When Liberals Burn Crosses
-
I'd consider myself a liberal - at least compared to cal
- so I'll step up for this one. It's stupid. It's completely out of line and whichever bureaucrat came up with it needs to remove the stick from their arse immediately. I mean really, it's just ridiculous. Let the kid wear a cross, a hijab, a yin/yang symbol, a vishnu hat, a spaghetti strainer, if it's their religious belief then that's their prerogative.Oh and there's no problem with the vagina monologues
So you are one of those Tea Party liberals, dont step on individual rights but give me all the free shit you can. And let it all hang out baby... Maybe you should go smoke some more grasss you hippy scum.
So you are one of those Tea Party liberals, dont step on individual rights but give me all the free shit you can. And let it all hang out baby... Maybe you should go smoke some more grasss you hippy scum.
Really not sure if you're being sarcastic or not here...
-
Funny how that works, you start with Cal's "news article" from his "source" and just work your way back up the conservative hole to get to the actual story
-
Fox is no more biased then CNN or MSNBC. I find foreign news channels much less politically biased then American. BBC, NHK, etc.
-
Are you really that stupid to come up with that lame excuse? She was ordered to take off the necklace.
Like momma always said, you cannot fix stupid.
This is what's known as "faux outrage."
Congratulations for taking a stand in life, you fucking bedwetter.
This is what's known as "faux outrage."
Congratulations for taking a stand in life, you fucking bedwetter.
You sound a little frightfully demented. Silly little girl why are you so paranoid?
Everyone knows that People on the left KILL IN THE NAME OF SOCIAL JUSTICE.
-
Fox is no more biased then CNN or MSNBC. I find foreign news channels much less politically biased then American. BBC, NHK, etc.
Fox is no more biased then CNN or MSNBC. I find foreign news channels much less politically biased then American. BBC, NHK, etc.
Speaking of foreign news...A British newspaper reports that a Saudi cleric is released from jail after brutally murders his 5yr old daughter after questioning her virginity.
The only way this news reaches the U.S., is if this act had been a story about a Catholic priest.
The follow up article states that he has been returned to jail.
There is some civility in the Muslim world thank God.
-
Why is everyone wearing clown shoes?
-
"It has been almost 24 hours since I posted this article and you can see clearly now that not one progressive commi loving fectard has denied this post. they only wish that it would go away so nobody will be able to witness what is truley going on in our country."
Or a more obvious explanation, when we see that a thread was started by "White Dog" or "Cal" or suggests that liberals want to burn crosses, we already know it's stupid and we ignore it.Take this story, for instance:"Jarvis, 19, an event planner for the student government, known as Associated Students, was working at a student orientation event last month when a supervisor approached her to ask her to remove or hide a large cross necklace, saying it might be offensive or off-putting to students looking to attend the school or join the organization.
Jarvis, upset by the request, left the orientation early. After talking with lawyers from the Texas-based Liberty Institute, she filed a complaint with the university. The story hit Fox News late last month and was picked up by news organizations as far away as the U.K.
President Ruben Armiñana and others at the university quickly apologized for the incident, saying it was a misguided but well-intentioned mistake by the supervisor."
...Maybe we don't think there's anything here to be aghast over. The woman obviously made a mistake. The university acknowledges it. The idea that you would take the actions of one supervisor at Sonoma State, which were then denounced by the university, and pretend that it's a frightening vision of what's to come when liberals get their way, is probably the likely reason why everyone is ignoring this thread. It's just another one of your minor, blip-on-the-radar culture war flare-ups that you guys like to treat as great affronts to your liberty. Except that they're not.
Obviously, the student can wear a necklace like this if she so chooses.
"It has been almost 24 hours since I posted this article and you can see clearly now that not one progressive commi loving fectard has denied this post. they only wish that it would go away so nobody will be able to witness what is truley going on in our country."
Or a more obvious explanation, when we see that a thread was started by "White Dog" or "Cal" or suggests that liberals want to burn crosses, we already know it's stupid and we ignore it.Take this story, for instance:"Jarvis, 19, an event planner for the student government, known as Associated Students, was working at a student orientation event last month when a supervisor approached her to ask her to remove or hide a large cross necklace, saying it might be offensive or off-putting to students looking to attend the school or join the organization.
Jarvis, upset by the request, left the orientation early. After talking with lawyers from the Texas-based Liberty Institute, she filed a complaint with the university. The story hit Fox News late last month and was picked up by news organizations as far away as the U.K.
