»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Unbelievable
| The Alley |
|
Unbelievable |
|
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648
|
quote: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16417 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41969 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42011 How could this happen in America? And how can any rational, fair, and right thinking person defend these arrests and charges? |
||
| © Copyright 2004 Denise - All Rights Reserved | |||
Ringo 
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
Basically Denise, Orwell was right... Certain pigs a just a bit more equal in the eyes of the law. As for the ACLU, they are willing to stand up and fight for ANYONE'S right to practice their freedoms as long as it isn't a Christian (or especially a Catholic) who is the one being free... Their website itself (and the source of my facts... well some of them) is full of decisions that they were involved in that were to the detriment of the Christians of the world and what they stand for. As for some facts that aren't on their site: In Pa there was a small town where there were NO Jewish families (the type of town where everyone had been there for 10 or 12 generations), the ACLU fought against the boro council and forced them to take down a nativity scene because a person of the Jewish persuasion MIGHT drive through their small town with no connection tio the major interstate. When they tried to argue their 1st Amendment rights and won, the ACLU fought back with Separation of Church and State, and by having the Nativity Scene on the grounds of the boro owned park adjacent to the boro hall, the boro (with a Methodist church, an Episcobal church, and a Catholic church) was in fact sponsoring and promoting the Christian faith. Flash forward 4 years... the ACLU is fighting against a boro that wants to put a Nativity on the boro property (in front of the boro hall), even though there is a minora standing tall and proud on the steps. In another case, a teacher is being ordered to pass his lesson plans past the principal because he is a very devout Christian. He is showing how American history is steeped in religeous tradition (NOT CHRISTIAN traditions, but RELIGEOUS). He is forbidden from showing his students the CONSTITUTION and the DECLARATION of INDEPENDANCE due to the fact that he would be passing out religiously slanted lessons and material. He is ther ONLY teacher in the entire school that is required to submit his lesson plans, and EVERY teacher is handing the students these two important documents... The main difference??? The offending educator is not hiding his light under a bushal and is not following the lead of Peter by denying his Master before the world. It must also be said that our of an entire day's worth of students... only ONE parent has EVER complained. We had more complain when my History teacher refused to teach the Civil War in a 3 week long detail oriented lesson plan (complete with battle maps and unit sizes and casualty counts... the hazards of growing up on a Marine base!!!) This teacher has also had superiors sit in on his classes, and he has NEVER been occused of attempting to convert his students to his way of thinking. As for the four hardened criminals who had the audacity to practice their right to peaceful assembly... you might want to check and see who is representing the Gay-rights organization in the civil suit, or who is going to be siding with them in case these guys and gals fight the charges... I wonder if their initials would be ACLU? Unfortunately, Denise, the ACLU no longer stands for American Civil Liberties Union... it stands for All Christian-hating Liberals Unite. Or maybe that's just me. In the wooden chair Beside my window I wear a face born in the falling rain |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
What did the Christian group say at the gay organization? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Was it government permitted (permit) or government sponsered (money)? |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I agree, Ringo, the ACLU certainly doesn't seem to have a good track record in representing the free speech rights of Christians, does it? City funded, the article says, Brad. Which I really don't understand since we are supposedly experiencing such a terrible budget deficit problem that they are laying off some of us city workers (civilians at the moment). So other than the "parade", called "OutFest", which I've seen in the past, containing X-rated grotesque displays of overt debauchery, I'd still be against the City financing it for budgetary reasons. The articles state that the protestors were reading bible verses, praying, staying on the sidewalk as per their permit, and being peaceful and cooperative with the police, even while being accosted and ridiculed by the "Pink Angels". The prosecutor called the bible verses "fighting words" and qualified as hate speech under the new PA law. The judge agreed. |
||
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
You're right, this is unbelievable. I am a liberal, and a Christian, and I certainly believe when you're the American Civil Liberties Union, I expect them to honor each individual's right to express themselves and their traditions and festivities, regardless of creed, gender, sexuality or political positioning. In my belief, Christmas is not merely an exlusive Christian holiday, like some others perceive it as a holy day that holds no meaning for other faiths. But in my heart I have always believed Christmas as a festival of the human heart. That time of year when we are aware more than any other day that we must continue to raise by at least one octave the conscious notion of peace on earth, to let the light shine upon the fear we all endure and let the healing begin with joy and the innocent nature that resonates in our childlike holiday hearts. Christmas celebrates the birth of Christ, but moreover, the rebirth of the soul. We all have endured the turmoils in our world throughout the year, but this time of year reminds us the light will always shine down on us and redemption is here, and we should set example to the light and harness it in our hearts to one another. Deep down I am grieved and outraged with these examples you and Balladeer have provided, just as I am grieved and outraged with the continuing disgrace to the homeless communities everywhere under sit-lie ordination laws, the high number of Americans (44%) who believe Muslim-Americans civil liberties should be restricted by the U.S government, etc. One quote I've always admired is what Agnes M. Pharo said, "What is Christmas? It is tenderness for the past, courage for the present, hope for the future. It is a fervent wish that every cup may overflow with blessings rich and eternal, and that every path may lead to peace." All throughout the spectrum, from the uncivil acts on Christian-gay relationships by the ACLU to the homeless and to Muslims and other minorities, etc, it is clear so much still needs to be done.  Love, Noah Eaton "You'll find something that's enough to keep you But if the bright lights don't receive you You should turn yourself around and come back home" MB20 [This message has been edited by Mistletoe Angel (12-26-2004 07:29 PM).] |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I'm with you, Denise. I'm beginning to feel like the fellow who said he had read so much about the ill effects of drinking that he decided to quit reading. I'm beginning to feel the same way about the news....  |
||
|
Larry C
since 2001-09-10
Posts 10286United States |
