious beliefs that they hold that have no problem with
homosexuals.
Reject America is known for
being loud, obnoxious, and tending to try to incite riots.
Who is rioting?
Nobody, yet. That is why I said that Reject America tries to INCITE,
i.e. start, riots. And attempts to incite riots is NOT protected
speech because of the danger to the general populous.
And thus,
they want to prevent them from exercising several of their First
Amendment rights, including Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly,
and
Freedom of Religion, which includes not having other religions
forced
onto you.
Why don't they just walk on then instead of infringing the Free
Exercise
of
Religion and Free Speech rights of Repent America?
For starters, because there is a central place at the beginning and end
of the march where speakers give speeches. And second, because Reject
America seeks to infringe on the Free Speech, Freedom of Peaceful
Assembly, and Freedom of Religion of the participants by shouting down
the speakers at the march, imposing their beliefs on others, and
inciting riots at these events.
Are they burning any U.S. Flags?
No. And it would not matter if they were.
You are not familiar with the code that makes it a crime to burn a U.S. flag
if it incites a riot?
That falls under the code that makes it a crime to incite a riot in
general. If you are attempting to incite a riot, it does not really
matter if you are burning a US flag or not.
There is nothing wrong or illegal with burning the flag itself,
particularly to make a political statement. This has been upheld in
the Supreme Court underneath the protections to free speech.
Freedom of Religion is not found in the First Amendment.
Yes, it is.
Your wording is in error.
My wording is quite correct.
Free Exercise of
Religion is found there.
Which is only a part of Freedom on Religion.
Your tendency to go with what is not written in the First Amendment shows
you to not be observant of it.
My tendency to go with the spirit of the wording, as well as the
Supreme Court ruling on the subjects, shows that I am very observant of
it.
The other part is that
the government shall not establish or favor any religious beliefs.
It does not say that.
Yes, it does.
You are misquoting the First Amendment.
That is because I was not quoting it. I was paraphrasing it. That is
why I did not use quote marks.
Separation of Church and State are nowhere to be found in the Constitution.
It is, however, found in Jefferson's writings, and in Supreme Court
rulings. That means that the separation of Church and State in implied
in the Constitution. Besides, without separation of church and state,
there cannot be any real freedom of religion.
You forgot the word 'exercise' above in your sentence.
Not really. The phrase "Freedom of Religion" includes the word
"exercise" implicitly,
Another misquote from Sebree.
There is no misquote in evidence.
Your are misquoting the phraseology of the First Amendment.
Where is the quote? I have to be quoting something to have misquoted
it.
The common term for the clauses in the First Amendment regarding
religion is the "Freedom of Religion". This includes both clauses.
Just your lies and misinterpretations.
I do not go with false interpretations.
Yes, you do. I have seen you do with incorrect and false
interpretations all the time.
I go with the verbatim language of
the First Amendment.
However, your interpretations are often incorrect according to the
Supreme Court.
The word exercise is explicity in the First Amendment and with reason.
And the free exercise of religion is a part of freedom of religion.
There is no 'freedom of religion' phrase in the First Amendment.
That is the commonly used phrase to describe both the applicable First
Amendment clauses.
is the more common phrasing, and includes the
other half of the freedom implicitly as well.
The First Amendment does not say Freedom of Religion. It says Free
Exercise
of Religion.
Which INCLUDES freedom from religion.
Another departure from the verbatim language of the First Amendment.
But not from the meaning of the phrase.
You again show me your tendeceny to go with words other than those found in
the First Amendment.
The words I use are the commonly used phrases that both clauses in the
First Amendment that deal with religion. And unlike you, I also
consider and use applicable Supreme Court decisions.
Free exercise of religion
INCLUDES freedom from having anyone else's religious beliefs forced
onto you.
At the expense of the free exercise rights of others?
That is what you are advocating, the freedom to exercise your religion
at the expense of the free exercise rights of others.
No. That is not inclued in the First Amendment.
Free Exercise of Religion is what is protected.
And Free Exercise includes not having other religions forced unto you,
because that interferes with your freedom to exercise your own
religion. Your right to exercise your religious beliefs STOP where
they start to interfere with other people's rights to exercise their
religious beliefs. That is why freedom FROM religion is included in
the freedom of religion, as well as why you are prevented from forcing
your religious beliefs on others.
