| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"human" |
| Date: |
08 Dec 2005 01:23:05 PM |
| Object: |
"No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
This "community columnist" column is in today's Milwaukee paper. I hope
that George Ott and the Journal Sentinel are swamped with replies.
His eddress, clearly visible on the column clipping is <gott @ wi.rr.com>
[remove spaces]
There is a delay with community columns appearing on-line at
www.jsonline.com . It will be there in about a week.
Here is an excerpt [keyed in, so any typos are my responsibility]:
"The phrase 'constitutionally mandated separation of church and state'
doesn't exist. It never has."
and
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here fleeing
religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in the new world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's founding
documents.
How ironic that over the past few decades there has been a move by a
minority of Americans to remove any reference to religion from public
view and discourse. Not all religion, just Christianity.
The meaning of the First Amendment has been twisted and perverted beyond
recognition. It clearly states that Congress shall make no law
establishing a religion. The government may not declare an 'official
religion.' It also states that the government may not prohibit the free
exercise of religion."
"The 'no religion anywhere, anytime, for any reason' crowd has singled out
Christian religious symbols and references.
No Ten Commandments, no nativity scenes, no crucifixes, no Pledge of
Allegiance. I cannot believe that running away from the very symbols of
the faith that was central in the formation of this country can possibly
be good for this nation. How does turning our back on our religious roots
make us a better people?
You will notice that any time people have a problem with a religious
display on public property they run to the courts. Look at what that guy
in California did trying to get the words 'under God' in the Pledge of
Allegiance declared unconstitutional. He went to the most liberal court in
America, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
These people don't dare try pulling this via the referendum because they
know they will lose. They seek out like-minded judges and have displays of
the Ten Commandments removed from courthouses by judicial fiat.
As a nation, it is time we took a long look at the moral direction these
people want the country to move in. A nativity scene in front of a
courthouse does not consitute the government establishing a religion.
For those who seem bent on removing every single piece of evidence of
religion in our society from view, I encourage you to read and reread the
First Amendment."
----------
Please, please, please do not take George Ott's sentiments or words as my
own!
----------
"History tells us that how much we want to believe a proposition is not a
reliable guide as to whether it is true." -- Steven Pinker
.
|
|
| User: "human" |
|
| Title: Re: Reported to the FBI |
13 Dec 2005 02:24:29 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, human wrote:
I received the following which is purported to be an official FBI warning.
[".au" indicates the sender is using a service in Australia]
It has been sent to the appropriate FBI authorities, with complete
headers.
A response was also made to the alleged "sender." It is a bogus I.D.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:13:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@csd.uwm.edu>
To:
Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details
The original message was received at Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:13:13 -0600 (CST)
from mail10.imt.uwm.edu [129.89.7.40]
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<mcgee@fbi.gov>
(reason: 550 <mcgee@fbi.gov>: Recipient address rejected: This
service is temporarily unavailable. Please contact the recipient via
other means.)
----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to
smtp00.fbi.gov.:
DATA
<<< 550 <mcgee@fbi.gov>: Recipient address rejected: This service is
temporarily unavailable. Please contact the recipient via other means.
550 5.1.1 <mcgee@fbi.gov>... User unknown <<< 554 Error: no valid
recipients
Return-Path: <thrasher@reece.net.au>
Received: from mail05.imt.uwm.edu ([unix socket])
by mail05.imt.uwm.edu (Cyrus v2.2.12) with LMTPA;
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:28:34 -0600
X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
Received: from batch3.csd.uwm.edu (batch3.csd.uwm.edu [129.89.7.226])
by mail05.imt.uwm.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBDHSVjY001857
for <human@mail05.imt.uwm.edu>; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:28:32 -0600
Received: from omta01sl.mx.bigpond.com (omta01sl.mx.bigpond.com
[144.140.92.153])
by batch3.csd.uwm.edu (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id
jBDHSTu7008388
for <>; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:28:31 -0600 (CST)
Received: from workshop ([61.9.247.77]) by omta01sl.mx.bigpond.com
with ESMTP
id <20051213172822.GCF16720.omta01sl.mx.bigpond.com@workshop>;
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:28:22 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by workshop (602LAN SUITE 2004) id
3320f5b8; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 1:27:44 +0800
To:
Date: 13 Dec 2005 17:27:44 -0000
Message-ID: <L9A4DMIL38700.0609259259@reece.net.au>
From: "Special Agent McGee" <mcgee@fbi.gov>
Subject: Your slanderous posts
CC:
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.
Please report problems or inappropriate use to the
remailer administrator... <>
X-Remailer-Contact:
X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.001 required=5 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=no
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 129.89.7.47
Sir:
I am agent McGee of the FBI Computer Crimes Division. I have observed
your slanderous postings about Mr. Pangborn and am demanding that you
cease and desist immediately.
The FBI is tracking all of the activity in this matter. You should be
made aware that Pangborn is NOT the forger. It is a man named David
Dennis Moore, who HAS been under investigation for 5 years. This official
e-mail shal serve as a legal notice of this, and you could be held civilly
and criminally liable for any further harassment of Pangborn.
If you do not cease posting in these threads, I have been authorized to
seize your computer equipment and arrest you. This is your first and last
warning.
Special Agent Magee
FBI
"History tells us that how much we want to believe a proposition is not a
reliable guide as to whether it is true." -- Steven Pinker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "human" |
|
| Title: Response from Remailer |
13 Dec 2005 01:11:25 PM |
|
|
The following message which pertains to the use of remailers to make posts
in someone else's name is self-explanatory:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:00:41 -0500
From: Admin <>
To: human <human@csd.uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: Please help
Hello human,
Tuesday, December 13, 2005, 1:49:01 AM, you wrote:
h> Someone is using your remailer to post MULTIPLE messages using my name.
h> Please help. (you got multiple pleas from me because there are
h> multiple messages posted on usenet using my name.
h> -----------
<snip portion of header>
h> Comments: This message did not originate from the above address.
h> It was automatically remailed by an anonymous re-mail service.
h> If you do not wish to receive further messages from this
h> re-mailer:
h> Reply to with the subject: dest-block
h> Mail-To-News-Contact:
h> Organization:
h> I fucking HATE jews.
h> Wish Hitler had FINISHED the job.
