On 3/3/12 11:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleTMadnbDP1J8G3M_SnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 3/3/12 10:32 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 10:13 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 10:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

In ,
says...

In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On 3/2/12 5:49 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/2/2012 5:20 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There is no
intention
that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty scary.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933


From CBN and it's not political?

Hehehe.

Right.

It has already started he

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisse...204051912.html





We have a long history in this country of the self-described
religious
attacking/isolating/discriminating against those whose beliefs
differ
from theirs, a history that began long before anyone noticed we
have
Muslims here.

Such religious bigotry is as American as apple pie.

What is the difference between those who have a religious axe to
grind
and those with a political axe to grind.

Exactly! When the Ayatollah Santorum has his way, we'll be a
theocracy
just like that.

Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?

Neither. And neither did our founding fathers.

Read the declaration of independence again. We were founded with an
acknowledgment of God's grace and that everyone could practice their
religion without interference by others. Contrary to popular belief
there is not separation of church and state.


snerk



Yeah, we know the constitution is a joke to you.. We get it..


No, silly...I'm giggling at the Santorumism, that we live in a
theocracy...and there *is* separation of church and state.

What does the 1st amendment state? I'll help you and post it here for
you.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.




Hehehe.

So, we do have spoken aloud group prayer each morning in the public
schools, eh?

If we did, it would be "establishment" of religion.

Sorry, you lose. Again.

*You* can exercise your religion. Your public school system cannot.

Do you understand the difference?

On 3/3/2012 10:48 AM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com,
says...

On 3/2/2012 8:31 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2012 17:30:49 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Mar 2012 17:20:22 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There is no
intention that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty scary.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933




From CBN and it's not political?


Hehehe.


Right.

Can,t get the link to work.

Try this: http://tinyurl.com/29ghyhx

Got it. And the cops were ordered to do nothing? That's the french for you.

Cheese eating surrender monkeys.



Well, the link I posted shows exactly the same thing. The Judge let the
Muslim break the law, because he and the defendant are Muslim...

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 11:09:50 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:
On 3/3/12 10:48 AM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com,

says...

On 3/2/2012 8:31 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2012 17:30:49 -0500,
wrote:

On Fri, 02 Mar 2012 17:20:22 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There is no
intention that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty
scary.


http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933




From CBN and it's not political?


Hehehe.


Right.

Can,t get the link to work.

Try this: http://tinyurl.com/29ghyhx

Got it. And the cops were ordered to do nothing? That's the
french for you.

Cheese eating surrender monkeys.






The United States hasn't won a serious shooting war against a
serious
opponent since World War II, and that war required many allies.

I take it you object to the use of the word monkey.

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 10:12:47 -0500, X ` Man wrote:

On 3/3/12 9:54 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleyKadnQGdHZuEt8_SnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...


Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?


What's the difference?

The problem is that you lefties are willing to lay down and be walked
all over by the Muslims but, when it is any form of Christianity you
freak out.




Really? I don't recall saying or implying that I am "willing to lay down
and be walked all over by Muslims." You should cut back on those magic
'shrooms.

Don't start projecting your recreational activities onto me or others.

As a student of history (actual history, not the "conservative" view of
history), I don't see the difference between being slaughtered by
christian zealots or by muslim zealots, the two religious groups under
discussion in this thread. Both religions have a long and bloody history
of slaughter in the name of the faith.

Actions speak louder than words Harry. Your actions and your fellow
lefty's action's belie your words.


My actions? What actions of mine in preferring to being slaughtered
by christian or muslim zealots? I don't see the difference. If you are
killed by a religious fanatic, you are just as dead, whether that
fanatic be christian or muslim. Or are you trying to contend that
muslims kill in the name of religion and christians don't? That's nonsense.



I also don't "freak out" about christianity. To me, it's just another
superstition-based collection of beliefs. My objections arise when its
practitioners attempt to force their religious beliefs onto my secular
society. I'm having many good laughs these days watching the "christian"
political zealots fall on their swords over womens' reproductive health
issues.

We don't have a secular society. Never have and never will.

Yeah, we do. You just don't understand what the word means.



