Quote from Rush Limbaugh's appearance on CBS evening news...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Irvine511 said:

however, simply serving in the military does not automatically make one great and wonderful.

No, it is not automatic - greatness takes time to develop, and the military is one of the best institutions for producing greatness. Think of the Army Values (Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage) - who can argue angainst these qualities?

However, there is a small percentage of men and women who come into the military do not seek greatness, but remain self centered. These people are usually weeded out, but not always.
 
Irvine511 said:
1. pray tell, what is a "mock marriage"?
Redefiniton of marriage for the first time in human history, which is a non-issue in the states, unless a leftist judicial activist in Massachussetts overturns the will of the people.

Irvine511 said:
2. the issue with the NSA wiretapping program was that the administration not only didn't get warrants, but that they said they didn't need to get warrants, even though you can get a warrant after the fact. THAT was the issue.
The Authorization of Use of Military Force was passed by Congress in 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks. It gave Bush the authority to order warrantless surveillance provided that the surveillance does not violate the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has historically recognized Fourth Amendment overrides in a time of war. As for those concerned about the feds screening phone calls, I wonder what kind of skeletons they are hiding in their closets. The NSA wiretapping program was not a violation of "civil liberties." It was a violation of terrorist liberties because it prevented attacks from being planned, and was an invaluable tool in foiling the recent terrorist plot in England.

The ACLU, being the America-hating, NAMBLA-loving communist suck-ups they are, have done everything outside of their power to protect Jihadists. Where is their "warrant" for acting like a fourth branch of government?
 
Last edited:
Macfistowannabe said:
The ACLU, being the America-hating, NAMBLA-loving communist suck-ups they are, have done everything outside of their power to protect Jihadists. Where is their "warrant" for acting like a fourth branch of government?



this is totally inappropriate.
 
Scarletwine said:
The Brooklyn bridge example is a joke.
It's only a joke to the ignorant who want more bureaucracy to flood counter-terrorist operations.

...a terrorism task force employed provisions of the Patriot Act to track down a man who was plotting attacks in New York and the Midwest. The man, Iyman Faris, pled guilty of plotting attacks on the Brooklyn Bridge (search) and an Ohio mall after he saw the case against him.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159043,00.html
 
Macfistowannabe said:
Redefiniton of marriage for the first time in human history, which is a non-issue in the states, unless a leftist judicial activist in Massachussetts overturns the will of the people.



how strange that marriage equality is so threatening.



[q]The Authorization of Use of Military Force was passed by Congress in 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks. It gave Bush the authority to order warrantless surveillance provided that the surveillance does not violate the Constitution.[/q]


but it does violate the constitution. this domestic surveillance over American citizens without evidence or proof that they are involved in any illegal activity. all they need to do is get a warrant. and they can even get a warrant after the fact. Congress passed a law in 1978 making it a criminal offense to eavesdrop on Americans without judicial oversight, this was constitutional. the Administration had been secretly breaking the law, and then pleaded with The New York Times not to reveal this, and then they claimed that executive powers gave them the right to break the law. this is about the unfettered expansion of executive powers, which is the path to tyranny.



The Supreme Court has historically recognized Fourth Amendment overrides in a time of war. As for those concerned about the feds screening phone calls, I wonder what kind of skeletons they are hiding in their closets. The NSA wiretapping program was not a violation of "civil liberties." It was a violation of terrorist liberties because it prevented attacks from being planned, and was an invaluable tool in foiling the recent terrorist plot in England.


how did the NSA wiretapping prevent the London plot? that was Scotland Yard's doing, not the CIA.
 
Macfistowannabe said:


The ACLU, being the America-hating, NAMBLA-loving communist suck-ups they are, have done everything outside of their power to protect Jihadists. Where is their "warrant" for acting like a fourth branch of government?

Not only is this inappropriate it's completely untrue.

I was wondering if you saw the students suspended for wearing 9/11 shirts thread? Sounds so America hating doesn't.

You know, you would get a lot more done, and perhaps even some credibility, if you didn't use such extreme hateful reactions.

Mock marriages? Death worshipping? America hating? These terms you use are bullshit.

Oh it also wouldn't hurt to use facts.
 
Last edited:
Macfistowannabe said:
Really? They don't support NAMBLA?
They want to protect Americans from Jihadists?



[q]ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations (8/31/2000)

NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.

What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. 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. That was true when the Nazis marched in Skokie. It remains true today.[/q]
 
Macfistowannabe said:
Redefiniton of marriage for the first time in human history, which is a non-issue in the states, unless a leftist judicial activist in Massachussetts overturns the will of the people.


Except for when marriage was one man and many women, man and pre-teen girls, oh and then there was that time it was defined as white man and white woman/ black man and black woman.