That is certainly not the intent of this re-mailer. I absolutely abhor the
misuse of it. I didn't see your message until this morning. I am
immediately putting in blocks for your name.
Please don't hesitate to contact me again if the abuse continues.
This re-mailer operates fully within the rules set down by the
Telecommunications act. That same act allows me to block certain addresses
at my discretion.
I apologize for the thoughtlessness of others.
--
Best regards,
Admin
mailto:
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: Response from Remailer |
14 Dec 2005 06:10:46 AM |
|
|
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051213130931.28506W-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
The following message which pertains to the use of remailers to make posts
in someone else's name is self-explanatory:
Carol do you feel a NEED to post it 20 times for emphasis??????
.
|
|
|
| User: "freedom" |
|
| Title: Re: Response from Remailer |
14 Dec 2005 09:29:16 AM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"KRP" <web2457k@verizon.net> wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051213130931.28506W-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
The following message which pertains to the use of remailers to make posts
in someone else's name is self-explanatory:
Carol do you feel a NEED to post it 20 times for emphasis??????
If the message in question had nothing to do with you, why is this a
concern for you?
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html
Conclusive proof that Ken Pangborn is a racist forger...
Keywords: trial consultant,trial consulting,dads,fathers,ken
pangborn,kenneth pangborn,florida,palm
harbor,men,abuse,incest,rape,pedophile,teens,megan
pangborn,sanciprian,peggy pangborn,jay
holland,florida,tampa,cyberstalking,dean tong,david sharp,marina
taylor,florida lawyer,florida attorney,astc,american society of trial
consultants,racism,racist,hate crime,forgery,forgeries,fraud
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBQ6AeFAu6zDezw650EQJfzACgi4IH4Ygq7F6jLlv7eF9NVNwM7lAAoL41
ti9aTUMyLK+3gqzz424fyvh8
=DW1e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: Response from Remailer |
14 Dec 2005 07:02:14 PM |
|
|
DAVID MOORE STALKER FROM MISSOURI
"freedom" <aboutken@KRPaboutISkenApangbornFRAUD.com> wrote in message
news:345d0f7ce2eb64450b17659a0aba75d1@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
The following message which pertains to the use of remailers to make
posts
in someone else's name is self-explanatory:
Carol do you feel a NEED to post it 20 times for emphasis??????
If the message in question had nothing to do with you, why is this a
concern for you?
Davey are you taking a break from harassing my wife via e-mail tonight, or
did you just find out that that account is now disabled?
.
|
|
|
| User: "freedom" |
|
| Title: Re: Response from Remailer |
16 Dec 2005 05:27:11 AM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"KRP" <web2457k@verizon.net> wrote:
DAVID MOORE STALKER FROM MISSOURI
..............did not write the message in question.
"freedom" <aboutken@KRPaboutISkenApangbornFRAUD.com> wrote in message
news:345d0f7ce2eb64450b17659a0aba75d1@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
The following message which pertains to the use of remailers to make
posts
in someone else's name is self-explanatory:
Carol do you feel a NEED to post it 20 times for emphasis??????
If the message in question had nothing to do with you, why is this a
concern for you?
Davey are you taking a break from harassing my wife via e-mail tonight, or
did you just find out that that account is now disabled?
Gotta wonder why you're so afraid to allow her access to e-mail....afraid
she might learn the truth?
Don't worry, I'll just send a registered letter....and if you intercept it
I'll have you charged with mail fraud :)
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
Keywords: trial consultant,trial consulting,dads,fathers,ken
pangborn,kenneth pangborn,florida,palm
harbor,men,abuse,incest,rape,pedophile,teens,megan
pangborn,sanciprian,peggy pangborn,jay
holland,florida,tampa,cyberstalking,dean tong,david sharp,marina
taylor,florida lawyer,florida attorney,astc,american society of trial
consultants,racism,racist,hate crime,forgery,forgeries,fraud
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBQ6Dl3Au6zDezw650EQJJ8ACgiP8fIwtu8W0Z7rI+Zke78QQch6cAoMxL
NqWxvHBPoZLZkvOTOYo7B/X1
=alcN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: Response from Remailer |
16 Dec 2005 07:24:39 AM |
|
|
"freedom" <aboutken@KRPaboutISkenApangbornFRAUD.com> wrote in message
news:64174a8e339e029c0d9bf8bb4c3cf255@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
The following message which pertains to the use of remailers to make
posts
in someone else's name is self-explanatory:
Carol do you feel a NEED to post it 20 times for emphasis??????
If the message in question had nothing to do with you, why is this a
concern for you?
Davey are you taking a break from harassing my wife via e-mail tonight, or
did you just find out that that account is now disabled?
Gotta wonder why you're so afraid to allow her access to e-mail....afraid
she might learn the truth?
Don't worry, I'll just send a registered letter....and if you intercept it
I'll have you charged with mail fraud :)
Don't worry Moore it will be handled.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "human" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
12 Dec 2005 09:33:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
The judges are ruling that xians must be burned at the stake, drowned,
crucified, and beaten to death?
They would IF they could.
Nope, wrong. The ACLU would be the first to defend
xians if they were being persecuted.
Absolutely!!
-------
"History tells us that how much we want to believe a proposition is
not a reliable guide as to whether it is true." -- Steven Pinker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mickey" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
10 Dec 2005 07:27:41 PM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:E6CdnfWjvY5rEgTeRVn-uA@centurytel.net...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in
the new world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version
of religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in
school is a death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones
into religious persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors
are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities committed
by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
And *I* was speaking of TODAY'S witch trials filed by the ACLU!
The ACLU is drowning witches?
You mean you missed this year's annual witch drowning? Too bad, it was a
CSPAN. You might catch a rerun on PBS, though. It's popular for fund drives.
mickey
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
11 Dec 2005 09:45:45 AM |
|
|
"Mickey" <mickey_and_edith@nomorephishsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:hgLmf.39400$6e1.32436@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:E6CdnfWjvY5rEgTeRVn-uA@centurytel.net...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in
the new world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version
of religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in
school is a death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones
into religious persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors
are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities
committed
by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
And *I* was speaking of TODAY'S witch trials filed by the ACLU!
