You missed it, the bit about "man-made global warming" is two fold: 1. There is no such thing and 2. It serves to follow his past articles debunking global warming in general. Think I'll let it go here, it's fun but I did not mean to turn Tim's Superman/Smallville board into a political judo forum. LOL!! __________________
The Bible is so powerful. It's not to be left on your shelf. It's to outline even the simplest scriptures that can mean so much in building yourself up.
"I am God's workmanship." (Ephesians 2:10)
"I have been redeemed and forgiven." (Colossians 1:14)
"I am the salt and the light of the earth." (Matthew 5:13-14)
Get it... Judo..ice...hahahhaa!!! __________________
Don't mess with me...I'm like a super BABY!!!
Posted: 16 Jul 2007 15:00 Last Edited By: Tim
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 4892
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote: OK, What part of this is not clear enough?
Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.'
Let's take it slow like a detective solving a case.
First piece of evidence is the Constitution itself.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The key words are Congress shall make no law. So the only thing the founding fathers specified was that no law shall be created establishing or prohibiting religion. It also goes on to say Congress shall not make a law prohibiting freedom of speech.
That's the first piece of evidence. With this you cannot conclude that the ACLU has the right to sue over every courthouse or every publicly owned building in the 50 states for having anything of any religious significance because it ain't there. You see if Congress cannot make a law either way regarding religion, the law cannot prohibit or endorse. Thus it doesn't matter if someone is a judge, or whatever if they put something up in a courthouse. It is not illegal. The constitution basically says there can be no laws writteneither way either for or against religion.
Second the ruling you posted was in 1947, was that correct? It would appear to me that if these judges were interpreting the constitution to mean that there is reason to remove works of art and monuments because of religious emphasis. Then they simply misinterpreted the constitution themselves adding words that aren't there. You saw yourself the words seperation of church and state are not in the first ammendment. A letter even by Thomas Jefferson is inadmissable.
Taken from http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html After the 1947 ruling.
Some Supreme Court justices did not like what their colleagues had done. In 1962, Justice Potter Stewart complained that jurisprudence was not "aided by the uncritical invocation of metaphors like the 'wall of separation,' a phrase nowhere to be found in the Constitution." Addressing the issue in 1985, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist lamented that "unfortunately the Establishment Clause has been expressly freighted with Jefferson's misleading metaphor for nearly 40 years." __________________
Also from that site
Jefferson paraphrased a passage, that "the legitimate powers of government extend to ... acts only" and not to opinions, from the Notes on the State of Virginia, which the Federalists had shamelessly distorted in the election of 1800 in an effort to stigmatize him as an atheist."
Sounds to me like he was more against creating laws surrounding religion than restricting religious expression.
What concerns me and irritates the fire out of me more than anything else in the world is the idea that expression of ideas be outlawed from the public arena by simply labeling them religious. Freedom of speech is right there in the first ammendment with the religious clause. I would think they were trying to tell us something.
You tell me what is more important to American society, worrying about pushing religion as far away from public places as possible or protecting the freedom of speech. The whole reason we fought the revolution was for freedom. Can not a little common sense be used here. Instead we have a bunch of lawyers running around the country suing every community who dare erect any sort of monument or even art that could in any way shape or form be religious in tone. Recently the ACLU sued over a painting of Jesus. A painting of all things. If a painting isn't an expression of freedom I don't know what is. Now I can almost guarantee if that painting were blasphemous the ACLU would have fought for it to stay on public property. __________________
It can't all be about Jefferson though, how about the fact that George Washington declared in his farwell address that religion was indispensable for the happiness and prosperity of the people.
From reading it might appear that Jefferson was less leaning toward Christianity than the other founders. If that were the case would we ignore the wishes of the other founding fathers.
another exerpt from http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html "Jefferson's public support for religion appears, however, to have been more than a cynical political gesture. Scholars have recently argued that in the 1790s Jefferson developed a more favorable view of Christianity that led him to endorse the position of his fellow Founders that religion was necessary for the welfare of a republican government.
It seems likely that in modifying the draft of the Danbury Baptist letter by eliminating words like "eternal" and "merely temporal," which sounded so uncompromisingly secular, Jefferson was motivated not merely by political considerations but by a realization that these words, written in haste to make a political statement, did not accurately reflect the conviction he had reached by the beginning of 1802 on the role of government in religion. Jefferson would never compromise his views that there were things government could not do in the religious sphere -- legally establish one creed as official truth and support it with its full financial and coercive powers. But by 1802, he seems to have come around to something close to the views of New England Baptist leaders such as Isaac Backus and Caleb Blood, who believed that, provided the state kept within its well-appointed limits, it could provide "friendly aids" to the churches, including putting at their disposal public property that even a stickler like John Leland was comfortable using."
I know it's a lot of reading with all these posts I've been making, but we are dealing with issues that have rocked the nation in the last 60 or more years. If we citizens don't take the time to understand history, and what's going on today then we might as well give up on liberty. You can't just accept everything you are told. You got to research, to get to the truth whether you like it or not. Don't just believe something because it feels good.
What amazes me for a generation that does not believe in absolute truths, how can they absolutely declare that government stay away from any and all religious practices in every case. Where are the shades of grey there? To me of course I don't believe in shades of grey with math, or within morality, but in the laws of man there most certainly are shades of grey because we are flawed and cannot prepare for every contingency. We have to use common sense. We shouldn't go out of our way to offend our fellow man, nor should we give up our liberties to avoid offending our fellow man. There is no constitutional law that gives us the right to be free from offense, but that seems to be what is driving our laws today. __________________
Quote: I did not mean to turn Tim's Superman/Smallville board into a political judo forum. LOL!!
