Now we just might have a case to sue the ACLU and stuff down their throats and break them financially.
Commie pinko lefty limp-wristed pro-Islamo-fascist bastards.

well at least her message has been spread to more than those who missed it at the ceremony.

hubba hubba

USN6872 on June 20, 2006 at 12:20 pm said:

Now we just might have a case to sue the ACLU and stuff down their throats and break them financially.
Commie pinko lefty limp-wristed pro-Islamo-fascist bastards.

USN6872 I concur with you in every way on that statement.

double major west siiiiieeed dittos.

So it’s fine to say ‘F—you’ anywhere anytime to anyone in public now, but we can’t mention Jesus Christ in public.
We have become a very sick society and are in need of a radical cure!

Here’s a link to more about this case of the Christian Valedictorian:
http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12845prs20040511.html

When is the ACLU going to stop ruining the country?

Post 7…

That’s a different case, AND it shows the ACLU to be on the student’s side and protected her free speech in that instance.

So yeah…the ACLU is very evil, all the time. huh?

Sam on June 20, 2006 at 12:43 pm said:

So yeah…the ACLU is very evil, all the time. huh?

Straw man alert! Straw man Alert..

Didnt you know that even mentioning Jesus could bring the very theocratic state that the ACLU and liberals everywhere dread?

Yessir, mention God even once and Bush will have the excuse to send out the Religious Stormtroopers to compel everyone to attend church. Resistors will be thrown in the American Gulag System, never to be seen again.

Try saying “allah” at a commencement and you will get a free pass, since islam is the new trend for hip libs everywhere.

ACLU: Defending Your Right Not To Hear What Others Have To Say…

This is how they protect the First Amendment in the Bizarro World….

Atheists must be awfully insecure about their convictions if an 18 year old girl speaking about Jesus at her graduation causes them so much grief.

It is amazing how normal, conservative, heterosexual people are so much better looking than liberal faggots.

There are just so many examples of this.

Start with first ladies.

Laura Bush or Hillary Clinton?

How long would it take Bill Blowjob to say yes if offered a trade?

Once again the far left and the far right unhinged have spoken, congratulations!

Scooter our resident king of hate as all atheists are.

REMEMBER ATHEISTS DON’T HELP CHARITY THEY SUE TO TAKE MONEY FROM CHARITIES!

Atheists do nothing but spread hate. Religions do too but they do a lot of good. Atheists only do bad.

Remember the atheists goal is to make it illegal to go to church.

You can say the f word the s word etc but DARE SAY GOD! I guarantee you if she had spoken out to say child molestation is okay and terrorism is peachy the ACLU would have defended her to the death as Al Queda and Nambla are their favorite groups. Atheists also love those groups.

Sorry worthless subhuman slimeball atheists this is a matter of freddom of speech. If she feels she owes a lot to God to get her where she’s gone she should have the right to say it. I gave a speech as class president in 86 at my graduation. I gave credit to God, my parents and my grandparents. If I had wanted to credit God, my parents, my dog or the Chicago Cubs it should have been my right.

But not being worthless subhuman slimeball hate filled atheists my school board said okay to what I said.

i’d invite you to dinner to discuss this Scooter but I am a very good cook and you wouldn’t believe there was a cook so my effort would be wasted.

And it’s freedom of religion which atheists want to stop.

If I want to worship God, Jesus, or Cubs pitcher Mark Prior it is my right.

And if I want to say it out loud it is my right.

As a Cub fan I was offended by all those signs celebrating the White Sox world series win since they offended me should they have been taken down.

Only a hate filled atheist would have a problem with someone saying God and/or Jesus.

I said this yesterday in the other thread about this at 5:13…

LtntWolfe Said:
5:13 pm [ Quote ]
She probably just did it for the attention. She is planning on going o a Christian college. 10:1 she is on Hannity’s show in the next day or two (provided that didn’t already happen).

Ok, that’s an easy three nails into the flesh from half court. Score it.

However, I would definitely like to do some sinning with her. Talk about bible-banging…..the Cubs suck. If they weren’t playing baseball (if you want to call it that) they would all be in drag somewhere in Wrigleyville.

Steph – I take so much offense at all of your comments.

I’m an atheist, I have no problem allowing anybody to speak about their God, to worship whoever they wish, or to do as they please so long as that faith does not interfere with my faith.

Now, I don’t exactly know what was in this girl’s speech and if it was censored simply because she stated she believed God helped her achieve what she has achieved then the school district and the ACLU are at fault. If not, however, if she did cross the line and abused her privilege to address her fellow classmates to preach from a soapbox, then by all means, cut her off.

Also, could you please explain to me how I’m a “subhuman” and “slimefilled.” Also I’m pretty sure I don’t love Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization for that matter.

My simple belief is that there is no God. I do however believe in the power of humans, and a natural law that governs all humans. See where I differ from you is that I don’t believe that a higher power created the naturrl law, I believe that it exists because humans do, because humans are mostly rational they will create a rational way of life. Part of which would state that violence and killing is bad.

So that being said. I, too am a Cubs fan.

How is permitting someone to express their right to Free Speech, even in a religious context a denial of anyones right to not have religion in their life?

1. Based on that perverse logic, them I have a right not to have pro-homosexual anti-Christian beliefs in my life as it offends my religious beliefs, so I demand that no one be allowed to speak in favor of homosexuality in any context in the public square, because my taxes support the public square.

2. Since secular humanism has been defined by the Supreme Court as a religion, based on this same logic, I have a right not to have anything of a secular nature in my life, so I demand that anyone speaking about any of their secular beliefs not be allowed access to the public square.

3. The same thing goes for atheism, because it too has been defined by the Supreme Court as a religion, and I don’t care if you agree with that definition or not it is a matter of law, so no one may express their atheist beliefs in the public square without offending me.

Either we have Free Speech for everyone; or we have the right to deny it to anyone, even the media and politicians. If we do have in the Bill of Rights a guarantee of Free Speech, then that means even religious speech and that means even proselytizing religious speech must be permissable.

It has been mentioned by other people that if someone testifies about their faith in Jesus, in a public setting, even one paid for by taxes; that does not mean that organization (even a school)is endorsing or promoting that belief, they are only allowing Freedom of Speech and Freedom of religious expression by the individual as are guaranteed by the the First Amendment.

Steph, you can’t help yourself by resorting to name calling, that’s very Christian of you, hope you go to confession for that one.

I would defend your right to have your religion just as much as I would defend my own right to NOT have religion. I find it interesting that I’ve never heard any of you far right conservatives or far left liberals EVER state that you would defend someone’s right to not have a religous belief and that your beliefs are your own and should not belong in the greater society at large because it’s a personal journey not governed by our country.

And the reasons for not proselytizing is because you are on government property, feel free to do that in your own front yard, anytime of the year. For some reason some of you can’t make the distinction. You still don’t get it, but those of us who do, understand your position.

Las Vegas Sun and Review Journal:
The Clark County School District free speech regulations prohibit district officials from organizing a prayer at graduation or selecting speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech or a prayer.

The policy does allow for religious expression at school ceremonies and says speakers chosen “on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria” are responsible for the content of their expression and “it may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content.”

District lawyer Bill Hoffman said the regulation allows students to talk about religion, but speeches can’t cross into the realm of preaching.

“We encourage people to talk about religion and the impact on their lives. But when that discussion crosses over to become proselytizing, then we to tell students they can’t do that,” Hoffman said.

What’s truly scary is some muslims want honor killings to be legal because it is their religious belief.

I’m just so tired of atheists thinking they are the only ones with rights.

I only think rights should be lessened if they hurt someone. And physically hurt someone. Hearing Jesus a few times will not hurt anyone.

It may offend you but you’ll live.