The ACLU is drowning witches?
You mean you missed this year's annual witch drowning? Too bad, it was a
CSPAN. You might catch a rerun on PBS, though. It's popular for fund
drives.
CNN is planning a TED TURNER SPECIAL.. TELETHON for it. Guest stars include
Tim Robbins, Barbara Streisand and Ed Asner back for a SPECIAL appearance!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "vrooooom" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
09 Dec 2005 10:01:20 AM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051209000625.2895E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here fleeing
religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in the new
world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version of
religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow? Placing
crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of some rights
you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a
death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones into religious
persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities committed
by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what you
were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time will come
in the pit of fire.
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.C." |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
09 Dec 2005 10:10:15 AM |
|
|
"vrooooom" <vrooooom@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:kThmf.1547$3Z.120@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051209000625.2895E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing
religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in the new
world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version
of
religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
Placing
crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of some
rights
you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a
death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones into religious
persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities committed
by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what you
were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time will come
in the pit of fire.
That's not in the Constitution!
--
My fervent hope is that the American people will
adopt a government in which there are two four
year term limits for everybody, no contributions of
any kind to anyone that the contributor can NOT
vote for, no retirement plan for politicians and no
taxpayer money to anyone that has not voted in
3 of the past 4 elections and no taxpayer funded
grants to anyone, only loans that must be paid
back at the private sector rate of interest.
Criticism is easy and takes no intelligence at all.
Offerring a valid, different solution takes brains.
J. C.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
09 Dec 2005 10:33:20 AM |
|
|
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051209000625.2895E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in
the new world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version
of religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in
school is a death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones
into religious persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors
are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities committed
by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what you
were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time will come
in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
--
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
| User: "vrooooom" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
10 Dec 2005 03:43:03 PM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051209000625.2895E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in
the new world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version
of religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in
school is a death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones
into religious persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors
are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities committed
by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what you
were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time will come
in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
Bring what, your eternal spiritual death? I have no power over that,
only the Heavenly Father has power over that.
Demons cannot be changed, they are minions of Satan.
All you people will know the truth on the last day.
.
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
10 Dec 2005 05:38:51 PM |
|
|
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051209000625.2895E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing religious persecution and looking for religious freedom
in the new world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version
of religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in
school is a death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones
into religious persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors
are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities
committed by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what you
were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time will come
in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
Bring what, your eternal spiritual death? I have no power over that,
only the Heavenly Father has power over that.
Demons cannot be changed, they are minions of Satan.
All you people will know the truth on the last day.
Since your god is a figment of your imagination, and therefore a part of
you, I consider that a direct threat. And I dare you to come through on it.
--
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
| User: "vrooooom" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
11 Dec 2005 05:23:50 AM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051209000625.2895E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing religious persecution and looking for religious freedom
in the new world.
They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding
documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version
of religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have? Or that singing Christmas carols in
school is a death penalty crime? Seems like we know who the ones
into religious persecution are, or at least the wannabe persecutors
are.
I was referring to the Salem Witch Trials and other atrocities
committed by the Pilgrims and their offspring.
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what you
were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time will come
in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
Bring what, your eternal spiritual death? I have no power over that,
only the Heavenly Father has power over that.
Demons cannot be changed, they are minions of Satan.
All you people will know the truth on the last day.
Since your god is a figment of your imagination, and therefore a part of
you, I consider that a direct threat. And I dare you to come through on
it.
ROFL
You losing little human you amaze me with the lack of brain you have.
Your synapses must be shorting out more and more each day with the
strain you are putting on it!
.
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
12 Dec 2005 01:01:57 AM |
|
|
vrooooom wrote:
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what
you were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time
will come in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
Bring what, your eternal spiritual death? I have no power over that,
only the Heavenly Father has power over that.
Demons cannot be changed, they are minions of Satan.
All you people will know the truth on the last day.
Since your god is a figment of your imagination, and therefore a part of
you, I consider that a direct threat. And I dare you to come through on
it.
ROFL
You losing little human you amaze me with the lack of brain you have.
Your synapses must be shorting out more and more each day with the
strain you are putting on it!
Ah, I make a statement you can't refute so you start insulting me. I win.
Yay for me.
--
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
| User: "vrooooom" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
12 Dec 2005 12:31:28 PM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what
you were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time
will come in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
Bring what, your eternal spiritual death? I have no power over that,
only the Heavenly Father has power over that.
Demons cannot be changed, they are minions of Satan.
All you people will know the truth on the last day.
Since your god is a figment of your imagination, and therefore a part of
you, I consider that a direct threat. And I dare you to come through on
it.
ROFL
You losing little human you amaze me with the lack of brain you have.
Your synapses must be shorting out more and more each day with the
strain you are putting on it!
Ah, I make a statement you can't refute so you start insulting me. I
win. Yay for me.
Hardly!
I see a definate lack of brain development goin on with you and your kind!
.
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
12 Dec 2005 06:23:12 PM |
|
|
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what
you were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time
will come in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
Bring what, your eternal spiritual death? I have no power over that,
only the Heavenly Father has power over that.
Demons cannot be changed, they are minions of Satan.
All you people will know the truth on the last day.
Since your god is a figment of your imagination, and therefore a part
of you, I consider that a direct threat. And I dare you to come
through on it.
ROFL
You losing little human you amaze me with the lack of brain you have.
Your synapses must be shorting out more and more each day with the
strain you are putting on it!
Ah, I make a statement you can't refute so you start insulting me. I
win. Yay for me.
Hardly!
I see a definate lack of brain development goin on with you and your
kind!
And yet another insult. This reminds me of a football team, losing 48-3,
running into their own end zone on purpose to cause a safety and make their
team lose by even more.