It's ok I think in a way politics and superheroes mix just a little. I think we get the nobleness of our superheroes from individuals like our founding fathers. Superheroes represent the bravery we read about in the history books. Only we imagine it existing today in bigger than life terms with super powers and laser beams, but when today becomes history who knows who will be known as the real heroes of our time. __________________
Global warming cannot be proven in my mind to be only affected by humans. I'm all for cleaning up rivers and limiting pollutants, but sorry to say I don't trust liberal politicians to do it. I see them taking away land from a farmer because he's got a musk rat on his property or raising taxes in the name of global warming without actually doing anything about the pollution. I guess in the end it's really all about who you trust. Before you even think it, no not every republican is honest. I thought I say that before someone can rant about how I just support bush or something and so I must be crazy blah blah blah. I support ideaology more than I support individual politicians at this point in my life. I've been dispointed by almost everyone in politics at least one time or another except for maybe Ronald Reagan. __________________
The constitution is an incomplete document. The framers of it knew that they could not know everything to come which is how the amendments came about in the first place. Just going by the first amendment itself is short-sighted. Congress can't make a law abridging free speech or freedom of the pres either. If I were a writer for a paper than I could, atheist that I am, say there is no God in a newspaper right? All that amendment says is that congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech or freedom of the press. The answer is no because the supreme court determines how each case that comes before it relates to the constitution and to previous cases before it. Then they make revisions as to how the laws and constitution and amendments are interpreted. The interpretation from before was judged by the supreme court in a case back in 1947 to settle the case and set down new meaning for future cases that might involve it. Nothing further has been really added or removed from that judgement since 1947 meaning it's pretty much the final word on what the amendment means and what it applies to up to this point.
Having said all that, I also believe that expression should not be legislated. If you own your own businesss and you wish to have the ten commandments on your wall or stain glass windows for that matter, it's yours. Knock yourself out. Government offices and buildings do not belong to one individual, (optimally) they belong to all of the people that they are supposed to be serving and according to that self-same judgement cannot have religious connections or affiliations in any form. This is not about public places, just ones connected to the government.
As for Jefferson, sounds to me like he was afraid to be outed as an atheist.
My issue with global warming was never where it came from, just people saying it doesn't exist. The icecaps are just disappearing, polar bears are drowning, hurricane Katrina was not a figment of anyone's imagination, and people are really dying on a global level from the disastrous changes whether by the heat or the floods or hurricanes, etc. I can see the detractors have valid issues with the methods of data gathering, the use of this issue for someone to gain on a political basis by scaring us, and vague/indefinate conclusions. Science isn't perfect. We will never have 100% agreement on any issue no matter how many experts you throw at it. The majority agree, global warming is real and the evidence amasses daily. The only issue they really agree more on is the existence of gravity, IMHO.
D, I trully hope you don't think we're fighting. This is still friendly from where I'm sitting. We may never agree on anything but that doesn't mean we can't get along. As far as I can with people I don't know personally and can't just go out and have a cup of coffee with, I like all of you just fine and hope we remain friendly regardless of our different beliefs.
Besides, the fact that people can't normally stay on any of the topics in any particlar thread here means we're setting a good example. __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
~V~
Posted: 16 Jul 2007 18:02
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 4892
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote: The constitution is an incomplete document. The framers of it knew that they could not know everything to come which is how the amendments came about in the first place.
If you are suggesting that we change it then that would take voting not simply reinterpretating what's there.
Quote: Nothing further has been really added or removed from that judgement since 1947 meaning it's pretty much the final word on what the amendment means and what it applies to up to this point.
With respect to current lawsuits that might be the correct perspective, but in respect to whether or not that was a correct decision then the answer is no. As well the Supreme Court could easily out rule this ruling at any time with a similiar case. The Constitution's wording is not going to change unless the Constitution is amended.
Quote: they belong to all of the people that they are supposed to be serving and according to that self-same judgement cannot have religious connections or affiliations in any form.
So you have no problem with squashing freedom of speech in public places. Where do you stop it? Are paintings wrong? What if someone comes into a public place with a t-shirt on that says something religious? Hey speaking of paintings should images of the founding fathers be taken away because they mentioned God? Hey sound crazy well the ACLU knows no bounds. Nobody has got the guts to say enough is enough.
I take it you at least are acknowledging the possibility of the misuse of the global warming scare for political gain. It's my fear that political gain is the only reason we are even hearing about it right now. That's the problem with everything, if there isn't any power or money to be gained we the public won't even hear about it. __________________
I like to point out to that right now we are in a battle for the right for freedom of speech. The left are trying to regulate how we think legally.
Right now this week a bill is up for vote that will make hate crimes illegal as if killing someone was based on love.
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070712/28416_Hate_Crimes_B ... Now if this bill was to pass, some people would have greater protection than others. Everyone is entitled to justice not just protected groups, and further the real reason for this bill is to lead up to hate speech laws. In some liberal areas people are already getting charged with hate crimes for nothing more than speaking their mind or peaceful protest. Man it's coming down to a liberal nazi order on America. Believe the lib way or go to jail. If you are a real liberal in the tradition of FDR this has to worry you. The modern liberal agenda is communism. If they can't debate you, they'll legislate you. This is got to be troubling to you. __________________
Holy crazy reading....ummm...gonna read this stuff later, short of time! hahaha __________________
Don't mess with me...I'm like a super BABY!!!
Posted: 16 Jul 2007 19:58
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 983
Join Date: Sep 2006
Quote: If you are suggesting that we change it then that would take voting not simply reinterpretating what's there.
I'm not suggesting anything be changed. It's already been changed. The supreme court told us exactly what the first amendment meant in 1947 and have left it to their definition since. It has nothing to do with my wishes, my interpretation, or any agenda. The first amendment is what they say it is and that's all there is to it.
Quote: in respect to whether or not that was a correct decision then the answer is no. As well the Supreme Court could easily out rule this ruling at any time with a similiar case. The Constitution's wording is not going to change unless the Constitution is amended.
You are definitely entitled to your opinion of it being a wrong decision, as well as I'm entitled to disagree with you. Nonetheless, their decision stands and they never changed a word of the original document to do it. They merely spelled out what those words mean, at least to this point.
Quote: So you have no problem with squashing freedom of speech in public places.
UGH. Where did you get this from?! Religious items and articles have no place in government offices and buildings, keeping the emphasis on government. Your police station, post office and court house are not 'public places'. They are government facilities where you can visit and conduct whatever business you need to. If you have something that shows or explains the ACLU attacking people in t-shirts, I would love to see it. The ACLU goes after people or groups that ignore laws affecting civil liberties, not people just expressing themselves for whatever purpose.
