Heroic church guard: 'It was me, the gunman and God'

[Lawman]

[quote name='CincyInDC' post='607966' date='Dec 12 2007, 02:54 PM']I think you mean drivel.[/quote]

Thanks

drivel
1 : [b]to let saliva dribble from the mouth[/b] : slaver
2 : to talk stupidly and carelessly

dribble
intransitive verb
1: to fall or flow in drops or in a thin intermittent stream : trickle
2: [b]to let saliva trickle from the corner of the mouth[/b]

[Lawman]

[quote]God created man independent of God with the ability to act against the nature of God, right? God must have known that by creating (or giving, same thing) free will within man that man would act against the nature of God; thus God had to know he was also creating evil.[b] Isn't that a mistake? Or is God that naive?[/b] Why not create man without the ability to do evil? I guess if God did that Jesus would be unemployed. It's so hard to get kids out of the house these days. Do you tell your oldest son, "Don't drive the car. Here's the keys." Then sit back to watch what unfolds?[/quote]

No, it is not a mistake. God chose not to create a robot that would do his will. Man was created to share companionship (love) with god. God has granted us the ability to think, create and share in camraderie with our fellow man. One of my favorite bible stories is "Joseph and the Coat of many colors". I love the line he gives his brothers at the end of the story dealing with them selling him into slavery: [quote]"You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good" (Gen. 50:15-21)[/quote]

You asked and followed up with the answer. [quote]Why not create man without the ability to do evil? I guess if God did that [u]Jesus would be unemployed[/u][/quote]
What is the greatest act of love again? I don't think you have figured out that 'self-centered/other-centered' thing yet.

Your car anology is skewered; if I say, "son you may have the car tonight, but be responsible"; then he goes out and drives over the speed limit or worse drinks and drives then that would be closer to the truth.

[quote]So the car bombing that killed the pregnant Iraqi woman, her unborn child, the driver, and 3 soldiers at the traffic check point in our sector was just to demonstrate Jesus' greatest act for me? Why not Hallmark? "When you care enough to send the very best."[/quote]

Suffering in the world is the result of human sin brought on by (the first) Adam. The world is not the way that god wants it to be, but permits evil to show how nothing good comes of it. What you are asking for will come to be.
[quote]"And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away" (Rev. 21:4).[/quote]

[quote]So what if I'm insincere. You're quest to understand Islam is insincere, but that hasn't stopped you. My insincerity isn't an obstacle preventing you from answering my questions. I haven't seen you demonstrate [b]a shred of respect towards anyone with a differing opinion regarding religion[/b]. Then you couch your bigotry in an shroud of political correctness. Don't act surprised when you get hit by some "dribble."[/quote]

[i]taquiya[/i] What do you know of it?

You say I have not demonstrated a shred of respect towards others with a differing opinion regarding religon; therefore from your own words, you are stating that 'atheism is a religon'. Of course I will be at odds with those that choose not to believe in God. They will question as to how I am unable to not see 'logic and reason' as proof demonstrating his lack of existence. I harbor my reasons for believing by viewing the same 'logic and reason' from a different varying perspective. I have my own presuppositions which to base my belief from. I laugh at your statement as I recollect what I have seen from others ridiculing christians within these threads.

On Islam, the question is should be posed: Why Christianity and not Islam? The answer is very simple;
Muhammad's tomb occupied; Jesus's tomb empty. Somebody is right and somebody is wrong.
The evidence once weighed, for me, does not favor Islam. Either Jesus was a liar or Muhammad was a liar; now whom do you think I believe?

You say I am a bigot. Yes I am a bigot against ignorance and deceipt as perpetrated by some that venture these forums. Some that choose to obfuscate truths in order to maintain comfort. Actually if you knew me as others do and you made such an accusation, you would recieve hard stares and chastized on-the-spot, especially by my next door neighbor who is black and whose friendship I cherish above many others.

Don't talk of whaling with Norweigians, don't speak of the English with the Irish, enjoyed the lamb in Turkey as well as the shwarma in Belgium and I still cannot understand why that lady wore six skirts at-once in Portugal; where incidently I first learned to haggle. I love people and I truly enjoyed meeting experiencing such diverse cultures in my travels. The most hospitable people I found to be were in the middle-east.

