What's new
By:
Filters

This is sure to piss off some Jazzfanz

I just find it funny that in another thread people are tripping all over themselves to point out how muslims have every right to build a mosque (and they do) on private property with private money, but when there is a cross put on private land funded by private money there is a lawsuit. Some of the crosses are on public land but some are not. But the ruling says that all must go.

"Yup, they need to be more sensible to the fact that we irrationally hate their religion.

-Craig"

I could have sworn he was talking about Christianity.
 
What's the point? Who cares about the Muslims, who cares about the Christians? This reminds me of those *** face Vegans who try to push their crap down my throat when I am feasting at my favorite cow slaughterhouse. Piss on 'em.
 
I honestly couldn't care less if they used a cross, the star of David or whatever religious symbol the family of the fallen office chose to put on the memorial. The point is that these men and women died in the line of duty. I think it is ridiculous that a few hyper-sensitive people rule the world.
 
Surely said:
I honestly couldn't care less if they used a cross, the star of David or whatever religious symbol the family of the fallen office chose to put on the memorial. The point is that these men and women died in the line of duty. I think it is ridiculous that a few hyper-sensitive people rule the world.
Click to expand...

They don't rule the world, but they do have a voice. You may not agree, but it is what it is. Quit being a bitch.
 
Raspberry Delight said:
They don't rule the world, but they do have a voice. You may not agree, but it is what it is. Quit being a bitch.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the rest of us must just shut up and give in to their every demand. I'm working on a new cream that people can apply that helps them grow thicker skin (ironically I was going to call it Raspberry Delight Cream). That way when they are driving down the highway and see one of those horrible, atrocious symbols where someone was killed in the line of duty they will be able to continue on down the road without crashing their car due to the trauma they suffered. Seriously, is it that hard to look away?
 
Surely said:
Yeah, the rest of us must just shut up and give in to their every demand. I'm working on a new cream that people can apply that helps them grow thicker skin (ironically I was going to call it Raspberry Delight Cream). That way when they are driving down the highway and see one of those horrible, atrocious symbols where someone was killed in the line of duty they will be able to continue on down the road without crashing their car due to the trauma they suffered. Seriously, is it that hard to look away?
Click to expand...

Preaching to the chior, dick wad, calm down.

So I guess you only like to uphold peoples beliefs and constitutional rights when it suits your opinion, man? Like it or hate it, that's the way this country runs. Again, quit bitching.
 
Surely said:
cream that people can apply that helps them grow thicker skin (ironically I was going to call it Raspberry Delight Cream).
Click to expand...

Taken literally, that would help make many peoples lives better. It would reduce the bloodshed or stop it altogether. Gay's and women rejoice. In particular, UB's girl thanks you.
 
Notwithstanding the UHPA’s position, the State Defendants, in oral argument before the district court and in their briefs and argument before us, asserted that they would not allow any change in the memorial, whether to accommodate other faiths or otherwise.

In other words, only crosses would be allowed. Compare that to the Army's poisiton of having different symbols for memebers of different faiths, and that maight be a significant reason why one is constitutional and the other is not.
 
UB said:
i appreciate your edit reason.
Click to expand...

Don't you like this UB?

Taken literally, that would help make many peoples lives better. It would reduce the bloodshed or stop it altogether. Gay's and women rejoice. In particular, UB's girl thanks you.
Click to expand...

It's a throwback to rasberry delight whale. A lot of hidden meaning in it ya hurr.

The only reason I type this, besides getting no respect for my brilliance from the rest of the board, I didn't want you to get offended. If taken wrong it looks like I'm saying you have thin skin but that is certainly not the case.
 
One Brow said:
Notwithstanding the UHPA’s position, the State Defendants, in oral argument before the district court and in their briefs and argument before us, asserted that they would not allow any change in the memorial, whether to accommodate other faiths or otherwise.

In other words, only crosses would be allowed. Compare that to the Army's poisiton of having different symbols for memebers of different faiths, and that maight be a significant reason why one is constitutional and the other is not.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Definitely this.
 
Raspberry Delight said:
They don't rule the world, but they do have a voice. You may not agree, but it is what it is. Quit being a bitch.
Click to expand...

You're right Kicky, this thread pissed me off. :D It reminded me I'm still pissed off that "bitch" is not included in the profanity filter. How sexist.
 
Sirkickyass said:
10th Circuit ruled that the Utah Highway Patrol Association can't erect crosses on the side of the freeway to commemorate dead troopers because of the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment.

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/08/08-4061.pdf

I fully expect 40 posts bashing athiests to follow.
Click to expand...

So what exactly is the legal difference between putting up a cross on the side of the road and the military putting up crosses/stars of david/etc. in Arlington, provided the Highway Patrol was able and willing to put up a star of david if a Jewish cop died?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top