President Ruben Armiñana and others at the university quickly apologized for the incident, saying it was a misguided but well-intentioned mistake by the supervisor."
...Maybe we don't think there's anything here to be aghast over. The woman obviously made a mistake. The university acknowledges it. The idea that you would take the actions of one supervisor at Sonoma State, which were then denounced by the university, and pretend that it's a frightening vision of what's to come when liberals get their way, is probably the likely reason why everyone is ignoring this thread. It's just another one of your minor, blip-on-the-radar culture war flare-ups that you guys like to treat as great affronts to your liberty. Except that they're not.
Obviously, the student can wear a necklace like this if she so chooses.
There you go again...libs using trivial garbage as ammo thinking it evens the score. lol
Your claim that the "IRS targeted lib groups too" was a nice try too.
It was was officially 292 conservative groups to 6 lib, in case you conveniently missed the official report.
-
Why is everyone wearing clown shoes?
Only a clown would have noticed that.
-
So yes, it was just some supervisor who had become over enthusiastic in wanting to keep a secular college. The incident was condemned by the university, what more do you want? Chris
**********************************************************
This bigoted person should be fired, or in the least, suspended and sent to Constitutional rights training.
Isn't that what happens when the left gets their tails all tangled up in briars? They go ballistic about THEIR rights?
And, it was not the supervisor's job to be America's college secular policeman. The outrage is cumulative. This anti-Christian mentality is more widespread as time goes on. The outrage is so much of the left has this same extreme antagonist arrogance. The left is all about
"diversity" ...but THEY get to choose what diversity is allowed, and what diversity is harrassed. See?
-
So yes, it was just some supervisor who had become over enthusiastic in wanting to keep a secular college. The incident was condemned by the university, what more do you want? Chris
**********************************************************
This bigoted person should be fired, or in the least, suspended and sent to Constitutional rights training.
Isn't that what happens when the left gets their tails all tangled up in briars? They go ballistic about THEIR rights?
And, it was not the supervisor's job to be America's college secular policeman. The outrage is cumulative. This anti-Christian mentality is more widespread as time goes on. The outrage is so much of the left has this same extreme antagonist arrogance. The left is all about
"diversity" ...but THEY get to choose what diversity is allowed, and what diversity is harrassed. See?
So yes, it was just some supervisor who had become over enthusiastic in wanting to keep a secular college. The incident was condemned by the university, what more do you want? Chris
**********************************************************
This bigoted person should be fired, or in the least, suspended and sent to Constitutional rights training.
Isn't that what happens when the left gets their tails all tangled up in briars? They go ballistic about THEIR rights?
And, it was not the supervisor's job to be America's college secular policeman. The outrage is cumulative. This anti-Christian mentality is more widespread as time goes on. The outrage is so much of the left has this same extreme antagonist arrogance. The left is all about
"diversity" ...but THEY get to choose what diversity is allowed, and what diversity is harrassed. See?
Frankly, no, I don't see why you're getting so upset. The supervisor was wrong; the college has said she was wrong and has apologised (I think?) to the girl in question. What happens now for the supervisor we probably won't hear about, some kind of internal disciplinary action probably.
It always makes me laugh when Christians talk about having their rights infringed upon. Hasn't Christianity spent the last 1500 years basically punishing anyone who doesn't conform to it? Even now, as the topic of gay marriage is discussed, the biggest and most vehement opposition comes from Christians - I'm not sure if the term Bible Belt is offensive or not? - saying that homosexuality is a sin. That's people having their rights taken away. Abortion - bible says it's a sin so people try to demand that it be illegal. Not saying that all people who oppose these things are Christian, but it seems like a large proportion are, and then complain about having their rights taken away.
You (in general, not specifically you, cal) have the right to hold whatever religious beliefs you like, or none at all. You're free to practise them, decorate your home, yourself, however you want to show your faith and be proud of it. Get a tattoo of jesus/mohammed/buddha/shiva/whoever on your face if you feel like it (and are happy to violate the doctrine to do so!) You're not free to interfere with other people's lives on the basis of them. For me, that's the point of freedom of religion.
And I'm sure you'll call me a hippy, a liberal or something equally true, but that's just my view, and the beauty of the free world is that I'm entitled to it as much as you're entitled to yours
-
I find that funny too. You see the "war on Christianity" or how Christians are being oppressed or something. When really its just them not getting whatever they want anymore.