If one chooses to stick a green tomatoe up their ass as part of some religous belief, so be it. You confuse me with a religous man, which I am not. I despise organized religon. Christianity is not an organized religon unto itself.
I do believe in companionship with other christians, whom I am at most ease with, but that is not always feasable;
remember I am in the Navy. If a religon makes a claim as "a religon of peace" then one would not to expect what is foundin it's holy book. God does not need us fighting for him, but he does command us to be prepared to defend his words when challenged.

[Homer_Rice]

Religon. Deceipt.

"Hey. look at me, I'm the Tower of Babel."

[-GoBengals-]

what church has security guards?

[|BlackJesus|]

[quote name='GoBengals' post='608144' date='Dec 12 2007, 11:39 PM']what church has security guards?[/quote]


[b]One that doesn't put their trust in God ... or has an ex infamous pastor who used to buy meth from male hookers who he fucked in the ass (Ted Haggard)[/b]

[Go Tory Go!]

[quote name='BlackJesus' post='608146' date='Dec 12 2007, 11:42 PM'][b]One that doesn't put their trust in God ... or has an ex infamous pastor who used to buy meth from male hookers who he fucked in the ass (Ted Haggard)[/b][/quote]

In his defense...the male hookers weren't prepubescent.

[SINcinnati513]

Lawman, are you a Jehovah's Witness? You seem to have the answer to every question. You remind me of this Jehovah's Witness I used to work with. Please don't tell me that you go door knocking too.

I just don't understand how some of you guys claim to know what you know. All this stuff about this abrahamic god and how we know what he wants us to eat, how he wants us to live our lives, what happens when we die. How is it possible to know these things?

If only people were as serious about their education as they are about their religion.

[img]http://www.religionisbullshit.net/pics/godwants.gif[/img]

[|BlackJesus|]

[b]Also the shooter was not some crazed athiest on a random rampage ... he was a former member of this church ... pissed that Ted Haggard (who he says his Mom loved) duped the congregration when they found out he was sucking guys cocks for crystal meth. [/b]

[LoyalFanInGA v2.0]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']No, it is not a mistake. God chose not to create a robot that would do his will.[/quote]
Have you murdered, raped, tortured? <==Evil
Have you fucked around on your wife? <==Against God's will, but I wouldn't consider it evil

There is a difference between "evil" and "against God's will." Well, maybe not with Christians like you, but with me there is a difference.

I think when you're omnipotent you can manage to create a non-robot without the ability to do evil.

The stuff sprewing from your keyboard is exactly what I would expect from a good little christian robot.

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']Man was created to share companionship (love) with god.[/quote]
God gets lonely? Or He has a God Complex and feels the need to be worshipped?

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']You asked and followed up with the answer.
[quote]Why not create man without the ability to do evil? I guess if God did that Jesus would be unemployed[/quote]
What is the greatest act of love again? I don't think you have figured out that 'self-centered/other-centered' thing yet.
[/quote]
You still haven't figured out [i]why[/i] I wrote that comment. [i]Try to follow along, OK?[/i] If God created man without the ability to do evil or as you say 'go against God's will' then there wouldn't be any sin. [i]You with me so far?[/i] If there was no sin, then God wouldn't have to give his only begotten son for our sins. [i]Keeping up?[/i] Thus there would be no reason for Jesus' greatest act of love and self-sacrifice and Jesus would be out of a job. [i]Are you out of breath from taking those two steps of logic?[/i] (About the self-sacrifice thingee, didn't Daddy have the whole sacrifice part planned from the time of the Immaculate Conception? Jesus the man had a choice because of free will, but Jesus the Messiah...You really think he had much of a choice with Daddy watching his every move?)

