I don't see that at all, that's why I'm laughing at the attempt to link the 2 unrelated events.TwinTownBisonFan wrote: no... wrong, wrong, wrong.
it's got everything to do with it... and don't deny it. a week after Tiller is shot to death IN A CHURCH a right-wing pastor calls on his congregation to bring their guns to church? the message it conveys is clear - he doesn't want Tiller to be the last.
It's Bob dammit!TwinTownBisonFan wrote:yet it didn't happen bobby... that's likely more instructive...
Where did I advocate violence? I predicted it, and was wrong. We are much more civilized.bobbythekidd wrote:It's Bob dammit!TwinTownBisonFan wrote:yet it didn't happen bobby... that's likely more instructive...
All I am saying is you (greater you, not directed at you, TT) either respect the rule of law or you don't. You can't have it both ways when it is politically expedient for your argument. You call Christians with guns domestic terrorists and compare them to McVeigh when they have done nothing violent nor have they advocated any violence in this case.
T-man calls Jon out for advocating violence even though the rule of law has spoken in Califonia. Why does the gay community get a pass for being domestic terrorists in that case? This ain't a Conk/Donk thing, it;s a human thing. Both sides do it.
I'm not linking the two events.Gil Dobie wrote:I don't see that at all, that's why I'm laughing at the attempt to link the 2 unrelated events.TwinTownBisonFan wrote: no... wrong, wrong, wrong.
it's got everything to do with it... and don't deny it. a week after Tiller is shot to death IN A CHURCH a right-wing pastor calls on his congregation to bring their guns to church? the message it conveys is clear - he doesn't want Tiller to be the last.
The fear mongering and drama by the left.
I m pretty sure I read it, and I thought it was on the last prop 8 thread. I reread it but didn't see it there.dbackjon wrote:Where did I advocate violence? I predicted it, and was wrong. We are much more civilized.
had they resorted to violence it would have been wrong, but they DIDN'T and THAT is instructive.bobbythekidd wrote:It's Bob dammit!TwinTownBisonFan wrote:yet it didn't happen bobby... that's likely more instructive...
All I am saying is you (greater you, not directed at you, TT) either respect the rule of law or you don't. You can't have it both ways when it is politically expedient for your argument. You call Christians with guns domestic terrorists and compare them to McVeigh when they have done nothing violent nor have they advocated any violence in this case.
T-man calls Jon out for advocating violence even though the rule of law has spoken in Califonia. Why does the gay community get a pass for being domestic terrorists in that case? This ain't a Conk/Donk thing, it;s a human thing. Both sides do it.
I don't see that either, they are exercising the American way of showing their support for something without repression from the government.BlueHen86 wrote:But the only fear mongering I see is by the right, who think if they don't bring their guns to church, Obama will take them away.
a man was assassinated in a church last week...Gil Dobie wrote:I don't see that either, they are exercising the American way of showing their support for something without repression from the government.BlueHen86 wrote:But the only fear mongering I see is by the right, who think if they don't bring their guns to church, Obama will take them away.
They have not resorted to violence, linking them with terrorists and murderers is fear mongering.
While he might be trying to send that message I don't think you can be absolutely positive that it was his intent. Remember a progressive is supposed to keep an open mind, not pre-judge and try and see the best in all people. You should be giving the right-wing extremist clergyman just as much benefit of the doubt as you do the meth addict with 6 kids by 4 different fathers living off of welfare.TwinTownBisonFan wrote:had they resorted to violence it would have been wrong, but they DIDN'T and THAT is instructive.bobbythekidd wrote: It's Bob dammit!
All I am saying is you (greater you, not directed at you, TT) either respect the rule of law or you don't. You can't have it both ways when it is politically expedient for your argument. You call Christians with guns domestic terrorists and compare them to McVeigh when they have done nothing violent nor have they advocated any violence in this case.