Women's reproductive health? This is a joke and most people can see
right through the "issue." The poor student Ms. Fluke is a 30 year old
woman who is going to Georgetown Law on a "public interest"
(http://www.law.georgetown.edu/pils/) scholarship. Her whole "beef" is
that someone else isn't paying for her birth control pills. Her argument
falls apart when it comes down to the low cost of condoms.

When a 30 year old woman stands up and says I want someone else to pay
for my birth control pills while I attend law school on a scholarship,
she doesn't garner sympathy from the majority of the country.


Ahh. You read Limbaugh's explanation of her testimony, not her
testimony. Lights out. Good night.

Her testimony was recorded. She wanted $3000 for birth control pills.

On 3/3/12 11:30 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 11:13 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 11:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleTMadnbDP1J8G3M_SnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 3/3/12 10:32 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 10:13 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 10:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

In ,
says...

In ,

says...

In ,

says...

On 3/2/12 5:49 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/2/2012 5:20 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There is no
intention
that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty
scary.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933




From CBN and it's not political?

Hehehe.

Right.

It has already started he

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisse...204051912.html







We have a long history in this country of the self-described
religious
attacking/isolating/discriminating against those whose beliefs
differ
from theirs, a history that began long before anyone noticed we
have
Muslims here.

Such religious bigotry is as American as apple pie.

What is the difference between those who have a religious axe to
grind
and those with a political axe to grind.

Exactly! When the Ayatollah Santorum has his way, we'll be a
theocracy
just like that.

Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?

Neither. And neither did our founding fathers.

Read the declaration of independence again. We were founded with an
acknowledgment of God's grace and that everyone could practice their
religion without interference by others. Contrary to popular belief
there is not separation of church and state.


snerk



Yeah, we know the constitution is a joke to you.. We get it..


No, silly...I'm giggling at the Santorumism, that we live in a
theocracy...and there *is* separation of church and state.

What does the 1st amendment state? I'll help you and post it here for
you.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.




Hehehe.

So, we do have spoken aloud group prayer each morning in the public
schools, eh?

If we did, it would be "establishment" of religion.

Sorry, you lose. Again.

*You* can exercise your religion. Your public school system cannot.

Do you understand the difference?



Facts are facts. Weather you believe in Religion or not, the law says
you can't tell me how to celebrate my faith,

No one is telling you you cannot pray in a public school. Go right
ahead, as an individual.

On 3/3/2012 2:18 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 11:30 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 11:13 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 11:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleTMadnbDP1J8G3M_SnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 3/3/12 10:32 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 10:13 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 10:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,

says...

In
,
says...

In ,

says...

In ,

says...

On 3/2/12 5:49 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/2/2012 5:20 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There is no
intention
that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty
scary.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933





From CBN and it's not political?

Hehehe.

Right.

It has already started he

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisse...204051912.html








We have a long history in this country of the self-described
religious
attacking/isolating/discriminating against those whose beliefs
differ
from theirs, a history that began long before anyone
noticed we
have
Muslims here.

Such religious bigotry is as American as apple pie.

What is the difference between those who have a religious
axe to
grind
and those with a political axe to grind.

Exactly! When the Ayatollah Santorum has his way, we'll be a
theocracy
just like that.

Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?

Neither. And neither did our founding fathers.

Read the declaration of independence again. We were founded with an
acknowledgment of God's grace and that everyone could practice
their
religion without interference by others. Contrary to popular belief
there is not separation of church and state.


snerk



Yeah, we know the constitution is a joke to you.. We get it..


No, silly...I'm giggling at the Santorumism, that we live in a
theocracy...and there *is* separation of church and state.

What does the 1st amendment state? I'll help you and post it here for
you.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.




Hehehe.

So, we do have spoken aloud group prayer each morning in the public
schools, eh?

If we did, it would be "establishment" of religion.

Sorry, you lose. Again.

*You* can exercise your religion. Your public school system cannot.

Do you understand the difference?



Facts are facts. Weather you believe in Religion or not, the law says
you can't tell me how to celebrate my faith,

No one is telling you you cannot pray in a public school. Go right
ahead, as an individual.


You are telling me I have to provide services that are against my
religion and conscience. And don't tell me "the insurance company pays".
You and I, and everyone else knows the insurance company will take that
into consideration when putting together the package for the religious
employer, and charge them more for the group plan, based on the
anticipation of more services, which is of course how insurance
companies work...