The ACLU…the most dangerous organization in America

Iowa Civil Liberties Union Defends Right of Students to Wear Anti-Abortion T-Shirts
http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12852prs20050429.html

ACLU Sues to Protect Free Speech Rights of Anti-Abortion Church Group in Indiana
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/11484prs20040716.html

They SO want to destroy Christianity!

ACLU Supports Right of Iowa Students to Distribute Christian Literature at School http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/religion/12811prs20020711.html

They are nothing but the extremist commie left!

ACLU Asks Court to Protect Confidentiality of Rush Limbaugh’s Medical Records
http://www.aclu.org/privacy/medical/14969prs20040112.html

It’s amazing what you might find if you stray from the conservative blogosphere for a change.

It is amazing how normal, conservative, heterosexual people are so much better looking than liberal faggots.

Interesting, you seem to appear rather ugly with that statement of hate. Can’t imagine anyone who’s good looking want to associate with you.

How low is the lowest common denominator of this logic of yours?

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 1:28 pm said:

Once again the far left and the far right unhinged have spoken, congratulations!

Thank you Scooter, take it easy y’all this isn’t the end of the world. Everyone here knows that the ACLU will piss all over the first amendment when it suits their purpose so don’t be so surprised they sided with the schoolboard.

Sam: You are not a slimeball, I believe God loves you even if you don’t believe in him.

Steph: Screw the Cubs, Screw the White Sox GO ASTROS!

AND STILL NONE OF YOU HAVE THE COURAGE TO STAND UP FOR BOTH SIDES HAVING THEIR EQUAL RIGHTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. THAT SAYS MORE ABOUT YOU THAN ANYTHING YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN WITH REGARD TO GOD.

They call that hypocrisy.

1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion

I would defend your right to have your religion just as much as I would defend my own right to NOT have religion. I find it interesting that I’ve never heard any of you far right conservatives or far left liberals EVER state that you would defend someone’s right to not have a religous belief and that your beliefs are your own and should not belong in the greater society at large because it’s a personal journey not governed by our country.

Where was the ACLU on this story in 2003?

Requiring seventh-grade students to pretend they’re Muslims, wear Islamic garb, memorize verses from the Quran, pray to Allah and even to play “jihad games” in California public schools has been legally upheld by a federal judge, who has dismissed a highly publicized lawsuit brought by several Christian students and their parents.

(snip)

In her 22-page ruling announced Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton said Excelsior is not indoctrinating students about Islam when it requires them to adopt Muslim names and pray to Allah as part of a history and geography class, but rather is just teaching them about the Muslim religion.

Answer: Claude Raines in “The Invisible Man”

Comrade Scooter Said: Your religious beliefs “are your own and should not belong in the greater society at large because it’s a personal journey not governed by our country.”

Most of our Founding Fathers and most of our Presidents have expressed their religious beliefs in the public square. So, you are saying that they have no right to express their religious beliefs, or to have their religious beliefs influence their policies; and they have knowingly violated the Constitution by doing so?

I say that your atheist, liberal, socialist, secular beliefs are your own, they do not belong in the greater society, they are a part of your personal journey; so shut up about your anti-Christ, socialist, anti-America beliefs – they offend me. Your beliefs have no place outside your own home, and that means here.

So, Ian better close down because nothing in this world can be discussed without our personal beliefs being involved and that means on almost every issue I see a religious component, and every time I speak about my faith I want to convince godless atheists to repent and be saved, because I hate the idea of anyone being condemned to Perditions flames for an eternity out of ignorance or because they are fools. When you discuss any issue you cannot keep your atheist, anti-Christ, secular-socialist beliefs out of the discussions, and whether you admit it or not, by denigrating my faith, you are in fact trying to convert me to atheism and hating God like you do.

So, I guess we all better shut up, none of us shouldengage in any conversations with anyone on any issue ever again; because Scooter has declared the Christian faith to be illegal, and he has reinterpreted the Constitution to support that lie.

Steph on June 20, 2006 at 1:35 pm said:

Scooter our resident king of hate as all atheists are.

REMEMBER ATHEISTS DON’T HELP CHARITY THEY SUE TO TAKE MONEY FROM CHARITIES!

Atheists do nothing but spread hate. Religions do too but they do a lot of good. Atheists only do bad.

Remember the atheists goal is to make it illegal to go to church.

You can say the f word the s word etc but DARE SAY GOD! I guarantee you if she had spoken out to say child molestation is okay and terrorism is peachy the ACLU would have defended her to the death as Al Queda and Nambla are their favorite groups. Atheists also love those groups.

Sorry worthless subhuman slimeball atheists this is a matter of freddom of speech. If she feels she owes a lot to God to get her where she’s gone she should have the right to say it. I gave a speech as class president in 86 at my graduation. I gave credit to God, my parents and my grandparents. If I had wanted to credit God, my parents, my dog or the Chicago Cubs it should have been my right.

But not being worthless subhuman slimeball hate filled atheists my school board said okay to what I said.

i’d invite you to dinner to discuss this Scooter but I am a very good cook and you wouldn’t believe there was a cook so my effort would be wasted.

The one thing that atheists are never asked which is something I ask them constantly and so should you is this. If you are an atheist, then that means that you don’t believe in any God or the notion of divinity. If that’s the case, then why are you complain about something you aren’t supposed to believe in the the first place? A real atheist wouldn’t even acknowledge that any divinity of any kind is in the realm of their thought.

But alas, this isn’t the case is it? Psuedo-atheists aren’t real atheists at all, they are God-haters, which means they are anti-god. They believe that a god or a divinity exists, but they don’t want it to, they want to expunge any mention of a divinity of any kind anywhere. You can’t have it both ways atheists. What’s it going to be? Completely remove your rhetoric from the political stage and proclaim that God/Divinity of any kind simply exists and therefore isn’t in your cultural construct or philosphy OR finally admit that your atheism is actually a religious movement, with it’s own religious fervor and that it’s your duty to evangelize an anti-god socio-political movement.

Choose.

Oh my, OH my, here are the real facts….....

The Clark County School District lawyer Bill Hoffman said the regulation allows students to talk about religion, but speeches can’t cross into the realm of preaching.

“We encourage people to talk about religion and the impact on their lives. But when that discussion crosses over to become proselytizing, then we to tell students they can’t do that,” Hoffman said.

This is just another example of liberals belief in free speech… as long as its speech they agree with.

Its amazing that anybody takes them seriously anymore.

Asmodeus on June 20, 2006 at 2:31 pm said:

Steph on June 20, 2006 at 1:35 pm said:

Scooter our resident king of hate as all atheists are.

REMEMBER ATHEISTS DON’T HELP CHARITY THEY SUE TO TAKE MONEY FROM CHARITIES!

Atheists do nothing but spread hate. Religions do too but they do a lot of good. Atheists only do bad.

Remember the atheists goal is to make it illegal to go to church.

You can say the f word the s word etc but DARE SAY GOD! I guarantee you if she had spoken out to say child molestation is okay and terrorism is peachy the ACLU would have defended her to the death as Al Queda and Nambla are their favorite groups. Atheists also love those groups.

Sorry worthless subhuman slimeball atheists this is a matter of freddom of speech. If she feels she owes a lot to God to get her where she’s gone she should have the right to say it. I gave a speech as class president in 86 at my graduation. I gave credit to God, my parents and my grandparents. If I had wanted to credit God, my parents, my dog or the Chicago Cubs it should have been my right.

But not being worthless subhuman slimeball hate filled atheists my school board said okay to what I said.

i’d invite you to dinner to discuss this Scooter but I am a very good cook and you wouldn’t believe there was a cook so my effort would be wasted.

The one thing that atheists are never asked which is something I ask them constantly and so should you is this. If you are an atheist, then that means that you don’t believe in any God or the notion of divinity. If that’s the case, then why are you complain about something you aren’t supposed to believe in the the first place? A real atheist wouldn’t even acknowledge that any divinity of any kind is in the realm of their thought.

