Page 18 of 22 FirstFirst ... 813141516171819202122 LastLast
Results 341 to 360 of 423
  1. #341  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    I canít believe people are continuing to bring up the red herring that this is a First Amendment right after so many pages of posts explaining that, yes, of course it is but what someone can do and what someone should do are always two different questions. How many times does this need to be said?
    Really.....I guess they have no arguement unless we are saying they don't have the right to build the mosque under the Constitution.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #342  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    I canít believe people are continuing to bring up the red herring that this is a First Amendment right after so many pages of posts explaining that, yes, of course it is but what someone can do and what someone should do are always two different questions. How many times does this need to be said?
    It's their only leg.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #343  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Who said that you should never be made to feel guilty for excercising your right?
    I said it.
    Last edited by Speebs; 08/19/2010 at 03:01 PM.
  4. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #344  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Sorry.....I brought up the atheists because they are the ones behind wanting the crosses taken down (in Utah) per the article I posted earlier. If you had read the article, you would have read the following:

    But American Atheists, Inc., the Texas-based group that sued to have the crosses removed from state property, argued that the crosses could imply that the trooper who died there was a Christian.

    Would that qualify as a "legitimate reason" for pointing the finger at the atheists on the cross issue? So again, why does a cross hurt a group so much as to want to pursue this?
    Sorry, I missed that part when I was reading (trying to get ready for work). It's legitimate to point the finger at THOSE atheists... since I missed that part of the article I thought you were blaming all atheists. Anyway... it's their prerogative what they want to spend their time and money on. To many people, crosses can be offensive. I guess they don't need any more motivation than that.
  5. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #345  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Really.....I guess they have no arguement unless we are saying they don't have the right to build the mosque under the Constitution.
    The argument has already been stated by Courousant.
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #346  
    Quote Originally Posted by Speebs View Post
    I said it.
    Obviously there are those that disagree.... as is their right
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #347  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Obviously there are those that disagree.... as is their right
    I know.. I just wanted to make sure you weren't misdirecting your comments.

    Now my only goal is to make those who disagree feel so guilty about disagreeing (even though they're well within their rights to do so) that they stop sticking up for what they believe in. Then I will have won
  8. #348  
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthRepublican View Post
    Wow. I guess the First Amendment was repealed while we weren't looking. There is a new national religion and Ground Zero is its Holy of Holies. I guess we won't be building a new office building there anymore but a temple where every American must make a pilgrimage at least once as a condition of citizenship. At least I got to vote for twenty years before democracy was swept away all of a sudden.
    Please re-read my posts. First, I was explaining why it makes sense that people are upset, because apparently there are plenty of people in NYC that feel that way. Second, I consistently talk about this as a matter of zoning and private property rights. If it is zoned correctly (and it is) they have every right build. But as good neighbors, they might want to consider a less-decisive strategy. Purely voluntary, purely between the mosque leaders and the residents around them.

    What part of that sounds like repealing the 1st amendment?

    Please grab a decaf, read slower for comprehension, and stop repeating the same silly talking points about religious freedom as if I just wrote an opinion that had anything to do with either of those.

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

    I'm all for that. Nothing I've posted has anything to do with changing or ignoring that.
  9. #349  
    Quote Originally Posted by Speebs View Post
    I know.. I just wanted to make sure you weren't misdirecting your comments.

    Now my only goal is to make those who disagree feel so guilty about disagreeing (even though they're well within their rights to do so) that they stop sticking up for what they believe in. Then I will have won
    Then you will never win. Does that mean I then win?
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  10. #350  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    I canít believe people are continuing to bring up the red herring that this is a First Amendment right after so many pages of posts explaining that, yes, of course it is but what someone can do and what someone should do are always two different questions. How many times does this need to be said?
    How many times? At least one more, apparently. I suggest that you simply repeat your post once on every page so those that are speed-reading will have multiple chances to see it.
  11. #351  
    Quote Originally Posted by Speebs View Post
    He said it was 1/10 of a mile, which is much more specific than "2 blocks" or "2 North-South blocks." Why nit-pick this?
    blocks schmocks. I measured it on google maps. The walking distance from the northern edge of the WTC property to the front door of the mosque is about 1,000 feet, which equates to about 330 yards. Yes, if you drive the one-way streets will stretch that to about 1/2 mile. Yes, as-the-crow-flies is even less that 1,000 feet.