'deer, What took you so long? I quit subscribing to the newspaper and reading it cover to cover twenty years ago. No regrets! But I agree with Denise this seems an atrosity all it's own. Though I must say as Christians we have not done well demonstrating God's love to the homosexual community. Which I think can and should be done without condoning the practice. If tears could build a stairway and memories a lane, I'd walk right up to heaven and bring you home again. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Yet more biased reporting. At the very least, the articles should have started, "In Philadelphia, four alleged Christians ..." Thinking there just might be a bit more to the story than was being told, I did a Google search on "philadelphia repent america." Though most of the results were just as biased as the quoted story, taken collectively, a pattern began to emerge. Michael Marcavage, director of Repent America, has pretty much made a career of in-your-face counter-demonstrations, being arrested in front of abortion clinics, evicted forcibly from the 2nd Annual Phillies Gay Day ball game, convicted of obstruction for preaching using amplification in front of "Condom Kingdom" (second offense), held and committed to the psychiatric ward of Temple University for protesting a school play that depicted Jesus as a homosexual, spent 30 hours in jail after being arrested across the street from Madison Square Garden for bringing a pro-life message to the Republican Convention, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. "We do what God is calling us to do," Michael Marcavage told the Philadelphia Gay News last week. "If it means breaking the law, we do that." I couldn't find a single unbiased report of what actually happened during the Gay Pride's OutFest celebrations, but I have to suspect the arrests were as much a response to PAST behavior as to events that took place that day. The alleged Christians were told by police to leave. They didn't. It doesn't legally matter whether the police were right or wrong to disperse the group, because the failure to comply was sufficient justification for immediate arrest. Those who bring an anti-gay message into the heart of a gay event, clearly aren't there to win converts. At what point does free speech become nothing but a tactic to disrupt the speech of others? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
At what point does free speech become nothing but a tactic to disrupt the speech of others? hmmm...that certainly brings up some food for thought, Ron. Would that mean that any person or group that disagrees with the subject of an event should be banned or arrested because they could be disruptive to the message of the event? Therefore blacks peacefully protesting a KKK rally should be arrested or banned? Democrats protesting the RNC or Republicans protesting the DNC or right to life groups outside of an abortion clinic or a variety of other topics we could come up with...these people should be arrested because of their views which are negative to the function at hand? If these people were screaming or yelling or using disruptive tactics I can see the issue but if they were peacefully doing their own thing and the "disruptiveness" was nothing more than their presence there, would their arrest be justifiable? I am not disputing your thoughts, Ron.I'm just saying that it does indeed pose some interesting food for thought, no? (btw, leaving in the am for two days so I won't be ignoring the conversation, just won't be around. I'll check in when I get back) |
||
|
Skyfyre Senior Member
since 1999-08-15
Posts 1906Sitting in Michael's Lap |
Agreed completely, Ron. Looks to me like these Repent America folks went looking for trouble, and found it. It seems to me like these "Christian" groups need to concentrate more on the love and understanding part of Christianity, and leave the judgement to God. Converts aren't won by criticism, but by compassion. Reading the article and seeing homosexuals referred to as "sexually abberant" doesn't sound terribly Christian to me. Not that I think someone can be "converted" from homosexuality. What did they think, some guy at the OutFest was gonna run up and say "Thank God you were here! I was gay, but now I'm cured!!" As for the ACLU, last I knew they were a private agency - they can represent whomever and whatever they want. I don't think they'd represent a troupe of gay men who got arrested going into a Christian function in costume and singing YMCA at the top of their lungs, either. quote: Absolutely. Just like I'd expect the police to arrest me or anyone else for going to any public (or private, for that matter) gathering and nearly incinting a riot by telling the people there that they were all evil and wicked for being what they are. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
You're right, Mike. I guess any time one person's freedoms impedes another's, there's going to be lots of issues to consider. In this particular instance, judging only by past behaviors, I'm guessing the protesters were less than peaceful, and much less than cooperative with police. Being heard probably shouldn't be a function of how loudly a bull horn can be cranked to drown the opposition. That would seem to be SOP for Marcavage and his team. This instance aside, however, there's still much to consider. If I spend time and money organizing an event, should I be forced to provide a venue at my event for my opposition? Even though they spent no money or time of their own? Yet, do we really want to promote a world where being heard has to carry a price tag (forgetting for a moment, of course, that such a world happens to be where we live). Personally, I think we all have the right to protest. I'm not so sure we should expect to use someone else's stage to do it. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
But does it changes things when that "other person's stage" is a public street, paid for by public tax money? |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
If it was a private stage, Pete, I don't think there would be any questions to ponder. My house, my rules. I was, however, assuming a public venue, specifically public access. That might be the street outside an abortion clinic or, as was the case in this thread, a public demonstration or rally. Yes, the streets are open to everyone, but that certainly doesn't mean you can try to forcibly park your car where mine is already sitting. Crunch! Your right of access has to be limited by my right of access, else chaos ensues. Too, while the streets are paid by government taxes, that is not necessarily the largest cost involved in building a "stage." Attracting an audience can be costly and time-consuming. Should that audience then belong to both sides of an issue? I honestly don't know. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Funny you should mention that Ron. Last night, after reading in Balladeer's corresponding thread: "A recent winter parade in Denver looked very much like a Christmas event, except for one small thing: Every reference to Christmas was banned Parade? Sounds like a public place to me..." I got to wondering why a Christian would even want Christ sitting next to Santa in a parade. And as I tend to bumblebee graze in my thought processes, naturally I thought of the various parades that will soon be rolling through the streets of New Orleans, depicting some of the Greco-Roman Gods, most notoriously Bacchus. I then tried to envision a "Krewe of Christ". Um, it'll never happen. The city would never grant a permit to such an event, simply because it would incite riots and be impossible to police. (And yet, permits are granted to religious procession all the time--consider that New Orleans is also a very Catholic city, and we have many such events dedicated to various Saints.) But a parade of such a scale as the others would open up the door to mockery. No one wants to see their religion parodied. And yet, there does happen to be a Krewe of Druids that does just that. And the druids I know (and yes, I know druids, sighs and smiles) aren't the least bit miffed by it, just more amused that a parade boasting their name and religious beliefs got it all so woefully wrong. And still further in my musings, I tried to imagine a country where Wicca had become the mainstrain religion. Would we then feel compelled to clean up the Holy Sabbat of Samhein? (Halloween to most of you.) And then I start reading (in a vain effort to sleep, about the history of the Roman Empire) and just how much political trouble the various Ceasars had with state sponsored religions. I'm no less confused today then I was yesterday, except on one point: Perhaps our forefathers took into account the difficulty of politics and religion when they wrote that bit that separated church and state, and it's prolly a very good thing that they did. (and I swear I have a brain in there somewhere)  |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