Quote: I take it you at least are acknowledging the possibility of the misuse of the global warming scare for political gain
I'd be blind not to. Politicians scare us for votes, while the media scares us to sell newspapers which bring in advertising revenue. If it wasn't global warming, it would be the war on terror or avian flu or welfare of senior citizens or some other cause-du-jour. However, just because it's getting attention because of some spin doctor doesn't mean we shouldn't pay attention to it. I'm not voting for Al Gore; I couldn't care less about the guy. I still highly suggest watching his 'scary' documentary 'an inconvenient truth'. Regardless of why it came to our attention, it's in our attention now, and we all need to do what we can about it.
As for HR 1592(the hate crime bill), I read the article you linked and now I'm going to look up more info on it to make a more informed decision. I'll definitely get back to you with my response when I have one. __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
From what I see in the bill itself:
It defines what constitutes a hate crime(mainly pertaining to bodily harm).
It defines some methods for committing said crimes.
It defines who would be an actual actionable recipient of such.
It sets parameters for states to asks for grant money to enforce such legislation.
What I don't see:
It says nothing about your pastor, priest or reverend saying that homosexuality is wrong. It doesn't even say that you or I can't say it.
If you yell 'fag' at someone before bludgeoning them with a pipe, that's a problem. If your priest wants Tom and Steve out of the neighborhood and goes about setting their house on fire, thats wrong. Reverend Jim can absolutely tell anyone who will listen what God doesn't approve of and you can certainly ignore as many 'fairies' as you please- we just can't act on it by attacking them.
The only things that really trouble me with this bill are the need to seperate one crime from another based on some BS imaginary line in the sand and the government finding another way to piss away tax money. I don't see anything concerning the first amendment here, but to be fair, I'm willing to hear how it might be. __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
~V~
Posted: 16 Jul 2007 20:28
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 4892
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote: I'm not suggesting anything be changed. It's already been changed. The supreme court told us exactly what the first amendment meant in 1947 and have left it to their definition since
No it's not, the Supreme Court can only interpret the Consitution not change it. Nothing's changed in the Constitution. A particular ruling and a constitutional amendment are two different animals.
Quote: The ACLU goes after people or groups that ignore laws affecting civil liberties, not people just expressing themselves for whatever purpose.
Police officers, judges, or whoever are still citizens. They have a right to express ideas religious or otherwise. Look it's common sense. The ACLU are troublemakers putting their nose into places they don't belong. If a judge has a 10 commandments plaque and the voters don't like it they can vote him out not the ACLU. The ACLU wants to take out the public opinion as if it weren't a part of the equation.
You didn't address my concern. What about the limiting of ideas in public places. Where does it stop. Does it not conscern you that ideas can be deemed illegal by just calling them religious? Just like hate speech. Hate speech legislation would be yet another way to deem speech one political group didn't like illegal. It's terrifying to me to think that one day, people in my state might go to jail because they spoke in public what they thought or believed.
I want to know just how much of a value do you put on the expression of ideas, and how can you claim religion is not an expression of speech? Like I said before the ACLU sued over a piece of art because it was a picture of Jesus. Doesn't that alarm you? A picture of Jesus doesn't show support for any particular religion. Do you know how many different religions recognize Jesus? Not to mention his historical signficance. You might as well sue over any and all art displays.
You want to believe in Global warming I don't care, just as long as you don't vote for a guy that uses it to raise taxes or create regulations that not only don't solve pollution but create other problems on top of that.
I can tell you right now some sites are going to claim the hate crimes bill is all about protecting minorities and nothing else, but just take it for face value.
If killer A goes to jail longer for killing a protected citizen than killer B for killing the nonprotected citizen, who gets the greater protection? I know if I was a crook and was planning on robbing someone I'd go for the crime with the less time. It's just a stupid idea from any perspective. __________________
Public opinion isn't part of the equation. The supreme court said no religious items in government places-period. Yes, Jesus is a part of several religions, but not all of them. I personally see no problem with a painting of him or a statue of the ten commandments anywhere anyone wants to put it. The ACLU on the other hand, has a problem with it because (this is getting repetitive )religious items don't belong in government places. The court makes sure you swear in on a bible, the judge can tell you he's a faithful believer in whichever, court personnel can each state what they believe, but you cannot have religious items in the courthouse. If that judge wants a statue of the ten commandments, he can keep it in his house or on any property he owns as long as it is not government property.
As far as expressing ideas in public places goes, I see so many people claiming that this is what they want, that is usually until they actually get it. How would you appreciate me standing in front of your church on a nice sunny day, permit in hand, to extol the virtues of atheism to your fellow churchgoers? It's well within my constitutional rights to express myself, and peaceably assemble. That doesn't grab ya? How about a porn shop next to your child's school? Video and magazines are media and media is just a physical manifestation of someone's ideas and beliefs. How about if all your local high school kids wore shirts with the N word on them, like a hip hop uniform? How about a billboard right near your house advertising RU486 pills? I believe totally in freedom of speech but I don't think the general public is ready for it. We can't even drop an f bomb on here really and let's not forget that nonsense debacle of Janet Jackson 'wardrobe malfunction' during the superbowl. There's a reason you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre....
Nobody should be violently attacked, regardless of what particulars they happen to be a part of. One killer shouldn't get any more of a sentence than another killer. That's just rediculous. I don't get where you're getting this protected citizen stuff from. The bill is addressing(supposedly) the motive for the attack. Gaybashing has been added to a list of things like painting swastikas on synagogues and burning crosses on black people's lawns so this begs the question; Unless you are planning on personally going out and attacking some member of some group you might hate, why would this bother you? __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
~V~
Posted: 17 Jul 2007 01:25
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 4892
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote: I personally see no problem with a painting of him or a statue of the ten commandments anywhere anyone wants to put it. The ACLU on the other hand, has a problem with it because (this is getting repetitive )religious items don't belong in government places.
Ok so if you don't see a problem with it, how come you seem to be defending the ACLU in the same breath.