T-man calls Jon out for advocating violence even though the rule of law has spoken in Califonia. Why does the gay community get a pass for being domestic terrorists in that case? This ain't a Conk/Donk thing, it;s a human thing. Both sides do it.
i'm not having it both ways... political violence is wrong...
and in this case, the guy is, one week after dr. tiller was assassinated in a church, telling his congregation to bring their guns... the message is clear.
This reminds me of how Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly spins his schpeel, only it's a leftwing version.TwinTownBisonFan wrote:a man was assassinated in a church last week...Gil Dobie wrote:
I don't see that either, they are exercising the American way of showing their support for something without repression from the government.
They have not resorted to violence, linking them with terrorists and murderers is fear mongering.
this week, some right-wing pastor decides it's time to celebrate firearms... yeah it's a total coinky-dink.
it's not fear-mongering, it's the fact that since January elements of the right in this country have been suggesting political violence... then last week, someone acted... but hey, the church can't outright do what they want to do and have Scott Roeder Appreciation Day where they celebrate the assassin...
Reread the article. Especially the part in bold.Gil Dobie wrote:I don't see that either, they are exercising the American way of showing their support for something without repression from the government.BlueHen86 wrote:But the only fear mongering I see is by the right, who think if they don't bring their guns to church, Obama will take them away.
They have not resorted to violence, linking them with terrorists and murderers is fear mongering.
LOUISVILLE, Ky. - A Kentucky pastor is inviting his flock to bring guns to church to celebrate the Fourth of July and the Second Amendment.
New Bethel Church is welcoming "responsible handgun owners" to wear their firearms inside the church June 27, a Saturday. An ad says there will be a handgun raffle, patriotic music and information on gun safety.
"We're just going to celebrate the upcoming theme of the birth of our nation," said pastor Ken Pagano. "And we're not ashamed to say that there was a strong belief in God and firearms — without that this country wouldn't be here."
The guns must be unloaded and private security will check visitors at the door, Pagano said....
Pagano, 50, said some members of his church were concerned that President Barack Obama's administration could restrict gun ownership, and they supported the plan for the event when Pagano asked their opinion....He said the point was not to mix worship with guns, though he may reference some passages from the Bible.
"Firearms can be evil and they can be useful," he said. "We're just trying to promote responsible gun ownership and gun safety."
BlueHen86 wrote:"Firearms can be evil and they can be useful," he said. "We're just trying to promote responsible gun ownership and gun safety."
Nice of them to explain why there are fear mongering.Gil Dobie wrote:Also in the article.......
BlueHen86 wrote:
I guess it comes down to I agree to disagree BH86BlueHen86 wrote:Nice of them to explain why there are fear mongering.Gil Dobie wrote:Also in the article.......
I would agree with most of what you say, but I wouldn't call this event as being intensely preoccupied with all three. IMO, it's just a show of support. In Waco they were intensely preoccupied with all three.bench wrote:There is a distinction that needs to be made here. I believe in God, I love my country, and I respect the Second Amendment, but any group of people intensely preoccupied with all three – in America or abroad – scares the **** out of me. There's a world of difference between your ordinary patriotic Christian gun owner and a nationalist zealot gun-nut, and those who would celebrate all three as some kind of Holy Triumvirate tend to lump in with the latter group.
The responsibility for fear mongering falls on those who use judicial activism to avoid the constaints of the Constitution and undermine the social compact necessary for a civil society.BlueHen86 wrote:Nice of them to explain why there are fear mongering.Gil Dobie wrote:Also in the article.......
native wrote:The responsibility for fear mongering falls on those who use judicial activism to avoid the constaints of the Constitution and undermine the social compact necessary for a civil society.BlueHen86 wrote:
Nice of them to explain why there are fear mongering.
I think the responsibility falls on anyone who uses fear for political gain. Judicial activism could fall under that definition, as could a politician running for office or a public figure making unsubstantiated statements about global warming.native wrote:The responsibility for fear mongering falls on those who use judicial activism to avoid the constaints of the Constitution and undermine the social compact necessary for a civil society.BlueHen86 wrote:Nice of them to explain why there are fear mongering.
