United We Stand..

[ZaPhOd]

No wonder new people are afraid to post here.

Hmmm. Well it is a hotly debated topic so maybe this is not the best post for a new person to make? After all, it has many countries divided in opinion.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by airhead

Athiests - you\'ve got a few radicals in this country that want \"under God\" out of the pledge and \"In God we trust\" off the coins. They expect us to accomodate them but are not percieved as being very accomodating in return.

Poor TBS was trying to work up a bit of patriotic feel and got torn to shreds.

No wonder new people are afraid to post here.

First off how is asking for \"under god\" being removed radical? Surely the entire point of freedom of religon is thatyou are not forced to make pledges based on beliefs you do not have?
Anyone who stands for office MUST make the pledge to be accepted into the position. By putting a reference to god in the pledge you are telling not only Athiests but anyone who has deistic belief, that their options are pledge to our god or you can\'t serve in our system.
On the other hand a pledge with no refernce to god does not ask a christian or anyone of any faith to publicly renounce their belief.

As to new people not posting here, complete BS. He posted something other people disagreed with and they said so, I didn\'t see anyone telling him to piss off or attack him personally.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by vincegamer
The joke is this.

A: God, if you exist do X.
B does X
B: \"God made me do it.\"

The joke is the utter impossibility of proving or disproving theism.

Really? And that\'s a joke? I don\'t think I would go and see any standups that you people find funny!

 

[MPJ]

I was going to say all that smart stuff Brimshack said but he beat me to it. :drunk:

Few points from me to stir up the pot a little...

A) And what exactily is wrong with US and UK involvement in Iraq? Perfectily justified, warranted, and even necessary.

B) Words don\'t hurt people, if they do then get thicker skin. If words make people hurt other people then we need smarter people.

C) If you didn\'t vote in your last election then why are you expressing your opinions, since you obviously don\'t care enough to attempt to effect any sort of change or voice your opinion when it actually matters. You get a pass if you have a really good excuse for not voting (like the year my wife was in labour during the election, though I did leave her side for 30min to go cast my vote).

D) Naa... I\'ll quit while I\'m way behind. :drunk:

 

[vincegamer]

I didn\'t say Chris Rock wrote the joke.

Sarcasm often isn\'t funny, it\'s sometimes even painful, but it\'s still a joke.

\"under god\" was put in the pledge of alegiance (not the oath of office by the way) during the Eisenhower administration to show that we Americans are different from the \"godless\" communists in Russia. I don\'t feel it has a sufficient tradition to permit its continued use.
Similar is the use of the Confederate flag in the Georgia (I think) state flag. It was put there during the Civil Rights movement to show that Georgia would support segregation no matter what. Hardly something we should support for the sake of \"tradition.\"


\"in god we trust\" however has been on the money for most of our country\'s history and no one is forced to read the statement on the money before using the money.

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by vincegamer


Phil:
From the ACLU web page:
\"The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not\". . . . \"It is easy to defend freedom of speech when the message is something many people find at least reasonable. But the defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive.\"

NAMBLA is being accused of causing the death of a 10-year old boy because the boy was murdered by two of its members. They may also have been members of AAA, but AAA is not being sued.

Vince: I had previously read a quote that is similar to how I feel about the ACLU:
\"They\'re a bunch of whale-saving, criminal-loving pinkos — and thank God for them.\"

I\'m not against the ACLU in general, and I agree with your excerpt from the mission statement. I do however worry when they defend NAMBLA in this most recent case, because (if I read the reports correctly) the NAMBLA website had instructions about how to lure young boys into situations where they could be molested. This was more than advocating the orgs. right to believe that this behaviour is OK. The site gave instructions on how to commit an illegal (and repulsive) act.

 

[Torn blue sky]

First off the bat, interesting disscussion.
Secondly, I didn\'t intend it to be in any way inflamatory.
You can say what you want about me posting it. I genuinely don\'t give a rats ass.
My reason for posting it was that I found it funny. It can be taken in a lot of contexts and seemingly has. A Joke, pure sarcasm, something deep and meaningfull about the way the words going to shit...