Quote: The court makes sure you swear in on a bible, the judge can tell you he's a faithful believer in whichever, court personnel can each state what they believe, but you cannot have religious items in the courthouse
That just goes to show you right there that in our history we didn't have problems with religious items. Look man, even schools originally taught Christian principles so it's beyond obvious that our Founding Fathers would have never went the way we have gone thanks to groups like the ACLU and a few liberal judges. It's also obvious I'm sorry to say that your opinion is biased based on your own atheistic ideas.
A lot of your examples are silly because they aren't even expressions of ideas. A naked chick isn't an idea.
Quote: How would you appreciate me standing in front of your church on a nice sunny day, permit in hand, to extol the virtues of atheism to your fellow churchgoers?
Well that example doesn't work either. I'd assume since the building belonged to church members if you weren't then they could get you for trespassing. Unless you were really loud they might just pray for your salvation. See I'm sensing that the real truth is here, you are afraid of people believing in God more than you are afraid of inching toward a society of rules and more rules and still more rules. You know like a communistic country. I guess I'm too much of a rebel to just go quitely into that kind of mess without raising a bit of verbal cain.
Quote: We can't even drop an f bomb on here really
Look if it was just you and me, I could care less what cuss words you used. I'd probably use a few myself after reading some this stuff, but you know I'd rather be on the safe side. I don't want a guilt tript knowing I influenced some kid to swear.
Quote: Nobody should be violently attacked, regardless of what particulars they happen to be a part of. One killer shouldn't get any more of a sentence than another killer.
That's exactly right. The bill adds additional penalty to hate crimes over as apposed to non-hate crimes. I mean come on, are you going to ask a crook if he loved you while he was killing or robbing you. This is exactly why liberalism doesn't work in the real world. It's not about doing the right thing, it's a smoke screen for power grabs and shady political agendas.
Quote: Unless you are planning on personally going out and attacking some member of some group you might hate, why would this bother you?
Why because I don't want a crook thinking he can kill me and get off easier because I don't belong to a minority. Two I told you this is a start to get to hate speech legislation. I just don't think you get it. You can't trust most libs to be fair and just minded on these things. You are going to have preachers in jail for preaching the Word because some wack job claims he listened to a message saying that gayness was a sin before he robbed some guy who just happened to be gay.
You know why I like to debate so much?. I care too much I guess. I really do. I worry that after all these years, all the men who died, all the men who worked their butts off risking everything they had for freedom, that after all that we are going to lose it all so some spoiled brats can show off their private sex lives in our faces, and so some (sorry), atheist can be free from the condemnation of God. See personally I don't care what people do in their homes, but it's not about that anymore. It's about being able to believe what I believe to be true regardless of whether or not it offends someone. The constitution doesn't guarantee anyone the right to not be offended, but in this backwards time we live in we have to give up freedom to protect people from being offended. It's crazy.
If it weren't for Christianity this country would still have slavery, the handicapped would still be mistreated, heck we wouldn't have an America. So forgive me, but I just don't trust liberalism. It's a bunch of smoking mirrors established to grab power. The last good liberal was probably Jack Kennedy if you could call him a liberal. He'd probably roll over in his grave to see what Ted's been up to.
Well please forgive any mispelled words, or any missed words, I'm in a hurry I guess. My back's killing me from chopping wood and yard work. I wish I could just express to you how important is for men to be able to think and express ideas. You just don't seem to realize the ACLU isn't fighting for your rights. They want to take mine away. If George Washington thought religion was important to our government how can you say you know better than the father of our country? __________________
This is what I was afraid of. It seems to be getting you upset to the point of thinly veiled attacks on my being a liberal and an atheist. For someone who wants to be able to 'believe what you want to believe to be true regardless of whether or not it offends someone' and someone who knows how important it is for men to be able to think and express ideas, I have to wonder why you seem so threatened by what I have to say. It saddens me that it's come to this, I hoped for better.
I'll give a few responses here as you deserve that much with what we've gone through together here and I'll show some respect and not pull my punches since it is just the two of us really.
I didn't defend the ACLU nor do I have to. They are fighting for my rights to have someone else's beliefs not interfere with my reality. You say they are trying to take away your rights but the only example I've seen of this is them rightfully getting that commandment statue out of the courthouse it didn't belong in in the first place.
Our founding fathers, if still around today, probably would have adapted to changing times. They did not create a theocracy nor would they probably have supported one today.
Rest assured, kids know more curse words than we do and use them more often than we do. Seeing the f word in print here would do nothing.
It's a shady political agenda for someone to try and stop hate crimes by at least adding an extra penalty for proving that one was committed? You want tolerance for your images and your beliefs as they relate to your religion so badly and yet you won't show a homosexual the slightest bit of compassion yourself. Maybe you don't understand what it's like to be picked on because you don't fit in. When I was a kid, I had lived for a year in an almost all black town, which is really no easy task for a white kid. I had to constantly look over my back to stay safe. It was only a year thankfully, but long enough for me to have a little taste of what they go through. It's a chance for their safety, stop thinking only of yourself here. Do you think if someone is going to rob you or kill you, that they are actually going to stop and consider whether or not you're on the hate bill list? And do you really think that any court or cops are going to haul a priest in for booking after one of their followers causes a hate crime? Think this stuff through better, it's absolute nonsense.
I've seen how much you say you don't like politicians but you just pulled one of their moves. Why on earth would you pull in 'all those who died for our freedom'? You sound like you're the one running for office. By the way, since they all died just so my atheist clique could get away from condemnation, where do I send the thank you notes? You also know what George Washington thinks? Tell me some time about your calling plan, I'd like to call Houdini and Thomas Edison.
Christianity stopped slavery? I thought Catholics gave silent consent of it and Abe Lincoln stopped it. Christianity stopped mistreatment of the handicapped? uhm.....ok....I don't suppose you have any sort of actual evidence to back up that load of crap do you? Queen Isabel from Spain gave financial backing to Chris Columbus who stumbled here by accident to 'create America'. You'll have to forgive me for not trusting Christian propaganda.
How could I possibly know anything better than George Washington? For starters, he's dead and I'm not. The living know far more than the dead. even the living dumb.
I knew this was gonna end badly. My apologies to all parties involved. I think I'll just go back to posting about comics and Smallville. People don't take those so personal. __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
~V~
Posted: 17 Jul 2007 07:59
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 2736
Join Date: Mar 2007
Hey, I haven't even read these posts...there is too much to read tonight. No hurt feelings here.