But alas, this isn’t the case is it? Psuedo-atheists aren’t real atheists at all, they are God-haters, which means they are anti-god. They believe that a god or a divinity exists, but they don’t want it to, they want to expunge any mention of a divinity of any kind anywhere. You can’t have it both ways atheists. What’s it going to be? Completely remove your rhetoric from the political stage and proclaim that God/Divinity of any kind simply exists and therefore isn’t in your cultural construct or philosphy OR finally admit that your atheism is actually a religious movement, with it’s own religious fervor and that it’s your duty to evangelize an anti-god socio-political movement.

Choose.

More idiotic logic. We should make all of our schools teach Islamic theology. Why would it offend you? You don’t believe it, right? Swish!

As an atheist, I think that valedictorians should be able to say whatever they want in their speeches (provided they don’t denigrate any particular group of people). There is, however, no constitutional issue whatever in cutting off a speech that deviates from the approved version, especially if the person delivering the speech has agreed to deliver that version.

Hey, waitforthefacts

Soooo… the girl mentions the name “Christ” and that is considered “preaching?” lol…

Like I said… its amazing your side is even taken seriously anymore.

Egg on June 20, 2006 at 2:37 pm said:

Hey, waitforthefacts

Soooo… the girl mentions the name “Christ” and that is considered “preaching?” lol…

Like I said… its amazing your side is even taken seriously anymore.

Uh, no. It looks like you didn’t read the article either. She didn’t just mention Christ…

“In the version approved by school officials, six of those words were omitted along with two biblical references. Also deleted from her speech was a reference to God’s love being so great that he gave his only son to suffer an excruciated death in order to cover everyone’s shortcomings and forge a path to heaven.”

If she said “Jesus was just a prophet,” you would have a can of gasoline and a cross ready. Maybe you should keep that piehole closed until you read the article, including the parts that great site stoptheaclue.com conveniently left out from the text repeated in his “analysis.”

That one had to hurt…that was a direct hit.

To such left-wing groups like the ACLU Atheists,Communist and Lawyers Underground and i understand where the ACLUs founder is was himself a confirmed socialists and its plain that to the ACLU freedom of speech and freedom of religion belongs to musils,buddas earth worshipping pagans but not to christians what two faced hypocracy

spurwing plover on June 20, 2006 at 2:59 pm said:

To such left-wing groups like the ACLU Atheists,Communist and Lawyers Underground and i understand where the ACLUs founder is was himself a confirmed socialists and its plain that to the ACLU freedom of speech and freedom of religion belongs to musils,buddas earth worshipping pagans but not to christians what two faced hypocracy

Is this President Bush?

LtntWolfe on June 20, 2006 at 2:34 pm said:

Asmodeus on June 20, 2006 at 2:31 pm said:

Steph on June 20, 2006 at 1:35 pm said:

Scooter our resident king of hate as all atheists are.

REMEMBER ATHEISTS DON’T HELP CHARITY THEY SUE TO TAKE MONEY FROM CHARITIES!

Atheists do nothing but spread hate. Religions do too but they do a lot of good. Atheists only do bad.

Remember the atheists goal is to make it illegal to go to church.

You can say the f word the s word etc but DARE SAY GOD! I guarantee you if she had spoken out to say child molestation is okay and terrorism is peachy the ACLU would have defended her to the death as Al Queda and Nambla are their favorite groups. Atheists also love those groups.

Sorry worthless subhuman slimeball atheists this is a matter of freddom of speech. If she feels she owes a lot to God to get her where she’s gone she should have the right to say it. I gave a speech as class president in 86 at my graduation. I gave credit to God, my parents and my grandparents. If I had wanted to credit God, my parents, my dog or the Chicago Cubs it should have been my right.

But not being worthless subhuman slimeball hate filled atheists my school board said okay to what I said.

i’d invite you to dinner to discuss this Scooter but I am a very good cook and you wouldn’t believe there was a cook so my effort would be wasted.

The one thing that atheists are never asked which is something I ask them constantly and so should you is this. If you are an atheist, then that means that you don’t believe in any God or the notion of divinity. If that’s the case, then why are you complain about something you aren’t supposed to believe in the the first place? A real atheist wouldn’t even acknowledge that any divinity of any kind is in the realm of their thought.

But alas, this isn’t the case is it? Psuedo-atheists aren’t real atheists at all, they are God-haters, which means they are anti-god. They believe that a god or a divinity exists, but they don’t want it to, they want to expunge any mention of a divinity of any kind anywhere. You can’t have it both ways atheists. What’s it going to be? Completely remove your rhetoric from the political stage and proclaim that God/Divinity of any kind simply exists and therefore isn’t in your cultural construct or philosphy OR finally admit that your atheism is actually a religious movement, with it’s own religious fervor and that it’s your duty to evangelize an anti-god socio-political movement.

Choose.

More idiotic logic. We should make all of our schools teach Islamic theology. Why would it offend you? You don’t believe it, right? Swish!

No, you fucking moron. I believe that islamic theology exists and I don’t have a problem with islamic theology, you naive little prick. If that was a muslim valedictorian, would the ACLU have cut of the microphone as well, you festering gob of pig-puss? When you are done trying to break the suction you’ve placed on your toilet seat from that large sack of shit you call your ass and broke a hand away to type this irreducible pile of illogical garbage, then you can pretend to be able to come to my level logic. Right now you are nothing but a flush away from imbecility.

While you are busy breaking your other hand trying to pat yourself on the back for some perceived zing against what i’ve said, you completely and assume far to much from that pea brain of yours, you’ve missed the obvious again. Who authorized the ACLU to even be the overseer of a public school graduation address? When did the ACLU become an arbiter of speech? While I wouldn’t be offended if she was a muslim student invoking Allah, she still may have had to deal with public opinion about her statements, but that wasn’t even the case here now was it, you simple-minded little troll.

Flush!

The aclu is run by amateur constitutionalists. Their best amateur pronouncement is that the CONSTITUTION has the words: “SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.”
aclu=yawn

“No, you fucking moron. I believe that islamic theology exists and I don’t have a problem with islamic theology, you naive little prick. If that was a muslim valedictorian, would the ACLU have cut of the microphone as well, you festering gob of pig-puss?”

Well, looks like someone is a little hot under the collar. You sound ridiculous. Athiests love Al Quaeda? Fine. Christians love Timothy McVeigh. Ooooh, that one must have put some color in your face. Also, she could have said she owed a lot to God, or Christ. That wasn’t the problem. If can close that sewer underneath your nose, you might realize she obviously went beyond that by her own statements and what is in the article. Also, you believe Islamic theology exists? That’s nice. Do you believe Islamic theology is correct? That is the point (not that it exists….duh).

Also, the ACLU didn’t oversee this; they only commented on it after it happened! But, I really doubt you (or anyone else on this site) would want to sit through a diatribe at graduation about how jesus was just a prophet, how the next caliphate is coming, how jews are pigs, etc, as this graduation speech cost tax-payer dollars.

Jesus Christ people, what’s up with the “Atheists love Al-Qaeda” crap around here??? Are you that retarded? Atheists don’t believe in any god in contrast to Al-Qaeda which believes it’s actions are blessed and santioned by God. In fact, people like the Jihadists are a perfect example of how religion can go too far.

In any case, I sort of go with Scooter on that one. If the girl only wanted to mention that God and Jesus helped her graduate, fine. However, if she were saying that there is no salvation but through Jesus Christ, that is no different than saying there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet. This sort of preaching is for sunday school, not public school. While the student is a private individual, she is still speaking at a tax-payer funded event. I don’t want my tax money to be used for preaching any particular religion, period.

LtntWolfe

Sooooo… once again… where is the “preaching” in what she said? So when someone says something in which someone else disagrees, that is automatically regarded as “preaching?” lol… get real.