--
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
| User: "vrooooom" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
13 Dec 2005 08:05:35 AM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
towelie wrote:
vrooooom wrote:
Atrocities? LMAOROFL
you demons are all alike. You dont have to say anything about what
you were talking about, we know you. God knows you too. Your time
will come in the pit of fire.
Bring it.
Bring what, your eternal spiritual death? I have no power over that,
only the Heavenly Father has power over that.
Demons cannot be changed, they are minions of Satan.
All you people will know the truth on the last day.
Since your god is a figment of your imagination, and therefore a part
of you, I consider that a direct threat. And I dare you to come
through on it.
ROFL
You losing little human you amaze me with the lack of brain you have.
Your synapses must be shorting out more and more each day with the
strain you are putting on it!
Ah, I make a statement you can't refute so you start insulting me. I
win. Yay for me.
Hardly!
I see a definate lack of brain development goin on with you and your
kind!
And yet another insult. This reminds me of a football team, losing
48-3, running into their own end zone on purpose to cause a safety and
make their team lose by even more.
There is no sense in talking sense with you. You are Anti-Christian.
You have no faith in God the Father, God the Son and God the HOly
Spirit, One God for ever and ever. So therefore the argument has been
won, by me.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "human" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
10 Dec 2005 01:28:19 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051209000625.2895E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here fleeing
religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in the new
world. They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version of
religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
That is a figment of your imagination.
<<Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of some rights you
think you have?>>
That is a figment of your imagination.
<<Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a death penalty crime? >>
That is a figment of your imagination.
<< Seems like we know who the ones into religious persecution
are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.>>
Seems like we know who it is who can't address what was written, but would
rather address what they think was written.
Is it common for these imagined voices to afflict you, Ken?
----------
"I think we ought always to entertain our opinions with some measure of
doubt. I shouldn't wish people dogmatically to believe any philosophy, not
even mine." --Bertrand Russell
-----------
http://www.truthdig.com/dig/page4/200512_an_atheist_manifesto
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
10 Dec 2005 11:13:41 AM |
|
|
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051210012315.11549B-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
[after quoting 'Congress shall make no law respecting ...']
So goes the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Many of those who first colonized this great nation came here
fleeing
religious persecution and looking for religious freedom in the new
world. They sought freedom of religion, not freedom from it. Divine
providence,
God, our creator are all mentioned prominently in this nation's
founding documents.
No, they sought a place where they could practice their own version of
religious persecution.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. It's a secret.
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
That is a figment of your imagination.
It seems to be yours, apparently since you support an objection to
calling a "Christmas Tree" a CHRISTMAS tree and are offended unless they
call it a "HOLIDAY tree!
<<Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you
think you have?>>
That is a figment of your imagination.
Not according to American ATheists and the ACLU.. Their lawsuits say
they are dead serious about it. They just filed ANOTHER lawsuit against the
State of Utah.
<<Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a death penalty crime? >>
That is a figment of your imagination.
Nope the lawsuits are real.
<< Seems like we know who the ones into religious persecution
are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.>>
Seems like we know who it is who can't address what was written, but would
rather address what they think was written.
Is it common for these imagined voices to afflict you, Ken?
Not "voices" - - - - lawsuits!
.
|
|
|
| User: "human" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
11 Dec 2005 12:31:22 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051210012315.11549B-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
That is a figment of your imagination.
It seems to be yours,
What 'seems to be' to you is not often what is reality.
apparently since you support an objection to calling a "Christmas Tree" a
CHRISTMAS tree and are offended unless they call it a "HOLIDAY tree!
Actually I don't care what YOU call yours or where you put it, but I could
recommend a place.
I recognize that ours is a pluralistic society and that citizens of many
faiths celebrate the winter holidays in a variety of ways. Governmental
entities have no business in exclusive terminology.
Citizens who may want to celebrate the holidays in ways other than Xn ways
shouldn't be excluded by exclusive terminology, even if you would have it
that way. Do you want public holiday trees to be called Chanukkah trees?
Is that OK? Or do you think that Xns would feel excluded?
How about a Solstice tree? Should we call public holiday trees Solstice
trees to please those who celebrate the Solstice? Would that make you
feel excluded?
For pity's sake: Walk a mile in someone else's mocassins, would you?
<<Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have?>>
That is a figment of your imagination.
Not according to American ATheists and the ACLU.. Their lawsuits say
they are dead serious about it. They just filed ANOTHER lawsuit against the
State of Utah.
Good for them. Those 12'-tall honkin' huge Latin crosses have no business
on public property.
<<Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a death penalty crime? >>
That is a figment of your imagination.
Nope the lawsuits are real.
The law suits may be real, but your hyperbole about "death penalty crime"
is assinine (and a figment of your imagination).
<< Seems like we know who the ones into religious persecution
are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.>>
Seems like we know who it is who can't address what was written, but would
rather address what they think was written.
Is it common for these imagined voices to afflict you, Ken?
Not "voices" - - - - lawsuits!
When there are violations, don't be shocked that there are lawsuits.
---------------
Religions, of course, have their own demanding intellectual traditions, as
Jesuits and Talmudic scholars might attest.... But, in its less rigorous,
popular forms, religion is about as intellectually challenging as the
average self-help book. (Like personal development literature, mass market
books about spirituality and religion celebrate emotionalism and denigrate
reason. They elevate the "truths" of myths and parables over empiricism.)
In its more authoritarian forms, religion punishes questioning and rewards
gullibility. Faith is not a function of stupidity but a frequent cause of
it. -- Wendy Kaminer, "The Last Taboo" (14 Oct 1996, The New Republic) &
folded into her 1999 book, Sleeping with Extraterrestrials: The Rise of
Irrationalism and Perils of Piety
For full article: http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/kaminer.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
11 Dec 2005 10:00:29 AM |
|
|
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051211002208.5159D-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
That is a figment of your imagination.
It seems to be yours,
What 'seems to be' to you is not often what is reality.
Lawsuits are reality in my world, I don';t know about yours.
apparently since you support an objection to calling a "Christmas Tree" a
CHRISTMAS tree and are offended unless they call it a "HOLIDAY tree!
Actually I don't care what YOU call yours or where you put it, but I could
recommend a place.