I have worked till dark tonight, had a sorta day off on Sunday...dealing with customers, and back at it for six more days in row if I am lucky. and each work day ends around nine oclock. So I am too wiped to get into tonight...and tomorrow night...and yeah....anyways, like I stated I said my peace earlier and there is no need to get in arguments. It's serves no one any good.
Cheers..all... __________________
Don't mess with me...I'm like a super BABY!!!
Posted: 17 Jul 2007 10:12
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 415
Join Date: Jun 2006
DH and tim, i just have a couple of questions for you. #1. do you have a problem with the way animals are raised in factory farms? i ask because the bible says we have dominion over all animals or something of the sort. #2. why do you not believe in global warming? is it because you think that god will always supply us with things like oil and natural gases? #3. do you think homosexuals that get "aids" deserve it? #4. do you think Bush did a good job handling Katrina? #5. do you believe in birth control? tim, i know you do so don't worry about answering that last question. just wondering guys. if you have any for me, let me know.
Posted: 17 Jul 2007 11:45
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 2736
Join Date: Mar 2007
I have no problems with animals being bread for food what's so ever. As long as they are cared for well during their lives.
I believe in Global Warming...heck like I said there was a mile of ice over Vancouver island not that too long ago. Also here in Victoria back in the 1900's my great uncle and grand parents drove their model T ford on Beaver and Elk lake in the winters. Here in Victoria. Now we can grow palm trees. hahaha no joke! My Grandma said that every winter when she was a child she put skates on and skated to school on the frozen roads. We are lucky if it snow once all winter here. Just lots of wind rain and sun. Average temperature here in Victoria now during Dec. and Jan is 7-8 degrees celsius...or 46 degrees F. I just don't think it's all man made. The sun maybe getting stronger, it maybe a natural cycle, etc. Heck it's been getting warmer for the last several thousand years and cars have only been around for a 100.
I don't believe anyone deserves to suffer. I have said this many times. In Christian teachings God hates sin but loves the sinner. And not one sin is greater than the other. When Christ walked on earth he showed love and kindness to those who the Jews would have put to death. Christ taught to show compassion and love. So no I do not believe anyone deserves suffering. But unfortunately our greed and our selfishness causes many to suffer and that's man's choice. Such as many go hungry and die of starvation in the world. People will say how can a God allow that to happen. Well there is more than enough food to feed everyone on earth. However to keep grain and milk products high here Just in Canada guess where all the excess goes that the Government won't allow farmers to sell when they have reached their allowable produce. that's right either it gets burned or goes down the drain. This is not God's doing at all. So unfortunately we have consequences for our actions. And some guy had sex with a monkey and aids was born and now we have a horrible decease. If I stole a car, I would go to jail. We live in a world of disobedience and prosecution.
Katrina was a nightmare. Zod you will probably know this but our american friends probably won't. The Vancouver emergency rescue teams were launched here from Vancouver Canada right away to go find survivors. The Vancouver team reached N.O. before any of the U.S. army and or Fema teams did. We were down there for weeks and save hundreds of lives. I am sickened by what happened in New O. the fact that people could be left in a stadium like that where woman where being raped and people being murdered and people dieing and in pain and in need of medical attention and the U.S. didn't send anyone in to help all the while the rest of the U.S. citizens in unaffected cities went to work and watched their American brothers and sisters being left like that on CNN like it was a movie is unreal. Also it's crazy that the people in New O. acted the way they did. I saw coast guard and marine helicopters trying to help people and send in food while citizens were shooting at the helicopters. People looting and killing and raping etc. It was like a horror movie, but this was and is an American City. This was not all Bush's fault, I agree he made a mistake and didn't lead the way he needed to. The U.S. military was being over stretched in the two wars for the Military to provide proper help to it's citizens. But a lot of these emergency safety nets lets call them were set up by Clinton etc and failed to achieve. I guess it's a lesson for all of us. What if the West Coast gets the big one, or what if a terrorist detonates a nuke in an american city, or what if a nuclear reactor goes chernobyl in Canada or the U.S. Katrina could be nothing in comparison. and if this could happen in the U.S. it could happen anywhere. I think we should all look at what went wrong and what can be done to make sure things go better next time etc. because there will be a next time, sometime. Better to find improvements and solutions than to focus on blame and finger pointing.
Lastly I have no problem with birth control at all. I do have a problem with abortions though.
Sorry it's late and I'm tired and spelling poorly hehehe. __________________
Don't mess with me...I'm like a super BABY!!!
Posted: 17 Jul 2007 15:09
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 4892
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote: thinly veiled attacks on my being a liberal and an atheist.
No, I'm not meaning to attack you, but there are groups of atheist and liberals that have agendas that probably do share common values with you, but don't take it personally. I get emotional yes, but you should hear the fights I get into with my best friend.
Quote: why you seem so threatened
I'm not, I'm just trying to make you understand.
Quote: They are fighting for my rights to have someone else's beliefs not interfere with my reality.
Look I'm sorry but that goes back to the fact we aren't guaranteed the right to not be offended. How in the heck does a bunch of words on a tablet effect your reality? Thou shalt not kill makes you feel funny? You don't have anything to lose, but if I'm right about God then maybe our country's woes can be traced back to all this seperation you crave. Believe me Christians would feel a whole lot better about putting God back into American than atheists feel good about taking him out.
Quote: Our founding fathers, if still around today, probably would have adapted to changing times. They did not create a theocracy nor would they probably have supported one today.
Adapt to changing times? No way, those guys were rebels! They didn't just go with the times or they'd have went happily with whatever the king wanted. Adapt to changing times, no my friend they were the type to change the times they were in. There is a problem in your definition of theocracy. Our founding fathers did not want a government controlled by the Baptists, or the methodist, or the Catholics for example. I personally believe that all religious activity in the government would have pleased most of the founding fathers up to the point where the government would appear to favor one over the other. An example would be the government forcing people to go to catholic church, or giving tax breaks only to baptists for giving to charity, or requring all men pray before breakfast. You seem to think your freedom is dwindled if you pass by an item of religious value, but you forget that the more expression of ideas there are in the world the more freedom itself excels. You are wanting to dominate your fellow man whether or not you realize it by squashing expression. We aren't talking about posting obscene material. We are talking about ideas that are precious to some of us. Ideas that are meant to help man not intimidate him or oppress him.