When it\'s all said and done I come from a Military family, I was a soldier myself. Now, people that heve served in the forces can more understand the general outlook and viewpoint here and possibly apreciate it more.
I don\'t expect everyone to share my views, but I should hope they would be respected too.
What it comes down to is that it made me laugh, period. I think Vikey actually manged to see it from my perspective. I think some things are taken a little bit too literaly sometimes, I really don\'t think there\'s grounds for an apology just because something I posted got a few peoples blood up.

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by vincegamer
Similar is the use of the Confederate flag in the Georgia (I think) state flag. It was put there during the Civil Rights movement to show that Georgia would support segregation no matter what. Hardly something we should support for the sake of \"tradition.\"

No Longer on our state (GA) flag. It is now a very tame version with no confederate flag.

 

[vincegamer]

Originally posted by MPJ
A) And what exactily is wrong with US and UK involvement in Iraq? Perfectily justified, warranted, and even necessary.
Necessary? I\'ll barely give you warranted, accept justified as a subject on which reasonable minds can differ, but I\'ll never concede necessary.

C) If you didn\'t vote in your last election then why are you expressing your opinions, since you obviously don\'t care enough to attempt to effect any sort of change or voice your opinion when it actually matters.
Voting is a privilege that one does not need to exercise. I agree it is best to participate, but some feel that they participate by not voting. Studies show the \"lesser of 2 evils\" will always lead to a decaying path. If that\'s what you feel you face, you may not want to go that way. Some feel by not voting they are affecting the major parties by pushing them more moderate - this is the Minnesota theory. Both parties were too extreme so all those people who\'d never voted before voted for Jesse Ventura. As a result, both parties moved more toward the center. The reasons for not voting are myriad (some posters here aren\'t old enough even) so not voting is no reason to deny someone the right to voice an opinion.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by vincegamer
I didn\'t say Chris Rock wrote the joke.

Sarcasm often isn\'t funny, it\'s sometimes even painful, but it\'s still a joke.

Actually I love sarcasm. I wouldn\'t class that as sarcasm at all however.
I guess I could (vaguely) see this in the same way as someone whou claims they have telekinesis becuase they can move their hand through the power of their mind. (still not funny)

 

[vincegamer]

Originally posted by philologusI\'m not against the ACLU in general, and I agree with your excerpt from the mission statement. I do however worry when they defend NAMBLA in this most recent case, because (if I read the reports correctly) the NAMBLA website had instructions about how to lure young boys into situations where they could be molested.

The quote was actually from the ACLU press release about the NAMBLA case, and what I read said the site never had anything more than pictures of nude young boys, some possibly in sexually suggestive poses, but not any advocation of criminal acts. Even if they did, it\'s not illegal to advocate criminal acts, only to do them. In any case, the criminals went to NAMBLA\'s web site after they had already kidnapped the kid.

Oh, and I should also mention that NAMBLA is not the only defendant. The Internet Service Provider that hosted their web site is also being charged with responsibility for the death.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by Torn blue sky
First off the bat, interesting disscussion.
Secondly, I didn\'t intend it to be in any way inflamatory.
You can say what you want about me posting it. I genuinely don\'t give a rats ass.
My reason for posting it was that I found it funny. It can be taken in a lot of contexts and seemingly has. A Joke, pure sarcasm, something deep and meaningfull about the way the words going to shit...

When it\'s all said and done I come from a Military family, I was a soldier myself. Now, people that heve served in the forces can more understand the general outlook and viewpoint here and possibly apreciate it more.
I don\'t expect everyone to share my views, but I should hope they would be respected too.
What it comes down to is that it made me laugh, period. I think Vikey actually manged to see it from my perspective. I think some things are taken a little bit too literaly sometimes, I really don\'t think there\'s grounds for an apology just because something I posted got a few peoples blood up.

I agree there is nothing to apologise for with you posting it (even though I think it is daft nonsense).