quote: Hmmmm...religious groups protesting on government streets... Could one call this a conundrum? If not, what happened to separation of church and state? If a religious event [organized praying, for whatever reason] can happen on government streets, and the government runs the schools and allows religious activities on the streets, ergo, I can pray in school, right? ARGH...  |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
You can pray in school. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I know I did.  |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Of course, you can pray in school, Kari. But do you really want a teacher or principle telling you that you can? Or when and to whom? THAT is the issue. Government is composed of people, making it perhaps a bit unrealistic to think we can ever wholly separate church and state. What we try, instead, is to isolate any hint of support by the state for a specific religion. The students can pray. The teachers can't. (And they probably need the benefit of prayers more than most.)  |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Why was the city funding “a gay celebration”? Did it before or subsequently fund a “straight celebration”? How about a celebration of old men who sleep with young women? [This message has been edited by Huan Yi (12-28-2004 12:22 AM).] |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Actually John, in New Orleans, the answer to all is: "yes" |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I honestly don't know, John. We do have a large gay community and many of them in high places, so maybe it's politically motivated, the old "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours"? I guess the City can fund anything it wishes to fund. It sure would be nice if the citizens of the City would have a say in how its tax dollars are spent, especially when the Mayor is crying poor mouth every day and laying off workers and taking over 5 months to finally give us a contract (as bad as it is, at least we finally have one). When things are this bad financially I think every non-essential should be voted on. There's money for gay festivals and two brand spanking new stadiums (costing the citizens millions and most of us can't even afford the price of a ticket to the games played there), and for a multi-million dollar expansion of the Central Library, and for whatever else strikes the fancy of the current powers-that-be. If the protestors were asked to leave by police and didn't, they deserved to be arrested...for failure to disperse. But I wonder who ordered the police to order the protestors to leave and why? During the anti-war demonstrations several times over the past two summers, when virtually the entire down town district was shut down by grid-lock due to protestors lying in the streets and blocking traffic (against the terms of their permit), the police were ordered not to interfere and to let them continue violating the law, despite the severe stress and inconvenience it caused to the folks just trying to get to and from work. Again I wonder by whom and why? Seems to be a double standard to me, selective enforcement of the rules? One group is given the wink of any eye, a pass, thereby having the effect of encouraging further disruption and law breaking, and the other charged with a felony? I also don't like the idea of my tax dollars funding something that contains X-rated acts performed in public. Geeze, didn't there used to be a law against that? Even if these displays are not "officially sanctioned", they know it happens, and no one ever gets arrested for it either. It seems to me the bottom line is in whom is offended by something. It's okay to offend folks who are appalled by X-rated public displays of lewd acts (we can just close our eyes and go away, afterall, and learn tolerance?), but don't quote bible verses to gay folks (whom I guess can't close their ears and learn tolerance?) My main problem with the incident was that the prosecutor and judge declared that the bible verses that were read were "fighting words" and only those who were caught on tape reading from the bible were the ones who are subject to the "hate crimes" felony charge. The other 7 protestors weren't. I think that sets a very dangerous precedent for freedom of religion and freedom of speech. But it wouldn't surprise me if that's the reasoning behind, and purpose of, these charges. Some people, and/or group, want a precedent set regarding the quoting of the bible. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: While that's certainly a darn good question, John, it's also an entirely separate one. We could also talk about police brutality or, as Denise appears to want, poor fiscal management, or probably a hundred others valid complaints, but muddying the waters seldom seems to accomplish much. Was city funding of the event germane to the protestors breaking the law? I don't think it was. quote: You guys don't vote in Pennsylvania, Denise? Gee, maybe y'all should start. Or, better yet, maybe you should consider running for office yourself? quote: Should the Bible be given greater legal significance than the Koran, Denise? Than the Book of Mormons? How about Darwin's "The Origin of Species?" Do you really think I couldn't quote something from each of those books that would be fighting words to many? The Bible not only can be used to incite hate and anger, Denise, it usually is. There are far more Christians professing love, I'm afraid, than there are actually practicing it. |
||
|
Titia Geertman Member Ascendant
since 2001-05-07
Posts 5182Netherlands |
I think one certainly must consider norms and values when using the right of free speech and see the perspective in wich it is used. There certainly is a great difference in disrupting a 'party' of terrorists/pornographers or disrupting a party of gay people in my opinion. I can't express myself very well in English but, as an example: would I be using my right of free speech in a proper way if I would've disrupted a church Christmas celebration, just because I don't believe in a God??? I think the moment I should do that, I would be crossing a line of tolerance and free expression of religion. Everybody is free to think and act as they please, unless their aim is to hurt other people. Gay people's aim is not primarily to hurt other people, so what gives Christian people the right to disrupt their party. There's nothing wrong with pornography either as long as it sticks to consenting adults. I think Christianity and Islam are the most agressive, surpressing and non tolerant religions on earth and the moment people act surpressively in one way or other towards other people under the flag of their religion, they're wrong - in my eyes anyway. Would you really have come in here posting in the same way if the article had read: 'four gay people are arrested because they've disrupted a Christian celebration party'??? I dare to think not. Like scattered leaves...my words will flow |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
"Why was the city funding “a gay celebration”?" Wow. That's really a problem? Seriously, I never thought it was. While I'm not sure if New Orleans actually funds The Southern Decadence festival, (a kind of Gay Mardi Gras) it certainly promotes it. They also promote The Essence Festival (which is sort of the same thing that caters to people of color). I guess I should stay out of these discussions. I really do live on another planet.  And the funny thing is, I never bothered to question that, and now that I have--it still doesn't bother me. And I was considering MOVING. HA.I don't think so. I barely know how to behave here.  |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