Once again… so much for free speech… right?

Oh wait… I disagree with you on this point… I must be preaching, right?

However, if she were saying that there is no salvation but through Jesus Christ, that is no different than saying there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet. This sort of preaching is for sunday school, not public school.

So how about the requirement of teaching Islam in California public schools as I posted (#27)?

Where was the ACLU? Where are you?

So how about the requirement of teaching Islam in California public schools as I posted (#27)?

Where was the ACLU? Where are you?

Well, me personally, I am far away from California. Having only read your comment, I think the education plan as you described it is somewhat extreme – I have no problem with teaching kids about different religions, but making them role play Muslims simply goes over the line.

Regarding where the ACLU, well, I am not in any way affiliated with the ACLU so I cannot answer that question, sorry. But then again, are the ACLU the only organization in America which can file a lawsuit? I am sure if Michele Malkin or Ann Coulter asked their supporters to contribute for a fund to launch the lawsuit, there would be plenty of responders and supporters.

Having only read your comment, I think the education plan as you described it is somewhat extreme – I have no problem with teaching kids about different religions, but making them role play Muslims simply goes over the line.

I appreciate your clarifying your position. I didn’t mean to give the impression you were an ACLU member. But I do believe you are supporting some of the same policy beliefs. You at least admitted the inconsistency of teaching Islam by mandate while the ACLU is/was nowhere to be heard.

Egg on June 20, 2006 at 3:44 pm said:

LtntWolfe

Sooooo… once again… where is the “preaching” in what she said? So when someone says something in which someone else disagrees, that is automatically regarded as “preaching?” lol… get real.

Once again… so much for free speech… right?

Oh wait… I disagree with you on this point… I must be preaching, right?

Go to church and listen to a sermon. It sounds the same, but is longer and much more boring. You have already conceded she didn’t just mention God or Christ and thank him.

But let me see if I understand where you are coming from. Let’s say I am the valedictorian and I put this in my speech.

“Also, I would like to thank Muhhamad and Allah, for exposing Jesus as a fictional zombie-character and also for showing the he was just a prophet. This is God’s word. Jesus was in reality, probably a homosexual.”

Just a disagreement right? Also, let’s also say that it cost the taxpayers $400 to hear that (cost of podium over time, electricity, microphone, special sash, etc.). Still just a disagreement?

Also, I don’t know why the ACLU wasn’t involved in that Islam-Classroom case. If anything, I think the devil is in the details. If you looks at the conservative blog posts about this story, they all conveniently leave out where she talks about Jesus as God’s son and how he was sacrificed. I wouldn’t be surprised if they left something important out on purpose as they did here. I’ll look into it, but every single site i have found for it so far is a conservative blog.

Regarding that California incident I found some links which elaborated more:

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/byronislam.htm

http://www.snopes.com/religion/islam.htm

Egg on June 20, 2006 at 2:37 pm said:

Hey, waitforthefacts

Soooo… the girl mentions the name “Christ” and that is considered “preaching?” lol…

Like I said… its amazing your side is even taken seriously anymore.

Get the facts, it wasn’t the word Christ that got her cut off.

It was her insistance of lecturing people…..

Learn the difference before you call people names.

And you’ve already conceded that you’re all about censorship.

Who cares if she mentions Jesus being God’s son and his sacrafice? I’m still confused on how this is “preaching.”

No… what this comes down to is political correctness and the fear that someone might get offended in hearing someone else mention their beliefs.

As for this:

“Also, I would like to thank Muhhamad and Allah, for exposing Jesus as a fictional zombie-character and also for showing the he was just a prophet. This is God’s word. Jesus was in reality, probably a homosexual.”

How in the hell is this even in the same realm? Did this girl insult anyone elses faith? No she didn’t… you can’t even compare the two. That example just proves your ignorance? Did she insult Mohamed or Allah once in her speech? lol… Keep trying, but you can’t hide the fact that you believe that the first amendment protects only speech you like.

waitforthefacts

And… once again… where is the example of her lecturing people? Oh wait… she brought up her religion and what it means to her… I guess that would be considered “lecturing.”

lol… keep trying.

Ian,

I thought you were going to keep this site a little more civilized. How can anyone talk about Christ and they use the f*** word. And they have the nerve to lecture liberals on decency. Give me a break.

Besides, I have my form of Christianity and I would not want to listen to some loud mouth highschool kid lecture me about Christ at a graduation.

waitforthefacts on June 20, 2006 at 4:22 pm said:

Ian,

I thought you were going to keep this site a little more civilized. How can anyone talk about Christ and they use the f*** word. And they have the nerve to lecture liberals on decency. Give me a break.

Besides, I have my form of Christianity and I would not want to listen to some loud mouth highschool kid lecture me about Christ at a graduation.

You wouldn’t want to hear a highschool kid “lecture” you? Hmmm… well that settles it, ban free speech you don’t like. Gotcha.

As for lecturing… I still fail to see where you’re getting that.

“LtntWolfe Said:
2:44 pm [ Quote ]

Uh, no. It looks like you didn’t read the article either. She didn’t just mention Christ…

“In the version approved by school officials, six of those words were omitted along with two biblical references. Also deleted from her speech was a reference to God’s love being so great that he gave his only son to suffer an excruciated death in order to cover everyone’s shortcomings and forge a path to heaven.”

Uh Wolfie, don’t you read your own cut and pastes? You told us what was DELETED from the speech, not what was OFFENSIVE IN the speech. As of now, all we know is the CENSORS found the word CHRIST to be offensive.

If you believe in Jesus as just a a prophet or just some guy or a myth, then hearing someone say he was God’s son and sacrificed by God for our sins and all could easily be offensive, especially if the only reason you came was to see your kid graduate and you were forced to support the school through taxation.

You even admitted it could be offensive. I believe Jesus was a zombie and possibly a homosexual. Why do my beliefs offend you? (that’s a swish)

Here is a legal doc for the Muslim classroom deal.
http://www.nsba.org/site/docs/34200/34136.pdf

It looks like she did the same thing with other religions, not just Islam and presented it in a historical & cultural view. Also, the ACLU doesn’t go after all biblical references in the public. For example, it agrees that a courtroom can show Moses delivering the ten commandments because historically Moses was a giver of laws. I personally think that class would just suck in general though. I would need ritalin to sit through something so boring. But more importantly, i would oppose it…I doubt some elementary school teacher who has a just b.a. in something is an expert enough on anything to teach this kind of stuff. If anything, I bet it is really just completely stereotypical.

Yes… we have a right to free speech, but not “offensive” speech. lol.

Ok… Now I know where the left stands. Well… I’ve always known where they’ve stood… but never has it been so obvious.

You pretty much said just this: “If speech offends me it should be banned.”

I thought the right were supposed to be the “advocates of censorship” Quit messing with the stereotypes!

Jerry on June 20, 2006 at 4:27 pm said:

“LtntWolfe Said:
2:44 pm [ Quote ]

Uh, no. It looks like you didn’t read the article either. She didn’t just mention Christ…

“In the version approved by school officials, six of those words were omitted along with two biblical references. Also deleted from her speech was a reference to God’s love being so great that he gave his only son to suffer an excruciated death in order to cover everyone’s shortcomings and forge a path to heaven.”

Uh Wolfie, don’t you read your own cut and pastes? You told us what was DELETED from the speech, not what was OFFENSIVE IN the speech. As of now, all we know is the CENSORS found the word CHRIST to be offensive.

She gave the unedited speech.

LtntWolfe on June 20, 2006 at 3:18 pm said:

“No, you fucking moron. I believe that islamic theology exists and I don’t have a problem with islamic theology, you naive little prick. If that was a muslim valedictorian, would the ACLU have cut of the microphone as well, you festering gob of pig-puss?”

