Gene wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:21:50 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:24:22 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:02:37 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 14:15:00 -0400, Gene
wrote:

been in a state where the government is the only one to sell alcohol?
Sure, I live in one. How do the prices compare?
http://www.ncabc.com/pricing/pricebook.aspx

That is interesting. The price for Booker (single barrel whiskey) is
about the same but Johnnie Walker Scotch (black) is almost $25 more a
1.75l bottle.
Some of that may be that you have a tax of about $6.50/gal. and I
think ours is more like $10.00/gal.
Yeah those taxes will kill you, which brings us back to the topic.

It would seem to, but those taxes were enacted when the NC General
Assembly was stuffed full of fundie Baptists who successfully imposed
socially engineered behaviors on those less "of the body."

Commercially motivated interests, compelled by their need to
successfully entertain high powered buyers "from out of town", locked
horns with the fundies and finally won the battle, but with scars of
taxes and other bizarre restrictions. Those scars are still evident,
today....


I am in favor of assigning one of our 50 states to religious
fundamentals of any stripe who want to impose their beliefs on those who
either are of other faiths or no faith.

Once the state is assigned, the fundies should relocate to that state,
and engage in whatever kind of religious nonsense they wish, with the
understanding that the residents of that state will be free to terminate
them with extreme prejudice if they step over the lines of
community-city-state acceptibility.

Naturally, I'm thinking Texas would be the appropriate state for the
fundies, perhaps a decently sized section of it.

It's only the fundies who want to control those outside of their faith
that would have to move.

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:23:05 -0400, H the K wrote:


It's only the fundies who want to control those outside of their faith
that would have to move.

There was a similar project several years ago, although I don't believe
it was fundamentalists. Might have been an anti-tax group. Anyway, they
were all going to move to a state so that there votes would control the
state. They picked New Hampshire.

Texas has to large a population to make any kind of dent in.

thunder wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:23:05 -0400, H the K wrote:


It's only the fundies who want to control those outside of their faith
that would have to move.

There was a similar project several years ago, although I don't believe
it was fundamentalists. Might have been an anti-tax group. Anyway, they
were all going to move to a state so that there votes would control the
state. They picked New Hampshire.

Texas has to large a population to make any kind of dent in.


There was also some talk about fundies moving en masse to one of the
Carolinas, I think. What is it with these religious nutcases?

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:40:14 -0500, thunder wrote:


There was a similar project several years ago, although I don't believe
it was fundamentalists. Might have been an anti-tax group. Anyway,
they were all going to move to a state so that there votes would control
the state. They picked New Hampshire.

Texas has to large a population to make any kind of dent in.

Found it:

http://www.freestateproject.org/intro