i have to admit i find the whole thing amusing. the irony of it all. after 364 days of neo-cons, the christian reich, and other forms of moral mafia dictating how people should live their lives, it's hard for many to sympathize with cries of victimhood. im not saying i agree with the pc agenda, i'm just amused by the outrage and disbelief now that the boot is on the other foot. call it unfair but there are many who'd call it kharma or just deserts. especially with christian/right wing 'morality' being forced on everything, ranging from what people can watch/read/listen to, to 'legal' definitions of what constitute marriage and/or life. i'm not agreeing with the pc agenda, PCism is a noble cause that too often spirals out of control. but that only because things tend to balance out. therefore in retaliation to the reich agendas, enter pc thugs. balance. and with all the things to be up in arms with this year with regards to government hypocrisy/stupidity/interference. this is the one that gets most of you riled? sighs..all these silly agendas. but then i suppose i have my own, exposing hypocrisy, which includes my own since i'd swore off responding or posting 'opinions' here. sighs..silly humans |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Is funding a celebration tantamount to promoting the subject being celebrated? |
||
|
Skyfyre Senior Member
since 1999-08-15
Posts 1906Sitting in Michael's Lap |
quote: For the same reason that they fund Black History or Hispanic History Month? Being gay is not a choice, or a "lifestyle" any more than being black or Hispanic is a lifestyle. The X-rated events in public I can certainly agree with Denise about, however while Serenity brings up the subject of Mardi Gras, how many people are arrested for the (many) heterosexual X-rated events that occur there? Definitely a double standard at work there, little different, if a bit subtler, than separate bathrooms or water fountains for gays. |
||
|
Tim Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794 |
"after 364 days of neo-cons, the christian reich, and other forms of moral mafia." I would tend to agree that there is more than enough hypocrisy and bigotry to go around... |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
We're basically like Massachusetts here, particularly Philadelphia, Ron. If you have a Democratic ideology, you're in whether you're an imbecile or not. And I can't run for office. I'm a civil servant, it's against the "rules" of the Home Rule Charter and Civil Service Regulations. And since I'm a conservative I wouldn't win anyway, so why bother? I think people should be able to freely quote from any book that they please to quote from in public venues without fear of being charged with a hate crime felony, whether it's the Bible, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, or Darwin's Origin of the Species, just as folks are free to disagree with whatever is being quoted. And telling someone what they may not want to hear does not necessarily mean it is being done to incite hatred and anger. It can sometimes be done as an act of love, an attempt to show someone the error of their ways. Now even though that may anger the person hearing it, it doesn't mean that was the intent of the speaker. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
quote: Why Linda? I guess I'm not following you. Are the gays in Mardi Gras being arrested for lewd acts in public whereas the straights are not? I personally find it equally appalling, no matter who is performing such acts in public. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Skyfyre, I know this getting off the track but: ‘Being gay is not a choice, or a "lifestyle"’ Please provide a link to the science supporting this. http://salmon.psy.plym.ac.uk/year1/psychobiology_site_backups/homosexuality-debate/choice.html |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
quote: Tim, if you choose to quote and label me i hope you at least took the time to read the entire post. you'd find that i'm clearly unimpressed with hypocrisy from all angles including my own quote: |
||
|
Tim Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794 |
then I would say we are both unimpressed. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
and youre entitled to be, just as long as its for the right reasons. condemnation of the christian reich and neo-cons is not an attack on all christians or conservatives. they are specific factions that attempt to dictate how life is lived by everyone else, the flipside, PC thugism. neither side sees their hypocrisy and a vicious cycle is continuously fed. its natural to express outrage and opinion, but its also important to find out the reasons why things happen. shrugs |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
In previous discussions concerning civil disobedience, of those offering opinions on its acceptability as a valid form of protest, I believe that I was one of the few, if not the only one, who deemed it unacceptable, that a line was crossed when protest turned to civil disobedience. Now it seems that civil disobedience is viewed here as an unacceptable form of protest, is that right? (I agree), and so much so that it even invalidates a person's claim of being a genuine Christian, that they can only be alleged Christians? (I disagree.) Or is it that civil disobedience is viewed to be a perfectly acceptable form of protest for basically everyone else, except when committed by these so-called alleged Christians at abortion clinics, and gay festivals and Condom Kingdom, and a school play depicting Jesus as a homosexual? And why is a play depicting Jesus as anything allowed in a school? It's okay as long as it is one that depicts him as a homosexual, but not okay if it depicts him as the Savior born in a manger? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Denise, Civil disobedience is okay. It also means you go to jail if you practice it. Are you sure you understand the term? |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Yep, I understand the term, Brad, just don't agree with you that it is okay. If it were okay, no one would go to jail for practicing it, would they? And not all those who practice it go to jail, do they? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
But the whole point of civil disobedience is to go to jail (or be punished in one way or another). This is done in order to protest the law being broken, to show the absurdity of the law itself. Which law were these people protesting? |
||
|
Skyfyre Senior Member
since 1999-08-15
Posts 1906Sitting in Michael's Lap |
quote: There are those, however, that would condemn the one while condoning the other, if not overtly. I commend you for not being one of them. quote: I'm afraid I can't. Well, actually I probably could, but I am unconvinced that psychology as a science can draw any supportable conclusions. It can document trends within a group or a population, or even over a number of years, but it is at best an inexact science with many "camps" who will draw the opposite, or at least incomparably disparate, conclusions from the same data. We are eons from understanding the human mind well enough to document its working with any sort of surety. Add to that the touchiness of the subject ("Excuse me Mr/Ms homosexual, would you mind if I studied you to see if you were born gay or just "decided" to be sexually abberrant?") and you've got a huge basis for suppositions, from likely to downright improbable, but nothing to support an actual scientific theory. I base my statements on personal experience and the experiences of those close to me who are truly homosexual. I say "truly" because there are those who experiment with same-sex unions because they are curious or because it's "cool," but I don't consider them homosexual. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I didn't mean to leave Linda holding the bag like that. For the record though, I have nothing but admiration for the city of New Orleans as the job that they do as they balance crowd control and protest is simply remarkable, if not downright commendable. But I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that Southern Decadence (a secondary celebration from Mardi Gras, specifically touted to celebrate the gay and lesbian lifestyle) has of recent years been targeted by several Christian protest groups, one of which seems to be profiting from the resulting publicity quite nicely I might add. Sadly, last year, the resulting hostile confrontation came to a violent head, as a tourist was shot by a member of this particularly vocal group after being mistaken for one of the gay participants. I'm quite certain, Denise that you don't condone such acts as civil disobedience, no more than any sane person would condone the bombing of a women's clinic in order to protest abortion. However, New Orleans rather infamous cry of "Show us your um, wits" is not only tolerated, but has become a source of amusement throughout the world. Whereas, the harassment of homosexuals (like Linda I have only the stories related to me by my homosexual friends to back that up) is also legendary. But for the most part, I think New Orleans does a fine job of tolerance and impartiality, as evidenced by our very large and robustly visible gay community. (er...yeah, sometimes very visable, but last I heard, it's okay for men to show their wits.)  