Well, looks like someone is a little hot under the collar. You sound ridiculous. Athiests love Al Quaeda? Fine. Christians love Timothy McVeigh. Ooooh, that one must have put some color in your face. Also, she could have said she owed a lot to God, or Christ. That wasn’t the problem. If can close that sewer underneath your nose, you might realize she obviously went beyond that by her own statements and what is in the article. Also, you believe Islamic theology exists? That’s nice. Do you believe Islamic theology is correct? That is the point (not that it exists….duh).

Also, the ACLU didn’t oversee this; they only commented on it after it happened! But, I really doubt you (or anyone else on this site) would want to sit through a diatribe at graduation about how jesus was just a prophet, how the next caliphate is coming, how jews are pigs, etc, as this graduation speech cost tax-payer dollars.

What the fuck are you? 12? You can’t even string together a cohesive thought much less a rational argumentative sentence structure to save your life. Where in the holy host of fuck did you come up with this, “Athiests love Al Quaeda?” Have I ever said that? Did I ever say that? You have a real problem with comprehension when it comes to things like reading words.

and what about this gem of creativity and phoney retort, “Christians love Timothy McVeigh.” First of all, I don’t know of a single American who thinks McVeigh was a christian and if you are even remotely implying that he was a Christian terrorist than you couldn’t be more wronger than trying to fondle yourself in front of old ladies at the hair salon.

I love this one too, “Ooooh, that one must have put some color in your face.” as if you can be pictured high-fiving yourself, while you try to move that 400 lbs. of girth that’s wedged into your nerd chair long enough for you to pull yourself away from your aol pedophile chat session, you rancid little vomit eater.

oh look, a real stab at logic (that fails yet again), “If can close that sewer underneath your nose, you might realize she obviously went beyond that by her own statements and what is in the article. Also, you believe Islamic theology exists? That’s nice. Do you believe Islamic theology is correct? That is the point (not that it exists….duh).”

She chose not abide by the censored speech, but yet the officials let her give her speech anyway, until she got to the oh-so-offensive-to-atheists-who-don’t-believe-in-god-anyway-crowd. It isn’t whether she went beyond, it’s the fact that her speech was censored, by public officials acting in the interest of a private socialist/communist lawyer group. Getting the point now? Even though you’ve brought up this idiotic comparison to Islam that has about as much relevance as your next prostate exam, I’ll go ahead and answer it anyway. Do I believe that Islamic theology is correct? No, I don’t. Does that mean I don’t like Islamic theology or that it shouldn’t be commented on in a public venue or forum, absolutely not. It’s up to the American citizenry on hand to determine if they are willing to uphold or condemn speech that uplifts, promotes, or values islamic theology. See the difference, you idiot? Let people make the decisions, not the ACLU, not public officials, not beauracrats. Of course that’s all you care about right? You want custom tailored, sanitized speech, right?

But hey, how much of a liar do you think you are? I’ll tell you how much, mallet head. You said this, “Also, the ACLU didn’t oversee this; they only commented on it after it happened!” really? Are you sure about that, you little liar:

From the article itself – “However, Clark County School District officials and an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union said Friday that cutting McComb’s mic was the right call.”

Wow, how did the Clark Country officials and an attorney for the ACLU get in on the action? Furthermore:

“Allen Lichtenstein, general counsel for the ACLU of Nevada, had read the unedited version of McComb’s speech and said district officials did the right thing by cutting McComb’s speech short because her commentary promoted religion.”

Hmmm, he read her unedited speech. Fancy that, you walking asshat. Funny how the ACLU seems to pop up in the oddest places whenever they consider speech to be objectionable and since the ACLU and the Clark Country school district have become the defacto arbiters of speech according to this statement alone”

“In 2003, the Clark County School Board amended district regulations on religious free speech, prohibiting district officials from organizing a prayer at graduation or selecting speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech or a prayer.

The remainder of the amendment allows for religious expression during school ceremonies.

Where students or other private graduation speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, however, that expression is not attributable to the school and, therefore, may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content,” it states.”

Then you have to wonder whether an arbitrary decision was made as to who decided, within these organizations, what is allowable speech that contains religious imagery, connotations, or expression as opposed to what they think proselytizing is given that they have discretion on what they even handed religious speech is.

In essence, what you are is a fifth columnist censor. That speech applies only to your brand of thinking. That any speech that contains any reference of divinity, religion, spirituality, christ, mohammed, krishna, or any other reference of that kind is verbotten. Maybe if you wanted me to close the doors to the sewers then maybe you should rethink that what stinks is the mental garbage that you continually spew around here and try to pass it off as actual logic, actual thought, or opinion based on facts. So far, your shit still smells like shit.

waitforthefacts on June 20, 2006 at 4:22 pm said:

Ian,

I thought you were going to keep this site a little more civilized. How can anyone talk about Christ and they use the f*** word. And they have the nerve to lecture liberals on decency. Give me a break.

Besides, I have my form of Christianity and I would not want to listen to some loud mouth highschool kid lecture me about Christ at a graduation.

HAHAHAHA Is this the lefts version of the high road? OH NOES You can’t use the name of Christ and then inject the word fuck within the same sentence now can you?

You are one transparent moron. Your smarmyness is directly proportional to your idiocy.

Egg on June 20, 2006 at 4:43 pm said:

Yes… we have a right to free speech, but not “offensive” speech. lol.

Ok… Now I know where the left stands. Well… I’ve always known where they’ve stood… but never has it been so obvious.

You pretty much said just this: “If speech offends me it should be banned.”

I thought the right were supposed to be the “advocates of censorship” Quit messing with the stereotypes!

I’m not the one who brought up offensive speech. Simply put, does this speech endorse a specific religion? Yes, christianity. I think everyone agrees on that, including the speaker. Is it preaching? I think so, you don’t, the word preaching is really irrelevant. I could use “prosteltyzing,” “endorsing,” whatever. Is it funded by tax dollars and school sponsored? Yes.

She can challenge this in court, but I bet the case would be thrown out. As I said before, i think she just did it to get on Hannity and that Other Guy and become a superstar at the Christian college she is going to.

waitforthefacts on June 20, 2006 at 4:15 pm said:

Egg on June 20, 2006 at 2:37 pm said:

Hey, waitforthefacts

Soooo… the girl mentions the name “Christ” and that is considered “preaching?” lol…

Like I said… its amazing your side is even taken seriously anymore.

Get the facts, it wasn’t the word Christ that got her cut off.

It was her insistance of lecturing people…..

Learn the difference before you call people names.

Uh, how is it possible that you could possibly infer that she was lecturing anyone when her microphone was cut off at the point you might have perceived that she may have lectured anyone? Does your stupidity know no bounds?

When you stop believing in God you start believing in anything.

You mean the school board is a socialst/communist lawyer group?
Also, where is your proof that the ACLU was there or even read the speech before she gave it? The article said the ACLU guy commented on it on Friday…the speech was given on Thursday (it’s in the article itself). The school board member probably cut it short because this Christian valedictorian was a liar and a Judas – she must have agreed to give the edited speech
or they would not have let her up there in the first place.

Once again, this speech clearly favored Christianity. It only gives the Christian version of jesus, not the muslim or jewish version (or my version). That is a fact, not logic.

And, for the 13th time, it would have been fine if she said she thanked Christ, God, Vishnu, or whoeever. She didn’t do just that, she went into how Jesus was sacrificed ont he cross as God’s son. This is a fact, not logic.

Asmodeus on June 20, 2006 at 4:54 pm said:

waitforthefacts on June 20, 2006 at 4:15 pm said:

Egg on June 20, 2006 at 2:37 pm said:

Hey, waitforthefacts

Soooo… the girl mentions the name “Christ” and that is considered “preaching?” lol…

Like I said… its amazing your side is even taken seriously anymore.