Quote: Rest assured, kids know more curse words than we do and use them more often than we do. Seeing the f word in print here would do nothing.
I know it's a shame, but we need to be responsible as adults to be good examples as much as we can. I cuss. I admit it. When I was youger everybody cussed so much it got engrained into my subsconsious. The more you hear it, the more it plays in your mind especially when your back is killing you like mine right now. Doesn't make it right though. I wouldnt make a law against cussing. I just think we need to be more polite as a society by choice.
I got more to say, but I'm going to post this. With my luck the electricity would blink and I'd lose everything I wrote. __________________
Quote: Maybe you don't understand what it's like to be picked on because you don't fit in.
That's hilarious. You have no idea, I got my butt kicked when I was little so many times because of being small and nerdy it's not even funny. But you know what, I did what I had to do to learn to protect myself. I got into sports, lifted weights, and I'm still short, but at least I got good physical fitness habits and learned some determination out of the whole mess. Still pull muscles though which makes me mad.
Quote: Do you think if someone is going to rob you or kill you, that they are actually going to stop and consider whether or not you're on the hate bill list?
Ok, then why make a hates crime bill then? You still made my point.
Quote: And do you really think that any court or cops are going to haul a priest in for booking after one of their followers causes a hate crime?
Well I've heard a priest in Canada got in legal trouble already for just speaking against gayness. A man in a liberal part of America faced thousands of dollars in legal fees for daring to witness to a gay man. Oh I'd say it's very likely. First the gay guy complains, and then the police have no choice but run somebody in once laws like that get put into place. And we see how liberal judges can interpret laws well past their original intent.
And a year is all you got picked on? I had to wait till I got old enough to walk to the gym in the middle of town. Somewhere in my teens before things chilled for me. I don't feel sorry for people that whine about being different because I had to go through hell by my own self. I was created short and skinny. I had to do something about it. That's the American way. Get off your butt and work. Making laws to manipulate others into liking you isn't going to work. Whatever happened to the John Wayne mentality? People are so spoiled nowadays. Without adversity I'm afraid there is no character. People nowadays have too much time on their hands, and not enough real problems to deal with. I feel sorry for people, but not because of what they are, but because they don't have a clue. You think people in the old west were worried about their orientation while Indians were attacking? What about the Great Depression? There is a reason this stuff is coming out now, and I think it's because we have it too easy. America has forgotten the basics of what really matters in life making mountains out of mole hills.
Quote: You also know what George Washington thinks?
Well it's easy you just research history a little. It's just a matter of taking the time to read the more sources the better of course. But here's one for you real quick I found just the other day.
"The country's first two presidents, George Washington and John Adams, were firm believers in the importance of religion for republican government."
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html
Watch this video on George by the way. If you haven't.
Let's be clear what I don't like about politicians is not so much their words, but their actions not matching up with their words, or in some cases what they say they want to do is bad enough on it's own merits.
Quote: Christianity stopped slavery? I thought Catholics gave silent consent of it and Abe Lincoln stopped it. Christianity stopped mistreatment of the handicapped? uhm.....ok....I don't suppose you have any sort of actual evidence to back up that load of crap do you?
Why yes I do indeed have proof or at least a little bit of history reading to back up my claims.
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/histryotln/national.htm "Most notable among them was the American Bible Society, founded in 1816. Social activism inspired by the revival gave rise to abolition-of-slavery groups and the Society for the Promotion of Temperance, as well as to efforts to reform prisons and care for the handicapped and mentally ill."
It was called the Second Great Awakening. It was basically an old fashioned very large time of revival.
Don't confuse my getting passionate about democracy as getting too personal. Even if I do get mad for a second. It's only for a second, then I usually calm down. It's not getting angry that's near as bad as holding grudges, and believe me I hold no ill will toward you for speaking your mind. It shows you have guts to be honest about your beliefs. I appreciate that. __________________
Quote: #1. do you have a problem with the way animals are raised in factory farms
Don't know a whole lot about it, but I do believe in treating animals decently. I am bothered when people put animals above humans. I'd die though if I couldnt' eat chicken. I can't stand vegetables.
But if I were a farmer I wouldn't put a animal in a spot where they couldn't move for years. That's cruel.
Quote: 2. why do you not believe in global warming?
Well because it seems to be created for political purposes. I know politics can tend to cancel out the truth even in scientists. If it is true, I doubt it's as bad as they say or if humans can even control it. I know what I see, and what I see being a problem is the polluted lakes. Clean that up first, and then we'll talk.
Quote: #3. do you think homosexuals that get "aids" deserve it?
Now that's a question designed to make me look bad if I ever saw one. Read this very carefully. I don't want to ever say somebody deserved to get sick. I think they need to consider it in their decision to take part of that lifestyle. It's a reality. It's there. Even hetros can get that disease from sleeping around and other ways of course. Bottom line I hate what they do, but I hate diseases too. It's just another reason for people to reconsider that there might be something to this thing called sin because usually there are good reasons for things to be called wrong in the Bible. God always tells us to stay away from things for a reason usually for our own good to keep us healthy or happier, and I'm a health nut. I like anything that helps make you healthier except for vegetables. Well I've been making myself eat carrots.
Quote: 4. do you think Bush did a good job handling Katrina?
As good as anybody else. The dems in that area sure didn't come out smelling like a rose.
Ok Zod your turn.
1. What do base right and wrong on?
2. What do you do if you can't pray to God for help in difficult circumstances?
3. Do you ever wonder what if God is real?
4. Have you ever considered that Heaven and Hell might be real and doesnt' that scare you just a little? (Hey you ask tough questions, I ask tough questions)
5.Just where in the world do you get some of your crazy off the wall ideas? A college professor, parents, drug users, alien beings from another planet, what? No offense meant, enquiring minds just have to know. __________________
Scaper now that you mention it not putting the blame only on Bush as the dems want to but I was getting p.o. when I saw people walking down the bridge without any help. I think I could have drove down there myself faster than our emergency units.