-
Except in Muslim controlled areas of London and Ann Arbor, MI where Sharia law probably would make you disappear.
-
Except in Muslim controlled areas of London and Ann Arbor, MI where Sharia law probably would make you disappear.
Except in Muslim controlled areas of London and Ann Arbor, MI where Sharia law probably would make you disappear.
Indeed. Although I'm not stupid enough to go to the dodgy parts of London (and other cities in the UK) wearing a giant cross, burning a picture of Mohammed and singing "I'm a happy Christian, Muslims can all die"
Now THAT was exaggerated for comic effect
-
LOL....
Chris: "Hasn't Christianity spent the last 1500 years basically punishing anyone who doesn't conform to it?"
We haven't been our U.S.A. for 1500 years. And I don't see a "right" to gay marriage, any more than I see a "right" to
child abuse, run naked through town, marry a bridge or a camel or a sheep. In this country, we are about "let me be free"...
except when others' "freedom" interferes with our own. Now, before you jump on that and say that gays should be free to marry...
I say Americans should be free to establish what marriage IS. Between a man and a woman. Pretty much universal. So why the tyranny
of the left to force those Americans to not be allowed to have their institution of marriage? Why do gays get their civil unions, and I don't
care that they did, it's fine by me....and that gives them all those rights of real marriage...why the angst to be allowed to force the rest of
America (generally considered about 97 percent not gay) to not be allowed to have a definition of marriage as they have always before?
No, it's a political hit by the left, on the America. That is the only explanation I can come up with, that explains why those civil unions.,
very much the same thing, weren't good enough. It's part of a general undermining of American institutions.
-
Bummer when Democracy doesn't give you what you want, huh? It becomes "the tyrannical left" lol
-
In this case, it is. What is your point? You don't agree, but WHY ?
-
So yes, it was just some supervisor who had become over enthusiastic in wanting to keep a secular college. The incident was condemned by the university, what more do you want? Chris
**********************************************************
This bigoted person should be fired, or in the least, suspended and sent to Constitutional rights training.
Isn't that what happens when the left gets their tails all tangled up in briars? They go ballistic about THEIR rights?
And, it was not the supervisor's job to be America's college secular policeman. The outrage is cumulative. This anti-Christian mentality is more widespread as time goes on. The outrage is so much of the left has this same extreme antagonist arrogance. The left is all about
"diversity" ...but THEY get to choose what diversity is allowed, and what diversity is harrassed. See?
Frankly, no, I don't see why you're getting so upset. The supervisor was wrong; the college has said she was wrong and has apologised (I think?) to the girl in question. What happens now for the supervisor we probably won't hear about, some kind of internal disciplinary action probably.
It always makes me laugh when Christians talk about having their rights infringed upon. Hasn't Christianity spent the last 1500 years basically punishing anyone who doesn't conform to it? Even now, as the topic of gay marriage is discussed, the biggest and most vehement opposition comes from Christians - I'm not sure if the term Bible Belt is offensive or not? - saying that homosexuality is a sin. That's people having their rights taken away. Abortion - bible says it's a sin so people try to demand that it be illegal. Not saying that all people who oppose these things are Christian, but it seems like a large proportion are, and then complain about having their rights taken away.
You (in general, not specifically you, cal) have the right to hold whatever religious beliefs you like, or none at all. You're free to practise them, decorate your home, yourself, however you want to show your faith and be proud of it. Get a tattoo of jesus/mohammed/buddha/shiva/whoever on your face if you feel like it (and are happy to violate the doctrine to do so!) You're not free to interfere with other people's lives on the basis of them. For me, that's the point of freedom of religion.
And I'm sure you'll call me a hippy, a liberal or something equally true, but that's just my view, and the beauty of the free world is that I'm entitled to it as much as you're entitled to yours
Frankly, no, I don't see why you're getting so upset. The supervisor was wrong; the college has said she was wrong and has apologised (I think?) to the girl in question. What happens now for the supervisor we probably won't hear about, some kind of internal disciplinary action probably.