What amazes me though, is that in order to be offended by the activities, one would have to attend. I'm proud to say there is a Christian protest group that proudly marches through the streets of the French Quarter every Fat Tuesday, carrying a cross, ministering and spreading the gospel. They have done this without fail for the past twenty years at least. Ironically, they have become a part of the spectacle that they are protesting. Peace to all. And btw? Should any of you be planning to visit our decadent city this upcoming Carnival season, you CAN and might very well be arrested for public nudity, should you try to, um, bargain for your beads. (Just buy 'em folks, there's only one place in New Orleans where the food is bad, and that's central lock up.) Although statistically, most arrests for nudity are due to public urination. (Ain't no place to pee on Mardi Gras Day.) and now, gee, after this description, who could pass up a party like that?  |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I'd say they were protesting against the police order that they disperse by not dispersing, Brad, if that actually is what happened? The subsequent charges that were leveled against them by the prosecutor and judge misusing the new PA hate crimes law is what strikes me as outrageous. They could have appropriately been charged with just failure to disperse. It's a sad day for America when peaceful protestors can't assemble in public and read bible verses without facing a felony charge that carries a possible sentence of 47 years in prison. The whole incident was on tape and only those caught on tape reading from the bible were charged with the felony. And it was not even the protestors who were being abusive and hateful, it was some of the participants in OutFest who reacted that way when hearing the bible verses, and that also is on tape, but the ones who were really being hateful and abusive were not arrested. I guess it's okay to be hateful and abusive to folks who aren't classified as one of the "protected groups" under the hate crimes law. I guess four Christians reading the bible on one small section of sidewalk as a huge celebratory extravaganza of a parade that stretched for miles marched by (with a noise level that could drown out any bullhorn, if there was one) was just way too much of an assault on the sensibilities of some. If these charges stand, what makes us any different than Communist China, or some other repressive regime? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: I can't comment on that, but I'm not a big fan of hate crime legislation either (more because I don't really understand how they work than anything else). Maybe they should have been charged with intent to incite a riot (which is not covered by the 1st amendment). Given the homework Ron did, this is probably what happened. The funny part in all of this is the outrage that we have over one instance. Bible reading, street preaching, were everywhere when I grew up (and I grew up in the evil, secular, blue state, California ). The last time I was in the states, we sat and listened to a man who had a pretty good voice (though his rhetorical skill weren't that great, he kept reiterating that if we didn't do what he said, we were going to go to hell and all that other stuff).It was a good show. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
It's certainly a different world that we live in today. And I think intent is not an easy thing to ascertain. Who knows what the intent of a person's heart is, with any degree of certainty? These folks could very well have been acting according their conscience to be a presence, a non-violent presence, to at least take a stand for the biblical principles of morality that they believe in, whether they are jeered and scoffed at or ignored. I've done the same at a pro-life rally. No violence, no evil intent, no hate, just a presence to take a stand against the loss of life of millions of unborn babies, with prayer and reading of bible verses. If such a presence makes even one woman think twice and prevents even one abortion, then that presence, that voice, has served a good end. I expected a little more outrage over the charges leveled in this incident, the obvious misuse of the hate crimes law in an attempt to silence a message that some don't want to hear. I guess no one will have to worry about those pesky activist Christians raining on their parade next year. Whether one agrees with the message presented, or even the wisdom of the venue that was chosen, I think it is a serious blow to freedom of religion and speech. And if assaults on freedom of religion and speech like this are allowed to occur, it won't end with just the Christians losing their freedom of expression. That will just be the beginning. |
||
|
ice Member Elite
since 2003-05-17
Posts 3404Pennsylvania |
If the Christian "protestors" were reading out loud any of the following scriptures, then it is my opinion that they should have been arrested for inciting a riot. Leviticus 18:22 Leviticus 20:13 Deuteronomy 23:17 Romans 1:26-27: I Corinthians 6:9: The Leviticus scriptures seem most condemning of homosexual activity..even calling for the death of practicing homosexuals.. Lev 20:13 (KJV) If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them. If they read Lev. 20:13 out loud, I consider it a hate message and think they should be prosecuted as such, in any way that the law provides. JMHO Does anyone know what passages were being read, and how it was presented? What was on the banners that were being waved? Was the legal rally carried on by the "Out" group physically interrupted in any way by the "protestors"? JMHO _________ice ><> |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I don't know the exact details, ice. I can't seem to be able to find them. They seem to be a pretty well-kept secret. I didn't even find out about the incident in the local papers, but online. I'm pretty sure though that it would have made the front page headlines if a group were protesting and calling for the blood of homosexuals. If I can find out any more details, I'll let you know. The Book of Leviticus contains the laws and the prescribed punishments for the breaking of those laws for the citizens of the Nation of Israel back in those times. They never pertained to the other nations, and you won't find those penalties called for in the New Testament pages, other than the general statement of fact that the wages of sin is death (the physical death that we will all experience due to the effects of sin and the spiritual death that is ours until we receive life through Christ). In Romans and Corinthians, homosexuality is among a long list of other things described as sins, like adultery, idolatry, cheating, thieving, envy, murder, pride, greed, drunkeness, disobedience to parents, etc., etc., the list so long that no one is excluded, which I think is the point, that we all need the forgiveness of God. None of us is righteous and good in and of ourselves, nor can we be, that we need Christ's righteousness. I think that's the central message of Christianity. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