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']Your car anology is skewered; if I say, "son you may have the car tonight, but be responsible"; then he goes out and drives over the speed limit or worse drinks and drives then that would be closer to the truth.[/quote]
Wrong. God didn't tell Adam, "eat from this tree responsibly." God commanded, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." -Genesis 2:17


[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']Suffering in the world is the result of human sin brought on by (the first) Adam. The world is not the way that god wants it to be, but permits evil to show how nothing good comes of it. What you are asking for will come to be.[/quote]

Continuing my role as Devil's Advocate, let's say you're right about God, man, free will, and the creation of evil. Why create malaria which kills about 1 million people each year; mostly infants, children, and pregnant women? [url="http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs094/en/index.html"]WHO factsheet[/url]

Was it a benign, little parasite that EVOLVED into a killer?

[LoyalFanInGA v2.0]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM'][i]taquiya[/i] What do you know of it?[/quote]
Have your read one of your own posts? Different fonts, colors, misuse of the quote function, copying and pasting two or more seperate articles together so they appear as one exept the verb tense has changed, not citing sources, etc, etc, etc.

You're confusing as fuck. I dare say, deceiving even.

You're walking, talking, thinking on a much lower mental capacity, living, breathing proof that the Terrorists have already won.

Sharia law, my ass. I will never date Halle Berry. I will never see Lawman walk on the moon. And I will never see sharia law in America.

That's what I know about taquiya.

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']therefore from your own words, you are stating that 'atheism is a religon'.[/quote]
Bubba, I never even parapharsed atheism is a religon, or even a religion. I would say atheism is a complete lack of faith in God. Not a religion. You stated 'atheism was a religon'.

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']Of course I will be at odds with those that choose not to believe in God.[/quote]
You're at odds with anyone who doesn't believe in your God; or believes in the same God, but in a different fashion. Obviously, this means Muslims with you, but the list doesn't end there. It includes everyone who doesn't believe as you. You've criticized other Christians for their beliefs as well.

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']I have my own presuppositions which to base my belief from. I laugh at your statement as I recollect what I have seen from others ridiculing christians within these threads.[/quote]
Good for you! If you could somehow understand that different people from different cultures may have different skin tones and different religions based upon different presuppositions that would be great for everybody else. I laugh because you don't realize you instigate the ridicule.

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']Somebody is right and somebody is wrong.[/quote]
Yes, indeed. Not one of us alive today knows for sure who is in the former group and who is in the latter. Who are we to question another's belief system?

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']Actually if you knew me as others do and you made such an accusation, you would recieve hard stares and chastized on-the-spot, especially by my next door neighbor who is black and whose friendship I cherish above many others.[/quote]
Then I would ask to use your computer, log onto this website, and let them read your words for themselves. Then they would know you as I know you.

Also, a friend is a friend is a friend is a friend. I'm sure you don't know what that means, so I'll have to explain. You see, I have friends. I don't have black friends, white friends, Georgia friends, Ohio friends, Army friends, civilian friends, christian friends, atheist friends. I just have friends. You have a black friend so you think that doesn't make you a racist. My answer to that is, "I have friends." I bet you're little, bigot brain is still confused.

[quote name='Lawman' post='608097' date='Dec 12 2007, 08:19 PM']You confuse me with a religous man[/quote]
No. No, I don't.

If I believed that, you wouldn't receive this treatment.

There are many religious men on this board, but I haven't directed any of my religiously offensive comments towards them.

What makes you different?

[Lawman]

[quote name='SINcinnati513' post='608183' date='Dec 13 2007, 03:30 AM']Lawman, are you a Jehovah's Witness? You seem to have the answer to every question. You remind me of this Jehovah's Witness I used to work with. Please don't tell me that you go door knocking too.[/quote]
No, I am not. If I must be labeled, I am a Seperatist (free will) Baptist. When they come to my door, I request that they go re-read their bible.

[quote]I just don't understand how some of you guys claim to know what you know. All this stuff about this abrahamic god and how we know what he wants us to eat, how he wants us to live our lives, what happens when we die. How is it possible to know these things?[/quote]

Some of the discussion that are brought up in these forums, I have had before, some as long as 30 years ago. Bible study. There is alot missunderstood due to translation; aramic to greek; greek to english.
Additionally, what is difficult to translate is the climate/culture at the time of the writings. Not sure as what you refer to when you ask "what he wants us to eat"; if it's edible and will not harm you then go ahead. Fasting is act of sacrifice to god. When you ask "how to live our lives" Jesus taught this.