On 3/3/12 1:16 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 10:12:47 -0500, X ` wrote:

On 3/3/12 9:54 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleyKadnQGdHZuEt8_SnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...


Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?


What's the difference?

The problem is that you lefties are willing to lay down and be walked
all over by the Muslims but, when it is any form of Christianity you
freak out.




Really? I don't recall saying or implying that I am "willing to lay down
and be walked all over by Muslims." You should cut back on those magic
'shrooms.

Don't start projecting your recreational activities onto me or others.

As a student of history (actual history, not the "conservative" view of
history), I don't see the difference between being slaughtered by
christian zealots or by muslim zealots, the two religious groups under
discussion in this thread. Both religions have a long and bloody history
of slaughter in the name of the faith.

Actions speak louder than words Harry. Your actions and your fellow
lefty's action's belie your words.


My actions? What actions of mine in preferring to being slaughtered
by christian or muslim zealots? I don't see the difference. If you are
killed by a religious fanatic, you are just as dead, whether that
fanatic be christian or muslim. Or are you trying to contend that
muslims kill in the name of religion and christians don't? That's nonsense.



I also don't "freak out" about christianity. To me, it's just another
superstition-based collection of beliefs. My objections arise when its
practitioners attempt to force their religious beliefs onto my secular
society. I'm having many good laughs these days watching the "christian"
political zealots fall on their swords over womens' reproductive health
issues.

We don't have a secular society. Never have and never will.

Yeah, we do. You just don't understand what the word means.



Women's reproductive health? This is a joke and most people can see
right through the "issue." The poor student Ms. Fluke is a 30 year old
woman who is going to Georgetown Law on a "public interest"
(http://www.law.georgetown.edu/pils/) scholarship. Her whole "beef" is
that someone else isn't paying for her birth control pills. Her argument
falls apart when it comes down to the low cost of condoms.

When a 30 year old woman stands up and says I want someone else to pay
for my birth control pills while I attend law school on a scholarship,
she doesn't garner sympathy from the majority of the country.


Ahh. You read Limbaugh's explanation of her testimony, not her
testimony. Lights out. Good night.

Her testimony was recorded. She wanted $3000 for birth control pills.


I'm hoping the young lady who Limbaugh slandered big time will initiate
a massive lawsuit against him. She is a private citizen and Limbaugh the
Pig will not be able to hide behind a claim that she was a public figure
when she testified before Congress. The woman should have all the help
she needs from her faculty and fellow students at Georgetown Law. I'm
also pleased to read that at least a handful of Limbaugh the Pig's
advertisers have decided to part ways with him.

There's no real civil penalty in most cases for insulting a public
figure on the airways. There are for what Limbaugh the Pig did.

On 3/3/12 2:31 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 2:18 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 11:30 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 11:13 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 11:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleTMadnbDP1J8G3M_SnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 3/3/12 10:32 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/3/2012 10:13 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/3/12 10:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,

says...

In
,
says...

In ,

says...

In ,

says...

On 3/2/12 5:49 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/2/2012 5:20 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There
is no
intention
that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty
scary.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933






From CBN and it's not political?

Hehehe.

Right.

It has already started he

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisse...204051912.html









We have a long history in this country of the self-described
religious
attacking/isolating/discriminating against those whose
beliefs
differ
from theirs, a history that began long before anyone
noticed we
have
Muslims here.

Such religious bigotry is as American as apple pie.

What is the difference between those who have a religious
axe to
grind
and those with a political axe to grind.

Exactly! When the Ayatollah Santorum has his way, we'll be a
theocracy
just like that.

Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?

Neither. And neither did our founding fathers.

Read the declaration of independence again. We were founded
with an
acknowledgment of God's grace and that everyone could practice
their
religion without interference by others. Contrary to popular
belief
there is not separation of church and state.


snerk



Yeah, we know the constitution is a joke to you.. We get it..


No, silly...I'm giggling at the Santorumism, that we live in a
theocracy...and there *is* separation of church and state.

What does the 1st amendment state? I'll help you and post it here for
you.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.




Hehehe.

So, we do have spoken aloud group prayer each morning in the public
schools, eh?