‘The California atheist who unsuccessfully sued to get the phrase "under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance is back with a new version of the same suit and another one seeking to prevent members of the clergy from praying at President Bush's inauguration, reports Religion News Service. Dr. Michael Newdow refiled the pledge suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on Monday. In the new case, Newdow has been joined in the suit by three families who include atheists and claim they are offended "to have their government and its agents advocating for a religious view they each specifically decry." Newdow says he also filed suit in a Washington district court to try to stop clergy from uttering prayers at Bush's Jan. 20 inauguration. He said in the filing that such prayers make him feel like a "second-class citizen."’ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,143822,00.html |
||
|
LeeJ Member Patricius
since 2003-06-19
Posts 13296 |
I'm afraid this will continue until these people who are being sued, stand up and sue right back....I'm so sick of being a minority with this politically correct business...it's really starting to go way overboard...talk about from one extreme to the next???? You know, if this continues...there will be a civil war... I'm so sorry for those people who were praying....what next? |
||
|
LeeJ Member Patricius
since 2003-06-19
Posts 13296 |
I forgot to add this in my last comment and wanted to sorry... I know how some of you feel about Christians...but they're not all bad...and if you consider the concept, you can't give what you haven't known, well, perhaps you might go easier on them.... Believe me, I was once married to A so called born again Christian...it curled my skin...to see him rather be right, then his concern for human kind. But....consider, it is all they know, and that belief has been drilled into them since childhood...narrow minded as they might seem, they are people to, and we must remember to consider that. I know, I know, the logic sometimes just is so absent...just the other day, this same man said to a mutual friend of ours...."I'm concerned about you...you need to associate with born again Christians".....shhhheessshhhh, he's turned into his mother....but long story short...it is all he knows...which might not excuse they're actions, but certainly might help to close the gap...they honestly believe they are doing good...and they're is nothing wrong with structured religion if you believe in it...but...it turned me off, and then some...have a difficult time dealing with that kind of narrow mindedness myself. But in the same, again....lack of education...in this country and a cultural conditioning. They've done a lot of good, and there are a lot of good people who believe that organized religion works.... I don't believe they are all bad, just simply a human being searching for something to believe in....aren't we all? And to be quit honest, people need to fight for their beliefs...even if they're wrong...I just wish more of us would be opened minded while we're at it...ya know? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
So Christians should be pitied? |
||
|
LeeJ Member Patricius
since 2003-06-19
Posts 13296 |
No Brad, not pitied...basically, trying to reinterate, they are like any other human being...sadly lost in their belief...despite perhaps the ability to realize, anything is possible... Oh I don't know, I just think if we'd be more patient with each other, before blame and pointing fingers, we'd all be able to learn something? Let me sum it up this way....They are doing the best that they possibly can do...due to conditioning by their parents and their human interritation of the Bible. If you sit back and watch...people can only give what they know...and none of us are perfect...not to mention those that from the beginning of time, want to control, for lust of whatever their obsession...? Point being, we should be much farther along and we're regressing, dividing ourselves by organized whatevers...man made quick fixes and beliefs... Not pity, but perhaps a better understanding, which might also open doors to a more realistic way of thinking...collaberating ideas...perspectives....until one day maybe, we begin to learn from experience...by understanding...we're all searching for something mystical, magical, something which exsists far beyond our imagination, which is an entity of all goodness...meek and right, who will set things straight.... I suppose the more I grow, the more I become agnostic...can you imagine, once a Sunday School Teacher and Born Again Christian...yup...that was me.... I just cannot let go of the fact, that indeed the Bible was written by Human Beings, capable to be led by the thirst of power, control, perhaps, not even realizing. Hey, I've had some really strange dreams to, that came true...detail for detail...but does that make me a profit? I think not....not by any means.... I just think and belief it is only through understanding, patience, and humbleness, that we grow closer to the truth...whose to really say? Who really knows, except for those who have passed on before us.... I can't wait to see what's there, when I get there, but to be honest, I'm not pushing to be first in line...I think and believe this is just one plain into the next, and the next after that? Perhaps I'm the one, whose got it all wrong? Not pity, but perhaps a learning of sorts, through understanding? |
||
|
JoshG Member
since 2004-11-16
Posts 127TX, USA |
"I'm a closet beastialitist. I didn't choose this lifestyle, but rather was born into it. I am now of age and want to start holding parades and parties in your streets and schools. I want to publicly display my lifestyle and make others of my kind comfortable with the life they have to live. (the note on the door of the school: Please keep all pets and animals on a tight leash or enter at your own risk)" An interesting tidbit of information. One day this is the battle we will be fighting. Maybe one day we will all understand that Freedom is not ever and never will be free. It will cost us our souls. |
||
|
LeeJ Member Patricius
since 2003-06-19
Posts 13296 |
Josh Point well taken This is all so complex, and yet, could be so simple...there is though, I believe, a time for things...things to be talked about, acted out and displayed in the privacy of one's own home... |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Hmmm, perhaps, I just misunderstand you. I mean the difference between, "Because I'm a Christian, I must do this." And, "Before I was a Christian, I wouldn't do this, but now I will because I want to." |
||
|
JoshG Member
since 2004-11-16
Posts 127TX, USA |
My point is that somewhere we must all stand for something or we will fall for anything. We are falling and will continue to fall, it is the way of humanity. There is nothing we can do to stop it, but we can at least slow it down. Humans are sick and demented creatures. We take, consume, digest and spit out every resource we identify. We spend tons of time trying to cope with our sick nature and thus turn to other habit to satisfy. Those habits turn into more sick nature and the process repeats itself. The problem I have is that we are using "American Freedom" as a basis for argument and justification. The mass desensitation of humanity. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Here are the latest articles I've found. The issue isn't whether you agree with their message, agree with their beliefs, or agree with their methods. The only issues here are freedom of religion and freedom of speech. quote: http://www.delcotimes.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13749114&BRD=1675&PAG=461&dept_id=18171&rfi=8 quote: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42370 |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
It's good, Denise, that you were able to find some solid, unbiased reports. It sure would be nice, though, to see the facts before they were twisted by so much fear and hatred. Yes, the issues are about freedom of speech, but that doesn't necessarily make them any simpler. You may have the right to park your car on a public street, but that doesn't mean you can choose a spot already occupied. They don't usually call that freedom, Denise, they call it a collision. When you bring a bullhorn to someone else's event, you're not just trying to be heard. You're trying to be heard at the expense of others being heard. That, too, is called a collision. |
||
|
~DreamChild~ Senior Member
since 2001-04-23
Posts 544in your dreams |