    But if you walk from the northern edge of where the north tower was and stay on the sidewalk, it's about 1,000 feet. All of this was posted previously, so I guess we will just have to re-post periodically so we don't have to keep debating how many blocks per mile and going through repetitive ready-fire-aim posts.

  12. #352  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    It is WAY off topic....but why would atheists be fighting gay marriage?
    You did see that I said "change the names of the players" right? Replace atheists with conservatives...
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  13. #353  
    Quote Originally Posted by IGNTNUNLMTD View Post
    And this isn't?
    Or this?
  14. #354  
    Quote Originally Posted by IGNTNUNLMTD View Post
    And this isn't?
    You might want to read articles when you post a link... here is an excerpt from your link:

    Later on, the magazine retracted this when the (still) unnamed official changed his story. A Pentagon investigation uncovered at least five cases of Qur'an mishandling by U.S. personnel at the base, but insisted that none of these were acts of desecration. The Pentagon's report also accused a prisoner of damaging a copy of the Qur'an by putting it in a toilet.
  15. #355  
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthRepublican View Post
    Or this?
    As long as it isn't the government doing it this is just another example of really stupid people being really stupid. It seems pretty far from the actual topic...
    Run your ad here... reach thousands daily...



    ...Now accepting orders for my upcoming iHandleô.
    Reserve yours today!
  16. #356  
    The "red herring" as it has been now named, is still a very reasonable response to the "vast majority" of Americans wanting this prayer room moved. One of the previous threads, it was repeatedly stated that the "tyranny of the majority" shall not over rule the rights of an individual. The so called "red herring", has to be considered. Again, do I think that building a prayer room "1000" feet from "ground zero" is wise. NO. Only because some right wing wacko mole baptist will probably blow it up, and kill a lot of innocents. The so called "red herring" makes this whole discussion moot by its mere existence.
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  17. #357  
    The "red herring" as it has been now named, is still a very reasonable response to the "vast majority" of Americans wanting this prayer room moved. One of the previous threads, it was repeatedly stated that the "tyranny of the majority" shall not over rule the rights of an individual. The so called "red herring", has to be considered. Again, do I think that building a prayer room "1000" feet from "ground zero" is wise. NO. Only because some right wing wacko mole baptist will probably blow it up, and kill a lot of innocents. The so called "red herring" makes this whole discussion moot by its mere existence.
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  18. #358  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    You might want to read articles when you post a link... here is an excerpt from your link:

    Later on, the magazine retracted this when the (still) unnamed official changed his story. A Pentagon investigation uncovered at least five cases of Qur'an mishandling by U.S. personnel at the base, but insisted that none of these were acts of desecration. The Pentagon's report also accused a prisoner of damaging a copy of the Qur'an by putting it in a toilet.
    Well that doesn't scream passive censorship, does it?
  19. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #359  
    Quote Originally Posted by xForsaken View Post
    The "red herring" as it has been now named, is still a very reasonable response to the "vast majority" of Americans wanting this prayer room moved. One of the previous threads, it was repeatedly stated that the "tyranny of the majority" shall not over rule the rights of an individual. The so called "red herring", has to be considered. Again, do I think that building a prayer room "1000" feet from "ground zero" is wise. NO. Only because some right wing wacko mole baptist will probably blow it up, and kill a lot of innocents. The so called "red herring" makes this whole discussion moot by its mere existence.
    First, the majority of American polled believe they have a constitutional right to build it, they just don't think it should be built. Second, even if the opposite were true, can I use an analogy? Lot's of liberals are against gun use and gun ownership. Gun ownership is a constitutional right. Tell me why my guns should be taken away.
  20. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #360  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    First, the majority of American polled believe they have a constitutional right to build it, they just don't think it should be built. Second, even if the opposite were true, can I use an analogy? Lot's of liberals are against gun use and gun ownership. Gun ownership is a constitutional right. Tell me why my guns should be taken away.
    Not to diverge, but I want to answer your question. The Second Amendment is worded in a way that leaves things up to interpretation (whether it is guaranteeing individual rights vs. the rights of a militia). See here: The History of the Right to Bear Arms - Modern Debate - Gun, Control, Amendment, Rights, Health, and Violence

    So, it's a slightly different situation.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions