Religious Freedom Reestablished!

[JoeB131]

[


Daily vocabulary lesson:

im·pose
/imˈpōz/
Verb
Force (something unwelcome or unfamiliar) to be accepted or put in place: "the decision was theirs and was not imposed on them".
Forcibly put (a restriction) in place: "sanctions imposed".


Try to use it correctly in the future.

When I send my kid to a school, and the teachers are telling him about the Magic Sky Man on a Stick, that's imposing your religion on me.

 

[JoeB131]

Would you consider someone that claimed to have a degree in history, yet who spends his time denying actual history, to be full of shit, or a lying sack of shit?

Again, not talking to you until you start taking your Meds.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[


Daily vocabulary lesson:

im·pose
/imˈpōz/
Verb
Force (something unwelcome or unfamiliar) to be accepted or put in place: "the decision was theirs and was not imposed on them".
Forcibly put (a restriction) in place: "sanctions imposed".


Try to use it correctly in the future.

When I send my kid to a school, and the teachers are telling him about the Magic Sky Man on a Stick, that's imposing your religion on me.

1. Link?


2. So, you refer to advertising as 'imposting'.....?

 

[JoeB131]

[q

1. Link?


2. So, you refer to advertising as 'imposting'.....?

I refer to advertising to "Annoying", because most of it is. Except the beer commercials. Those are usually pretty funny. But where was I?

Oh, yeah, Imposing.

A school is a center of authority. We teach our children to respect their teachers and listen to what they have to say. (Unless you are a libertarian loon who thinks public education is a conspiracy and shit.)

So when a teacher starts going on about how Jesus is Lord, and I'm trying to teach my kid to ignore Bronze Age fairy tales, that's imposing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[q

1. Link?


2. So, you refer to advertising as 'imposting'.....?

I refer to advertising to "Annoying", because most of it is. Except the beer commercials. Those are usually pretty funny. But where was I?

Oh, yeah, Imposing.

A school is a center of authority. We teach our children to respect their teachers and listen to what they have to say. (Unless you are a libertarian loon who thinks public education is a conspiracy and shit.)

So when a teacher starts going on about how Jesus is Lord, and I'm trying to teach my kid to ignore Bronze Age fairy tales, that's imposing.

So....you have no link for ".... the teachers are telling him about the Magic Sky Man on a Stick,"

You just made that up, as is traditional with the subject matter of your posts.



"Oh, yeah, Imposing."

And you still don't understand how to use the word 'imposing.'

Well, one works to ability, it seems.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Would you consider someone that claimed to have a degree in history, yet who spends his time denying actual history, to be full of shit, or a lying sack of shit?

Again, not talking to you until you start taking your Meds.

I am not the one that is making ridiculous claims that historical figures are fictional characters just because I don't like the philosophy they represent, am I? Since you are the one that claims tohave a degree in history, yet you are willing to lie about actual history, you must be associated with some sort of wackadoodle conspiracy shit.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Would you consider someone that claimed to have a degree in history, yet who spends his time denying actual history, to be full of shit, or a lying sack of shit?

Again, not talking to you until you start taking your Meds.

QW has the distinction of being the first poster on my ignore list for good reason.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Would you consider someone that claimed to have a degree in history, yet who spends his time denying actual history, to be full of shit, or a lying sack of shit?

Again, not talking to you until you start taking your Meds.

QW has the distinction of being the first poster on my ignore list for good reason.

Would that be because you don't like having your ass handed to you?

 

[JoeB131]

Would you consider someone that claimed to have a degree in history, yet who spends his time denying actual history, to be full of shit, or a lying sack of shit?

Again, not talking to you until you start taking your Meds.

QW has the distinction of being the first poster on my ignore list for good reason.

I'm seriously considering adding him. Especially after the stalking incident.

 

[JoeB131]

[

So....you have no link for ".... the teachers are telling him about the Magic Sky Man on a Stick,"

You just made that up, as is traditional with the subject matter of your posts.



"Oh, yeah, Imposing."

And you still don't understand how to use the word 'imposing.'

Well, one works to ability, it seems.

Not going to trade you for the navel gazing on single words. that's kind of tedious and borderline OCD.

But...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/u...electives-a-call-for-more-inclusion.html?_r=0

 

[PoliticalChic]

[

So....you have no link for ".... the teachers are telling him about the Magic Sky Man on a Stick,"

You just made that up, as is traditional with the subject matter of your posts.



"Oh, yeah, Imposing."

And you still don't understand how to use the word 'imposing.'

Well, one works to ability, it seems.

Not going to trade you for the navel gazing on single words. that's kind of tedious and borderline OCD.

But...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/u...electives-a-call-for-more-inclusion.html?_r=0

From your link:

"...using a high school elective to pole-vault the wall between church and state."






Here's another word you seem unable to understand: "ironic."


You claim to object to fairy tales about men in the sky.....

.....yet you advance the bogus presumption, fairy tale, that the Constitution includes some "wall between church and state."



Get your pencil and paper for another lesson that your bar and grill failed to teach you:

As for the famous “separation of church and state,” the phrase appears in no federal document.
In fact, at the time of ratification of the Constitution, ten of the thirteen colonies had some provision recognizing Christianity as either the official, or the recommended religion in their state constitutions.



You should pay me for all the instruction I'm forced to provide.....

...or at least remember me in your will.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Did you miss post #94, little fella?


Or is this an admission that your charge about Fox was the expression of a bubblebutt?

You are going to have to do a whole lot better than just flinging a post number around. Either you prove that Hemmings had the right to refuse sex or you admit that you are wrong. Your choice.

So....you have completely retracted your contention that Fox News claimed it had the right to lie?

Good job.

That would be up to Fox "news". Their website admits that they are only for "entertainment". Take it up with them since they are your "source" that has zero credibility.

FYI the Thomas Jefferson Foundation has concluded that he fathered all of Hemmings children. Perhaps you can let them know that they are wrong according to your "entertainment" source.

Jefferson?Hemings controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2000, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, which operates Monticello, issued a report of its own investigation, which concluded by accepting Jefferson's paternity.[53] Dr. Daniel P. Jordan, president of Monticello, committed at the time to incorporate "the conclusions of the report into Monticello's training, interpretation, and publications." This included new articles and monographs on the Hemings descendants reflecting the new evidence, as well as books on the interracial communities of Monticello and Charlottesville; and new exhibits at Monticello show Jefferson as the father of the Sally Hemings children.[53][54] In 2010, the Monticello website noted the new consensus that has emerged on Jefferson's paternity of Hemings' children in the decade since those major studies.[55]

In its January 2000 issue, the William and Mary Quarterly published Forum: Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings Redux, a total of seven articles noting the changed consensus and the developing new views on Jefferson.[56] Included among them was the results of an analysis by Fraser D. Neiman, who studied the statistical significance of the relationship between Jefferson's documented residencies at Monticello and Hemings' conceptions.[34]

In May 2000, PBS Frontline produced a program Jefferson's Blood about the issues related to the DNA test and historical controversy. It stated in its overview:

"More than 20 years after CBS executives were pressured by Jefferson historians to drop plans for a mini-series on Jefferson and Hemings, the network airs Sally Hemings: An American Scandal. Though many quarreled with the portrayal of Hemings as unrealistically modern and heroic, no major historian challenged the series' premise that Hemings and Jefferson had a 38-year relationship that produced children."[57]

In the fall of 2001, the National Genealogical Society published a special issue of its quarterly about the Jefferson–Hemings controversy. In several articles, its specialists concluded that, as the genealogist Helen M. Leary wrote, the historical, genealogical, and DNA evidence were sufficient by standard genealogical standards to conclude that Thomas Jefferson was the father of all of Hemings' children.[58]

The odds of someone on the USMB convincing the TJF to reject the DNA evidence are probably very long indeed but at least you can always claim that you gave it your best shot. Give it go and let us all know how it turns out, ...mkay?

 

[PoliticalChic]

You are going to have to do a whole lot better than just flinging a post number around. Either you prove that Hemmings had the right to refuse sex or you admit that you are wrong. Your choice.

So....you have completely retracted your contention that Fox News claimed it had the right to lie?

Good job.

That would be up to Fox "news". Their website admits that they are only for "entertainment". Take it up with them since they are your "source" that has zero credibility.

FYI the Thomas Jefferson Foundation has concluded that he fathered all of Hemmings children. Perhaps you can let them know that they are wrong according to your "entertainment" source.

Jefferson?Hemings controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2000, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, which operates Monticello, issued a report of its own investigation, which concluded by accepting Jefferson's paternity.[53] Dr. Daniel P. Jordan, president of Monticello, committed at the time to incorporate "the conclusions of the report into Monticello's training, interpretation, and publications." This included new articles and monographs on the Hemings descendants reflecting the new evidence, as well as books on the interracial communities of Monticello and Charlottesville; and new exhibits at Monticello show Jefferson as the father of the Sally Hemings children.[53][54] In 2010, the Monticello website noted the new consensus that has emerged on Jefferson's paternity of Hemings' children in the decade since those major studies.[55]

In its January 2000 issue, the William and Mary Quarterly published Forum: Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings Redux, a total of seven articles noting the changed consensus and the developing new views on Jefferson.[56] Included among them was the results of an analysis by Fraser D. Neiman, who studied the statistical significance of the relationship between Jefferson's documented residencies at Monticello and Hemings' conceptions.[34]

In May 2000, PBS Frontline produced a program Jefferson's Blood about the issues related to the DNA test and historical controversy. It stated in its overview:

"More than 20 years after CBS executives were pressured by Jefferson historians to drop plans for a mini-series on Jefferson and Hemings, the network airs Sally Hemings: An American Scandal. Though many quarreled with the portrayal of Hemings as unrealistically modern and heroic, no major historian challenged the series' premise that Hemings and Jefferson had a 38-year relationship that produced children."[57]

In the fall of 2001, the National Genealogical Society published a special issue of its quarterly about the Jefferson–Hemings controversy. In several articles, its specialists concluded that, as the genealogist Helen M. Leary wrote, the historical, genealogical, and DNA evidence were sufficient by standard genealogical standards to conclude that Thomas Jefferson was the father of all of Hemings' children.[58]

The odds of someone on the USMB convincing the TJF to reject the DNA evidence are probably very long indeed but at least you can always claim that you gave it your best shot. Give it go and let us all know how it turns out, ...mkay?

Now...don't run that quickly....

I can see why you'd like to race away from your post #90 in this thread.

You posted:
"In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.....During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.z'

This, specifically, is what I've challenged you on.


I've stated that I can prove that to be a lie.


In each post you've slid away from it.....

....are you ready to admit that what you posted was a lie?



You can simply say you misspoke....or didn't actually research it, and Fox made no such claim.


Your serve.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So....you have completely retracted your contention that Fox News claimed it had the right to lie?

Good job.

That would be up to Fox "news". Their website admits that they are only for "entertainment". Take it up with them since they are your "source" that has zero credibility.

FYI the Thomas Jefferson Foundation has concluded that he fathered all of Hemmings children. Perhaps you can let them know that they are wrong according to your "entertainment" source.

Jefferson?Hemings controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2000, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, which operates Monticello, issued a report of its own investigation, which concluded by accepting Jefferson's paternity.[53] Dr. Daniel P. Jordan, president of Monticello, committed at the time to incorporate "the conclusions of the report into Monticello's training, interpretation, and publications." This included new articles and monographs on the Hemings descendants reflecting the new evidence, as well as books on the interracial communities of Monticello and Charlottesville; and new exhibits at Monticello show Jefferson as the father of the Sally Hemings children.[53][54] In 2010, the Monticello website noted the new consensus that has emerged on Jefferson's paternity of Hemings' children in the decade since those major studies.[55]