Quote: marine helicopters trying to help people and send in food while citizens were shooting at the helicopters
Oh yeah that burned me up. A bunch of nuts shooting at people that were trying to help them. __________________
Tim, I'm glad you're not really upset as I couldn't tell by that earlier post so let's continue.
First of all, being short and nerdy has absolutely no comparison to being the only white kid in a black neighborhood. Being beat up wasn't really the problem, try being afraid for your life.
The hate crime bill is about violence on those groups. Here's the exact list of those 'protected groups' pasted from the bill itself >`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, OR DISABILITY-. Because of your religious beliefs you're actually at the top of the 'protected list'.
There will never be a case of someone using this particular bill to try and amend free speech. The cases you mention happened way away from this bill and in case you didn't know, people have the right to sue for slander. To avoid a slander case all your local preacher or reverend has to do is preclude their sermon with 'the way I see it' or some other way putting it as their opinion and not outright stating it as fact. That's the difference- say it's an opinion instead of stating it as fact which they should be doing at every sermon anyways seeing it is their interpretation and not actual fact anyways. Yep, that was a straight shot from the atheist handbook- and the gospel.
As for why the bill was passed? The same reason there are different penalties for amount of speed exceeding a speed limit and the penalties per amount of drugs found and how finding drugs in a school zone is different from finding them anywhere else. It gives the illusion that politicians care and it raises more revenue for various levels of government and the actual incentives they represent- don't speed but if you do, only go 10 miles over and not 25 or this will happen. If you're going to distribute only carry a few ounces instead of pounds and keep it the hell away from our schools(even at 3am). If you're going to attack or kill someone, the motive shouldn't be simply because of their religion(real or perceived), their color, or their gayness(real or perceived). As I already said, it's a BS line in the sand to say that 'amounts' change one crime to a different worse one. People shouldn't speed, sell drugs, or run around beating up or killing others.
As for that video, I'll go with the narrator saying pure imagination. It's propaganda to me.
As for that quote, let's have the whole passage:
Quote: In contrast to the Great Awakening of the 1730s, the revivals in the East were notable for the absence of hysteria and open emotion. Rather, unbelievers were awed by the "respectful silence" of those bearing witness to their faith. The evangelical enthusiasm in New England gave rise to interdenominational missionary societies, formed to evangelize the West. Members of these societies not only acted as apostles for the faith, but as educators, civic leaders, and exponents of Eastern, urban culture. Publication and education societies promoted Christian education. Most notable among them was the American Bible Society, founded in 1816. Social activism inspired by the revival gave rise to abolition-of-slavery groups and the Society for the Promotion of Temperance, as well as to efforts to reform prisons and care for the handicapped and mentally ill.
There were groups for the abolition of slavery but it doesn't say anything about them actually accomplishing anything and 'efforts to' doesn't equate to actually doing anything. Here's your quote again:
Quote: If it weren't for Christianity this country would still have slavery, the handicapped would still be mistreated, heck we wouldn't have an America
Things like this are probably the root of our communication breakdown Tim. We stick to what each of us respects more- your have the spirit of your beliefs and I can only stand by provable fact. It really is a shame there isn't a middle ground here.
Now I see this going to Zod and not me? Shame on you Tim.
Quote: 1. What do base right and wrong on?
2. What do you do if you can't pray to God for help in difficult circumstances?
3. Do you ever wonder what if God is real?
4. Have you ever considered that Heaven and Hell might be real and doesnt' that scare you just a little? (Hey you ask tough questions, I ask tough questions)
5.Just where in the world do you get some of your crazy off the wall ideas? A college professor, parents, drug users, alien beings from another planet, what? No offense meant, enquiring minds just have to know.
1. I took what my parents taught me, what my teachers taught me, learned a bit about the law and how things work and add some common sense to the mix. If you couldn't tell, I love to be right. 2. I find a solution or a real live person who can actually help me solve it.
3. Don't you ever wonder if He isn't? There's the very strong possibility that absolutely no-one has it right.
4. If Heaven and Hell were real, that would be absolutely horrifying. Should be equally frightening for you if they aren't, considering the value you seem to place on them.
5. You're on your own on this one Zod.
On that note-if nobody is getting that upset and nobody is holding a grudge, rock on.... __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
~V~
Posted: 17 Jul 2007 19:12
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 4892
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote: First of all, being short and nerdy has absolutely no comparison to being the only white kid in a black neighborhood. Being beat up wasn't really the problem, try being afraid for your life.
I've been there too, but I won't make it a contest on whose had the lousiest past.
Quote: There will never be a case of someone using this particular bill to try and amend free speech
Sorry I'm just not buying it. Experience tells me different. The last thing we need is this bill. Murder, robbery, and the like are already illegal. You can't make laws on what goes on in somebody's head without guessing, and that's exactly what will happen.
Quote: As for that video, I'll go with the narrator saying pure imagination. It's propaganda to me.
The clips were from One Step Beyond. If you listen carefully though you can tell which part has been past down, and which part is part of historical record. The ending regarding George Washington's inability to be shot was as the narrator put it agreed upon by all historians.
Quote: it doesn't say anything about them actually accomplishing anything and 'efforts to' doesn't equate to actually doing anything.
doesn't say they didn't either. It doesn't say that there were any other movements that worked against slavery either does it? Who took chances on getting shot to get slaves out of the south? Atheists? I don't think so Al.
Besides at the very least you can't deny anymore that Christians were the forerunners of social activism. Know any atheist groups that worked against slavery? How about an atheist group that built hospitals and colleges? The same huge famous colleges that now have turned their back on God were once created by Christian groups.
I sense a cop out on most of your answers. 1.Where did your parents and teachers base their idea on right and wrong. And if you say from their parents and teachers, I'm going to slap you. 2. What if the problem is beyond human help?
3. Have I ever doubted? Yes, but then I look outside and I know better. I just wonder how it feels to not believe at all in God. No ultimate sense of good or evil. No sense in the end good will not only conquer all, but that it has to.
