In article ,
says...

On 3/3/12 1:16 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 10:12:47 -0500, X ` wrote:

On 3/3/12 9:54 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleyKadnQGdHZuEt8_SnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...


Do you want to be a Catholic theocracy or a Muslim theocracy?


What's the difference?

The problem is that you lefties are willing to lay down and be walked
all over by the Muslims but, when it is any form of Christianity you
freak out.




Really? I don't recall saying or implying that I am "willing to lay down
and be walked all over by Muslims." You should cut back on those magic
'shrooms.

Don't start projecting your recreational activities onto me or others.

As a student of history (actual history, not the "conservative" view of
history), I don't see the difference between being slaughtered by
christian zealots or by muslim zealots, the two religious groups under
discussion in this thread. Both religions have a long and bloody history
of slaughter in the name of the faith.

Actions speak louder than words Harry. Your actions and your fellow
lefty's action's belie your words.


My actions? What actions of mine in preferring to being slaughtered
by christian or muslim zealots? I don't see the difference. If you are
killed by a religious fanatic, you are just as dead, whether that
fanatic be christian or muslim. Or are you trying to contend that
muslims kill in the name of religion and christians don't? That's nonsense.



I also don't "freak out" about christianity. To me, it's just another
superstition-based collection of beliefs. My objections arise when its
practitioners attempt to force their religious beliefs onto my secular
society. I'm having many good laughs these days watching the "christian"
political zealots fall on their swords over womens' reproductive health
issues.

We don't have a secular society. Never have and never will.

Yeah, we do. You just don't understand what the word means.



Women's reproductive health? This is a joke and most people can see
right through the "issue." The poor student Ms. Fluke is a 30 year old
woman who is going to Georgetown Law on a "public interest"
(http://www.law.georgetown.edu/pils/) scholarship. Her whole "beef" is
that someone else isn't paying for her birth control pills. Her argument
falls apart when it comes down to the low cost of condoms.

When a 30 year old woman stands up and says I want someone else to pay
for my birth control pills while I attend law school on a scholarship,
she doesn't garner sympathy from the majority of the country.


Ahh. You read Limbaugh's explanation of her testimony, not her
testimony. Lights out. Good night.

Her testimony was recorded. She wanted $3000 for birth control pills.


I'm hoping the young lady who Limbaugh slandered big time will initiate
a massive lawsuit against him. She is a private citizen and Limbaugh the
Pig will not be able to hide behind a claim that she was a public figure
when she testified before Congress. The woman should have all the help
she needs from her faculty and fellow students at Georgetown Law. I'm
also pleased to read that at least a handful of Limbaugh the Pig's
advertisers have decided to part ways with him.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sand...ake-victim-of-
georgetowns-policy-on-contraceptives/

Looks like Ms. Fluke went looking for a fight and she got what she
wanted.

There's no real civil penalty in most cases for insulting a public
figure on the airways. There are for what Limbaugh the Pig did.

With the knowledge that she was looking for a fight there she has no
reasonable expectation of privacy.