As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
%$@#&*
On Dec 10, 5:46=A0pm, "SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Dec 10, 8:41=A0am, tiredofspam <nospam.nospam.com> wrote:
>
> > This is just an example of a nut job religious group.
>
> As a Christian myself I totally reject the strange and unsupprted
> beliefs and actions of this group. They do not represent in any way
> the belief of Christianity as I know it. This type of hate is exactly
> the reason for the teaching about loving your neighbor.
Yabbut.... Elizabeth Edwards was expounding the virtues of a man she
_knew_ was having an affair. The prospect of becoming First Lady of
the USA was irresistible to her.
It is tragic that cancer strikes the way it does, it somehow doesn't
turn her into an angel.... that, in itself, is not a free pass for
complete zealot fuck-ups like Phelps and his hangers-on to disrupt a
private affair... clowns like that are giving good-living christians
the same bad name as those crazed muslims are tainting those who do
NOT subscribe to insanity.
People need to learn to tear down the blinds that main stream media
insists on draping before our eyes- Elizabeth Edwards was no better
than that husband of hers.
<nomex>
"DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
> needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
> that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
> been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
> bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the
> family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.
Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned. OK......
"Tim Daneliuk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 12/10/2010 10:26 AM, RonB wrote:
>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>> protest her funeral.
>>
>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>>
>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>>
>> %$@#&*
>
> The irony is that if we truly wish to defend freedom, speech like that
> from these people must be protected.
>
> However ... I fail to see how they get away with forcing people to
> listen to them by interfering in private events like funerals. A free
> society guarantees you the right to speak freely. It does not
> guarantee you the right to have listeners.
>
> The simple solution to this is to back these people far enough away so
> that they cannot disrupt an entirely private event. They belong on
> public property where they can exercise the 1st Amendment rights so
> any squirrels or other nut collectors that wish to listen ...
>
>
That's where they operate, on public property. They protest on the sidewalks
across from the funeral home, church, streets going to either, etc. This is
all public property. The key, which was accomplished at a few funerals for
soldiers, is to have more people lined up on the same sidewalk as the Phelps
clan, with HUGE signs and flags blocking theirs. I'm willing to bet if this
was accomplished at all of their sites of protest, they would eventually
diminish. We outnumber them by thousands. Surely we can overpower their
existence with a greater display.
"CW" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
>> needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
>> that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
>> been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
>> bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the
>> family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.
> Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned. OK......
Nonsense. The law limits speech when a compelling public interest overrides
a private interest. I cannot libel or slander you without risking a
lawsuit, the law recognizes that preventing *damaging* defamation is more
important than my right to speak defamatory words--your right not to be
injured overrides my right to speak. The Phelps clan cannot demonstrate that
being kept away from the gates of a cemetery prevents them from speaking, it
only keeps them from inflicting emotional distress on the family of a dead
soldier (or whoever's family they are trying to hurt). So the right of a
family at a funeral not to injured by hateful speech should override the
Phelps clan's right to speak *at that particular location*. This isn't a
blanket ban on their speech, only a limitation on it being conducted in a
location designed purely to inflict needless pain.
As one of the Supreme Court Justices hearing the related case asked, what if
the Phelps wanted to protest outside the homes of wounded soldiers, follow
them to their rehab sessions, picket family picnics, follow them down public
streets and so on. Would that speech be protected? Are there no limits,
anywhere, ever?
On Dec 10, 3:45=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:43:24 -0600, "Dr. Deb" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
> >sometimes the KKK almost made sense. =A0Though I seriously doubt Phelps =
is
> >smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.
>
> >Deb
>
> I think something like "You're too rude/stupid/<your_term_here> to be
> allowed to reproduce, so we will ensure that you can't" might be
> appropriate.
>
> I'll pay for the knife - don't think any anesthetic should be
> provided.
>
> If that's too drastic, maybe tarred and feathered instead?
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >> This is just an example of a nut job religious group.
>
> >> Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
> >> This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserv=
e
> >> it either.
>
> >> It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanista=
n,
> >> and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
> >> other out.
>
> >> On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
> >>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
> >>> want to hide under a damned rock. =A0For those who haven't heard the
> >>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
> >>> protest her funeral.
>
> >>>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-
> >edawards-funeral/story?id=3D12364430
>
> >>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>
> >>> %$@#&*
I don't know who you are, and I really don't give a shit, but
sometimes there is a need for drastic measures. Hauling the KKK into
this discussion is a no-starter. Too much bad history and baggage.
