God, you're very quick to decide what rights people have forfeited.

I think you might be one of the religious nutters that I am referring
to.>>>

What rights am I denying anyone, other than the "right" to make death
threats against the president of the United States?

How forgiving would you be of Rush had he stated: "...I don't even

agree with his blowing up Federal building, exactly. I would be
content simply arresting everyone in the building for treason. That
being said, you've got to admit that Tim McVeigh had some fine economic
ideas there.">>>

We're not talking about Rush, stop putting up the strawman arguments

so that you can blow them down.>>>

That is not a strawman argument, but a fair question. Had Rush made
the above statement, you'd be calling for his blood. But since it was
made by someone you like, you're willing to give them a pass.

I agreed that Bush was, in my view, a war criminal and made clear

that I did not agree with the guys on comments concerning death or
Judaism.>>>

Tell me, do you believe that the Israeli's are a bunch of war
criminals, too?

I do find it interesting that you find anti-Semitism to be worse

than being anti-Fundamentalist Christian. I guess that you believe
bigotry is acceptable, as long as it's against the right people.>>>>

I think one group of people petitioning TV stations and theatres

etc., to
decide what we can and can't watch is forcing their views onto us.>>>

So, you're outraged by such groups who promote censorship? I've got

a

little list:

Act Up is responsible for having Doctor Laura thrown off the air.
The Federal Teachers Union organized protests and destroyed Rush
Limbaugh's television show.
Three Democratic Presidential candidates called for Rush Limbaugh to

be

fired after Rush suggested that McNabb was overpromoted because he

was

black.
Al Gore has called for bloggers to be regulated by the Fed. He

refers

to on-line conservatives a "cyber-brown shirts."
MOVEON.ORG has called to reinstate the "Hush Rush", which would
regulate who Rush would be allowed to have on his show, and what

topics

he could discuss.
TAKE BACK THE MEDIA tried to have Rush's show banned.
Ed Asner bragged about being part of a cabal that "brought down" Rush
Limbaugh, and had Sean Hannity in their sights nes.

I'm sure many of the above would argue that they believe the media

should be neutral and without bias.>>>

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH. ACT UP believes in a media that's neutral and without
bias? What, exactly, does that even mean, other than statements which
you agree?

That's not the same as saying only TV programmes

that conform to your moral values should be allowed to be aired.>>>

No, you just want TV programs that conform to YOUR moral values be
allowed on the air.

I do loath Christian Fundamentalists who continually attempt to

have us all live according to their beliefs. >>>

OK, so you admit that you're an anti-Christian bigot. Glad to hear

you

being honest for a change.

I've never been dishonest. I was brought up a Catholic, that's

enough to turn you against ALL organised religions.>>>

You do know, of course, that the bloodiest religion in history, by a
factor of about a hundred, are the Atheists, don't you?

So, what are you prepare to do to end their

freedom of religion?

I have never said I wanted to do anything to "end their freedom of

religion". That's ANOTHER strawman attack. I simply want them to live
the way they want and allow the rest of us to do the same.>>>>

And what if part of the way they want to live is to work to change the
system, and help elect politicians they like, and pass laws which
conform to their religious beliefs? What then?

Why? You want Christian Fundamentalists to live according to your

beliefs, why can't they return the favor?

They're not returning the favour. They are trying to force the rest

of us to live within their narrow world.>>>

Really? They've made church attendance mandatory? Burned temples?
What, exactly, are you talking about?

I've already explained that. They try to influence what we can

watch, amongst other things.>>>

And as I've explained before, the liberals play that game far more
often, and far more effectively.

I loath such lunatics for the exact same reasons as I loath bin

Laden. >>>

Fundamentalist Christians murdered three thousand New Yorkers?

Please

site.

I regard George Bush as dangerously fundamentalist as I regard bin

Laden.>>>

You didn't answer the question. Mudanmentalist Christs murdered

three

thousand New Yorkers? Please site.

ANOTHER strawman!! When did I say that Fundamentalist Christians
murdered 3,000 New Yorkers? I said I loath them for the same reasons
that I loath bin Laden.>>>>

Either you're claiming that bin Laden had nothing to do with the
bombing, or that the 3000 deaths didn't bother you all that much.

Which is it?

Namely, they are ideologues who want us all to live within their

religious beliefs.>>>

So, in your mind, Jerry Falwell campaigning to have Penthouse Magazine
sold under the counter of 7/11 is identical to bin Laden bombing the
World Trade Center?

And Bush has killed more innocents than bin Laden could ever dream

of
killing. And worse, unlike the 3,000 killed and remembered on 9-11,
Bush
doesn't even bother to count the number he kills.>>>

The ONLY reason that the number of American casulaties have reached
four digits is because Bush ran as humane a war as possbile. He used
smart bombs to target buildings. He avoided populated areas. If

Bush

is a muderer, than FDR is a far larger one.

Hahahahahahahahahahah! You're an insane person. >>>

Hey, babe, you're the one denying a historical fact.