It always makes me laugh when Christians talk about having their rights infringed upon. Hasn't Christianity spent the last 1500 years basically punishing anyone who doesn't conform to it? Even now, as the topic of gay marriage is discussed, the biggest and most vehement opposition comes from Christians - I'm not sure if the term Bible Belt is offensive or not? - saying that homosexuality is a sin. That's people having their rights taken away. Abortion - bible says it's a sin so people try to demand that it be illegal. Not saying that all people who oppose these things are Christian, but it seems like a large proportion are, and then complain about having their rights taken away.
You (in general, not specifically you, cal) have the right to hold whatever religious beliefs you like, or none at all. You're free to practise them, decorate your home, yourself, however you want to show your faith and be proud of it. Get a tattoo of jesus/mohammed/buddha/shiva/whoever on your face if you feel like it (and are happy to violate the doctrine to do so!) You're not free to interfere with other people's lives on the basis of them. For me, that's the point of freedom of religion.
And I'm sure you'll call me a hippy, a liberal or something equally true, but that's just my view, and the beauty of the free world is that I'm entitled to it as much as you're entitled to yours
Appreciate your civility in this discussion but counting on inaccuracies and generalizations won't cut it. I seriously doubt that since the birth of this nation Christians have been punishing those who do not conform to Christanity. Many Islam sects on the other hand, from it's inception 1000 + years ago to this very day, punishes those that don't comply...funny how you folks are so quick point out Christianity as the bad guys.
Homosexuality is condemned in fundamentalist Muslim countries and is punishable in a court of law...all Christians want is to preserve the meaning of marriage.
You claim that Christians are always complaining that their "rights" are being infringed upon. Which ones? There is no doubt that their religious beliefs are being infringed upon though.
You're right about having the freedom to express your religious beliefs any way you see fit, as long as you don't force your religious beliefs on anyone. I don't use religion as basis for arguing against gay marriage...although valid, it opens up a whole new can of worms.
In turn, gays have the right to unions and engage in perversion all they want without religious teachings being forced down their throats like a big cock...just don't call it what it isn't..marriage.
-
Bummer when Democracy doesn't give you what you want, huh? It becomes "the tyrannical left" lol
Bummer when Democracy doesn't give you what you want, huh? It becomes "the tyrannical left" lol
Umm wiz kid...it's not a matter of want we want, It's a matter of whats being taken away, and whats being forced on us.
Does Obamacare ring a bell?
Democracy gives losers like you with your hands out what they want.
-
Frankly, no, I don't see why you're getting so upset. The supervisor was wrong; the college has said she was wrong and has apologised (I think?) to the girl in question. What happens now for the supervisor we probably won't hear about, some kind of internal disciplinary action probably.
It always makes me laugh when Christians talk about having their rights infringed upon. Hasn't Christianity spent the last 1500 years basically punishing anyone who doesn't conform to it? Even now, as the topic of gay marriage is discussed, the biggest and most vehement opposition comes from Christians - I'm not sure if the term Bible Belt is offensive or not? - saying that homosexuality is a sin. That's people having their rights taken away. Abortion - bible says it's a sin so people try to demand that it be illegal. Not saying that all people who oppose these things are Christian, but it seems like a large proportion are, and then complain about having their rights taken away.
You (in general, not specifically you, cal) have the right to hold whatever religious beliefs you like, or none at all. You're free to practise them, decorate your home, yourself, however you want to show your faith and be proud of it. Get a tattoo of jesus/mohammed/buddha/shiva/whoever on your face if you feel like it (and are happy to violate the doctrine to do so!) You're not free to interfere with other people's lives on the basis of them. For me, that's the point of freedom of religion.
And I'm sure you'll call me a hippy, a liberal or something equally true, but that's just my view, and the beauty of the free world is that I'm entitled to it as much as you're entitled to yours
Appreciate your civility in this discussion but counting on inaccuracies and generalizations won't cut it. I seriously doubt that since the birth of this nation Christians have been punishing those who do not conform to Christanity. Many Islam sects on the other hand, from it's inception 1000 + years ago to this very day, punishes those that don't comply...funny how you folks are so quick point out Christianity as the bad guys.
Homosexuality is condemned in fundamentalist Muslim countries and is punishable in a court of law...all Christians want is to preserve the meaning of marriage.
You claim that Christians are always complaining that their "rights" are being infringed upon. Which ones? There is no doubt that their religious beliefs are being infringed upon though.
You're right about having the freedom to express your religious beliefs any way you see fit, as long as you don't force your religious beliefs on anyone. I don't use religion as basis for arguing against gay marriage...although valid, it opens up a whole new can of worms.