I am sure you have a place in mind. I bet having to see them REALLY
offends you no end.
I recognize that ours is a pluralistic society and that citizens of many
faiths celebrate the winter holidays in a variety of ways. Governmental
entities have no business in exclusive terminology.
CHRISTmas is a Federal Ho,iday,. NOT the "winter event." CHRISTmas!
Citizens who may want to celebrate the holidays in ways other than Xn ways
shouldn't be excluded by exclusive terminology, even if you would have it
that way. Do you want public holiday trees to be called Chanukkah trees?
Is that OK? Or do you think that Xns would feel excluded?
Ever see a Hannukah bush? UNLIKE you when I see a Minorah I do not start
sweating and my testicles don't start playing ping pong. I don't start
frothing at the mouth when I hear that a local Wiccan coven is going into
the woods to celebrate nature. When a local atheist goes on public access TV
and proclaims he doesn't believe there is a God, I don't panic and run to my
lawyer's office. I'm not offended by your beliefs or lack thereof. I AM
offended that you want to CONTROL - - MY beliefs. I don't feel excluded
by Jewish celebrations at all. Why? Because I am often INVITED to them and
enjoy their celebrations and - - AND I "respect" them. As I do my Muslim
friends.
How about a Solstice tree? Should we call public holiday trees Solstice
trees to please those who celebrate the Solstice? Would that make you
feel excluded?
We call them Christmas trees becaue that is what they ARE bozo. I know
that YOU don't like it. (and people like you) When we cut through the
***** here, what this is REALLY about is your antagonism to theism, and
particularly Christianity.
For pity's sake: Walk a mile in someone else's mocassins, would you?
I have. I respect diverse beliefs. YOU are one of the MOST totally
INTOLLERANT people on the planet. Many atheists are today.
<<Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have?>>
That is a figment of your imagination.
Not according to American Atheists and the ACLU.. Their lawsuits say
they are dead serious about it. They just filed ANOTHER lawsuit against
the
State of Utah.
Good for them. Those 12'-tall honkin' huge Latin crosses have no business
on public property.
Now we are cutting through the ***** dishonesty! First you say that
it is a figmnent of my imagination but you are FOR it. Would a SMALL cross
be okay? Of course not.
<<Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a death penalty crime?
That is a figment of your imagination.
Nope the lawsuits are real.
The law suits may be real, but your hyperbole about "death penalty crime"
is assinine (and a figment of your imagination).
Yeah it is hyperbole. BUT if you could REALLY get your way, I bet you'd
love to see many laws making ir a crime and allowing you to eliminate it.
And if you couldn't get rid of Christianity any other way, make teaching it
to kids a crime, and jail parents who violated the law. EVEN putting the to
death. Make ANY mention of God a crime. That's the road YOU are on!
<< Seems like we know who the ones into religious persecution
are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.>>
Seems like we know who it is who can't address what was written, but
would
rather address what they think was written.
Is it common for these imagined voices to afflict you, Ken?
Not "voices" - - - - lawsuits!
When there are violations, don't be shocked that there are lawsuits.
So putting up a memorial where somebody was killed is a
"VIOLATION" - - hmm "VIOLATION" of what? Some months ago I made reference
to crosses in federal cemeteries. I recall the TOTALLY dishonest denials...
Guess what.. Today there are some. Again in Utah the spokesman for American
Atheists has targeted crosses in Veterans cemeteries.
It is funny to listen to all the fake ANGRY denials of the REAL agenda
only to see the agenda unfold precisely along the lines predicted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "human" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
11 Dec 2005 07:14:19 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005, KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051211002208.5159D-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
What 'seems to be' to you is not often what is reality.
Lawsuits are reality in my world, I don';t know about yours.
I did not suggest that lawsuits were not a reality.
apparently since you support an objection to calling a "Christmas Tree" a
CHRISTMAS tree and are offended unless they call it a "HOLIDAY tree!
Actually I don't care what YOU call yours or where you put
it, but I could recommend a place.
I am sure you have a place in mind. I bet having
to see them REALLY offends you no end.
I have no problem with holiday trees in the public square. I do have a
problem with folks who scream and hollar when they are called holiday
trees, insisting that they be called *CHRIST*mas trees when many citizens
are excluded by insistance on such terminology.
I recognize that ours is a pluralistic society and that citizens of many
faiths celebrate the winter holidays in a variety of ways. Governmental
entities have no business in exclusive terminology.
CHRISTmas is a Federal Ho,iday,. NOT the "winter event." CHRISTmas!
No one is required to celebrate *CHRIST*mas if they prefer to celebrate
Kwaanza or Chanukkah or the solstice.
Citizens who may want to celebrate the holidays in ways other than Xn ways
shouldn't be excluded by exclusive terminology, even if you would have it
that way. Do you want public holiday trees to be called Chanukkah trees?
Is that OK? Or do you think that Xns would feel excluded?
Ever see a Hannukah bush?
Yes. I have seen several. There is a variety of styles. Some are
actually pine trees--the same pines which Xns decorate and call Xmas
trees.
<< UNLIKE you when I see a Minorah I do not start sweating>>
I don't.
<< and my testicles don't start playing ping pong.
I have as much interest in your testicles as I have in seeing you with a
holiday tree sticking up your butt.
I don't start frothing at the mouth when I hear that a local Wiccan coven is going into
the woods to celebrate nature.>>
Who claimed you did?
<< When a local atheist goes on public access TV and proclaims he doesn't believe there is a God, I don't panic and run to my
lawyer's office. I'm not offended by your beliefs or lack thereof. I AM
offended that you want to CONTROL - - MY beliefs.
Evidence/data that shows I want to control your beliefs
goes here ---->>
UM..... How would it even be possible for one person to control the
beliefs of another person?
<< I don't feel excluded by Jewish celebrations at all. Why? Because I am often INVITED to them and enjoy their celebrations and - - AND I "respect" them. As I do my Muslim friends.>>
How nice. Who suggested you did feel excluded?
What I want to know is this: Have you written your local papers--have you
called your town hall--and asked to call the public holiday tree a
Chanukkah tree?