[quote]If only people were as serious about their education as they are about their [s]religion.[/s] God[/quote]

The current climate in American academia is a dangerous one, which college professor today teach from their own personal agenda's and ideologies. They should present information and material which can be researched and offered through empirical data while encouraging their students to examine and question all.

1 Corinthians 1:17-17

[quote]17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;[/quote]

[Lawman]

[quote name='BlackJesus' post='608184' date='Dec 13 2007, 03:51 AM'][b]Also the shooter [b]was not some crazed athiest on a random rampage [/b]... [u]he was a former member [/u]of this church ... pissed that Ted Haggard (who he says his Mom loved) duped the congregration when they found out he was sucking guys cocks for crystal meth. [/b][/quote]

... who hated christians, his letters clearly stated as such. Ted Haggard definatelly has some demons to deal with.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608196' date='Dec 13 2007, 08:08 AM']The current climate in American academia is a dangerous one, which college professor today teach from their own personal agenda's and ideologies. They should present information and material which can be researched and offered through empirical data while encouraging their students to examine and question all.[/quote]

This is absurd. You have absolutely no credibility when it comes to methodology/epistemology/pedagogy.
So, how would you know? Did David Horowitz whisper this in your ear? Did you ask for a reach-around?

[Lawman]

[quote]LoyalFanInGA v2.0
Have you murdered, raped, tortured? <==Evil
Have you fucked around on your wife? <==Against God's will, but I wouldn't consider it evil

There is a difference between "evil" and "against God's will." Well, maybe not with Christians like you, but with me there is a difference.

I think when you're omnipotent you can manage to create a non-robot without the ability to do evil.

The stuff sprewing from your keyboard is exactly what I would expect from a good little christian robot[/quote]

In a nutshell; Adam was granted dominion over everthing on the earth except one tiny little itty-bit thing; the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Why did god do this? It was a test and this pisses you off that god had even placed it there. God wanted Adam to place his trust in him (God); as he does with each and everyone
of us. If you have not figured it out yet, it is my belief that Jesus as part of the Holy Trinity, and has always been with/is God.

Adams disobedience (rejection of their covenant) to God brought sin into the world which perpetrates evil.


[quote]God gets lonely? Or He has a God Complex and feels the need to be worshipped?[/quote]

As I alluded to earlier, God was not alone: "Lets make man in [b]OUR[/b] image" he did not say MY image. There were angels created prior to man in Gods company; Lucifer was one of them.

[quote]You're at odds with anyone who doesn't believe in your God; or believes in the same God, but in a different fashion. Obviously, this means Muslims with you, but the list doesn't end there. It includes everyone who doesn't believe as you. [u]You've criticized other Christians [/u]for their beliefs as well.[/quote]

If you claim that I feel the Catholic (with Big C) church has turned into an apostate church, you would be correct. Yes, I have attended Catholic mass; I came away with an empty feeling.
Now, here is where you make a mistake; I still believe there are catholics that are christian. There are few basic tenents of christianity:

Recognizing that Jesus is God in flesh, second person of the Trinity. He is our savior born of virgin birth. He died on the cross and rose again, conquering death. there are other non-essentials which cause division
and denominations.

Secularist will say that he was merely a very wise man. Mormonism says that he was the offspring from a god and goddess of another world. Jehovah Witnesses do not believe in the trinity and claim Jesus was
Michael the archangel who became a man. Muslims do not believe that Jesus was the son of God and did not die on the cross, but was replaced.

When Moses was up on the mount, he had asked God what was his name; god replied ""I AM WHO I AM”; and He said, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you,’” Exodus 3:14. In John 8:58 Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” The jews knew what he was saying; he was claiming to be god.

[quote]Yes, indeed. Not one of us [u]alive today knows for sure who is in the former group and who is in the latter[/u]. [b]Who are we to question another's belief system[/b]?[/quote]
Did you not say that you were an Army officer; is that present or former? So, you would not questions one belief's system when it attempt to imposes itself upon others. Yes, christianity attempts to convert others to its faith, but the mannerism in which is done allows others the choice; the same cannot be said of Islam. Islam is the LEAST tolerant of all the worlds religons and people are finally beggining to see it for what it is. Are there tenents within Islam that are commendable, yes there is. Additionally, as I stated earlier with concerning other christians there MORE good people within Islam than there are bad; just like christianity.