However, sitting on your hands and wishing for change is a no-starter
as well.
On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 06:29:03 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 8:57 am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>[snipped]
>>
>> Me, too. But, like I've said, the ratio is very wide and the bad guys
>> are on the big end.
>
>I couldn't disagree more. I might agree with the exact opposite.
I've met too many hypocrites right out of church. <shrug>
--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch
On Dec 10, 9:26=A0am, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
> want to hide under a damned rock. =A0For those who haven't heard the
> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
> protest her funeral.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth...
>
> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>
> %$@#&*
Take comfort in the fact that not many of us likely judge your
beautiful state by the actions of its minority whack-jobs.
I have to frequently remind myself that freedoms are often
distasteful, but better than not having them at all.
"DGDevin" wrote:
> The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried
> things like that. Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a
> couple of members of his genetic-bottleneck family are lawyers, they
> know how to work the system.
------------------------
His daughter is the legal eagle for the "business".
Lew
On 2010-12-14 08:57:55 -0500, Larry Jaques
<[email protected]> said:
> Churches could do a lot more for the homeless and hungry if they
> didn't spend countless millions on ornate and gaudy church buildings.
> $100 million for one church in HelL.A., $25 million for a gold-topped
> Mormon temple in Sandy Eggo, etc. That money could have fed, clothed,
> and housed a metric shitload of people, huh?
Just to play devil's advocate for a moment, didn't the money feed,
clothe and house a metric shitload of contractors?
On 2010-12-14 08:57:55 -0500, Larry Jaques
<[email protected]> said:
> Me, too. But, like I've said, the ratio is very wide and the bad guys
> are on the big end.
Um, maybe. I tend to believe everyone is pretty decent, right up to the
point they reveal their true natures. But then the evil does seem to be
truly out of proportion -- evil people must work very hard to prove
just how evil they can be.
It takes a lot of Mahatma Gandhis to balance out even one Radislav KrstiÄ.
On Dec 10, 8:41=A0am, tiredofspam <nospam.nospam.com> wrote:
> This is just an example of a nut job religious group.
As a Christian myself I totally reject the strange and unsupprted
beliefs and actions of this group. They do not represent in any way
the belief of Christianity as I know it. This type of hate is exactly
the reason for the teaching about loving your neighbor.
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>RonB wrote:
>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>> protest her funeral.
>>
>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>>
>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>>
>> %$@#&*
>
>With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the words
>from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring very true
>when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of religeous intolerance
>and bigotry.
>
>Imagine there's no Heaven
>It's easy if you try
>No hell below us
>Above us only sky
>Imagine all the people
>Living for today
>
>Imagine there's no countries
>It isn't hard to do
>Nothing to kill or die for
>*And* *no* *religion* too
>Imagine all the people
>*Living* *life* *in* *peace*
>
>I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction in this
>world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce at the interment
>of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker in peace.
Nice thought, but the idiots on both (or all, as there are more than
two) sides want to snuff the others.
I'll see you and call you one:
That's me in the corner
That's me in the spotlight
Losing my religion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ2yXWi0ppw
(REM, 1991)
--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch
Tim Daneliuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Freedom of one citizen is always bounded by the freedom of another.
I like this phrasing. It captures something I've known forever, but never been
able to express so well. The closest is Oliver Wendell Holmes' "The right to
swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
Sidebar: I'd always attributed that to Will Rogers, but it seems the Internet
has another opinion.
-- Doug
On Dec 13, 7:51=A0pm, Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, DGDevin wrote:
> > Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can
> > be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.
>
> Absolutely correct. =A0And whether or not the religion is "true" or not
> seems to have no bearing.
>
> Have a wonderful winter solstice festival, whatever myths you attach to
> it :-).
>
> --
> Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw
I celebrate Festivus.
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:43:24 -0600, "Dr. Deb" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
>>sometimes the KKK almost made sense. Though I seriously doubt Phelps is
>>smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.
>>
>>Deb
>
> I think something like "You're too rude/stupid/<your_term_here> to be
> allowed to reproduce, so we will ensure that you can't" might be
> appropriate.
>
> I'll pay for the knife - don't think any anesthetic should be
> provided.
>
> If that's too drastic, maybe tarred and feathered instead?
>
Nope. A simple bullet between the eyes is sufficient. Some people simply
shouldn't be allowed to breathe. He's one of them....and any one who follows
him.