Get the facts, it wasn’t the word Christ that got her cut off.

It was her insistance of lecturing people…..

Learn the difference before you call people names.

Uh, how is it possible that you could possibly infer that she was lecturing anyone when her microphone was cut off at the point you might have perceived that she may have lectured anyone? Does your stupidity know no bounds?

She was giving the older, unedited version of the speech that the school board had previously read. They cut it when they knew she would start banging her bible. I guess they hoped she wouldn’t betray them and give another version of the speech (not the edited or edited), but as soon as the bible-banging began they had to take it to level 2.

Rob on June 20, 2006 at 4:55 pm said:

When you stop believing in God you start believing in anything.

Yeah, like people coming out of the grave (zombies or Jesus).

What a bunch of cowards, how do you live with yourselves and you know who you are!

AND STILL NONE OF YOU HAVE THE COURAGE TO STAND UP FOR BOTH SIDES HAVING THEIR EQUAL RIGHTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. THAT SAYS MORE ABOUT YOU THAN ANYTHING YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN WITH REGARD TO GOD.

They call that hypocrisy.

1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion

I would defend your right to have your religion just as much as I would defend my own right to NOT have religion. I find it interesting that I’ve never heard any of you far right conservatives or far left liberals EVER state that you would defend someone’s right to not have a religous belief and that your beliefs are your own and should not belong in the greater society at large because it’s a personal journey not governed by our country.

quoted by the moron “she went into how Jesus was sacrificed ont he cross as God’s son.”

And explain to me how that is an endorsement of Christianity? This is a biblical fact to all Christians. Since she was GOING TO utter those words, how was making that specific statement an endorsement of religion? How is saying that Jesus was sacrificed on the cross as God’s son an endoresment of Christianity. How is saying that Purple teletubbie sacrificed the Red teletubbie for the Baby-in-the-Sun an endorsement of the teletubbies?

Please, simply admit that you are for suppression of speech and you can at least have a modicum of credibility. If you want to call it that. Because right now, you are nothing a mouth with his hand on the ctrl-c buttons.

Asmodeus on June 20, 2006 at 5:26 pm said:

quoted by the moron “she went into how Jesus was sacrificed ont he cross as God’s son.”

And explain to me how that is an endorsement of Christianity? This is a biblical fact to all Christians. Since she was GOING TO utter those words, how was making that specific statement an endorsement of religion? How is saying that Jesus was sacrificed on the cross as God’s son an endoresment of Christianity. How is saying that Purple teletubbie sacrificed the Red teletubbie for the Baby-in-the-Sun an endorsement of the teletubbies?

Please, simply admit that you are for suppression of speech and you can at least have a modicum of credibility. If you want to call it that. Because right now, you are nothing a mouth with his hand on the ctrl-c buttons.

“And explain to me how that is an endorsement of Christianity? This is a biblical fact to all Christians.”

Done.

Also, I’ve never seen the teletubbies, but I was not aware that people believe they are real and that one of them was supposedly sacrificed.

Ltnt Wolfe is proselytizing.

Ban him.

.

And explain to me how that is an endorsement of Christianity? This is a biblical fact to all Christians. Since she was GOING TO utter those words, how was making that specific statement an endorsement of religion? How is saying that Jesus was sacrificed on the cross as God’s son an endoresment of Christianity.

LOL, are you freaking kidding me? Citing Jesus’s death as the death of the son of God is not simply mentioning a historical fact, it is endorsing a MAJOR tenet to the Christian religion, since obviously it is Christians who believe that Jesus was the son of God, not Jews or Muslims, or Hindus, etc.

In any case, if she indeed made an agreement with the school but then packpedalled than she deserves what happend. Maybe what she was going to say is not controversial whatsover, but when the school officials saw that she is not going according to plan, they didn’t have much of a choice, did they?

Zim you are attempting to discuss this matter intelligently with unarmed individuals. Clearly those that are so entrenched in their beliefs on either side are not willing to address my post #65 or your intelligent writing because the left is no better than the right and the right is no better than the left. But cheers to you for trying.

Christian children are constantly being indoctrinated by atheists every day in classrooms but are not allowed the first ammendment right of expressing their beliefs.
The fact is that atheists are allowed their right to offend but Christians are not allowed their right to offend.

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 5:48 pm said:

Zim you are attempting to discuss this matter intelligently with unarmed individuals. Clearly those that are so entrenched in their beliefs on either side are not willing to address my post #65 or your intelligent writing because the left is no better than the right and the right is no better than the left. But cheers to you for trying.

GAHAAHAHHAA Scooter restorts to ideological equivocation and generic flattery. The right is universes better than the left could possibly hope to be. The left aspires to manifest itself into the depths of immoral bluriness.

LtntWolfe on June 20, 2006 at 5:30 pm said:

Asmodeus on June 20, 2006 at 5:26 pm said:

quoted by the moron “she went into how Jesus was sacrificed ont he cross as God’s son.”

And explain to me how that is an endorsement of Christianity? This is a biblical fact to all Christians. Since she was GOING TO utter those words, how was making that specific statement an endorsement of religion? How is saying that Jesus was sacrificed on the cross as God’s son an endoresment of Christianity. How is saying that Purple teletubbie sacrificed the Red teletubbie for the Baby-in-the-Sun an endorsement of the teletubbies?

Please, simply admit that you are for suppression of speech and you can at least have a modicum of credibility. If you want to call it that. Because right now, you are nothing a mouth with his hand on the ctrl-c buttons.

“And explain to me how that is an endorsement of Christianity? This is a biblical fact to all Christians.”

Done.

Also, I’ve never seen the teletubbies, but I was not aware that people believe they are real and that one of them was supposedly sacrificed.

You mean you couldn’t equivocate it in your own special needs way. Stating the biblical fact of Christ dying on the cross to absolve sin isn’t an endorsement of religion. Saying something like this, “Christ died on the cross to absolve my sins and he did it for you too” is an endorsement of religion. Until you can reconcile the two, this girl’s speech was patently constitutional and within the bounds of even the Clark County School districts guidelines.

It’s just like the Leftists here on the post that they are like the ACLU too a bunch of Satan Worshipers and Anti-Christ provocators and as far as I am concerned your kind can all go to hell end of story.

zim the dim said “citing Jesus’s death as the death of the son of God is not simply mentioning a historical fact,”

You must like to see what you only want to see. I never said HISTORICAL FACT, I said BIBLICAL FACT. Do you understand the difference? Are you even capable of comprehension on a 3rd grade level? For her to state this biblical fact as it pertains to her person and how it affected her personage, then you do not have prostelyzation or endorsement. She was going to state her opinion to that affect, not project that everyone else within the sound of her voice must ascribe to her version or vision of her beliefs.

But since she never got the chance to actually utter those words, your argument is NIL, you vapid airhead. You see, this is called a nuanced argument, something you are clearly incapable of conducting much less being able to sustain on any primitive level. Just stop already. Your attempts at resolution are growing tiresome. You have no legal foundation to stand on. You have no Constitutional basis to stand on. You can’t even make the claim of someone endorsing a religion when the endorsment you perceived it to be wasn’t even put out over the school PA system. Instead, you’ve taken it upon yourself to champion against something that was never said and never heard. This is why you live in a fantasy world. A world where you can conjure arguments to suit your thought and argumentative tastes.

Please stop. You are an embarrasement to your ideology. As if that in and of itself was not enough to embarrass any of you that even apply it on a daily basis.

So, lemme get this straight. This pretty, smart, Christian young lady, who is the valedictorian of her class, got the microphone CUT OFF during her speech because she mentioned Jesus?

How can these bully boys on the school board or their candy ass, bedwetter defenders sleep at night? How embarassing for them. Deep in their puny, black little hearts, they know that they’re wrong. Deep down, they know that they’ve done a disservice to this young lady.