[quote]If I believed that, you wouldn't receive this treatment.

There are many religious men on this board, but I haven't directed any of my religiously offensive comments towards them: What makes you different?[/quote]

Probably because I do not fall within your paradigm of christianity. To help you out: see Richard Wurmbrand

[Lawman]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='608205' date='Dec 13 2007, 08:34 AM']This is absurd. You have absolutely no credibility when it comes to methodology/epistemology/pedagogy.
So, how would you know? Did David Horowitz whisper this in your ear? Did you ask for a reach-around?[/quote]

With whom do you hold your tenure with professor?

[Lawman]

[quote]Have your read one of your own posts? Different fonts, colors, misuse of the quote function, copying and pasting two or more seperate articles together so they appear as one exept the verb tense has changed, not citing sources, etc, etc, etc.

You're confusing as fuck. I dare say, deceiving even.

You're walking, talking, thinking on a much lower mental capacity, living, breathing proof that the Terrorists have already won.

Sharia law, my ass. I will never date Halle Berry. I will never see Lawman walk on the moon. And I will never see sharia law in America.

That's what I know about taquiya.[/quote]

If this is your reply, then you know very little at all. Enough said.

[quote]You still haven't figured out why I wrote that comment. Try to follow along, OK? If God created man without the ability to do evil or as you say 'go against God's will' then there wouldn't be any sin. You with me so far? If there was no sin, then God wouldn't have to give his only begotten son for our sins. Keeping up? Thus there would be no reason for Jesus' greatest act of love and self-sacrifice and Jesus would be out of a job. Are you out of breath from taking those two steps of logic? (About the self-sacrifice thingee, didn't Daddy have the whole sacrifice part planned from the time of the Immaculate Conception? Jesus the man had a choice because of free will, but Jesus the Messiah...You really think he had much of a choice with Daddy watching his every move?)[/quote]

Setting aside your patronization; [quote]didn't Daddy have the whole sacrifice part planned from the time of the Immaculate Conception?[/quote] even before that.

[quote]Then I would ask to use your computer, log onto this website, and let them [b]read your words [/b]for themselves. Then they would know you as I know you.[/quote]
They would wonder what it is you cannot understand. While some would merely state that you are barking up the wrong tree.

[quote]Also, a friend is a friend is a friend is a friend. I'm sure you don't know what that means, so I'll have to explain. You see, I have friends. I don't have black friends, white friends, Georgia friends, Ohio friends, Army friends, civilian friends, christian friends, atheist friends. I just have friends. You have a black friend so you think that doesn't make you a racist. My answer to that is, "I have friends." I bet you're little, bigot brain is still confused[/quote]

Are you black?

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608285' date='Dec 13 2007, 11:09 AM']With whom do you hold your tenure with professor?[/quote]
Sorry. I thought you knew. Ballbuster U. I teach a course in "How To Spot Fraudulent, Hypocritical Christians Who Advocate Death Instead Of Life."

[LoyalFanInGA v2.0]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608280' date='Dec 13 2007, 10:46 AM']In a nutshell; Adam was granted dominion over everthing on the earth except one tiny little itty-bit thing; the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Why did god do this? [b]It was a test and this pisses you off that god had even placed it there.[/b] God wanted Adam to place his trust in him (God); as he does with each and everyone
of us. If you have not figured it out yet, it is my belief that Jesus as part of the Holy Trinity, and has always been with/is God.

Adams disobedience (rejection of their covenant) to God brought sin into the world which perpetrates evil.[/quote]
It doesn't piss me off at all.

If I'm going to do something, I do it right the first time. I'm not even omnipotent.

If I were omnipotent, why would I need to test something I did right the first time?