"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
>> needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
>> that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
>> been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
>> bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the
>> family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.
>
>
> Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned. OK......
>
...and who defines what's correct and what's not? The government? Then we'll
have more complaints about gov intervention and slowly stripping our freedom
away.
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Religious folks can keep their witch burnings, Crusades, Westboros,
> etc.
How about their soup kitchens and homeless shelters and rehab programs and
hospices and so on, can they keep those two? You're choosing to see only
one side, and while bigotry and stupidity can certainly be found among
religious people, so can compassion and generosity. I've known some real
jerks who made a big deal of their religious faith, but some of the nicest
folks I've ever met were also very religious--they're not all looking for
opportunities to burn witches.
Neil Brooks wrote:
> On Dec 10, 9:26 am, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>> protest her funeral.
>>
>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth...
>>
>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>>
>> %$@#&*
>
>
> Take comfort in the fact that not many of us likely judge your
> beautiful state by the actions of its minority whack-jobs.
>
> I have to frequently remind myself that freedoms are often
> distasteful, but better than not having them at all.
The two are not mutually exclusive. For example, I have the freedom to own a
baseball bat in a state that recognizes "fighting words" as justification.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> Yabut ... violence isn't the right way to solve this problem. Freedom
> of one citizen is always bounded by the freedom of another. We have
> a spineless government (particularly of late) that refuses to grasp
> this notion. Phelps and his mob must be free to peddle their ideas -
> however malignant. But I cannot grasp why the various governmental
> bodies don't get that the funeral attendees also have co-equal rights.
> Then again, I sort of do get it ... for some 70 years, the government
> has anointed itself as being in charge of who is- and who is not worth
> of particular rights and privileges... and "equal" isn't part of the
> formula...
The nutjobs' behaviour sounds a lot like the behaviour of brownshirt
fascists to me.
They also sound a bit like terrorists.
I would ask the question, "Who benefits politically from their bad
behaviour and what is that political beneficiarie's politics when you
strip the facade back to frame and foundation?"
They are on a continuum. If government/law will not stop them, you have
to ask *why* it will not stop them.
Follow the power.
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> Neil Brooks wrote:
> > On Dec 10, 9:26 am, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
> >> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
> >> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
> >> protest her funeral.
> >>
> >> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth...
> >>
> >> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
> >>
> >> %$@#&*
> >
> >
> > Take comfort in the fact that not many of us likely judge your
> > beautiful state by the actions of its minority whack-jobs.
> >
> > I have to frequently remind myself that freedoms are often
> > distasteful, but better than not having them at all.
>
> The two are not mutually exclusive. For example, I have the freedom to own a
> baseball bat in a state that recognizes "fighting words" as justification.
What state would that be?
"SBH" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
>> pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one
>> of their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.
> I will. The trucker will have to take the time to clean Phelps splatter
> from his truck and that could take awhile.
The bank is going to repo his rig anyway, that's one of the reasons he's so
pissed-off.
"SBH" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> ...and who defines what's correct and what's not? The government? Then
> we'll have more complaints about gov intervention and slowly stripping our
> freedom away.
The courts have the final say on *everything*. So if the courts can
determine whether or not someone goes to prison for the rest of his life (or
gets a lethal injection), is it reasonable to insist they can't be trusted
to rule on where the Phelps clan can stage their nightmarish protests?
tiredofspam <nospam.nospam.com> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
> and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
> other out.
Good idea.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote in news:a1877b77-6b34-4d19-a19b-
[email protected]:
> Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
> You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
> by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.
>
That's right: To each his own, or as the poet said:
Jeder soll nach seiner Façon selig werden
(one line):
<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_gefl%C3%
BCgelter_Worte/J#Jeder_soll_nach_seiner_Fa.C3.A7on_selig_werden.>
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote in news:f26e53db-6003-4d63-89c7-
[email protected]:
> On Dec 14, 8:57 am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> [snipped]
>>
>> Me, too. But, like I've said, the ratio is very wide and the bad guys
>> are on the big end.
>>
>
> I couldn't disagree more. I might agree with the exact opposite.
I guess it is a personal thing. Both from the observer's point of view and
from the organization's/practitioner's. In the end, I would hope that
everyone gets what he/she deserves to get <grin/snicker>
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried
>> things like that.
>> Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a couple of members of his
>> genetic-bottleneck
>> family are lawyers, they know how to work the system.
