Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

    Originally posted by Chloe View Post
    But that religious philosophy did have some relation to the founding of the nation ; if it shows preference then it is to the historical set up of the way the land was recognized.

    That religious aspect is fundamental to the creation of the nation, thus the historical element to the symbolism in the square.
    Really? Gosh I guess I missed the part in the 10 commandments that said "thou shalt not kill, unless you're in the army, navy or in cases of self defense" cause my copy just says "thou shalt not kill". Odd that huh?

    Historical symbolism? You mean like America being the land of religious freedom where all can openly profess their beliefs without government censure? Seems like monuments from many faiths would fit right in with that.

    (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

    Originally posted by tsquare View Post
    Fine... be that way.

    3,000 years.

    But you still need billions of believers.
    Not under US law you don't.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #62
      Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

      No, not at all.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #63
        Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

        Originally posted by AJG View Post
        I'm not sure I follow. Anyone could go up to the monument and yell "G-D FKING D*MNIT" (self censored so I won't offend any religious folks). They might be stoned to death by an angry mob of Christians, but the government won't do anything about it.
        Better: If she wants that then she's gotta be ok with abortion as in the bible causing a miscarriage (abortion) was not a crime and kids weren't even given names until they'd lived 8 days. The jewish word for life is also translated as breath IE until it draws breath its not really alive.

        (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

        Originally posted by Chloe View Post
        But what relevance or benefit would there be to it being decried in the public square...there is zero historical significance of any sort. Having it purely for religious purposes would indeed be an endorsement of one religion over another.
        a demonstration of the freedom of religion, one of the core values our nation was actually founded upon, has no benefit?

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #64
          Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

          Originally posted by Chloe View Post
          I'm glad you brought that post up as i had promised to ignore Fennica and give him the last word but this is another example of failure to understand English...i expected better from you (shit is weak as you would say).

          I never said it in the plurality of all non Christians, i was talking about Fennica, and i was not saying i am superior to him. I was saying he is inferior [to everyone]..see the difference? And you'd have to be to intentionally misconstrue what someone tells you dozens of times, ignore it, and then claim no-one is answering your questions. I can understand if you don't agree with it but the constant "answer my questions" which everyone already has is more than tiresome.
          >The issue with yer posts is that ye actually do no answer to the questions.
          -Ye also did not stay on topic.

          THEN ye make the deliberately worded post, which can be read in a manner of ways, and then use that to taunt.
          -Ye thus baited, ignored a post, bashed and did not stay on topic.

          Ye were suppose to be a representative poster, being an admin. and all.
          -Instead...

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #65
            Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

            No it does, which is why we continue to exhibit those in the square that have historical relevance to the creation of the nation.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #66
              Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

              Originally posted by Fennica View Post
              >The issue with yer posts is that ye actually do no answer to the questions.
              -Ye also did not stay on topic.

              THEN ye make the deliberately worded post, which can be read in a manner of ways, and then use that to taunt.
              -Ye thus baited, ignored a post, bashed and did not stay on topic.

              Ye were suppose to be a representative poster, being an admin. and all.
              -Instead...
              Thanks for lecturing me on the role as a staff member, but weren't you supposed to stop replying to me?

              In regards to a "deliberately worded post" btw, i did try and cut you some slack / explain that English wasn't your first language in the kindest possible way and you flew right off the handle and stayed off it, ever since.

              You gave back, dished it out and when someone retorted back in kind, you got up on the cross, you whined, bitched and no-one enabled your attention seeking and now you have no other outlet or avenue left.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #67
                Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                Originally posted by Fennica View Post
                >Initially yes.
                -In the early lore, Jahve commanded Lucifer. When bad/evil deeds needed to be done, Jahve ordered Lucifer to destroy.

                Later on, when the issues of Monotheistic faith became clear to the clergy, Lucifer became separated from the initial role of being the destroyer, maul of god.. into Nemesis.
                -Even now, it seems that many christian sects view Satan/Luficer a very powerful entity, with the powers of a deity.
                Lucifer was not the angel of destruction he was the tester of faith. Other angels did things like kill the first born and nuke Sodom and gamorrah. By that time Lucifer was cast out.

                An entity with power but no authority to employ it is how I am given to understand it. It can't act without you letting it do so, which people will fall all over themselves to do apparently. Contrasted with the actual deity of the monotheistic religion, Jehovah (whatever way you feel like spelling it), who acts without your permission.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #68
                  Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                  Dear Thread Participants,

                  On the main forum we strive to keep threads on topic and avoid derailing things into personal attacks, insults and general griping. While I understand that the temptation to discuss ones personal feelings about another user is often quite difficult to resist I respectfully request that you refrain from such behavior because it tends to disrupt the discussion for those that actually want to talk about the topic at hand.

                  Capisce?

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #69
                    Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                    Originally posted by Chloe View Post
                    As it should be.. This way the Christian based statute stays / no nonsense about Satanic stuff is given footing in the square. The only reason they came in, was the commandments couldn't be removed btw. Not one and the same, just one subservient of another. Cute sort of attention seeking.