In its January 2000 issue, the William and Mary Quarterly published Forum: Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings Redux, a total of seven articles noting the changed consensus and the developing new views on Jefferson.[56] Included among them was the results of an analysis by Fraser D. Neiman, who studied the statistical significance of the relationship between Jefferson's documented residencies at Monticello and Hemings' conceptions.[34]

In May 2000, PBS Frontline produced a program Jefferson's Blood about the issues related to the DNA test and historical controversy. It stated in its overview:

"More than 20 years after CBS executives were pressured by Jefferson historians to drop plans for a mini-series on Jefferson and Hemings, the network airs Sally Hemings: An American Scandal. Though many quarreled with the portrayal of Hemings as unrealistically modern and heroic, no major historian challenged the series' premise that Hemings and Jefferson had a 38-year relationship that produced children."[57]

In the fall of 2001, the National Genealogical Society published a special issue of its quarterly about the Jefferson–Hemings controversy. In several articles, its specialists concluded that, as the genealogist Helen M. Leary wrote, the historical, genealogical, and DNA evidence were sufficient by standard genealogical standards to conclude that Thomas Jefferson was the father of all of Hemings' children.[58]

The odds of someone on the USMB convincing the TJF to reject the DNA evidence are probably very long indeed but at least you can always claim that you gave it your best shot. Give it go and let us all know how it turns out, ...mkay?

Now...don't run that quickly....

I can see why you'd like to race away from your post #90 in this thread.

You posted:
"In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.....During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.z'

This, specifically, is what I've challenged you on.


I've stated that I can prove that to be a lie.


In each post you've slid away from it.....

....are you ready to admit that what you posted was a lie?



You can simply say you misspoke....or didn't actually research it, and Fox made no such claim.


Your serve.

Let me reiterate that you are more than welcome to post whatever makes you happy. However none of that changes the fact that Fox "news" is a self confessed "entertainment" channel that has no interest in the facts.

That you wish to believe their tripe is both your choice and your right and I am more than wiling to defend both your right to believe it and their right to spew disinformation.

In the real world the facts remain unchanged. TJF has looked at the DNA evidence and concluded that Jefferson did father Hemmings children.

That you would rather nitpick than admit that this is true says volumes. If you want to post something that proves you "right" then be my guest. Go ahead and post it. If it proves to be what you say I am more than willing to admit that I am mistaken. I have been wrong before and I probably will be again. Such is life. Just deal with it and move on.

 

[JoeB131]

[


You should pay me for all the instruction I'm forced to provide.....

...or at least remember me in your will.

Yes, I will remember you in my will.

"This goes to PC, whoever she (or he, because, frankly, if I were trolling, I'd put up a picture of a chick) is. It's a copy of all the lame ass arguments I used to make when I was conservative, until i realized the rich could care less if I lived or died unless the fuckers were making money off of me. I honestly hope she gets some use out of them. I also hope someday she learns the Plutocrats are not her friend and don't really care about her or her magic sky man."

On a serious note, the founders intended there to be a Wall between Church and State because of the glaring example England was.

That every time there was a new King or Queen or Lord Protector, the officially sanctioned religion became the Heresy that got you burned at the stake. (Just ask Archbishop Cramner, or as his friends knew him, Crispy)

The Founders knew that if they didn't keep the religous nuts out of their new ideal government, you'd all be burning each other over whether Jesus was made of wafers or not.

So while the words "Separation of Church and State" aren't in there, the Estabishment clause pretty clearly is.

 

[Agent.Tom]

[


Daily vocabulary lesson:

im·pose
/imˈpōz/
Verb
Force (something unwelcome or unfamiliar) to be accepted or put in place: "the decision was theirs and was not imposed on them".
Forcibly put (a restriction) in place: "sanctions imposed".


Try to use it correctly in the future.

When I send my kid to a school, and the teachers are telling him about the Magic Sky Man on a Stick, that's imposing your religion on me.