> Understood, but somewhere along the way, it would be nice for the
> government
> to actually defend *everyone's* civil liberties, not just the fringe
> lunatics.
> I get - and support - their right to speak their piece. This is a
> cornerstone of a free society. I do not get why they are able to
> morph this into making everyone listen to their lunacy.
I agree. IMO their tactic is to generate publicity by doing something they
know will cause anguish to the families of dead soldiers (and others). I do
not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the family
can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.
One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one of
their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.
On Dec 13, 2:24=A0pm, "Disbelief" <disbelief@diilly-
daally....invalid.com> wrote:
> Larry Jaques wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> RonB wrote:
> >>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
> >>> want to hide under a damned rock. =A0For those who haven't heard the
> >>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
> >>> protest her funeral.
>
> >>>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth.=
..
>
> >>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>
> >>> %$@#&*
>
> >> With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the
> >> words from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring
> >> very true when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of
> >> religeous intolerance and bigotry.
>
> >> Imagine there's no Heaven
> >> It's easy if you try
> >> No hell below us
> >> Above us only sky
> >> Imagine all the people
> >> Living for today
>
> >> Imagine there's no countries
> >> It isn't hard to do
> >> Nothing to kill or die for
> >> *And* *no* *religion* too
> >> Imagine all the people
> >> *Living* *life* *in* *peace*
>
> >> I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction
> >> in this world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce
> >> at the interment of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker
> >> in peace.
>
> > Nice thought, but the idiots on both (or all, as there are more than
> > two) sides want to snuff the others.
>
> > I'll see you and call you one:
>
> > That's me in the corner
> > That's me in the spotlight
> > Losing my religion
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DFQ2yXWi0ppw
> > (REM, 1991)
>
> Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
> would be a damn site better place. =A0Too many have died, been maimed,
> deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
> usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.
>
> When was the last time you saw a hungry clergyman? =A0I could go on, but =
this
> is not the place to do so.
>
> And just to finish Lennon's song:
>
> You may say that I'm a dreamer
> But I'm not the only one
> I hope someday you'll join us
> And the world will be as one
>
> Imagine no possessions
> I wonder if you can
> No need for greed or hunger
> A brotherhood of man
> Imagine all the people
> Sharing all the world
>
> You may say that I'm a dreamer
> But I'm not the only one
> I hope someday you'll join us
> And the world will live as one
>
> And that's the world without religion..
Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.
phorbin wrote:
>
> The nutjobs' behaviour sounds a lot like the behaviour of brownshirt
> fascists to me.
>
> They also sound a bit like terrorists.
Throwing extreme words like facists and terrorists makes you sound more like
them than not. Nutjobs - sure, I can buy into that, but if wackos like this
cause you to feel terror, then you shouldn't step outside of your front
door.
>
> I would ask the question, "Who benefits politically from their bad
> behaviour and what is that political beneficiarie's politics when you
> strip the facade back to frame and foundation?"
>
> They are on a continuum. If government/law will not stop them, you
> have to ask *why* it will not stop them.
>
> Follow the power.
And you suggest the government have to power to decide who to stop? You're
really scaring me now.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 21:41:23 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 12/13/2010 5:15 PM, DGDevin wrote:
>> "Disbelief" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>> Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed, deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.
>>
>> A fellow my wife and I know lost everything to Hurricane Katrina, his house had six feet of water in it. He didn't even see anyone from FEMA for months, but he and his neighbors were fed and housed for the most part by church groups, many of them had come hundreds or even thousands of miles to help. So while I agree that religion has been the source of a lot of strife over the centuries, that doesn't mean that no good has ever come of it. Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.
>
>More people have died at the hands of atheists than at the hands of the
>religious wingnuts. Stalin alone probably eclipses the entire death
>toll of the Crusades and medieval Christian church. Tribalists come in
>second - think Tutsi/Hutu for one example - but religion is a far distant
>third.
Perhaps. Then again, those killings weren't done in the name of some
god, or NO god, either.
Mayans and Incas offed a few in the name of their gods, too. The list
is endless.
--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch
On Dec 14, 11:14=A0pm, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Larry Jaques wrote:
>
> > I've met too many hypocrites right out of church. =A0<shrug>
>
> And I've met too many hypocrites that have nothing to do with churches.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> [email protected]
Hypocrites are the worst scum. Being dope-smoking/stealing cops,
diddling priests or politicians.