seems to me that Christianity is the only religion that ISN'T protected by the constitution. that's no surprise though. the bibe tells of persecution that christians will endure. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I wouldn't call a reporter from a neighboring local community newspaper a biased source, Ron. It's not a church newspaper and he isn't a representative of a church or an ideology and nowhere does he even identify himself as a christian. The public sidewalks are not occupied parking spaces, they are open to everyone, to be shared by everyone, unless they are cordoned off by a court injunction, which they weren't. Any two opposing views could result in a collision. Does that mean then that protestors should not be free to exercise their right of freedom of speech at or near events organized by groups with whom they ideologically disagree? Should freedom of speech only be utilized when you are agreeing with someone else? Somehow, I don't think that was the intention. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Are you honestly going to tell me this writer was reporting facts and not editorializing, Denise? His entire piece drips with bias. And that's fine, because editorials definitely have a place, but let's please not pretend it's something it's not. quote: It's called an analogy, Denise. And if I happen to be standing on the sidewalk at the time, then it IS occupied, and I'd very much appreciate if you didn't step on my toes in your haste to yell in my ear (that's an analogy, too, by the way). quote: You an I clearly have opposing views, Denise, yet there is no collision. If I took a metaphorical bullhorn, however, and used it to deprive you of your chance to post, I suspect you'd have a much better idea of what a collision is. Marcavage has NEVER evidenced interest in freedom of speech. On the contrary, what he wants is the right to yell louder than the other guy, disrupting the rights of anyone who disagrees with his own views. He's repeated the same pattern over and over, right down to the bullhorn that got him in trouble at the Condom Kingdom, and I think it's clear that someone finally got tired of it. He's "playing" the system, confident he's smart enough to get away with it, and frankly, I honestly hope he gets his fingers burnt. If Marcavage truly wants to exercise his freedom of speech, he should spend a couple of bucks and organize his own events. Of course, that would require some honest effort, and there is always the danger he would discover (shudder) no one wants to hear what he has to say. As long as he's disrupting others' events, yelling at people he KNOWS disagree with him, Marcavage never has to test his own convictions. Is his message compelling enough to draw an audience? I don't think he has the courage to find out. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
If some municipality funded a public Outfest and parade for deer hunters, and members of the Buddhist faith or members of PETA demonstrated their opposition in view and within hearing nearby, without physically obstructing the proceedings, would the police force of the municipality be right in arresting them, and would the municipality’s prosecutor be right in bringing charges against them? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: Yes and yes. Apparently you haven't been around animal rights activists recently (Come to think of it, neither have I). |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Brad, And the Buddhists? |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: If they're within hearing, do they really need a bullhorn? There is absolutely nothing wrong with protesting, but Marcavage apparently isn't content to protest. His pattern is one of designed disruption. quote: For protesting? No. For trying to provoke the opposition or incite violence? Quite possibly. For refusing to follow the legal directions of the police? Absolutely. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Maybe I can call the DA's office to get the raw facts of the incident? Maybe they will be more forthcoming with me than they seem to be with the press? The most important aspect of the article, to me, was the point of the silence of the ACLU, and the fact that the ACLU's website referenced freedom of speech as the first freedom mentioned in the Bill of Rights, completely ignoring that freedom of religion is actually the first right mentioned (I can't believe that this faux pas is due to their lack of knowledge of the First Amendment, do you? ). Those pieces of information seem like facts to me, not editorializing. I would think that most protestors tend to be disruptive to draw attention to their words, Ron. I'm not defending that, anymore than I defend the anti-war protestors who blocked traffic for most of the day one day last summer and the summer before (and who were not arrested, by the way, even though that was a clear violation of the permit...go figure). If protestors are not obeying the law through disruptive behavior they should be arrested. I don't have a problem with that. My problem with this incident is with what they are being charged. That is where the free speech issue is being violated, in my opinion. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
I'm curious, Denise, if you've seen the ACLU reference in question? Since you think it's important, perhaps it would be best if it was directly cited. |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
Actually Denise, since both the freedom of religion and speech issues are addressed in the First Amendment, I fail to see your point of contention with the ACLU's statement. Freedom of speech IS a First Amendment issue. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Here's the first amendment: quote: I can't find the quote on the ACLU homepage, I did find this: quote: Anybody know where that quote is? |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeechMain.cfm Kacy, their statement says that freedom of speech is the first right mentioned in the First Amendment. It's not true. And they know it's not true. They are supposed to be the experts, the guys who look after our rights. That is my problem with it. And to boot they conveniently left out any mention of freedom of religion at all. They mentioned every one but that one. [This message has been edited by Denise (01-17-2005 09:25 PM).] |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Hmmm, I see it as a rhetorical trick, (arguable, I suppose, but not very convincing). Still, given that it has been brought up: Which is the most important: Government shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, shall make no law prohibiting the exercise of religion, or no law abridging free speech? |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I see it as an elevating of the freedom of speech right and a downplaying of the freedom of religion right by the ACLU, their 'spin', if you will, Brad. If someone's main source for information about their rights is the ACLU, they would be led to believe that freedom of speech is actually the first right mentioned and therefore perhaps the most important, which seems to be what they are trying to convey with "It is probably no accident that..."? quote: They are all equally important, not one more important than the other, and none can really exist without all being held equally in regard, in my opinion. Their above statement should read, to accurately reflect the spirit of the First Amendment: quote: [This message has been edited by Denise (01-17-2005 09:32 PM).] |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
You're right, Denise. They definitely got it wrong, and should be encouraged to correct it. I wouldn't consider it a conspiracy, however, because Brad's quotation above is only one of many such references to religious freedom that are mentioned on the ACLU site. And it's not just lip-service, either, because the separation of church and state has historically been one of their most active battlegrounds. Some, I think, have fervently WISHED the ACLU would forget what the First Amendment says about religion, but I'm certainly glad to see you're not one of them. I think this is an isolated instance, as Brad said, a bit of rhetoric, but I nonetheless think you are right. We should all write to the ACLU, urging them to correct this obvious mistake and to re-double their efforts on the religious front. |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 Aside from that, taken from the very very bottom of their website, I couldn't find contact addresses or emails, not even to the webmaster. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