How about a Solstice tree? Should we call public holiday trees Solstice
trees to please those who celebrate the Solstice? Would that make you
feel excluded?
We call them Christmas trees becaue that is what they ARE bozo.
You may call your own personal holiday tree a Xmas tree if you like. No
one has suggested that is a problem.
I know that YOU don't like it. (and people like you) When we cut through
the ***** here, what this is REALLY about is your antagonism to
theism, and particularly Christianity.>>
I have no antagonism to theism and/or Xnity unless it is endorsed by
governmental agencies, or if there is an appearance of endorsement.
For pity's sake: Walk a mile in someone else's mocassins, would you?
I have. I respect diverse beliefs.
If you respected diverse beliefs, you wouldn't be crawling up on a soapbox
insisting that holiday trees be called *CHRIST*mas trees.
<< YOU are one of the MOST totally INTOLLERANT people on the planet. Many
atheists are today.>>
Data which shows intollerance on my part goes
here --->>
<<Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have?>>
That is a figment of your imagination.
Not according to American Atheists and the ACLU.. Their lawsuits say
they are dead serious about it. They just filed ANOTHER lawsuit against
the State of Utah.
Good for them. Those 12'-tall honkin' huge Latin crosses have no business
on public property.
Now we are cutting through the ***** dishonesty! First you say that
it is a figmnent of my imagination but you are FOR it. Would a SMALL cross
be okay? Of course not.
On someone's personal grave marker, I don't see a problem. I object to
endorsement or the appearance of endorsement of particular religious
persuasions by governmental entities.
That is not dishonesty. That is not intollerance. It is merely expecting
that governmental entities not endorse religion.
<<Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a death penalty crime?
That is a figment of your imagination.
Nope the lawsuits are real.
The law suits may be real, but your hyperbole about "death penalty crime"
is assinine (and a figment of your imagination).
Yeah it is hyperbole.
I thought so.
BUT if you could REALLY get your way, I bet you'd love to see
many laws making ir a crime and allowing you to eliminate it.
I don't know what ir is, so how would I know if ir should be made a crime
or should be eliminated.
And if you couldn't get rid of Christianity any other way, make teaching it
to kids a crime, and jail parents who violated the law. EVEN putting the to
death. Make ANY mention of God a crime. That's the road YOU are on!
More hyperbole and erroneous assumptions and whacky claims and
allegations.
<< Seems like we know who the ones into religious persecution
are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.>>
Seems like we know who it is who can't address what was written, but
would rather address what they think was written.
Is it common for these imagined voices to afflict you, Ken?
Not "voices" - - - - lawsuits!
When there are violations, don't be shocked that there are lawsuits.
So putting up a memorial where somebody was killed is a
"VIOLATION" - - hmm "VIOLATION" of what?>>
Putting up a Latin cross on public land is the endorsement of a particular
religion.
<<Some months ago I made reference to crosses in federal cemeteries. I
recall the TOTALLY dishonest denials... Guess what.. Today there are some.
Again in Utah the spokesman for American Atheists has targeted crosses in Veterans cemeteries.>>
I have no idea of that to which you refer, and you have given no link or
no quotation to make your case.
Until you do, there is nothing to comment on.
It is funny to listen to all the fake ANGRY denials of the REAL agenda
only to see the agenda unfold precisely along the lines predicted.
"History tells us that how much we want to believe a proposition is
not a reliable guide as to whether it is true." -- Steven Pinker
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
12 Dec 2005 08:37:00 AM |
|
|
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051211185124.28714B-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005, KRP wrote:
What 'seems to be' to you is not often what is reality.
Lawsuits are reality in my world, I don';t know about yours.
I did not suggest that lawsuits were not a reality.
You only suggested that they were a "fiement" of my "imagination." What
did you think that statement meant?
apparently since you support an objection to calling a "Christmas
Tree" a
CHRISTMAS tree and are offended unless they call it a "HOLIDAY tree!
Actually I don't care what YOU call yours or where you put
it, but I could recommend a place.
I am sure you have a place in mind. I bet having to see them REALLY
offends you no end.
I have no problem with holiday trees in the public square. I do have a
problem with folks who scream and hollar when they are called holiday
trees, insisting that they be called *CHRIST*mas trees when many citizens
are excluded by insistance on such terminology.
CHRISTMAS TREES..... That's the holiday in question! Tough ***** if you
are excluded!Really, really TOUGH *****! There is NO provision in the
Constitution that YOU have to be included in EVERYTHING! It ain't there
bub! ANYWHERE! YOU casn call it anythign you want, you just have NO right
whatsoever to make ME call it what YOU want!
I recognize that ours is a pluralistic society and that citizens of
many
faiths celebrate the winter holidays in a variety of ways.
Governmental
entities have no business in exclusive terminology.
CHRISTmas is a Federal Holiday,. NOT the "winter event." CHRISTmas!
No one is required to celebrate *CHRIST*mas if they prefer to celebrate
Kwaanza or Chanukkah or the solstice.
Kwanza is NOT a Federal Holiday. CHRISTMAS IS!!! You arem't required to
celebrate it. The poroblem here is that people like you want to PROHIBIT
others from being able to celabrate it!
Citizens who may want to celebrate the holidays in ways other than Xn
ways
shouldn't be excluded by exclusive terminology, even if you would have
it
that way. Do you want public holiday trees to be called Chanukkah
trees?
Is that OK? Or do you think that Xns would feel excluded?
Ever see a Hannukah bush?
Yes. I have seen several. There is a variety of styles. Some are
actually pine trees--the same pines which Xns decorate and call Xmas
trees.
Anybody seeking to make a LAW prohibiting Jews from having the bush? OR
demanding at legal gunpoint (figure of speech) to call it what THEY want
instead?
<< UNLIKE you when I see a Minorah I do not start sweating>>
I don't.
Just the Christian cross. THAT not only causes you to sweat but your
blood pressure to spike.
<< and my testicles don't start playing ping pong.
I have as much interest in your testicles as I have in seeing you with a
holiday tree sticking up your butt.
That much huh?
I don't start frothing at the mouth when I hear that a local Wiccan coven
is going into the woods to celebrate nature.>>
Who claimed you did?