On 12/11/2010 4:19 PM, SBH wrote:
>
> "CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.
>>
>>
>> Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned. OK......
>>
> ...and who defines what's correct and what's not? The government? Then we'll have more complaints about gov intervention and slowly stripping our freedom away.
Even as we speak, one corner of the political spectrum wants to use FCC
oversight to silence the other. Both corners are obnoxious, but both
ought to be free to peddle their ideas. Putting government in charge
of who get's to say what is deadly ... there are no exceptions.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
Larry Jaques wrote:
>
> I've met too many hypocrites right out of church. <shrug>
And I've met too many hypocrites that have nothing to do with churches.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Dec 14, 9:36=A0am, Han <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote in news:f26e53db-6003-4d63-89c7-
> [email protected]:
>
> > On Dec 14, 8:57 am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > [snipped]
>
> >> Me, too. But, like I've said, the ratio is very wide and the bad guys
> >> are on the big end.
>
> > I couldn't disagree more. I might agree with the exact opposite.
>
> I guess it is a personal thing. =A0
Very personal indeed.
On Dec 14, 8:57=A0am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
[snipped]
>
> Me, too. =A0But, like I've said, the ratio is very wide and the bad guys
> are on the big end.
>
I couldn't disagree more. I might agree with the exact opposite.
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 12:00:47 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Dec 13, 2:24 pm, "Disbelief" <disbelief@diilly-
>daally....invalid.com> wrote:
--snip--
>Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
>You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
>by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.
Yeah, tell us all about your Old Testament punishments and such, Toy.
Poor John was horribly liberal, too.
--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch
On 12/10/2010 10:12 PM, DGDevin wrote:
> "Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> But merely being on public property does not guarantee the right to do whatever you want.
>> There are public nuisance ordinances, for example, that prevent you from disturbing
>> the neighbors or running naked through the streets. These people should be subject
>> to the same restrictions - they are interfering with people involved in a private
>> matter.
>
> The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried things like that. Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a couple of members of his genetic-bottleneck family are lawyers, they know how to work the system.
Understood, but somewhere along the way, it would be nice for the government
to actually defend *everyone's* civil liberties, not just the fringe
lunatics.
I get - and support - their right to speak their piece. This is a
cornerstone of a free society. I do not get why they are able to
morph this into making everyone listen to their lunacy.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
"DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
> pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one
> of their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.
I will. The trucker will have to take the time to clean Phelps splatter from
his truck and that could take awhile.
On 12/10/2010 9:00 PM, SBH wrote:
>
> "Tim Daneliuk" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> On 12/10/2010 10:26 AM, RonB wrote:
>>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>>> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>>> protest her funeral.
>>>
>>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>>>
>>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>>>
>>> %$@#&*
>>
>> The irony is that if we truly wish to defend freedom, speech like that
>> from these people must be protected.
>>
>> However ... I fail to see how they get away with forcing people to
>> listen to them by interfering in private events like funerals. A free
>> society guarantees you the right to speak freely. It does not
>> guarantee you the right to have listeners.
>>
>> The simple solution to this is to back these people far enough away so
>> that they cannot disrupt an entirely private event. They belong on
>> public property where they can exercise the 1st Amendment rights so
>> any squirrels or other nut collectors that wish to listen ...
>>
>>
> That's where they operate, on public property. They protest on the sidewalks across from the funeral home, church, streets going to either, etc. This is all public property. The key, which was accomplished at a few funerals for soldiers, is to have more people lined up on the same sidewalk as the Phelps clan, with HUGE signs and flags blocking theirs. I'm willing to bet if this was accomplished at all of their sites of protest, they would eventually diminish. We outnumber them by thousands. Surely we can overpower their existence with a greater display.
But merely being on public property does not guarantee the right to do whatever you want.
There are public nuisance ordinances, for example, that prevent you from disturbing
the neighbors or running naked through the streets. These people should be subject
to the same restrictions - they are interfering with people involved in a private
matter.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
In article <[email protected]>, "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
>One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
>pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one of
>their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.
Nor will I. And I doubt that it would be easy to find 12 men who would vote to
convict him, either.
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "DGDevin" wrote:
>
>> The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried
>> things like that. Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a couple
>> of members of his genetic-bottleneck family are lawyers, they know how to
>> work the system.
> ------------------------
> His daughter is the legal eagle for the "business".
>
> Lew
>
>
>
Making her The Target.
--
If your name is No, I voted for you - more than once ...