If they try to force their beliefs onto you, they are
infringing on your freedom to exercise your own beliefs, and thereby
violating your First Amendment rights.
In a public venue?
Yes, including in a public venue.
What you consider force is only speech.
Not quite. They are trying to say that homosexuals should not have the
same rights as everyone else. They are also trying to be disruptive
and trying to interfere with the free speech rights of the people at
the demonstration.
Force is actual force which was used by Philadelphia Police in the arrests
they made last year in Philadelphia.
Which were warranted by the actions of Reject America.
You do not have the right to
impose your beliefs on others, and force them to follow your beliefs as
opposed to their own. It does not matter what your religion says on
the matter. The Constitutional protections trump your religious
beliefs and law on the matter, since they apply to everyone equally.
The First Amendment guarantees Free Speech and Free Exercise of
Religion.
Which Reject America does nor respect. Or you, for that matter.
My statement still stands as accurate. The First Amendment prevents
you from imposing your beliefs on anyone else.
You are that insecure in your personal beliefs?
No. But you seem to be. You want to force them on others.
And it trumps whatever
your religion states on the matter, since your religion only applies to
you, and the Constitution applies to everyone equally.
You seem to think it applies to non-religious sects at the expense of the
religious.
A non-religious sect, which is an oxymoron by the way, would not fall
under the Freedom of Religion clauses in the Constitution because they
are not religions.
Why do they seek to force Repent America from their Freedoms?
Because Reject America
Who is Reject America?
A more accurate name for "Repent America". Anyone with even an average
intellect could figure that out on their own, given the thread and
context.
Anyone could see that you erroneously referred to Repent America as 'Reject
America".
No. I referred to them accurately and sarcastically. The name change
was purposeful and based on what I know of their actions and agenda.
is trying to force others from their freedoms.
Is that some code word for the ACLU?
No. The ACLU protects people's freedoms. Reject America is a better
and more accurate name for "Repent America".
I am protecting everyone's freedoms and liberties.
You are contesting the rights of Repent America.
The can say whatever they want and believe whatever they want.
However, they cannot incite riots or try to force their beliefs on
anyone else.
Incite riots?
Yes.
There are laws against the use of physical force against persons who are
only speaking.
There are also laws against trying to incite riots. A person that is
purposely trying to start a fight by being extremely insulting to a
large group of people is not protected by the right to freedom of
speech, since he is a danger to the general population.
Everyone else's rights prevent them from doing so, since
everyone else has the same rights that Reject America does.
Reject America has
a reputation for being disruptive as they try to force their beliefs
on others, in contravention of the freedom of religion clause in the
First Amendment,
Freedom of Religion, per se, is not written into the First Amendment.
Yes, it is.
Show me the quote then, verbatim.
There is no verbatim quote. That is the common joint term for the two
clauses in the First Amendment that deal with religion.
Free Exercise of Religion is written in the First Amendment.
And that is part of freedom of religion.
Freedom of Religion is not written verbatim into the First Amendment.
It is, however, the commonly used term for the religious freedoms
guaranteed in the First Amendment.
Too bad you don't understand
the concept.
I understand it.
You have not shown any real understanding of it.
You do not understand it adequately because you are relying
other than the First Amendment itself.
I understand it better than you do. I am able to go to other pertinent
sources that you refuse to consult because that say something different
than you would like them to say.
as well as the Freedom of Speech and Freedom of
Peaceful Assembly. Reject America
Who is Reject America?
Answered several times already.
seeks to deny others their freedoms
why they hide behind the very freedoms that they seek to deny.
Reject America is a code phrase for the ACLU?
No. They are the antithesis of the ACLU, since they Repent America
does not respect anyone's rights but their own. The ACLU protects
people's rights.
Reject America can have any beliefs they want, they just cannot force
their beliefs on anyone else. And that is EXACTLY what they were
formed to do. The organization deserves no respect, and the police
have every right to arrest them when they turn disruptive and seek to
disturb the police and incite riots.
Reject America isn't even at this event from what I saw.
Yes, it was. You just do not understand a sarcastic rename to a more
accurate name when you read one.
Even your assumptions are amiss.
You have not shown that I am amiss in anything. My statement is
accurate given your words.
Mark Sebree
Most people with even average
intelligence could have figured out whom I was talking about.
Mark Sebree
Mark Sebree
.