How would you liberals like it if your microphone got shut off because you mentioned…..say…..”gay” or “liberal” or “choice.”

This nation is supposed to be about the arena of ideas. What the hell are you so afraid of? That your ideas will be roundly rejected? Ridiculed? You have the freedom to say whatever you want. So does this young lady.

Another reason to abolish government schools.

crickets chirping

And still some of you have no guts to address the subject of the postings which draw out your imbalanced viewpoint and hypocrisy.

AND STILL NONE OF YOU HAVE THE COURAGE TO STAND UP FOR BOTH SIDES HAVING THEIR EQUAL RIGHTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. THAT SAYS MORE ABOUT YOU THAN ANYTHING YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN WITH REGARD TO GOD.

They call that hypocrisy.

1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion

I would defend your right to have your religion just as much as I would defend my own right to NOT have religion. I find it interesting that I’ve never heard any of you far right conservatives or far left liberals EVER state that you would defend someone’s right to not have a religous belief and that your beliefs are your own and should not belong in the greater society at large because it’s a personal journey not governed by our country.

I guess if the Liberal Left or the Self-Rightous Far Right don’t get their proverbial way, then it negates the other side completely.

Can’t you assimilate this observation of human behavior, not just on this site but throughout politics. It only changes when you change.

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 7:40 pm said:

I guess if the Liberal Left or the Self-Rightous Far Right don’t get their proverbial way, then it negates the other side completely.

Can’t you assimilate this observation of human behavior, not just on this site but throughout politics. It only changes when you change.

You too Scooter, your just as much as a part of the Leftists as the other leftists, don’t bother with trying to confuse the issue it wont do you any good. End of story period.

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 7:36 pm said:

crickets chirping

And still some of you have no guts to address the subject of the postings which draw out your imbalanced viewpoint and hypocrisy.

AND STILL NONE OF YOU HAVE THE COURAGE TO STAND UP FOR BOTH SIDES HAVING THEIR EQUAL RIGHTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. THAT SAYS MORE ABOUT YOU THAN ANYTHING YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN WITH REGARD TO GOD.

They call that hypocrisy.

1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion

I would defend your right to have your religion just as much as I would defend my own right to NOT have religion. I find it interesting that I’ve never heard any of you far right conservatives or far left liberals EVER state that you would defend someone’s right to not have a religous belief and that your beliefs are your own and should not belong in the greater society at large because it’s a personal journey not governed by our country.

You moron. This isn’t about balance. You want balance, then I suggest you supplant and ingest more fiber in your diet. Otherwise leave the real thinking to those that can do it, the right wing in this country and The Conservative movement. Proof:

“I would defend your right to have your religion just as much as I would defend my own right to NOT have religion.”

How can you possibly make this remark when you can’t even defend the underlying, foundational issue about this girl getting her microphone cut off at her own commencement speech because it was deemed that she deviated from the ‘approved’ speech. She made the choice to change her mind and yet she was still silenced from making her speech, therefore she never made or uttered the comments that you and your moronic leftist brethren thinks she made and that no one heard regardless.

You know what is hypocritical? The fact that you defend someones speech being curtailed regardless of the content of that speech and then look towards the ACLU to champion that very censorship and call it freedom, liberty, nuanced, and enlightened. Your very utterance on the subject is like poison on the fabric that the Constitution was written on. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

I’m not far left or far right you twit! Never have been, never will be, clearly you’re an idiot since you can’t perceive that from my writings, why don’t you pick up a copy of any of Ayn Rands books and see if it does anything for that pea sized brain of yours, it might help for starters.

Oh that’s right, you’re too busy being a far self-rightous twit to focus on anything other than yourself. If you were even intelligent on a scale of 1/100th in understanding and evaluating things you never would have made that statement, thank you for revealing yourself. If enough of you do reveal yourselves for the self-rightous hypocrits that you are then we’ll all know how to deal with you even MORE efficeintly.

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 8:05 pm said:

I’m not far left or far right you twit! Never have been, never will be, clearly you’re an idiot since you can’t perceive that from my writings, why don’t you pick up a copy of any of Ayn Rands books and see if it does anything for that pea sized brain of yours, it might help for starters.

Oh that’s right, you’re too busy being a far self-rightous twit to focus on anything other than yourself. If you were even intelligent on a scale of 1/100th in understanding and evaluating things you never would have made that statement, thank you for revealing yourself. If enough of you do reveal yourselves for the self-rightous hypocrits that you are then we’ll all know how to deal with you even MORE efficeintly.

Your the peon shit head, only a commie socialist would read Ayn Rand. What a commie twit you are.
Where did Ayn Rand come from? Hum she was a commie and was raised a commie and beleived in communism. You leftist scum are all the same.

Asmodeus, you are a dunce. All of life is about balance. SCIENCE - HOMEOSTASIS – ever heard of it. All life’s organisms are constantly moving towards health/balance or away from it, that includes you even at your lowest form of existence, which at this point must be fairly low. How stupid are you? Did you even go to school? OH MY GOD! You’re an idiot.

AND STILL, YOU DON’T HAVE THE GUTS TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE. WHY? BECAUSE IN ORDER TO DO SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO SEE YOURSELF FOR WHO YOU ARE BUT YOUR DENIAL WON’T LET YOU DO THAT.

It’s amazing that you would have faith in something and subjugate your life while here on this earth for something that you have ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF EXITS BEYOND DEATH - NADDA, NOTHING, ZIP, ZERO. If you have scientific proof that shows that GOD exists and he actually believes as you do, then present it to the public and we’ll all be saved. But you don’t, you have fables, parables, fiction that has no basis in reality.

BUT STILL, even in my disagreement of your viewpoint and decision to follow that doctrine, I defend your right to have your religious beliefs; you just don’t have the guts to defend others who don’t espouse your views – YOU ARE A HYPOCRIT!

AND Kronos just proved my point! People can have something valid to say even if you don’t agree with everything they do say.

You are a twit and clearly have little or no intelligence.

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 8:18 pm said:

AND Kronos just proved my point! People can have something valid to say even if you don’t agree with everything they do say.

You are a twit and clearly have little or no intelligence.

Chicken Shit Twit

BTW -

YOUR - of or relating to you or yourself

You’re – you are

Have you ever read any of her books? Oh, I see, contempt prior to investigation, of course that would be your one-sided viewpoint. Thanks for revealing yourself as an idiot.

Scooter you are just a suck ass shit head leftists scum bag and that’s all there is to that, oh btw kiss my ass.

Kronos, you are the coward, clear and simple because you don’t have the fortitude to understand that others in this country don’t believe as you do AND YET would still believe that you have a valid right to believe it.

AND there it is, you resort to your uneducated manner of speak by attacking with expletives and name calling.

Why? Because you have no foundation for argument and when confronted about your own self-rightousness, you become defensive.

Scooter not everyone is a leftist scum sucking bag like you and a few of the others here you are the coward asswipe.

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 8:25 pm said:

AND there it is, you resort to your uneducated manner of speak by attacking with expletives and name calling.

Why? Because you have no foundation for argument and when confronted about your own self-rightousness, you become defensive.

No I just go on the offensive not defensive, attack attack attack is my motto.

Kronos, you should be scared of me and others like me, because we’re Republicans with brains and intelligence who may just undermine your far right self-righteousness into oblivion.

It’s okay to admit you’re scared. That’s usually the first step to health.

ummmmm….no, it’s defensive behavior. Perhaps if you studied harder in school you would have understood that simplistic idea.

DEFENSE MECHANISMS—An unconscious way of dealing with difficult situations. ... This can include name-calling, derogatory comments, insults, threats

Scooter not everyone is a leftist scum sucking bag like you and a few of the others here you are the coward asswipe.

This sentence is not even coherent. I’m sure you mean to insult me, but please do it with some dignity and proper sentence structure.