[quote name='Lawman' post='608280' date='Dec 13 2007, 10:46 AM']As I alluded to earlier, God was not alone: "Lets make man in [b]OUR[/b] image" he did not say MY image. There were angels created prior to man in Gods company; Lucifer was one of them.[/quote]
Here I thought God had a mouse in his pocket, or was referring to the Holy Trinity with that verse from Genesis. But from the single word "our" you were able to infer God had created angels to keep him company? Impressive.

Please give me one piece of empirical datum that supports this theory. Also, please point out to me where it says God created man to keep Him company. Thanks.

Also, do angels have free will?

[quote name='Lawman' post='608280' date='Dec 13 2007, 10:46 AM']If you claim that I feel the Catholic (with Big C) church has turned into an apostate church, you would be correct. Yes, I have attended Catholic mass; I came away with an empty feeling.[/quote]
That isn't what I claimed. I stated you criticized everyone's beliefs that weren't the same as yours, including other christians. Your feelings towards the Catholic Church have done nothing to dissuade me from that opinion. Thanks for sharing.

[quote name='Lawman' post='608280' date='Dec 13 2007, 10:46 AM']Did you not say that you were an Army officer; is that present or former? So, you would not questions one belief's system when it attempt to imposes itself upon others.[/quote]
Former.

Yes, I do question when someone attempts to impose their belief system on me or others.

Why do you think I'm fucking with you?

[LoyalFanInGA v2.0]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608285' date='Dec 13 2007, 11:09 AM']With whom do you hold your tenure with professor?[/quote]
This is like listening to nails on a chalkboard.

[LoyalFanInGA v2.0]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608287' date='Dec 13 2007, 11:28 AM']Are you black? [/quote]
It's amazing how you used your neighbors race and the fact you two are friends as some sort of magnanimous character statement about yourself.

If he is your friend it doesn't matter if he is white or black.

You characterize his friendship differently because he is black.

This speaks to me about your character, but it has the opposite affect than the one in which you intended. This is not to say I am surprised.

It shouldn't matter, but I'm a Cracker Ass Cracker.

What the hell does my skin color have to do with this discussion?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lawman' post='608196' date='Dec 13 2007, 08:08 AM']The current climate in American academia is a dangerous one, which college professor today teach from their own personal agenda's and ideologies. They should present information and material which can be researched and offered through empirical data while encouraging their students to examine and question all.[/quote]




Not at all my experience at Mason, and I dont know that my dad teaches his own personal agenda while teaching masters students how to be physician assistants.

There may be professors who have their own opinions on things, but if you can disagree and have some data to back up your position I have never seen one that would be unwilling to accept that.

When was the last time you attended school to know this?

[|BlackJesus|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='608510' date='Dec 13 2007, 09:11 PM']When was the last time you attended school to know this?[/quote]


[b]Hold on wait ...

when did Lawman ever attend school ?


[/b]

[LoyalFanInGA v2.0]

[url="http://www.soc.mil/75thrr/75thrrorders.shtml"]Robert Rogers' Standing Orders[/url]

[quote]4. Tell the truth about what you see and what you do. There is an army depending on us for correct information. [b]You can lie all you please when you tell other folks about the Rangers[/b], but don't ever lie to a Ranger or an officer. -Major Robert Rogers, 1759[/quote]
How is this different from taquiya? Bet you didn't know the Rangers had been infiltrated by Muslims for almost 250 years. We're just biding our time until we can spring sharia law on infidels like you, Lawman.

American politicians don't lead people to believe they will do one thing only to do something different?

You've stated yourself you have ulterior motives. Your true intent is hidden behind a facade. That's no different than taquiya. Anyone who has ever played a simple game of chess knows this isn't a concept unique to Muslims.

Tell me how many people have died in the US because of sharia law?

Now tell me how many people have died in the US because of religious intolerance? Racism?

So on one hand you give me sharia law and taquiya.

On the other hand I give you religious intolerance and racism.

Which is the perceived threat and which is the real threat?

Lawman, you're a more insidious threat to the US than sharia law or taquiya.

[Lawman]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='608510' date='Dec 13 2007, 09:11 PM']

Not at all my experience at Mason, and I dont know that my dad teaches his own personal agenda while teaching masters students how to be physician assistants.