                    Doesn't matter. The first part is like saying Christ didn't reform Judaism ; only a man preaching Christian doctrine and professing. It hasn't flown with the courts thus far.



                    No i was just saying your not being a Jew should not be a hurdle to your being sacrificed. (I mean that line in jest of course)



                    Yup, and what the high court says, or refuses to head when the lower courts bitch slap the atheists, will be.



                    Exactly! (Let's excuse your confusion above, asking for clarification etc).
                    I thought you said you were a lawyer? You DO know what "moratorium" means right? You haven't thought this through at all have you? Just chasing your carrot? If the judge rules "religion can be in the public square" THEN the moratorium goes away AND the Satanists have settled case law behind them to demand space in the public square FFS look beyond the tip of your nose.

                    Slavery withstood tests. Hell you didn't have to have a notification of your rights until quite recently. Your point is not a point but an opinion. If what you're saying is that the 10 commandments are immaterial because Jesus, then why the fuck do you want them on the square?

                    And again jews don't sacrifice people. I thought you had read the bible?

                    And again if the atheists get slapped down in favor of religion in the square THEN you're going to have Satanists that you so abhor there. Use that noggin lady.

                    Ah the moses' rights are being trampled thing. I was pretty sure you were being facetious with that. You were serious? Are you high?

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #70
                      Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                      Originally posted by reality View Post
                      Lucifer was not the angel of destruction he was the tester of faith. Other angels did things like kill the first born and nuke Sodom and gamorrah. By that time Lucifer was cast out.

                      An entity with power but no authority to employ it is how I am given to understand it. It can't act without you letting it do so, which people will fall all over themselves to do apparently. Contrasted with the actual deity of the monotheistic religion, Jehovah (whatever way you feel like spelling it), who acts without your permission.
                      >I'll have to get back ye on the role of Luficer, I have to visit the books. I remember it being an angel of wrath, muscle of Jehove/Jahve.
                      -I agree that initially Lucifer had no own mind, own authority. Could not act own its own behalf. That was altered later on, though.
                      (edit: and it's not really the topic of this thread.)

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #71
                        Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                        Originally posted by Chloe View Post
                        Nope...you may say it as often as you like, it just simply is not true. And not the case in this instance anyway.



                        I know you are not a Scientologist and i was saying in the sense of "whomever Scientologists worship", not you as one.



                        Everything is italicized when you quote it unfortunately but yes, good job indeed...same way the courts don't care whether you recognize what they think / interpret of your rights, either. They just are the authority and if you refuse to comply, you end up paying the cost / burden of it.



                        You are the one whining it needs to go from the public square, not me, i am perfectly content and fine with it where it is.



                        I never said that...i said i don't care what you want. I can understand some who don't understand English but you should be able to. Or are you just insinuating i am selfish? Not to hurt your feelings even more but there are those i care about. (Just not you...but i'll say you too, if it hurts?)



                        Sorry, i had to dumb it down some for this thread given...well, you can read the rest. I didn't mean to make you feel butt sore about it!



                        Ahh...there's the self-righteous Reality i was waiting for to lecture me on the topic...and yes, some may lose, most who win are pro life (want religion in the public square for your thread topic purposes :p) and if they lose because people like you refuse to get in line i had the added joy of coming on here to revel in your whining about "DA GUBBEMINT" and various liberal big government / liberal politicians getting in power. Kind of win-win for me.



                        You too for a bit...see how much fun this is and how much fun we have doing it? That reminds me, i still owe you some replies on the NHS / social services thread which went quiet for the Christmas break.



                        Both of us together? You sin on Saturday for what you go to church for on Sunday, right?
                        It actually is true in this specific instance. What with the public mandate and the public funds. That's the rub.

                        You mean I pay the cost of it when they rule in a frankly foolish fashion (say that 3 times fast) and then every made up bullshit religion gets to sit on the public square with public funds? Well I guess you got me there

                        But you're not fine with anyone else getting space on the public square with public funds hence special treatment of one religion over and above others hence establishment violation.

                        No skin off my nose honey, I don't know you from adam. You are indeed selfish as you care not a fig for the rights of others. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

                        and again you are the one causing the problem by calling for public funds for religion.

                        yep I'm the self righteous one. Shall I quote you all up on your high horse or is it too far from there to here for you to see? I can use large print and small words if you like.

                        nah see I'm not catholic so I don't believe that I need to be in a box with a priest for god to hear me when I say "sorry I'm worthless dickhead that doesn't deserve your mercy. thank you for it anyway. I love you sir.". Nor do I think that just because it is a certain day of the week I must ask forgiveness or commune with my deity nor that because it is that day that I am somehow incapable of sin.
                        See what I mean about it being a con man cult? You've got some wicked weird ideas lady

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #72
                          Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                          Originally posted by reality View Post
                          I thought you said you were a lawyer?
                          I said i have a law degree (i really shouldn't critique Fennica's English wen it is bad in Texas, too).