Oh, but don't let facts get in the way. Spew on with your hate.:|
 
traditional marriage, or, better, biblical marriage, was one man and many girls, starting when they were 13.

but that's another topic.

though we haven't had a good gay marriage thread in a while :hmm:
 
Justin24 said:


I actually kind of agree with Mac there. The ACLU protects certain groups and chides others.



[q]ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations (8/31/2000)

NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.

What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. 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. That was true when the Nazis marched in Skokie. It remains true today.[/q]
 
Let me as you something Irvine. Let's say a highschool group wants to create a christian club in school or have a time for prayer that does not interfere with class should they have a right too? Or do you think the ACLU and school district ban this group. I am sure they would be banned due to seperation of church and state.

Now if Muslims did the same and since we are in Sensitive times I am sure it would be allowed.
 
Justin24 said:
Let me as you something Irvine. Let's say a highschool group wants to create a christian club in school or have a time for prayer that does not interfere with class should they have a right too? Or do you think the ACLU and school district ban this group. I am sure they would be banned due to seperation of church and state.

Now if Muslims did the same and since we are in Sensitive times I am sure it would be allowed.

Has this happened? Until then, just like I told Mac, stick to the facts.

Both of you have very little when it comes to the ACLU...
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Except for when marriage was one man and many women, man and pre-teen girls, oh and then there was that time it was defined as white man and white woman/ black man and black woman.
Interracial marriage is a totally different issue. Your race is a proven concrete gene that you are born with.

BonoVoxSupastar said:
Oh, but don't let facts get in the way. Spew on with your hate.:|
What a stupid, thoughtless comment. Anything that isn't liberal is apparently hateful to you.
 
Justin24 said:
Let me as you something Irvine. Let's say a highschool group wants to create a christian club in school or have a time for prayer that does not interfere with class should they have a right too? Or do you think the ACLU and school district ban this group. I am sure they would be banned due to seperation of church and state.

Now if Muslims did the same and since we are in Sensitive times I am sure it would be allowed.
And how would that be state-sponsored religion?

I know this was addressed at Irvine, but I can't help but notice the similarities between your hypothetic statement and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
 
Your signature is entirely hateful and the mods should remove it. I remember when I was freaking crucified for even mentioning Hilter. But not it's ok. Bush and his ilk are the fascist in the world.
 
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003957.htm

(following the muslim religon learning about islam) I don't think they teach world history in Elementary school??)

ACLU to Defend NAMBLA

Associated Press
Aug. 31, 2000

BOSTON -- The American Civil Liberties Union will represent a group that advocates sex between men and boys in a lawsuit brought by the family of a slain 10-year-old.

The family of Jeffrey Curley of Cambridge said the North American Man/Boy Love Association and its web site which is now off-line incited the attempted molestation and murder of the boy on Oct. 1, 1997.

One of two men convicted in the killing, Charles Jaynes, 25, reportedly viewed the group's web site shortly before the killing, and also had in his possession some of NAMBLA's publications. Also convicted in the killing was 24-year-old Salvatore Sicari.

The ACLU said the case, filed in federal court in mid-May, involves issues of freedom of speech and association.

"For us, it is a fundamental First Amendment case," John Roberts, executive director of the Massachusetts branch of the ACLU, told Boston Globe Wednesday. "It has to do with communications on a web site, and material that does not promote any kind of criminal behavior whatsoever."

ACLU officials said NAMBLA members deny encouraging coercion, rape or violence.

Attorney Lawrence Frisoli, who represents the Curleys, said he is glad the ACLU is defending NAMBLA, because he has had trouble locating the group's members.

Harvey Silverglate, an ACLU board member, said Wednesday that the group's attorneys will try to block any attempt by the Curleys to get NAMBLA's membership lists, or other materials identifying members.

The ACLU also will act as a surrogate for NAMBLA, allowing its members to defend themselves in court while remaining anonymous.

According to the Globe, NAMBLA officials in the past have said their main goal is the abolition of age-of-consent laws that classify sex with children as rape.

At two separate trials last year, prosecutors said Jaynes and Sicari were sexually obsessed with the boy, lured him from his Cambridge neighborhood with the promise of a new bike, and then smothered him with a gasoline-soaked rag when he resisted their sexual advances. They then stuffed him into a concrete-filled container and dumped it into a Maine river.

Sicari, convicted of first-degree murder, is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Jaynes' second-degree murder and kidnapping convictions enable him to seek parole in 23 years.

The Curleys last week were awarded $328 million by a superior court jury in a civil suit against Jaynes and Sicari.

Copyright (c) 2000 The Associated Press

The ACLU's ongoing war on Christianity reached absurd levels when it announced its plans to sue the mayor of Inglis, Florida for denouncing Satan. When the resident who complained about the mayor's proclamation declined to sue, the ACLU announced it would move forward with the suit anyway.