4.Hell is horrifying, but so is total blackness which is the only thing left to you assuming you are right. It must take so much faith to believe you are sitting there thinking, writing, feeling emotion all by a cosmic accident. Much more faith than I could ever muster.
5.I wonder where you get your ideology as well. __________________
I have never denied the Christians as forerunners of anything. I merely stated your claims as to their 'accomplishments' as untrue. I can't personally name any group that does anything as an 'atheist group'-there is no such thing.
There is absolutely nothing in anything I have posted on here that should even remotely be considered a cop-out. I've been as thorough, forthcoming, and honest as possible.
My parents called themselves Catholic(dad) and Mormon(mom). Neither one attended church, both smoked, both gambled, and my dear old dad drank, beat on both of us and cheated on my mom several times before trying to kill her. I learned wrong by watching them. The fact that they pretended to be religious did in fact lead me away from the church. I attended Sunday school exactly twice when I was around 7 and was connived into attending a Mormon service when I was about 15, while mom was at home no less. Every living being on this planet that has the ability to make even the simplest choice knows right from wrong Tim, and they don't need any book or any passed on knowledge to know it. That is something we are born with that we get better at doing as we go on by making mistakes along the way and learning from them. If you want to know where those particular folks got their ideas about right and wrong, you'll just have to ask them.
Praying to me is something of a cross between wishing and complaining. When faced with a situation you can try wishing it away, sit and complain about it, hope someone else takes care of it for you, or get off your ass and do something about it. If it's beyond human help, then tough it out.
When I first realized I did not believe in God, it felt lonely. I felt betrayed and let down and lied to. Then I took a good long look around me and decided I had to rely on myself. I have absolutely no need for everything in the universe to be placed under some banner of what equates to little more than a magic act. I could not swallow the stories the good book relies on. I certainly knew I didn't want some carrot held in front of my face, promising me something for after I die. After the lonliness and anger subsided, I felt stronger, more confident, and happy not to be someone's sheep. This was not a commercial for someone to follow my path, but you did ask.
Let me put it you this way. Knowing how short and precious life is and knowing I don't have some eternal reward and I'm not coming back as something else or going to wander the earth as a disembodied spirit makes each day that much more important. It makes all life more precious. It makes time more valuable. You have more faith than I do sir. I'm just enjoying a really short ride.
My ideology comes from a rediculous number of sources. I've done some minor study on various religions- which encompass Christianity, Judaism, Mormon, and Muslim sources as well as such 'out there' things as the occult, Wicca, and Satanism (take note, anyone who might have felt pity for me being an atheist-these idiots actually worship Satan-someone needs to pray for them, it just won't be me). I watch the news, enjoy sci-fi and fantasy entertainment, and will occasionally pick up a book on philosophy just for the hell of it. The books on philosophy lose me quick usually as they tend not to make sense after a while. It's a great big cauldron of information I have brewing in my skull with ideas that crash against each other.
Where's your ideology from? __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
~V~
Posted: 18 Jul 2007 01:41
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 4892
Join Date: Apr 2005
Ok it's obvious that having a bad time with your folks put you off on religion, but just think of it this way. Religion by itself is just a tradition or a set of empty rules. It's Jesus the Son of God that makes the difference in someone's life. I know a lot of people that have religion that don't really have God. No offense to your family or anything. I know people that seem to know God, but have spells where they get so back slid they are worst than the worst non-believer, but I don't stop believing in God.
You know that people do wrong right? Just having your name on a church membership doesn't make you holy no more than it makes you bad. The only thing different about a Christian is on the inside. God puts another desire in your heart to do right. You still got that desire to do wrong in there though.
I've heard this story 2 different ways, but it holds a lot of truth. A missionary talked to an old Indian chief or it could have been an African chief. The chief told the missionary that he had two dogs inside him now since becoming a Christian. Two dogs always fighting. One good, one bad. The missionary asked which one wins. He said the one I feed the most.
Look I know a lot more about drinking than I would care to admit. I've seen at least 3 family members die early. So I don't want to come off debating you on this area in a argumentive way. I see God as a way to help people avoid alcohol, and drugs and wasted lives. While maybe you see something else entirely.
Quote: When I first realized I did not believe in God, it felt lonely. I felt betrayed and let down and lied to.
There's nothing wrong with being independent, or letting the problems of life make you stronger, but I don't think that God meant for it all to make you not believe in Him. I guess everybody takes rough spots differently. Believing in God isn't going to make you weak.
My ideology comes from reading the Bible, listening to preachers, and just living life. I've spent my life watching others, I've looked for contradictions, I've tried living like a wild kid, I've tried being neutral I suppose, in the end most of everything I've been taught made more sense than what everybody else was doing. By meeting folks of different persuasions I saw their end. I knew where they were headed. I saw how they were living, and I didn't like it. It scared the crap out of me. I was trapped in a way at one point in my life, but by the grace of God I got back on my feet. I'm being more honest than I like to be since you've been so honest. I'm lucky to own a website much less even a computer the way I was headed. So in short without going into a lot of details. Experience showed me that what was in the Bible was real. I learned it didn't matter if every preacher, or every person I ever trusted messed up or lied. The Bible was still true.
Ok I got to eat now plus I'm out of words. I need some food. __________________
They didn't necessarily put me off religion so much as make the hypocrisy evident and I certainly hope no-one thinks I had a miserable childhood or anything, just a handful of rough spots. I fell out with God after constantly questioning and never getting an answer-that was the breaking point. That was when I decided to get my own answers and be my own person. After that I just started collecting reasons to be justified in not believing, and I have something of a large collection. I don't think for a second that anyone else believing makes them weak, just that not having those beliefs make me stronger. It may not seem it, but there is a difference.
So....now that we've hit a cooling down point and everyone's all mellow now........who's got the next hot topic for us to battle over?(The thread is too hot to cool down now) __________________
Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea Mr Creedy and ideas are bulletproof.
~V~
Posted: 18 Jul 2007 05:22
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 2736
Join Date: Mar 2007
How about...
Should Canada and The U.S. merge to be one big super Country? In theory it would be amazing. But On both sides of the border you'd have people that would never support such a grand vision. __________________
Don't mess with me...I'm like a super BABY!!!