Alicat there's a 'Local ACLU' section with local addresses/contact info and there is a Feedback section for FAQs and email |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
Saw those, Aenimal, but figured to get website changes, you pretty much had to contact the corporation/webmaster directly. On the feedback page, perhaps I just didn't find what I was looking for. What I did see was links for ACLU members or those who desire to become members, but not ones for direct contact/feedback. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
on the feedback page: "Among the types of feedback we most especially welcome are corrections and suggestions for our site and reports of how you made use of the information you found here. And of course, we want to know immediately if you experience technical problems with our web site. If your question or concern was not listed, please complete our online feedback form" |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
Ah, thanks Aenimal. Time to upgrade this system and my glasses. Did manage to send along the suggestion that the ACLU webmasters correct their Freedom of Speech page. |
||
|
Aenimal Member Rara Avis
since 2002-11-18
Posts 7350the ass-end of space |
lol no problem Ali |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
Well, seems this story is finally getting some attention. Hannity and Colmes will have a segment on it tonight. Now, I don't normally watch that show, though they do have some good discussions. The reason being those rude people who shout down and speak over those with whom they disagree, including the hosts from time to time. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Message sent. Am I an 'activist' now? I also suggested that they begin to defend against freedom of religious exercise infringements as zealosly as they do with what they perceive to be separation of church and state issues. They state, at least, that they believe that it is the protection of both that guarantees religious liberty. quote: http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLibertyMain.cfm And I told them that I would be watching the webpage for the needed correction on the Freedom of Speech page and that I would be watching the newspapers for news that they will end their silence and do the right thing and speak out against the hate crime charges levied against the Philly 4 (actually it is the Philly 5...the 5th is a 17 year-old girl who is being processed through juvenile court on the hate crime charge) for reading bible verses that state homosexual behavior is sinful to practicioners of homosexual behavior. And I also told them that I would love to be proven wrong that I suspect that they have a bias against the expression of certain religious beliefs. Who knows, if they prove me wrong maybe I'll become a 'card carrying member'. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for the webpage correction. But I'm really not holding my breath on the other issue. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Thanks, Ali! I'm off to watch it. The segment is coming up next. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Well, I'm glad it's getting national attention now. This won't be something that the city will be able to sweep under the rug. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
LR mentioned this once. But you get the feeling at times that media types actually pay attention to these pages. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
You just never know, Brad. Maybe one of those Fox producers is a poet that peruses the blue pages! And still it took almost a month to go national! The ACLU has updated their Freedom of Speech page already! Didn't think it would happen that fast! http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeechMain.cfm I sent a note of thanks along with a suggestion on how they could improve their presentation of the First Amendment, like quoting it in its entirety instead of enumerating all the rights except the first one listed, giving that one only a "..." , as in "It's no accident that freedom of speech, just like freedom of religion, is protected by the First Amendment...yadda, yadda, yadda" Yes, I know, they have a Religious Freedom page, but they don't quote the First Amendment anywhere on that page that I could find anyway. Well, they've made a step in the right direction, gotta give them that. But I'm still not holding my breath on the other issue. |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
Well, I was darn near speechless, and really didn't believe they would move so quickly. From their feedback page, I sent a note of appreciation for their prompt attention to factual record instead of perceived bias. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Thank you, my fellow activist! |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Here's the latest news I found: quote: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42492 quote: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42372 |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
"If a person can walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm, then that person is living in a free society, not a fear society.” Natan Sharansky |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I agree, John. And if a person can't do that, then we don't live in a free society, period. |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Absolutely agree with Sharansky's quote. And that means all individuals and protesters. In other words, no more "free-speech zones" like at the DNC or Pier 57's like at the RNC. I'm glad that this issue is getting national exposure because I think it's important we recognize the right to expressing our views and dissent as a society and taking value in it. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "You'll find something that's enough to keep you |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
“SALEM, Ore. — Two green Adopt-A-Highway signs reading "American Nazi Party" have popped up on a rural road a few miles from downtown, and it's got people upset with the county for agreeing to put up the signs and worried about their neighborhood. .. County officials said they know people are upset. But free-speech guarantees in the Constitution prevented them from turning down the person who signed the American Nazi Party up with the local Adopt-A-Highway program.” http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,145725,00.html |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I wonder what would happen if a church tried to do that, sponser a stretch of highway? I'm pretty sure you'd hear from the ACLU then. And they wouldn't be siding with the church either. But check out the Free Speech page. They've updated it to include the entire First Amendment. Wonders never cease! |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42905 The charges have been dropped. quote: |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/polls/former_poll.asp?POLL_ID=1485 |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Yea!!!!!! Sometimes justice does prevail! Even without the help of the ACLU. Thanks for sharing the great news, Brad! I'm glad the case went to Judge Dembe. I know her from my days when I worked at the library (she is on the Board of Directors there). She's one judge who has her head screwed on straight regarding the Constitution. I'm also glad for the fact that a video was available of the events that transpired thanks to a film maker who was there doing a documentary and caught it all on tape, proving that all the charges were baseless. We don't have to like what some say, we don't have to agree with what some say, but they do have the Constitutionally protected right to say it, just as everyone has the Constitutionally protected right to disagree with them in return. Nobody should be prosecuted for expressing their thoughts, or beliefs in the public square. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