In turn, gays have the right to unions and engage in perversion all they want without religious teachings being forced down their throats like a big cock...just don't call it what it isn't..marriage.
Appreciate your civility in this discussion but counting on inaccuracies and generalizations won't cut it. I seriously doubt that since the birth of this nation Christians have been punishing those who do not conform to Christanity. Many Islam sects on the other hand, from it's inception 1000 + years ago to this very day, punishes those that don't comply...funny how you folks are so quick point out Christianity as the bad guys.
Homosexuality is condemned in fundamentalist Muslim countries and is punishable in a court of law...all Christians want is to preserve the meaning of marriage.
You claim that Christians are always complaining that their "rights" are being infringed upon. Which ones? There is no doubt that their religious beliefs are being infringed upon though.
You're right about having the freedom to express your religious beliefs any way you see fit, as long as you don't force your religious beliefs on anyone. I don't use religion as basis for arguing against gay marriage...although valid, it opens up a whole new can of worms.
In turn, gays have the right to unions and engage in perversion all they want without religious teachings being forced down their throats like a big cock...just don't call it what it isn't..marriage.
LOL....
Chris: "Hasn't Christianity spent the last 1500 years basically punishing anyone who doesn't conform to it?"
We haven't been our U.S.A. for 1500 years. And I don't see a "right" to gay marriage, any more than I see a "right" to
child abuse, run naked through town, marry a bridge or a camel or a sheep. In this country, we are about "let me be free"...
except when others' "freedom" interferes with our own. Now, before you jump on that and say that gays should be free to marry...
I say Americans should be free to establish what marriage IS. Between a man and a woman. Pretty much universal. So why the tyranny
of the left to force those Americans to not be allowed to have their institution of marriage? Why do gays get their civil unions, and I don't
care that they did, it's fine by me....and that gives them all those rights of real marriage...why the angst to be allowed to force the rest of
America (generally considered about 97 percent not gay) to not be allowed to have a definition of marriage as they have always before?
No, it's a political hit by the left, on the America. That is the only explanation I can come up with, that explains why those civil unions.,
very much the same thing, weren't good enough. It's part of a general undermining of American institutions.
So you're basically making the same two points here, so I'll address them together to save effort because I'm late for work.
1) "America hasn't been punishing non-christians for 1000 years, we haven't existed that long"
I didn't say America. I said Christianity. Look back to things like the crusades, killing the templars that then helped protect the holy land, forcing Galileo to renounce his claim that the earth goes round the sun because it went against the bible, burning "witches" at the stake because of their unholy understanding of science/nature. I'm not going to cite every single case because there just isn't time. But the point remains, Christianity, whilst it has done a lot of good in a lot of ways, has also been a very oppressive religion.
2) "Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because marriage should be between a man and a woman"
So two responses pop in to my head, pick your favourite.
a) This is a matter of semantics. Gay couples should be entitled to the same legal rights as straight couples, this is a right that I don't think anyone can dispute without going all bible-y on me. Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't make it illegal. I'm sure in deepest darkest Texas there are plenty of people who think a black man and a white woman getting married should be illegal. Hell, my grandad would be furious if I brought home a black woman. That doesn't mean it should be illegal. So the point, then, is that yes, gay people should have the right to get "married." This shouldn't be in a church or any other institution, religious or not, that frowns on homosexuality, because that would infringe on *their* rights to believe what they want.
A more interesting topic, why is marriage defined as between a man and a woman? Marriage is a man made concept, it's not something found in nature. So we have defined it to be what we want. On a strictly biological level, it's doesn't help procreation, it is - again, leaving the religious side of things out - an opportunity for two people to get up in front of their friends and tell everyone how much they love each other. They get presents, uncles get drunk, then they have the same legal rights discussed previously. So, the point is "we can't redefine marriage?" Sorry, but that's been happening for centuries. Henry VIII (british king, just in case) decided he didn't like his wife, so he invented a new religion and a new church, and then the concept of divorce, just so he could be free of her! How long ago was it illegal to marry someone of a different race? These things are now thought of as basic rights - I love someone, I can marry her, regardless of race. Now people just want to add 'regardless of gender'I think we're probably butting heads in eternal futility here, I doubt I'll convince either of you that my side is right and you're not going to convince me, so we should probably wrap this up at some point, yes?
-
Don't sorry Chris, some people agree with you
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login