I still fail to see the connection between some prof talking about the existence of god and his not supporting the troops.
But then I\'m not one of those loony religous types! :twisted:

 

[Torn blue sky]

When do any of you ever think anything I post is daft nonesense??? lol

 

[ZaPhOd]

Dr. the connection is where the right wing propoganda lies. He is a pinko commie that undoubtedly supports terrorists and hates his country for not supporting the war er I mean troops.

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by vincegamer

Originally posted by philologusI\'m not against the ACLU in general, and I agree with your excerpt from the mission statement. I do however worry when they defend NAMBLA in this most recent case, because (if I read the reports correctly) the NAMBLA website had instructions about how to lure young boys into situations where they could be molested.

The quote was actually from the ACLU press release about the NAMBLA case, and what I read said the site never had anything more than pictures of nude young boys, some possibly in sexually suggestive poses, but not any advocation of criminal acts. Even if they did, it\'s not illegal to advocate criminal acts, only to do them. In any case, the criminals went to NAMBLA\'s web site after they had already kidnapped the kid.

Oh, and I should also mention that NAMBLA is not the only defendant. The Internet Service Provider that hosted their web site is also being charged with responsibility for the death.

Fair enough. It\'s hard to wade through media hype to get to the bare facts at times. I wish I had the money to spend on a Lexus-Nexus subscription, just for the pure research power. (how\'s that for nerdy?)

 

[MPJ]

Originally posted by vincegamer

Originally posted by MPJC) If you didn\'t vote in your last election then why are you expressing your opinions, since you obviously don\'t care enough to attempt to effect any sort of change or voice your opinion when it actually matters.
Voting is a privilege that one does not need to exercise. I agree it is best to participate, but some feel that they participate by not voting. Studies show the \"lesser of 2 evils\" will always lead to a decaying path. If that\'s what you feel you face, you may not want to go that way. Some feel by not voting they are affecting the major parties by pushing them more moderate - this is the Minnesota theory. Both parties were too extreme so all those people who\'d never voted before voted for Jesse Ventura. As a result, both parties moved more toward the center. The reasons for not voting are myriad (some posters here aren\'t old enough even) so not voting is no reason to deny someone the right to voice an opinion.
Not voting shows only that the elector in question has not the inclination, desire, nor interest in participation. A more valid method of telling the parties that none of them are worth a darn is the spoiling of the ballot (something I\'ve done myself many times). Apathy is a tool of the devil (no religions intent, only a saying) and shows nothing. Not voting shows they don\'t care enough to take 20min out of their lives, which is fine and their right in a free country, but my point is if they can\'t be bothered to take 20min to do this simple act then why are they bothering now (or any time they choose to complain). Those to young to vote do fall under the \'good excuse\' clause though we must consider that youths do not have the life experience necessary in making or understanding many tough decisions (not youth bashing, it\'s just a fact that short life = less life experience, intelligence gets you to a point but experience leads to understanding just as much if not more).

 

[Torn blue sky]

Originally posted by Zaphod

Dr. the connection is where the right wing propoganda lies. He is a pinko commie that undoubtedly supports terrorists and hates his country for not supporting the war er I mean troops.

I think you\'ll actually find the Court Martial offence is Insubordination.
A lot of troops may share this view but they signed the line, they know the drill.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by ZaPhOd
Dr. the connection is where the right wing propoganda lies. He is a pinko commie that undoubtedly supports terrorists and hates his country for not supporting the war er I mean troops.

Don\'t get me wrong, I understand the connection which was intended. I guess what I can\'t get a grip on is how people who think like that ummm.. think like that.

 

[ZaPhOd]

Yeah I simply can\'t understand it either.

Oh well. Each to their own

 

[vincegamer]

Originally posted by MPJNot voting shows only that the elector in question has not the inclination, desire, nor interest in participation. A more valid method of telling the parties that none of them are worth a darn is the spoiling of the ballot (something I\'ve done myself many times).

Spoiling the ballot???
What, you urinate on it?