If we did, it would be "establishment" of religion.

Sorry, you lose. Again.

*You* can exercise your religion. Your public school system cannot.

Do you understand the difference?



Facts are facts. Weather you believe in Religion or not, the law says
you can't tell me how to celebrate my faith,

No one is telling you you cannot pray in a public school. Go right
ahead, as an individual.


You are telling me I have to provide services that are against my
religion and conscience. And don't tell me "the insurance company pays".
You and I, and everyone else knows the insurance company will take that
into consideration when putting together the package for the religious
employer, and charge them more for the group plan, based on the
anticipation of more services, which is of course how insurance
companies work...


Lots of us pay taxes that go for "services" that are against our
conscience. That's the way it is in a complex society. No one is forcing
you or yours to use contraception or get an abortion.

In article ,
says...

In article , dump-on-
says...

On 3/3/12 9:05 AM, BAR wrote:
In article5sydnaa0EsQUuc_SnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 3/3/12 9:00 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On 3/2/12 5:49 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/2/2012 5:20 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There is no intention
that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty scary.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933


From CBN and it's not political?

Hehehe.

Right.

It has already started he

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisse...204051912.html



We have a long history in this country of the self-described religious
attacking/isolating/discriminating against those whose beliefs differ
from theirs, a history that began long before anyone noticed we have
Muslims here.

Such religious bigotry is as American as apple pie.

What is the difference between those who have a religious axe to grind
and those with a political axe to grind.

Exactly! When the Ayatollah Santorum has his way, we'll be a theocracy
just like that.

Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?


What's the difference?

The problem is that you lefties are willing to lay down and be walked
all over by the Muslims but, when it is any form of Christianity you
freak out.




Really? I don't recall saying or implying that I am "willing to lay down
and be walked all over by Muslims." You should cut back on those magic
'shrooms.

Don't start projecting your recreational activities onto me or others.

As a student of history (actual history, not the "conservative" view of
history), I don't see the difference between being slaughtered by
christian zealots or by muslim zealots, the two religious groups under
discussion in this thread. Both religions have a long and bloody history
of slaughter in the name of the faith.

Actions speak louder than words Harry. Your actions and your fellow
lefty's action's belie your words.

I also don't "freak out" about christianity. To me, it's just another
superstition-based collection of beliefs. My objections arise when its
practitioners attempt to force their religious beliefs onto my secular
society. I'm having many good laughs these days watching the "christian"
political zealots fall on their swords over womens' reproductive health
issues.

We don't have a secular society. Never have and never will.

Women's reproductive health? This is a joke and most people can see
right through the "issue." The poor student Ms. Fluke is a 30 year old
woman who is going to Georgetown Law on a "public interest"
(http://www.law.georgetown.edu/pils/) scholarship. Her whole "beef" is
that someone else isn't paying for her birth control pills. Her argument
falls apart when it comes down to the low cost of condoms.

When a 30 year old woman stands up and says I want someone else to pay
for my birth control pills while I attend law school on a scholarship,
she doesn't garner sympathy from the majority of the country.

So... because she doesn't need birth control pills for reproductive
health means that no other woman needs it for that purpose as well?
Typical.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On 3/2/12 5:49 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/2/2012 5:20 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 3/2/12 4:32 PM, Happy John wrote:
I hope this is not taken as a 'political' post. There is no intention
that it be political. I
received the link in an email and thought it was pretty scary.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplay....swf?aid=17933


From CBN and it's not political?

Hehehe.

Right.

It has already started he

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisse...204051912.html



We have a long history in this country of the self-described religious
attacking/isolating/discriminating against those whose beliefs differ
from theirs, a history that began long before anyone noticed we have
Muslims here.

Such religious bigotry is as American as apple pie.

What is the difference between those who have a religious axe to grind
and those with a political axe to grind.

Exactly! When the Ayatollah Santorum has his way, we'll be a theocracy
just like that.

Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?

Neither. And neither did our founding fathers.

Read the declaration of independence again. We were founded with an
acknowledgment of God's grace and that everyone could practice their
religion without interference by others. Contrary to popular belief
there is not separation of church and state.

Bull****! Ever hear of this:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

And if you really want to delve into the matter, go he

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...uotations.html