                          You DO know what "moratorium" means right? You haven't thought this through at all have you? Just chasing your carrot? If the judge rules "religion can be in the public square" THEN the moratorium goes away AND the Satanists have settled case law behind them to demand space in the public square FFS look beyond the tip of your nose.
                          How could you have gotten that so badly wrong?

                          Let's say the judge rules the religious aspect is fine in the public square if it continues to show some historical semblance / reasoning. Then there is no need for the moratorium as the bastard satanic cult has no standing...follow?

                          Slavery withstood tests.
                          I was waiting for it to come full circle (the ultimate fail of legal interpretation: But slavery was legal too!!!)

                          Hell you didn't have to have a notification of your rights until quite recently. Your point is not a point but an opinion. If what you're saying is that the 10 commandments are immaterial because Jesus, then why the fuck do you want them on the square?
                          The historical aspect of the Judea-Christian philosophy the nation was founded on...how hard is that for you to understand? I never said they were immaterial because of Christ, you are thinking of a different discussion. (Noa's hate of shellfish / NT vs OT)

                          Btw it is fine to disagree with the opinion, just don't keep repeating it parrot style, was my point above, when someone says something 1000 times over, which i hope you won't do.

                          And again jews don't sacrifice people. I thought you had read the bible?
                          I didn't say Jews sacrifice people though, did i?

                          And again if the atheists get slapped down in favor of religion in the square THEN you're going to have Satanists that you so abhor there. Use that noggin lady.
                          Not at all, if the atheists get knocked down because there is a historical element to the 10 commandments being up then the atheists and Satanists both lose, no? Not arguing the merits of it, but that would be the case, correct?

                          Ah the moses' rights are being trampled thing. I was pretty sure you were being facetious with that. You were serious? Are you high?
                          No, it is usually you who posts high. And yes i was being facetious with that, as i am glad you cottoned on to. (See, if that were someone else, they would get the wording wrong, say you accused them of being full of shit, even after 40 explanations of the difference between being facetious, and the word feces).

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #73
                            Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                            Originally posted by Chloe View Post
                            I'm glad you brought that post up as i had promised to ignore Fennica and give him the last word but this is another example of failure to understand English...i expected better from you (shit is weak as you would say).

                            I never said it in the plurality of all non Christians, i was talking about Fennica, and i was not saying i am superior to him. I was saying he is inferior [to everyone]..see the difference? And you'd have to be to intentionally misconstrue what someone tells you dozens of times, ignore it, and then claim no-one is answering your questions. I can understand if you don't agree with it but the constant "answer my questions" which everyone already has is more than tiresome.
                            so you are not included in the definition of "everyone"? Now who can't speak English? Shit is WEAK

                            (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

                            Originally posted by Chloe View Post
                            No it does, which is why we continue to exhibit those in the square that have historical relevance to the creation of the nation.
                            which as discussed is not the 10 commandments for a variety of reasons.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #74
                              Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                              Yes it is.

                              But you are right, i am superior to Fennica if i classify myself within the confines of everyone...thanks for pointing it out! I never see myself in such mannerisms of course.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #75
                                Re: Do The Ten Commandments violate freedom of speech?

                                Originally posted by reality View Post
                                It actually is true in this specific instance. What with the public mandate and the public funds. That's the rub.
                                So say there were no public funds involved but in the public square? Would you be okay with that?

                                You mean I pay the cost of it when they rule in a frankly foolish fashion (say that 3 times fast) and then every made up bullshit religion gets to sit on the public square with public funds? Well I guess you got me there
                                And you got me on the Fennica / superiority / inferiority issue. 1&1 as they say in Luther's baseball terms.

                                But you're not fine with anyone else getting space on the public square with public funds hence special treatment of one religion over and above others hence establishment violation.
                                Sure i am. If Jews wish to put in stuff in the public square i am fine with it given the Judea role in the founding of the nation.

                                No skin off my nose honey, I don't know you from adam. You are indeed selfish as you care not a fig for the rights of others. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.
                                Not at all...if i valued your opinion, i would be. Maybe i need to start caring more about you...would that help?

                                Btw i see you the exact same way. You care not one bit about other(s) and their religious views / ideologies etc, rail off at everyone who votes for either major party, insult them for doing so, claim everything would be fine if they woke up / enough people voted for third party candidates etc. At least i don't get up on an actual high horse claiming to be any better, unlike you.

                                and again you are the one causing the problem by calling for public funds for religion.
                                The public funds are there...the problem is caused by those trying to remove it. And their backers.

                                yep I'm the self righteous one. Shall I quote you all up on your high horse or is it too far from there to here for you to see? I can use large print and small words if you like.
                                Its usually best in your case given it makes it easier to manage, right?

                                nah see I'm not catholic so I don't believe that I need to be in a box with a priest for god to hear me when I say "sorry I'm worthless dickhead that doesn't deserve your mercy. thank you for it anyway. I love you sir.". Nor do I think that just because it is a certain day of the week I must ask forgiveness or commune with my deity nor that because it is that day that I am somehow incapable of sin.
                                See what I mean about it being a con man cult? You've got some wicked weird ideas lady
                                Aww, you say some adorable things!

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X