There may be professors who have their own opinions on things, but if you can disagree and [b]have some data to back up your position [/b]I have never seen one that would be unwilling to accept that.[/quote]
Not to broadbrush the entire academia universities, merely pointing out the elite ones; which incidently recieve substantial amount of funding by the Saudi's.

Academia - No Jamie_B, George Mason is not on the list.

[quote]This section of DiscoverTheNetworks examines the politicized atmosphere that has developed at American institutions of higher learning; the leftist campus and professional associations that have been established there; and the key players (professors, administrators, and organizational leaders) who shape the ideological agendas of those institutions and associations.

It is generally accepted that the politicization of the American university began in the 1960s. Student radicals involved in the University of California's Free Speech Movement in 1964, the opening salvo in what became the student movement, criticized the Berkeley campus as a "multiversity" that worked too closely with other key American institutions such as the Defense Department. But after a tumultuous decade, many of them returned to school once the revolution they had sought proved to be stillborn, got graduate degrees, got academic positions, and set about giving the university an identity far different from the one it had acquired in the early post-war years; one that was truly political and at odds with much of American society. They are what writer Roger Kimball calls "tenured radicals," and they have made the contemporary university an institutional outpost of leftist thinking and organizing by reshaping disciplines, particularly in the humanities and social sciences, and by using control of the hiring process to constitute faculties whose views are uniformly Left, leading to the use of the classroom for purposes of indoctrination, not education.

As liberal columnist Paul Krugman conceded in The New York Times, "It's a fact . . . that registered Republicans and self-proclaimed conservatives make up only a small minority of professors at elite universities." A significant body of research confirms Krugman's observation. For instance, a recent survey by the [u]Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC) examined the phenomenon of political bias among faculty at 32 elite colleges and universities, where it found 1,397 professors who were registered Democrats and only 134 who were registered Republicans -- a ratio greater than 10 to 1.[/u] Another CSPC study found that at 10 major law schools in the U.S., 430 professors were registered Democrats and 53 were registered Republicans -- a ratio of more than 8 to 1. The same survey further revealed that at 9 major journalism schools, 120 professors were registered Democrats and 29 were registered Republicans -- a ratio of more than 4 to 1.

A study released in late December 2005 by UC-Santa Clara economics professor Dan Klein found that social science professors are overwhelmingly Democratic, and that Democratic professors in those disciplines are more homogeneous in their thinking than Republicans. On the question of political affiliation, the survey showed an immense imbalance in the breakdown of Democrats to Republicans, ranging from 21.1 to 1 among anthropologists; 9.1 to 1 among political and legal philosophers; 8.5 to 1 among historians; and 5.6 to 1 among political scientists. Another 2005 study by Stanley Rothman, S. Robert Lichter, and Neil Nevitte, titled Politics and Professional Advancement Among College Faculty, found that [u]72 percent of those teaching at American colleges and universities describe themselves as liberal[/u], as compared to only 15 percent who claim to be conservative. According to the study, [b]the most one-sided departments are English literature, philosophy, political science, and religious studies, where at least 80 percent of the faculty say they are liberal and no more than 5 percent call themselves conservative.[/b]

"The American College Teacher" a major 2001 study by the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA, which has never been challenged, posed a number of questions on politics to a nationwide sample of professors. The researchers found that 5.3 percent of faculty members could be classified as far left, and another 42.3 percent as liberal. By contrast, 17.7 percent were conservative, and 0.3 percent were far right. According to a Fall 2005 paper published in The Georgetown Law Journal, politically active professors at top law schools overwhelmingly tend to be Democrats. This study by Northwestern Professor John McGinnis and two co-authors, which covers the faculties of the top 21 law schools listed in the 2002 U.S. News & World Report graduate-school rankings, finds that just under a third of the professors at those institutions contributed at least $200 to a federal political campaign over an 11-year period. Of that politically active group, 81 percent contributed "wholly or predominantly" to Democratic campaigns, while just 15 percent did the same for Republicans. Relatedly, a comprehensive study by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education found that over 90 percent of well-known college campuses have speech codes intended to ban and punish "politically incorrect" speech.[/quote]

[url="http://thefire.org/index.php/article/8702.html"]Report: Unlawful Speech Codes Thrive at Schools Nationwide[/url]

