On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:26:28 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/16/20 1:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:18:34 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 8:04 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 12:34 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
https://ibb.co/bXyng01

So, is okay if you rank on a Christian religion, but I bet you support
Muslims rioting and killing over a cartoon.


I don't support any religions behaving badly or intruding on those who
believe differently or not at all. In this country, the offenders
typically are christians.


I don’t see Christians trying to implement their version of Sharia laws.


You're not looking.


The Christian’s are not trying to force their laws on us. Unlike the
Shariat.

I have to agree with Harry on this one. There are plenty of "morality"
laws that are based on religion not any real danger to the public.
Examples would be bigamy, laws about drugs and alcohol, obscenity,
blue laws and until recently adultery, cohabitation and various sex
acts among consenting adults. I bet they still exist in some bible
belt states.
I bet Harry even supports some of them, left over from his abandoned
Judeo/Christian upbringing.


I object to religious symbolism being displayed on public property and
on currency. I have no objection to public Christmas trees or lights, as
I don't consider them religious. I object to religious organizations
pushing to end availability of abortion. I think responsible use of
alcohol and drugs by adults should be decriminalized, along with
possession of small, personal amounts of drugs. Adultery, cohabitation
and "various sex acts" between consenting adults are none of my
business and shouldn't be the state's business, either. I don't think
there should be billboards along the highways and byways showing sex
acts, but otherwise, not my business. My dad was deeply involved in
efforts in Connecticut to repeal "blue laws" as they pertained to forced
Sunday closing.

Oh, in high school, I presented reports on Joyce's Ulysses and
Donleavy's The Ginger Man in my junior year English lit class. I believe
both books were "banned" by some groups for a while for "obscenities."

That's not a baby kicking, sweetheart, it's just a fetus!
--

Freedom Isn't Free!

On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:26:28 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/16/20 1:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:18:34 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 8:04 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 12:34 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
https://ibb.co/bXyng01

So, is okay if you rank on a Christian religion, but I bet you support
Muslims rioting and killing over a cartoon.


I don't support any religions behaving badly or intruding on those who
believe differently or not at all. In this country, the offenders
typically are christians.


I don’t see Christians trying to implement their version of Sharia laws.


You're not looking.


The Christian’s are not trying to force their laws on us. Unlike the
Shariat.

I have to agree with Harry on this one. There are plenty of "morality"
laws that are based on religion not any real danger to the public.
Examples would be bigamy, laws about drugs and alcohol, obscenity,
blue laws and until recently adultery, cohabitation and various sex
acts among consenting adults. I bet they still exist in some bible
belt states.
I bet Harry even supports some of them, left over from his abandoned
Judeo/Christian upbringing.


I object to religious symbolism being displayed on public property and
on currency. I have no objection to public Christmas trees or lights, as
I don't consider them religious. I object to religious organizations
pushing to end availability of abortion. I think responsible use of
alcohol and drugs by adults should be decriminalized, along with
possession of small, personal amounts of drugs. Adultery, cohabitation
and "various sex acts" between consenting adults are none of my
business and shouldn't be the state's business, either. I don't think
there should be billboards along the highways and byways showing sex
acts, but otherwise, not my business. My dad was deeply involved in
efforts in Connecticut to repeal "blue laws" as they pertained to forced
Sunday closing.

Oh, in high school, I presented reports on Joyce's Ulysses and
Donleavy's The Ginger Man in my junior year English lit class. I believe
both books were "banned" by some groups for a while for "obscenities."

See you are a Libertarian after all. ;-)

I don't even have a problem with religious displays on public property
as long as the tax payer is not paying and it is open to all beliefs
or even the lack of belief.

In High School I did a book report on "The Tropic of Cancer" when that
was scandalous and illegal (bootleg copies were around tho) but in the
end my report was pretty negative. I really didn't care about these
people's miserable lives. Henry Miller failed to make it any more
interesting to me by dropping a few F bombs and calling women ****s.

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:18:34 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 8:04 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 12:34 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
https://ibb.co/bXyng01

So, is okay if you rank on a Christian religion, but I bet you support
Muslims rioting and killing over a cartoon.


I don't support any religions behaving badly or intruding on those who
believe differently or not at all. In this country, the offenders
typically are christians.


I don’t see Christians trying to implement their version of Sharia laws.


You're not looking.


The Christian’s are not trying to force their laws on us. Unlike the
Shariat.

I have to agree with Harry on this one. There are plenty of "morality"
laws that are based on religion not any real danger to the public.
Examples would be bigamy, laws about drugs and alcohol, obscenity,
blue laws and until recently adultery, cohabitation and various sex
acts among consenting adults. I bet they still exist in some bible
belt states.
I bet Harry even supports some of them, left over from his abandoned
Judeo/Christian upbringing.


I am not saying there are present laws, but does not seem to be a punch for
new laws.

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/16/20 1:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:18:34 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 8:04 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/15/20 12:34 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
https://ibb.co/bXyng01

So, is okay if you rank on a Christian religion, but I bet you support
Muslims rioting and killing over a cartoon.


I don't support any religions behaving badly or intruding on those who
believe differently or not at all. In this country, the offenders
typically are christians.


I don’t see Christians trying to implement their version of Sharia laws.


You're not looking.


The Christian’s are not trying to force their laws on us. Unlike the
Shariat.

I have to agree with Harry on this one. There are plenty of "morality"
laws that are based on religion not any real danger to the public.
Examples would be bigamy, laws about drugs and alcohol, obscenity,
blue laws and until recently adultery, cohabitation and various sex
acts among consenting adults. I bet they still exist in some bible
belt states.
I bet Harry even supports some of them, left over from his abandoned
Judeo/Christian upbringing.


I object to religious symbolism being displayed on public property and
on currency. I have no objection to public Christmas trees or lights, as
I don't consider them religious. I object to religious organizations
pushing to end availability of abortion. I think responsible use of
alcohol and drugs by adults should be decriminalized, along with
possession of small, personal amounts of drugs. Adultery, cohabitation
and "various sex acts" between consenting adults are none of my
business and shouldn't be the state's business, either. I don't think
there should be billboards along the highways and byways showing sex
acts, but otherwise, not my business. My dad was deeply involved in
efforts in Connecticut to repeal "blue laws" as they pertained to forced
Sunday closing.

Oh, in high school, I presented reports on Joyce's Ulysses and
Donleavy's The Ginger Man in my junior year English lit class. I believe
both books were "banned" by some groups for a while for "obscenities."



As long as the government is not paying for the display, have no problem
with them. The founding fathers even acknowledged a supreme being. There
just was not to be a state sponsored being. Church of England was a very
recent memory. And those public lands also belong to the Christians, the
Muslims, the agnostic, the atheists.