You started to. YOU are the one on the side of people who wish to
PROHIBIT religious symbols, NOT me.
<< When a local atheist goes on public access TV and proclaims he doesn't
believe there is a God, I don't panic and run to my
lawyer's office. I'm not offended by your beliefs or lack thereof. I AM
offended that you want to CONTROL - - MY beliefs.
Evidence/data that shows I want to control your beliefs goes here ---->>
Read the thread.
UM..... How would it even be possible for one person to control the
beliefs of another person?
We have had ***** slike that all through time in this world.
<< I don't feel excluded by Jewish celebrations at all. Why? Because I am
often INVITED to them and enjoy their celebrations and - - AND I
"respect" them. As I do my Muslim friends.
How nice. Who suggested you did feel excluded?
What I want to know is this: Have you written your local papers--have you
called your town hall--and asked to call the public holiday tree a
Chanukkah tree?
WHY should I? I am not the one who seeks to COMPELL others to use
terminology acceptqable to ME. YOU ARE!
How about a Solstice tree? Should we call public holiday trees
Solstice
trees to please those who celebrate the Solstice? Would that make you
feel excluded?
We call them Christmas trees becaue that is what they ARE bozo.
You may call your own personal holiday tree a Xmas tree if you like. No
one has suggested that is a problem.
Sure they have in LAWSUITS where they seek to PROHIBIT calling them
"CHRISTMAS" trees!
I know that YOU don't like it. (and people like you) When we cut through
the ***** here, what this is REALLY about is your antagonism to
theism, and particularly Christianity.>>
I have no antagonism to theism and/or Xnity unless it is endorsed by
governmental agencies, or if there is an appearance of endorsement.
Some of your best friends are, eh?
For pity's sake: Walk a mile in someone else's mocassins, would you?
I have. I respect diverse beliefs.
If you respected diverse beliefs, you wouldn't be crawling up on a soapbox
insisting that holiday trees be called *CHRIST*mas trees.
Because, bozo, THAT is what they ARE! PERIOD! The flap is because some
people have come along and now INSIST that it be a CRIME to call them that!
They want them called "HOLIDAY TREES" when that is NOT what they are!
<< YOU are one of the MOST totally INTOLLERANT people on the planet. Many
atheists are today.
Data which shows intollerance on my part goes here --->>
Carol Lee Smith.... Uggghhh.. Start with your argument here wanting them
called "HOLIDAY TREES."
<<Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you
of
some rights you think you have?>>
That is a figment of your imagination. Not according to American
Atheists and the ACLU.. Their lawsuits say
they are dead serious about it. They just filed ANOTHER lawsuit
against
the State of Utah.
EXAMPLE of INTOLERANCE HERE!!!!:
Good for them. Those 12'-tall honkin' huge Latin crosses have no
business on public property.
Now we are cutting through the ***** dishonesty! First you say that
it is a figmnent of my imagination but you are FOR it. Would a SMALL
cross
be okay? Of course not.
On someone's personal grave marker, I don't see a problem. I object to
endorsement or the appearance of endorsement of particular religious
persuasions by governmental entities.
So a CROSS at a Federal Cemetary is an "ENDORSEMEN" of religion?
That is not dishonesty. That is not intollerance. It is merely expecting
that governmental entities not endorse religion.
It is 100% INTOLLERANCE! It is nothing buy hate filled INTOLLERANCE!
<<Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a death penalty
crime?
That is a figment of your imagination.
Nope the lawsuits are real.
The law suits may be real, but your hyperbole about "death penalty
crime"
is assinine (and a figment of your imagination).
Yeah it is hyperbole.
I thought so.
It is RIDICULE...
BUT if you could REALLY get your way, I bet you'd love to see
many laws making it a crime and allowing you to eliminate it.
I don't know what ir is, so how would I know if ir should be made a crime
or should be eliminated.
Coy, but DUMB!
And if you couldn't get rid of Christianity any other way, make teaching
it
to kids a crime, and jail parents who violated the law. EVEN putting the
to
death. Make ANY mention of God a crime. That's the road YOU are on!
More hyperbole and erroneous assumptions and whacky claims and
allegations.
No this is simple - IF there really was some "truth serum" or Wonder
WOman's magic lasso that made people like you tell the truth you'd have to
admit that.
<< Seems like we know who the ones into religious persecution
are, or at least the wannabe persecutors are.>>
Seems like we know who it is who can't address what was written, but
would rather address what they think was written.
Is it common for these imagined voices to afflict you, Ken?
Not "voices" - - - - lawsuits!
When there are violations, don't be shocked that there are lawsuits.
So putting up a memorial where somebody was killed is a
"VIOLATION" - - hmm "VIOLATION" of what?>>
Putting up a Latin cross on public land is the endorsement of a particular
religion.
ONLY in your sick sick sick mind! You serious need help for these
delusions of persecution. They are nothing more than a memorial for a HUMAN
BEING that died on that spot who happened to be a Christian.
<<Some months ago I made reference to crosses in federal cemeteries. I
recall the TOTALLY dishonest denials... Guess what.. Today there are some.
Again in Utah the spokesman for American Atheists has targeted crosses in
Veterans cemeteries.>>
I have no idea of that to which you refer, and you have given no link or
no quotation to make your case.
Oh come on you are BULLSHITTING now. I never mentioned the SIZE of the
crosses. YOU did, meaning that you are familiar with the CASE in point and
now you are just DISHONESTLY playing dumb. Some of us would call that
"deliberate LYING.
Until you do, there is nothing to comment on.
DISHONEST!
It is funny to listen to all the fake ANGRY denials of the REAL agenda
only to see the agenda unfold precisely along the lines predicted.
"History tells us that how much we want to believe a proposition is not a
reliable guide as to whether it is true." -- Steven Pinker
True but when that proposition is unfolded and the drapes come off the
guide is there.
.
|
|
|
| User: "KRP" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
13 Dec 2005 10:07:28 AM |
|
|
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051212214834.20698H-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
What 'seems to be' to you is not often what is reality.