Oh really. So public school teachers are teaching Christian Theology? I don't think so. Now, I guess it's possible that some teachers mention Christianity in passing, just to inform the kids that the belief system is out there. But I doubt even that happens in most schools. Even then, isn't it proper to at least prepare the children for the existence of a major belief system they will soon encounter? And since (I assume) you feel it is all absurd and bogus, you should easily be able to set your kid straight with your vastly superior version of the "facts."

Would you be pleased to know that some religious private schools don't even mention Darwinian or Evolution Theory to the children so as to present them an alternate view? I'm fairly certain that would bother you. But obviously, if it does, then you are being a hypocrite.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Oh really. So public school teachers are teaching Christian Theology? I don't think so. Now, I guess it's possible that some teachers mention Christianity in passing, just to inform the kids that the belief system is out there. But I doubt even that happens in most schools. Even then, isn't it proper to at least prepare the children for the existence of a major belief system they will soon encounter? And since (I assume) you feel it is all absurd and bogus, you should easily be able to set your kid straight with your vastly superior version of the "facts."

Believe me, I would love to prepare kids for the fact religion exists.

I would have a whole course teaching people how religion has lead to Jihads, Crusades, Inquisitions, Witch-Burnings, the molestation of Altar Boys, Magadlene Houses for Girls, Female Genital Mutilation and every other evil, stupid thing people have done trying to please their Imaginary Sky Pixie.

Oh, yeah, and Merry Fucking Christmas, you slack-jaws.

[
Would you be pleased to know that some religious private schools don't even mention Darwinian or Evolution Theory to the children so as to present them an alternate view? I'm fairly certain that would bother you. But obviously, if it does, then you are being a hypocrite.

It doesn't just worry me that private schools are keeping kids ignorant about evolution, it's that PUBLIC schools aren't teaching it. The biggest problem is that textbooks are written for the market in Texas. You know, people so fucking stupid they put George W. BUsh AND Rick Perry in the governor's mansion. So not surprising, when writing for these slack-jawed, inbred idiots, we wouldn't want to offend them with the notion that the universe can exist without their magic Sky Man.

The result, American kids are way behind their Asian and European counterparts.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[
Oh really. So public school teachers are teaching Christian Theology? I don't think so. Now, I guess it's possible that some teachers mention Christianity in passing, just to inform the kids that the belief system is out there. But I doubt even that happens in most schools. Even then, isn't it proper to at least prepare the children for the existence of a major belief system they will soon encounter? And since (I assume) you feel it is all absurd and bogus, you should easily be able to set your kid straight with your vastly superior version of the "facts."

Believe me, I would love to prepare kids for the fact religion exists.

I would have a whole course teaching people how religion has lead to Jihads, Crusades, Inquisitions, Witch-Burnings, the molestation of Altar Boys, Magadlene Houses for Girls, Female Genital Mutilation and every other evil, stupid thing people have done trying to please their Imaginary Sky Pixie.

Oh, yeah, and Merry Fucking Christmas, you slack-jaws.

[
Would you be pleased to know that some religious private schools don't even mention Darwinian or Evolution Theory to the children so as to present them an alternate view? I'm fairly certain that would bother you. But obviously, if it does, then you are being a hypocrite.

It doesn't just worry me that private schools are keeping kids ignorant about evolution, it's that PUBLIC schools aren't teaching it. The biggest problem is that textbooks are written for the market in Texas. You know, people so fucking stupid they put George W. BUsh AND Rick Perry in the governor's mansion. So not surprising, when writing for these slack-jawed, inbred idiots, we wouldn't want to offend them with the notion that the universe can exist without their magic Sky Man.

The result, American kids are way behind their Asian and European counterparts.

Many teachers, unfortunately, do 'impose' their religion:



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO3NBqT3LBc]School Children Taught to Praise Obama - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JoeB131]

[


Many teachers, unfortunately, do 'impose' their religion:



School Children Taught to Praise Obama - YouTube

Boy, that tape made you guys crazy, didn't it?

NO sillier than this...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxdt_f0hwUg]Jesus Camp Extract Praise Bush - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JoeB131]

Of course, cutout cardboard Bush was probably smarter than the genuine article.