RonB wrote:
> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
> protest her funeral.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>
> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>
> %$@#&*
With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the words
from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring very true
when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of religeous intolerance
and bigotry.
Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
*And* *no* *religion* too
Imagine all the people
*Living* *life* *in* *peace*
I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction in this
world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce at the interment
of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker in peace.
Larry Jaques wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> RonB wrote:
>>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>>> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>>> protest her funeral.
>>>
>>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>>>
>>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>>>
>>> %$@#&*
>>
>> With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the
>> words from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring
>> very true when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of
>> religeous intolerance and bigotry.
>>
>> Imagine there's no Heaven
>> It's easy if you try
>> No hell below us
>> Above us only sky
>> Imagine all the people
>> Living for today
>>
>> Imagine there's no countries
>> It isn't hard to do
>> Nothing to kill or die for
>> *And* *no* *religion* too
>> Imagine all the people
>> *Living* *life* *in* *peace*
>>
>> I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction
>> in this world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce
>> at the interment of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker
>> in peace.
>
> Nice thought, but the idiots on both (or all, as there are more than
> two) sides want to snuff the others.
>
> I'll see you and call you one:
>
> That's me in the corner
> That's me in the spotlight
> Losing my religion
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ2yXWi0ppw
> (REM, 1991)
Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed,
deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.
When was the last time you saw a hungry clergyman? I could go on, but this
is not the place to do so.
And just to finish Lennon's song:
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
And that's the world without religion..
Han wrote:
> Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:a1877b77-6b34-4d19-a19b-
> [email protected]:
>
>> Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
>> You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
>> by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.
>>
>
> That's right: To each his own,
I fully agree, and then perhaps the various religious factions could get on
with living their own beliefs whilst respecting others and perhaps praying
to whatever god they believe in peacefully side by side.
All the best and may your Christmas be a good and peaceful one - and if your
religion doesn't recognise the birth of a Christ, then peace to you all.
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, DGDevin wrote:
> Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can
> be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.
Absolutely correct. And whether or not the religion is "true" or not
seems to have no bearing.
Have a wonderful winter solstice festival, whatever myths you attach to
it :-).
--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 17:26:27 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Dec 13, 7:51 pm, Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, DGDevin wrote:
>> > Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can
>> > be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.
>>
>> Absolutely correct. And whether or not the religion is "true" or not
>> seems to have no bearing.
>>
>> Have a wonderful winter solstice festival, whatever myths you attach to
>> it :-).
>>
>> --
>> Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw
>
>I celebrate Festivus.
Warn't he that guy on Rawhide?
Happy Yule! Joyous Saturnalia!
P.S: No, Genitalia is not an Italian airline.
--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> More people have died at the hands of atheists than at the hands of the
> religious wingnuts. Stalin alone probably eclipses the entire death
> toll of the Crusades and medieval Christian church. Tribalists come in
> second - think Tutsi/Hutu for one example - but religion is a far distant
> third.
What leads you to believe Stalin was an atheist? There is significant
evidence that he never really shook off the seminary training he had as a
young man, and that his support of religious persecution especially prior to
WWII was largely from fear that the church represented competition for the
loyalty of the people.
You're also forgetting some religiously inspired slaughters, e.g. the
Taiping Rebellion in China (led by the self-announced brother of Christ)
killed twenty million. But it also isn't a competition in which the
body-count determines who is worst. An atheist who kills to achieve power,
or a supposed Christian who kills to achieve power--which one is defying the
moral code he claims to believe in?
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> But merely being on public property does not guarantee the right to do
> whatever you want.
> There are public nuisance ordinances, for example, that prevent you from
> disturbing
> the neighbors or running naked through the streets. These people should
> be subject
> to the same restrictions - they are interfering with people involved in a
> private
> matter.
The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried things
like that. Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a couple of
members of his genetic-bottleneck family are lawyers, they know how to work
the system.
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 08:26:18 -0800 (PST), RonB <[email protected]>
wrote:
>As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>protest her funeral.
>
>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>
>No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>
>%$@#&*
One way to counter them would be to picket, protest, and otherwise
totally obstruct THEIR lives. i.e.: send a well-behaved mob to their
church, homes, and place of business. Protest loudly all night long.
Publish photographs of individuals at their business. Sic a PI on
them and publish the dirt. Send a mob to THEIR gatherings (weddings,
funerals, company picnics, graduations, church functions, &tc.).