The ACLU has filed a brief with a Kansas state appeals court arguing that the state's sexual age of consent laws should be lowered to 13 years of age. This request comes as the ACLU is defending 18-year old homosexual Matthew Limon, who was convicted of sexually assaulting a mentally disabled 14-year old boy.

The Colorado ACLU sent a formal request to Elbert County Charter School, requesting that all references to Christmas be removed from all school functions. The ACLU even demanded that children be stopped from singing secular songs, such as "Jingle Bells", which have no reference to God.

Christmas is no longer celebrated as a national holiday in most public schools in America. Government Schools now tend to refer to Christmas as a "winter festival".

After succeeding in halting a tradition of prayer at the Virgina Military Institute, the ACLU is now threatening the Naval Academy at Annapolis.

The ACLU sued the city of San Diego for allowing the Boy Scouts to lease city property for meetings. In the suit, the ACLU charged that the Scout's positions on faith and homosexuality preclude them from entering into contractual agreements with a goverment entity. Judge Jones sided with the ACLU against the Scouts and ordered the city to nullify the lease agreements.

The Iowa Civil Liberties Union is suing the Cedar County administration officials regarding a nativity scene that rests on the courthouse lawn.

On Septemember 24, 2003, workers in a Custer County, Montana decided to settle a six-year battle with the ACLU and removed a monument of the Ten Commandments from the Custer County Courthouse lawn.

Attorny David Limbaugh reports that a teacher in a Houston middle school spotted two female students carrying Bibles. The teacher seized the Bible, threw them in the trash, exclaiming "this is garbage." Another teacher at this same school confiscated book covers that contained the Ten Commandments and threw them in the trash saying the Ten Commandments were "hate speech"

In New York City's public schools, students can display a menorah for Hanukkah, a Muslim flag for Ramadan, but are forbidden from displaying a nativity scene in honor of Christmas.

U.S. District Court Judge Samuel B. Kent of the Southern District of Texas decreed that any student uttering the word "Jesus" would be arrested and tossed in jail for six months. He further warned: "And make no mistake, this court is going to have a United States marshal in attendance at the graduation. If any student offends this court, that student will be arrested and will face up to six months incarceration in the Galveston County Jail for contempt of court. Anyone who thinks I'm kidding about this order better think again...Anyone who violates these orders, no kidding. is going to wish that he or she had died when this court gets through with it."
 
Scarletwine said:
Your signature is entirely hateful and the mods should remove it. I remember when I was freaking crucified for even mentioning Hilter. But not it's ok. Bush and his ilk are the fascist in the world.

Would that Avatar piss you off if it was Bush?? probably not. Stop being a hypocrite.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Not only is this inappropriate it's completely untrue.

I was wondering if you saw the students suspended for wearing 9/11 shirts thread? Sounds so America hating doesn't.

You know, you would get a lot more done, and perhaps even some credibility, if you didn't use such extreme hateful reactions.

Mock marriages? Death worshipping? America hating? These terms you use are bullshit.

Oh it also wouldn't hurt to use facts.
“I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class… Communism is the goal.”

- Roger Baldwin
Founder of the ACLU

baldwin_r1.jpg
 
Justin24 said:
Let me as you something Irvine. Let's say a highschool group wants to create a christian club in school or have a time for prayer that does not interfere with class should they have a right too? Or do you think the ACLU and school district ban this group. I am sure they would be banned due to seperation of church and state.

Now if Muslims did the same and since we are in Sensitive times I am sure it would be allowed.



religious groups of any kind can meet after school, it's during designated school hours where it is ever a problem.

Wiccans can meet after school, so can Jews for Jesus, so can Muslims.
 
Macfistowannabe said:
“I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class… Communism is the goal.”

- Roger Baldwin
Founder of the ACLU

baldwin_r1.jpg



hence, free speech.
 
But Muslims pray what 5 times a day right. So wouldn't they get a special privilage and go to a seperate room to pray to Allah?
 
Irvine511 said:



how is that a special privilege?

Well it's during school time so where is the seperation of church and state. Then Christians should be able to pray in class or budhhits should mediate etc.... during class right?
 
Macfistowannabe said:
Interracial marriage is a totally different issue. Your race is a proven concrete gene that you are born with.


You said it's never been changed, I proved to you it has, but continue to ignore the facts.
 
Justin24 said:


Well it's during school time so where is the seperation of church and state. Then Christians should be able to pray in class or budhhits should mediate etc.... during class right?



many schools have a moment of silence before class -- pray if you want, or don't.

have you seen a muslim student get up in the middle of class and start to pray?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom