Knoxville votes out three city council members for caving to atheists

Yep.

The fear of a lawsuit causing harm to the community is a real one though.

Well financed libs lawyer love to drag people though long court case to punish them for not conforming to lib ideals.

The verdict doesn't matter.

It's really a type of legal oppression with legal costs as a weapon.

Someday, the people of this nation are going to get really pissed off with such tyranny.
Well if it illegal to put up the cross .........

It's not, if it were every military cemetery in the country would be in violation, almost every headstone has a cross on it.
No, military cemetaries mark graves with symbols of the individual faiths. I suppose the display in question would have been ok if there'd been an attempt to include Jews and Muslims

View attachment 54304

I'd say there was no need.
Yes, to you there is only one faith that matters, fuck everyone else...

The Jews should be able to put up a marker for Jewish Soldiers that died. In case you forgot,the Muslims are the ones that killed many of the US soldiers so they can go suck an egg.
 
Of course you have a link to counter this one. MY bold.
History | American Battle Monuments Commission

In performing its functions, ABMC administers, operates and maintains on foreign soil 25 permanent American burial grounds, and 27 separate memorials, monuments and markers, including three memorials in the United States. Presently there are 124,905 American war dead interred in these cemeteries, of which 30,922 are from World War I, 93,233 are from World War II and 750 are from the Mexican-American War. Additionally 14,907 American veterans and others are interred in the Mexico City National Cemetery, Corozal American Cemetery and Clark Veterans Cemetery. Commemorated individually by name on stone tablets are more than 94,000 American servicemen and women who were missing in action, or lost or buried at sea in their regions during World War I, World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War.


Counter what?

Your own quote notes that the cemeteries are on foreign soil.

If they are on foreign soil, in this case France, then it is a French Cemetery. Now it's for US Servicemen who died in the conflicts they were established for. Never said anything different. But a cemetery on French soil is a French Cemetery. It is not like an embassy (which is considered US soil) in that just because an American is buried their that it becomes US soil.


>>>>

You posted this:

"Actually it is a French cemetery. Those cemeteries are maintained by those countries, you know that right?

They aren't "US Cemeteries", they are (in the example you showed) French Cemeteries maintained by France for US servicemen that died in WWII."

OKTEXAS showed you where these cemeteries are NOT maintained by France or by those countries as you clearly and erroneously stated. Why not admit you were wrong.
 
>

I was wrong about maintained. I was correct that the picture was of a French Cemetery, not a US Cemetery.


>>>>
 
Well if it illegal to put up the cross .........

It's not, if it were every military cemetery in the country would be in violation, almost every headstone has a cross on it.
No, military cemetaries mark graves with symbols of the individual faiths. I suppose the display in question would have been ok if there'd been an attempt to include Jews and Muslims

View attachment 54304

I'd say there was no need.
Yes, to you there is only one faith that matters, fuck everyone else...

The Jews should be able to put up a marker for Jewish Soldiers that died. In case you forgot,the Muslims are the ones that killed many of the US soldiers so they can go suck an egg.


Muslims died for this nation, too!!

And atheist, hindis and buddhists and sikhs and jainists and pantheists and .......and taoists and shintoists and.....

get the picture?
 
As an atheist, I normally oppose religious displays on public property

But the context of this display is a soldier grieving at a grave. I think it is appropriate
 
Well if it illegal to put up the cross .........

It's not, if it were every military cemetery in the country would be in violation, almost every headstone has a cross on it.
No, military cemetaries mark graves with symbols of the individual faiths. I suppose the display in question would have been ok if there'd been an attempt to include Jews and Muslims

View attachment 54304

I'd say there was no need.
Yes, to you there is only one faith that matters, fuck everyone else...

The Jews should be able to put up a marker for Jewish Soldiers that died. In case you forgot,the Muslims are the ones that killed many of the US soldiers so they can go suck an egg.

The Japanese and Germans "killed many US soldiers"....Do they get to "suck and egg" too? American Muslims serve.

jmahearn-gravesite-photo-september-2007-001.jpg
 
Stop already! Although what else can you expect from a redneck hillbilly town?

Imagine that. The citizens vote to uphold the honor of veterans and a shitbird comes along and calls them names. Must be an Obama voter.

Yep.

The fear of a lawsuit causing harm to the community is a real one though.

Well financed libs lawyer love to drag people though long court case to punish them for not conforming to lib ideals.

The verdict doesn't matter.

It's really a type of legal oppression with legal costs as a weapon.

Someday, the people of this nation are going to get really pissed off with such tyranny.
Well if it illegal to put up the cross .........

It's not, if it were every military cemetery in the country would be in violation, almost every headstone has a cross on it.
Not every vet is or was a cross groveler, many died who were other or no religions defending this country

Beaufort+National+Cemetery+5+2008+CBlog.jpg



Atheist headstone

1947946219.jpg


Headstones.png
 
Last edited:
Knoxville IOWA. Not Knoxville Tennessee.

Dimbart as news source is always hilarious. No bias there, nope. Actual local news link here

They all seem to be intentionally distracting off to the shiny object of what it is, ignoring the whole point of where it is.

The link from Breitbart was quite explicit noting the location was Knoxville, Iowa. Did you see an earlier release that indicated otherwise?

Breitbart may be biased, but since when is bias a bad word in journalism? Or does the fact all the mainstream media TV news networks under-reporting or failing to report on liberal political scandals or cover ups not indicate bias? I see they are hammering Rubio for his $22,000 tax mishandling but taking no notice of the $500,000,000 Clinton Foundation outrage.

I agree, if the news reporting were more honorable and without bias this nation would be far better off. It would also be far less endearing to left wing causes and ideals.
 
It's not, if it were every military cemetery in the country would be in violation, almost every headstone has a cross on it.
No, military cemetaries mark graves with symbols of the individual faiths. I suppose the display in question would have been ok if there'd been an attempt to include Jews and Muslims

View attachment 54304

I'd say there was no need.
Yes, to you there is only one faith that matters, fuck everyone else...

The Jews should be able to put up a marker for Jewish Soldiers that died. In case you forgot,the Muslims are the ones that killed many of the US soldiers so they can go suck an egg.

The Japanese and Germans "killed many US soldiers"....Do they get to "suck and egg" too? American Muslims serve.

jmahearn-gravesite-photo-september-2007-001.jpg

Death is the great leveler , The dead have no beliefs or religion
 
Well if it illegal to put up the cross .........

It's not, if it were every military cemetery in the country would be in violation, almost every headstone has a cross on it.
No, military cemetaries mark graves with symbols of the individual faiths. I suppose the display in question would have been ok if there'd been an attempt to include Jews and Muslims

View attachment 54304

I'd say there was no need.
Yes, to you there is only one faith that matters, fuck everyone else...

The Jews should be able to put up a marker for Jewish Soldiers that died. In case you forgot,the Muslims are the ones that killed many of the US soldiers so they can go suck an egg.
The Jews should be able to put up a marker for Jewish Soldiers that died. In case you forgot,the Muslims are the ones that killed many of the US soldiers so they can go suck an egg.

They should be allowed? how nice of you , since you decide nothing
 
Seems they took it down to avoid a costly legal battle. I guess the townspeople want to waste a ton of money in court. Oh well.
The townspeople chose them specifically for them to represent the community....which is largely Christian and veteran. This is something worth going to court over. When people act for the people's"own good" while ignoring the desires of those same people, they need to go.
 
Seems they took it down to avoid a costly legal battle. I guess the townspeople want to waste a ton of money in court. Oh well.
The townspeople chose them specifically for them to represent the community....which is largely Christian and veteran. This is something worth going to court over. When people act for the people's"own good" while ignoring the desires of those same people, they need to go.
Hence why we don't have mob-rule here. They rule like morons because they think, as do you, like morons.
 
Seems they took it down to avoid a costly legal battle. I guess the townspeople want to waste a ton of money in court. Oh well.
The townspeople chose them specifically for them to represent the community....which is largely Christian and veteran. This is something worth going to court over. When people act for the people's"own good" while ignoring the desires of those same people, they need to go.
That is not how it works. If the majority cannot decide to put up their religious symbols on public land, it would be the same thing if muslims or jews or any other group was the majority in any given town, why are christians trying to christianize Veterans day when it is a day to honor all Veterans of all or no religion
 
And now, for some sanity instead of Breitbart blather...

James Lane released a statement to Channel 13 saying, “There has been speculation that the recent vote by the incumbents on the removal of the fallen soldier silhouette memorial was the driving factor behind the results of the election. From the citizens I have spoken to many of the people in Knoxville who voted made up their minds on the future direction of Knoxville before the recent city council meeting."


Some Say Ousting of Knoxville Council Members Was Result of Soldier Memorial Vote

And let's keep this entire matter in context. All that was voted for by the council was to move the wooden memorial to nearby private land, and replace it with a bronze monument.

The city council voted 3-2 Monday night to approve a plan to move the memorial — a wooden silhouette of a soldier kneeling before a cross — onto private property and place a new bronze memorial where it stood in Young's Park.....Under the plan endorsed by the council, the AMVETS chapter will remove the memorial and erect a bronze statute featuring a rifle and solider's helmet. The new memorial will be dedicated at a Veterans Day ceremony on Nov. 11.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...ille-votes-remove-veterans-memorial/75113512/

You have to be seriously deluded to have an issue with this.
 
Knoxville IOWA. Not Knoxville Tennessee.

Dimbart as news source is always hilarious. No bias there, nope. Actual local news link here

They all seem to be intentionally distracting off to the shiny object of what it is, ignoring the whole point of where it is.

The link from Breitbart was quite explicit noting the location was Knoxville, Iowa. Did you see an earlier release that indicated otherwise?

Nope. I saw a thread title that indicated otherwise. If you take the trouble to put the word "Knoxville" in the title but refrain from the word "Iowa", then you're misleading the reader for whatever reason. Like if I said "New York" and didn't tell you I was talking about New York, Utah.

One poster already alluded to the town in question being the "home of the university". It isn't. He was misled to Knoxville Tennessee, the default Knoxville. This is a little southeast Iowa industrial town whose claim to fame is being a county seat. Why the poster wanted to mislead us only she can say. Presumably she wanted us to think this was going on in a bigger town than it actually is in order to pump up an issue that's not much more than a fart in the wind.

Breitbart may be biased, but since when is bias a bad word in journalism?

Since it began, if it's legitimate journalism, but of course that's the "if" I acted on. When you get a story from a heavily-agendaed source, you have to then go look it up from more genuine sources to see what they're leaving out. That's extra work.


Or does the fact all the mainstream media TV news networks under-reporting or failing to report on liberal political scandals or cover ups not indicate bias? I see they are hammering Rubio for his $22,000 tax mishandling but taking no notice of the $500,000,000 Clinton Foundation outrage.

To the extent that any of that's legitimate news, if they choose to downplay it (or up-play bullshit news, which happens far more often), sure that's bias. But in this case the source has never been known for reporting news for the sake of reporting news (as opposed to swaying public opinion) -- in fact has never been known for reporting news at all. Therefore it's automatically suspect.

I agree, if the news reporting were more honorable and without bias this nation would be far better off. It would also be far less endearing to left wing causes and ideals.

Sadly the major media we're forced to depend on for news has an agenda above journalism, and that's making money. So that's going to greatly influence what is deemed "news" and "not news" Ideologies can't do that. Nobody makes money by pushing an ideology. But they make a lot of money (get ratings, web clicks etc) by pushing sensationalist bullshit. Any of the "scandals" you mention above, whether they're legitimate scandals or not, would be pushed if they figured to make money.

I haven't heard of the Rubio thing. I've heard of the Clinton one, though only from hair-on-fire posts on this message board. I have no evidence that either one is legitimate, or an "outrage". So how much major media is pushing either one depends directly on what sources one is paying attention to.
 
Well if it illegal to put up the cross .........

It's not, if it were every military cemetery in the country would be in violation, almost every headstone has a cross on it.
No, military cemetaries mark graves with symbols of the individual faiths. I suppose the display in question would have been ok if there'd been an attempt to include Jews and Muslims

View attachment 54304

I'd say there was no need.
Yes, to you there is only one faith that matters, fuck everyone else...

The Jews should be able to put up a marker for Jewish Soldiers that died. In case you forgot,the Muslims are the ones that killed many of the US soldiers so they can go suck an egg.
A better man than you .... or I.
http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2011/314/2/8/muslim_american_head_stone_by_filmbrut-d4fsfwo.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top