And jam potatoes up the tailpipes of their cars (I learned that one
when I was ~ 7 yrs old).
-Zz
-Zz
On 12/10/2010 11:07 PM, DGDevin wrote:
> "Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>
>>> The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried things like that.
>>> Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a couple of members of his genetic-bottleneck
>>> family are lawyers, they know how to work the system.
>
>
>> Understood, but somewhere along the way, it would be nice for the government
>> to actually defend *everyone's* civil liberties, not just the fringe
>> lunatics.
>
>> I get - and support - their right to speak their piece. This is a
>> cornerstone of a free society. I do not get why they are able to
>> morph this into making everyone listen to their lunacy.
>
> I agree. IMO their tactic is to generate publicity by doing something they know will cause anguish to the families of dead soldiers (and others). I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.
>
> One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one of their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.
Yabut ... violence isn't the right way to solve this problem. Freedom
of one citizen is always bounded by the freedom of another. We have
a spineless government (particularly of late) that refuses to grasp
this notion. Phelps and his mob must be free to peddle their ideas -
however malignant. But I cannot grasp why the various governmental
bodies don't get that the funeral attendees also have co-equal rights.
Then again, I sort of do get it ... for some 70 years, the government
has anointed itself as being in charge of who is- and who is not worth
of particular rights and privileges... and "equal" isn't part of the
formula...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, "DGDevin"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Disbelief" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
>> would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed,
>> deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
>> usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.
>
>A fellow my wife and I know lost everything to Hurricane Katrina, his house
>had six feet of water in it. He didn't even see anyone from FEMA for
>months, but he and his neighbors were fed and housed for the most part by
>church groups, many of them had come hundreds or even thousands of miles to
>help. So while I agree that religion has been the source of a lot of strife
>over the centuries, that doesn't mean that no good has ever come of it.
>Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can be a
>force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.
Please remember that one does not have to go to church, nor preach to
natives to have a good heart, to share their bounty, or to be nice to
people. Religion gets in the way of that more than you think, driving
away generous people who don't want to put up with the horrible
bigotry and animosity of churchgoers of all races and religions.
I'm totally against organized religion yet I gave $6 to a lady and her
daughter who approached me as I left the market yesterday. They needed
gas to get to Portland.
Religious folks can keep their witch burnings, Crusades, Westboros,
etc.
--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
>> pocket
>> is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one of
>> their roadside
>> protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.
> Yabut ... violence isn't the right way to solve this problem.
IMO it would solve this particular problem quite nicely. It's not like the
Phelps clan is a franchise operation with branches in every city.
> Freedom
> of one citizen is always bounded by the freedom of another. We have
> a spineless government (particularly of late) that refuses to grasp
> this notion.
Legislators climb over each other to pass laws stopping the Phelps clan from
getting near military funerals, the problem isn't the legislative or
executive branches, it is the judicial branch. The courts (usually
correctly) lean towards protecting freedom of speech, but there are still
limitations when a public need is more pressing than an individual one--IMO
this should be one of them. But as the lawyers say, hard cases make bad
law.
> Phelps and his mob must be free to peddle their ideas -
> however malignant. But I cannot grasp why the various governmental
> bodies don't get that the funeral attendees also have co-equal rights.
Because they don't see them as equal, they assume that hurt feelings are not
as important as freedom of speech. In general I agree with that, but I do
feel that this particular speech should not be protected outside the gates
of a cemetery even if I would protect it a quarter of a mile away. We
impose limitations on speech in order to serve compelling public needs, e.g.
discouraging defamation or incitement to violence. I think a case could be
made that the Phelps mutants have ample opportunity to express their views
in places other than in front of grieving relations at a funeral, that their
rights do not depend on protesting outside the cemetery gates. Some laws
that have been passed require them to stay 1,000 feet away, but others
impose a useless 150 foot requirement--I'd make it at least 1,500 feet. If
they want to protest a few blocks away in front of some car wash, fine.
Then the car wash owner can sue them for interfering with his business.
On 12/13/2010 5:15 PM, DGDevin wrote:
> "Disbelief" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed, deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.
>
> A fellow my wife and I know lost everything to Hurricane Katrina, his house had six feet of water in it. He didn't even see anyone from FEMA for months, but he and his neighbors were fed and housed for the most part by church groups, many of them had come hundreds or even thousands of miles to help. So while I agree that religion has been the source of a lot of strife over the centuries, that doesn't mean that no good has ever come of it. Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.