[quote]December 6, 2007
PHILADELPHIA, December 6, 2007—Today, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) released its 2007 report on campus speech codes, revealing that American colleges and universities are teeming with restrictions on students’ freedom of expression.[/quote]

[url="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=7C435293-51AE-4B92-942E-CA531A047703"]It's 1984 at the University of Delaware [/url]

[quote]Among the coercive and unconstitutional features of the program flagged by FIRE:
At an August 2007 “diversity facilitation training” session for RAs, students were given a list of “definitions and descriptions of racism.” The list defines “A RACIST” as “one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.” “REVERSE RACISM” is defined as “A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege” and “A NON-RACIST” is declared to be “A non term…created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism….”[/quote]

Of course there is plenty more, but this should suffice for now.

[quote]When was the last time you attended school to know this?[/quote]

I don't believe this is a relevant question; I haven't had a three-way and a cheese coney from Skyline in more than five years

[Lawman]

[quote name='LoyalFanInGA v2.0' post='608453' date='Dec 13 2007, 05:23 PM']It's amazing how you used your neighbors race and the fact you two are friends as some sort of magnanimous character statement about yourself.

If he is your friend it doesn't matter if he is white or black.

You characterize his friendship differently because he is black.

This speaks to me about your character, but it has the opposite affect than the one in which you intended. This is not to say I am surprised.

It shouldn't matter, but I'm a Cracker Ass Cracker.[/quote]

It was presented to show that you don't know jack about me; and illustrate the point that you are attempting to paint a picture through personal attacks which are unwarranted and without credence. To make my point, I offer the following:

You call me a bigot, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry"]Bigotry[/url]

[quote]A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of [b]opinions, lifestyles, or identities [/b]differing from his or her own

The origin of the word bigot in English dates back to at least 1598, via Middle French, and started with the sense of "religious hypocrite", especially a woman. Bigot is often used as a pejorative term against a person who is obstinately devoted to prejudices even when these views [b]are challenged or proven to be false[/b] or [u]not universally applicable or acceptable[/u].[/quote]

You may be correct, I may be a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigot"]bigot[/url], when it comes to Radical Islam which attemps to promote the caliphate and implementation of sharia law. If that's the case,then I cannot deny it.

When you accuse me of bigotry, you are actually refering to me as being an Religous Intolerant.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_intolerance"]Religious intolerance[/url]

[quote]Religious intolerance is either intolerance motivated by one's own religious beliefs or intolerance against another's religious beliefs or practices. It manifests both at a cultural level, but may also be a formal part of the dogma of particular religious groups.

[b]The mere statement on the part of a religion that its own beliefs and practices are correct and any contrary beliefs incorrect does not in itself constitute intolerance.[/b]

[i]Reread that last line again, I'll wait right here.[/i]

There are many cases throughout history of established religions tolerating other practices. Religious intolerance, rather, is when a group (a society, a religious group) specifically refuses to tolerate practices, persons or beliefs on religious grounds.

[i]Like in Saudia Arabia where bibles are not permitted.[/i]

Religious intolerance may be purely religious, but can be a "cover story" for an underlying political or cultural motive.[/quote]

While I am not sure if hubris or being inundated and fully saturated with political correctness; either way something has blinded your perception of my posts and position.

I believe I have been perfectly clear that I respect the rights of others to practice their religon here in the United States as they seem fit and as protected under their rights as prescribed with the First Ammendment keeping within respect to the "[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Exercise_Clause"]Free Excercise Clause[/url]".

On the subject of Islam and it's claim as being the "Religon of Peace"; I have brought forth enough information to refute such a claim and explored the conception of this faith; with all the trappings. Now, some have attempted discredit such post due to the natur of some authors referenced. However, my main piece of evidence has actually been the Koran itself.

What you and others have done is taken these two seperate issues and interwoven them to make it appear that I am attempting to deny others their rights, but moreimportantly make it appear as if I am a bigot.

Maybe God is a Bigot!

[quote]What the hell does my skin color have to do with this discussion?[/quote]

Nothing and everything, meaning it shouldn't but it could.