Lawsuits are reality in my world, I don';t know about yours.
I did not suggest that lawsuits were not a reality.
You only suggested that they were a "figment" of my "imagination." What
did you think that statement meant?
Actually, I don't think I said anything was a "fiement" of your
imagination.
Now Carol...
This is how the conversation went, Kenny:
KP > >> So you think celebrating Christmas is "PERSECUTING" you somehow?
cs> > That is a figment of your imagination.
KP: It seems to be yours, apparently since you support an objection to
calling a "Christmas Tree" a CHRISTMAS tree and are offended unless they
call it a "HOLIDAY tree!
KP> <<Placing crosses where people have died is somehow "DEPRIVING" you of
some rights you think you have?>>
cs> That is a figment of your imagination.
Yep it is what you claimed Carol.
KP: Not according to American Atheists and the ACLU.. Their lawsuits say
they are dead serious about it. They just filed ANOTHER lawsuit against
the State of Utah.
KP> <<Or that singing Christmas carols in school is a death penalty crime?
cs> That is a figment of your imagination.
KP: Nope the lawsuits are real.
KP> >> >> apparently since you support an objection to calling a
"Christmas Tree" a CHRISTMAS tree and are offended unless they call it a
"HOLIDAY tree!
cs> >> > Actually I don't care what YOU call yours or where you put
it, but I could recommend a place.
KP> >> I am sure you have a place in mind. I bet having to see them
REALLY offends you no end.
I have no problem with holiday trees in the public square. I do have a
problem with folks who scream and hollar when they are called holiday
trees, insisting that they be called *CHRIST*mas trees when many
citizens
are excluded by insistance on such terminology.
CHRISTMAS TREES..... That's the holiday in question! Tough ***** if you
are excluded!Really, really TOUGH *****!
Thank you very much for making it crystal clear you really don't care if
citizens are excluded.
There is NO provision in the
Constitution that YOU have to be included in EVERYTHING!
I don't expect an invitation from you to your holiday party, but I don't
expect the government to exclude me.
I am having a CHRISTMAS PARTY Carol I know you want the POLICE to
rerquire I call it a "HOLIDAY" party!
It ain't there bub! ANYWHERE! YOU
can call it anythign you want, you just have NO right
whatsoever to make ME call it what YOU want!
What is it you do not understand about what I said about YOUR tree, Kenny.
You can call your own tree anything you want to call it and put it where
you want to put it on your own property.
I don't give a ***** if YOU like it or not on PUBLIC propertyy Carol! It
IS a Christmas tree! GOT IT? AND Christmas IS a federal holiday! Whether
YOU like it or not!
But public celebrations should be inclusive and recognize that everyone
celebrates in their own way.
NOPE..
I recognize that ours is a pluralistic society and that citizens of
many faiths celebrate the winter holidays in a variety of ways.
Governmental entities have no business in exclusive terminology.
CHRISTmas is a Federal Holiday,. NOT the "winter event." CHRISTmas!
No one is required to celebrate *CHRIST*mas if they prefer to celebrate
Kwaanza or Chanukkah or the solstice.
Kwanza is NOT a Federal Holiday. CHRISTMAS IS!!!
Christmas is not a religious holiday. Christmas is a secular holiday. The
government has determined that for you. The federal government may not
name, support or endorse religion or religious holidays.
It is a RELIGIOUS HOLIDAY Carol GET USED TO IT! It has been a FEDERAL
HOLIDAY for MANY decades! Hey here is an idea, why don't you get Mikey
NEWDOW to file ANOTHER lawsuit?
<< You arem't required to celebrate it. The poroblem
here is that people like you want to PROHIBIT
others from being able to celabrate it!
I have no desire to prevent or prohibit you or any other private citizen
from celebrating what you want, when you want.
*****!
Ever see a Hannukah bush?
Yes. I have seen several. There is a variety of styles. Some are
actually pine trees--the same pines which Xns decorate and call Xmas
trees.
Anybody seeking to make a LAW prohibiting Jews from having the bush? OR
demanding at legal gunpoint (figure of speech) to call it what THEY want
instead?
Of course Chanukkah trees/bushes are not prohibited. But I don't think it
would be appropriate to have the village holiday tree officially named the
Chanukkah tree, do you?
Bugt maybe U.S. Marshalls shoupld raid the temple and MAKE the Jews call
it a HOLIDAY BUSH?
<< UNLIKE you when I see a Minorah I do not start sweating>> >
I don't.
Just the Christian cross. THAT not only causes you to sweat but your
blood pressure to spike.
The Christian cross doesn't cause me to sweat. Neither does it cause my
blood pressure to spike.
Oh Carol, Christianity in general, Catholicism in specific makes your
sphincter flutter!
I do object to governmental endorsement of or the appearance of
endorsement of particular religions or particular religious symbols.
And calling it a CHRISTMAS tree does that, huh? It PERSECUTES you!
<< and my testicles don't start playing ping pong.
I have as much interest in your testicles as I have in
seeing you with a holiday tree sticking up your butt.
That much huh?
I am so glad you understand that none of your anatomy is of interest to
me.
Oh come on Carol you think of little else.
I don't start frothing at the mouth when I hear that a local Wiccan
coven
is going into the woods to celebrate nature.>>
Who claimed you did?
You started to.
Provide a direct quotation of something I said to support that erroneous
assumption.
No Carol not playing your little game of PROVE IT!
<< YOU are the one on the side of people who wish to PROHIBIT religious
symbols, NOT me.>>
Only on governmental property. See the above.
Like CHRISTMAS TREES!! UNDER PENALTY OF DEATH!
<< When a local atheist goes on public access TV and proclaims he
doesn't
believe there is a God, I don't panic and run to my
lawyer's office. I'm not offended by your beliefs or lack thereof. I
AM
offended that you want to CONTROL - - MY beliefs.
.
|
|
|
| User: "human" |
|
| Title: Re: "No FFR" --George Ott, Milwaukee |
13 Dec 2005 12:48:44 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, KRP wrote:
"human" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1051212214834.20698H-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu
Anybody seeking to make a LAW prohibiting Jews from having t | | | | | | | | |