More people have died at the hands of atheists than at the hands of the
religious wingnuts. Stalin alone probably eclipses the entire death
toll of the Crusades and medieval Christian church. Tribalists come in
second - think Tutsi/Hutu for one example - but religion is a far distant
third.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:26:42 -0800, "DGDevin"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> Religious folks can keep their witch burnings, Crusades, Westboros,
>> etc.
>
>How about their soup kitchens and homeless shelters and rehab programs and
>hospices and so on, can they keep those two? You're choosing to see only
>one side, and while bigotry and stupidity can certainly be found among
>religious people, so can compassion and generosity.
The jerk/nice ratio is about 1,000:6 in my experience. The local soup
kitchen/flop house -demands- that the partakers listen to their
sermons before dinner, say grace, and all but demand (which would be
illegal) work from them for their services. There's not much room for
compassion and generosity with all that need for spouting religion. My
neighbor is a Catholic and says that her church gives away food and
such without asking the needy to listen to their religious views or
for anything in return. That sounds like a lot more compassionate and
generous
Churches could do a lot more for the homeless and hungry if they
didn't spend countless millions on ornate and gaudy church buildings.
$100 million for one church in HelL.A., $25 million for a gold-topped
Mormon temple in Sandy Eggo, etc. That money could have fed, clothed,
and housed a metric shitload of people, huh?
>I've known some real
>jerks who made a big deal of their religious faith, but some of the nicest
>folks I've ever met were also very religious--they're not all looking for
>opportunities to burn witches.
Me, too. But, like I've said, the ratio is very wide and the bad guys
are on the big end.
--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:43:24 -0600, "Dr. Deb" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
>sometimes the KKK almost made sense. Though I seriously doubt Phelps is
>smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.
>
>Deb
I think something like "You're too rude/stupid/<your_term_here> to be
allowed to reproduce, so we will ensure that you can't" might be
appropriate.
I'll pay for the knife - don't think any anesthetic should be
provided.
If that's too drastic, maybe tarred and feathered instead?
John
>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>> This is just an example of a nut job religious group.
>>
>> Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
>> This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserve
>> it either.
>>
>> It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
>> and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
>> other out.
>>
>> On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
>>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>>> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>>> protest her funeral.
>>>
>>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-
>edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>>>
>>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>>>
>>> %$@#&*
On 12/10/2010 10:26 AM, RonB wrote:
> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
> protest her funeral.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>
> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>
> %$@#&*
The irony is that if we truly wish to defend freedom, speech like that
from these people must be protected.
However ... I fail to see how they get away with forcing people to
listen to them by interfering in private events like funerals. A free
society guarantees you the right to speak freely. It does not
guarantee you the right to have listeners.
The simple solution to this is to back these people far enough away so
that they cannot disrupt an entirely private event. They belong on
public property where they can exercise the 1st Amendment rights so
any squirrels or other nut collectors that wish to listen ...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
This is just an example of a nut job religious group.
Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserve
it either.
It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
other out.
On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
> protest her funeral.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>
> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>
> %$@#&*
You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
sometimes the KKK almost made sense. Though I seriously doubt Phelps is
smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.
Deb
wrote:
> This is just an example of a nut job religious group.
>
> Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
> This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserve
> it either.
>
> It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
> and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
> other out.
>
> On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
>> As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
>> want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
>> nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
>> protest her funeral.
>>
>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-church-protest-elizabeth-
edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430
>>
>> No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.
>>
>> %$@#&*
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the words
>from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring very true
>when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of religeous intolerance
>and bigotry.
>
>Imagine there's no Heaven
>It's easy if you try
>No hell below us
>Above us only sky
>Imagine all the people
>Living for today
>
>Imagine there's no countries
>It isn't hard to do
>Nothing to kill or die for
>*And* *no* *religion* too
>Imagine all the people
>*Living* *life* *in* *peace*
>
>I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction in this
>world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce at the interment
>of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker in peace.
>
Well said!
--
Mr.E
"Disbelief" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
> would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed,
> deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
> usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.
A fellow my wife and I know lost everything to Hurricane Katrina, his house
had six feet of water in it. He didn't even see anyone from FEMA for
months, but he and his neighbors were fed and housed for the most part by
church groups, many of them had come hundreds or even thousands of miles to
help. So while I agree that religion has been the source of a lot of strife
over the centuries, that doesn't mean that no good has ever come of it.
Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can be a
force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.