If you’re coming to the battlefield of wits, Kronos, at least have the dignity to be armed.

Scooter on June 20, 2006 at 8:28 pm said:

Kronos, you should be scared of me and others like me, because we’re Republicans with brains and intelligence who may just undermine your far right self-righteousness into oblivion.

It’s okay to admit you’re scared. That’s usually the first step to health.

HA You are about as Republican as Bill Clinton. See, where you falter is that you associate yourself with the party, not the ideology that is the foundation of the party. Conservativism is the foundation of the Republican party. Lately, that hasn’t been the case, but for you to try and assume that you are somehow even related in any way, shape, or form with Republicanism is a farce. You are lying to yourself. You have no inkling of the notion of Conservativism because if you did, you would be defending the girls RIGHT to speak freely on the content of her speech. Instead you defend the indefensible. You are a leftist by your own words if not your own actions.

I think it’s great that you think that you are defending my rights to have religious beliefs, but you incessantly ignore the facts as they are present. You ignore the arguments I’ve placed before you and yet you have the temerity to say that you defend my right to freedom of religion. Where were you when this girl was asking for the same support? You were making specious and vacuous arguments against why she shouldn’t be able to and then proclaiming all of those that disagree with you as self-righteous hypocrits and neglecting the actual irony of your very own statements.

You willfully ignore the very core issue I’ve presented. I’ve given proof of the statements from the article above as the nature of the collective atrocity that the Clark Country School Board and the ACLU has displayed against someones Freedom of Speech under the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. You’ve summarily ignored it. Just like every other argument I’ve put forth for dissemination and analysis. You instead resort to make emotional pleas about hypocrisy and self-righteousness and then proclaim you are a republican. You further make specious assumptions that I’m a Christian without any facts to back that up. Yet, you call me a a self-righteous hypocrit with no basis in fact that I am.

How do you reconcile that fact, Scooter? Can you even try to? You aren’t even equipped to handle an argument like this which is proven by your display in this blog thread alone and yet I’m here trying to explain color to a blind man. You are a confused person (since I don’t know your gender) that has no concept of the socio-political world around her/himself. You want to play at a feint by trying to describe to me how nature seeks equilibrium as a corollary of how I described you trying to seek balance by using the intangibles of thought to describe your verbal/textual utterances. The two aren’t even similar. You are trying to seek a balance in the most ephemeral way, it’s a meaningless endeavor since argumentative verbalizations do not affect nature one bit.

Further proof that you aren’t capable of making cohesive arguments. You are trying to apply intangible concepts to nature when nature itself only deals with the physical. Nature seeks a balance within itself. Nature further abhors a vacuum, like the on between your ears and if you had any sense you would do yourself well and stay away from concepts and ideas you have no clue about.

No decent human being would engage in the use of such vulgar language, engage in childish name calling and/or make blasphemous attacks on Christ and people of faith. I will no longer respond to those posting here that are unwilling to engage in civil, reasonable debate. A few of you who are usually great at logical, sane, well thought out and decent debate have been dragged down into the sewer with LntWolf, Scooter and a couple of other atheists; and I feel bad that you allowed these hate filled people to lower your usual high standards.

Scooter spewed “DEFENSE MECHANISMS—An unconscious way of dealing with difficult situations. ... This can include name-calling, derogatory comments, insults, threats”

Self-application of this concept would work well for you, Scooter. Your entire lifespan in this blog thread has been the clearest definition of the what defense mechanism means. Take my advice, please and cease this wishful thinking that you have that you are remotely correct on this issue. You simply aren’t.

Yet more attempts to distort the 1st Amendment by the local trolls.

All I have to say is:

Conservatives have hotter women.

Yet more proof of this obvious fact. No burkinstocks, mad misandry, and hairy pits/legs/arms/god knowns what else.

Umnumzana on June 20, 2006 at 8:52 pm said:

No decent human being would engage in the use of such vulgar language, engage in childish name calling and/or make blasphemous attacks on Christ and people of faith. I will no longer respond to those posting here that are unwilling to engage in civil, reasonable debate. A few of you who are usually great at logical, sane, well thought out and decent debate have been dragged down into the sewer with LntWolf, Scooter and a couple of other atheists; and I feel bad that you allowed these hate filled people to lower your usual high standards.

Umnumzana, I tread were I need to. High or low. It doesn’t matter to me. Even the intellectually dishonest like LntWolf, Scooter, Zim, et al. need to know that they can’t get away with anything that manifests itself from what little brains they have, to operating a keyboard in this little corner of the internet. They are many in a sea of ineptitude, ignorance, and hatred. They are the antithesis of wisdom and knowledge that is applied to issues like this on a daily basis. They are simply intellectually lazy children who throw a tantrum when they are asked to submit to what is right and correct. They wear the clothes of contrarianism and think they look fashionable.

Oh, you’re all so self-rightous in your defenses, it’s such a beautiful thing to watch.

I am a registered Republican, you twit, and voted as such since 1996. Just because I don’t agree with you means I don’t understand anything about conservatives or leftists? Grow up. You would never be allowed on the debate team.

And Umnumzana you’re victimization has played itself out, by all means, don’t blog here anymore, we’ll all be the better for it.

Why, you never say anything derogetory or mean spirited, right?

Umnumzana Said:
2:04 pm
The quotations this buffoon finds laughable are the numerous direct quotations from our Founding Fathers and prior Supreme Courts decisions about this being a Christian nation. He hates it when faced with evidence of his stupidity.

Umnumzana Said:
3:44 pm
You must be French; they passed a law some years ago that exposing children to Christian teaching even in the home is a form of child abuse.

Umnumzana Said:
5:53 pm
You, in ignorance said

Umnumzana Said:
6:17 pm
It is a most damnable lie!
Despite LtntWolfe being a son of Satan and lying continually just like his father

Umnumzana Said:
6:35 pm
Like your father, you are a liar

Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds – Emerson

Asmodeus, you just can’t spar with someone of my great intelligence because you can’t recognize anything beyond your own ideas.

You see, most intelligent people, like myself and some others on this blog, know the difference between debating an issue and imposing your beliefs. You DON’T understand this so you resort to behaviors that are childish in order to make yourself feel better. It’s okay, it’s understandable, most people who engage in defense mechanisms don’t recognize the behavior at first, but you will in time. Keep reading and learning and it will happen for you. Hang in there.

I think she is a religious nutball. But for fuck sake, let her speak. Left-wing nutballs who get to be valedictorian or commencement speakers are given free reign of their bullshit. She should be allowed to say whatever she feels got her through HS. Oh, there must have been at least one Muslim valedictorian in this vast country of ours. Did he/she try to thank Allah? And if so, were they cut off?

David, where do we draw the line then on people speaking their minds when they are on government property? I understand your point and I can agree to a certain point that she should have free speech, we all should, but where should we draw the line then? If we could all agree on that aspect I could see people not having an issue with speeches, etc.

Lots of celebs, sports stars “thank God” when they win an award, which I have no problem with and defend their right to do so. If they want to talk about how Christ came into their lives and how he died for their sins, etc. I still don’t care, and it’s great that they want to do that, BUT, they are in an auditorium, hotel, blah, blah, that is not funded by government taxpayer dollars, this is where the disctinction comes in and creates the dissent.

This girl started proselytizing which crossed the line for the administration of a government run school according to the following account:

Las Vegas Sun and Review Journal:
The Clark County School District free speech regulations prohibit district officials from organizing a prayer at graduation or selecting speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech or a prayer.

The policy does allow for religious expression at school ceremonies and says speakers chosen “on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria” are responsible for the content of their expression and “it may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content.”

District lawyer Bill Hoffman said the regulation allows students to talk about religion, but speeches can’t cross into the realm of preaching.

“We encourage people to talk about religion and the impact on their lives