It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

One Million Moms rally at JcPenny's to fire Ellen Degeneres for being GAY!

page: 50
32
<< 47  48  49    51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Furbs
The Educational System isn't going to tolerate Hate Speech. Denigrating children solely on the fact that they are Gay would be Hate Speech.


I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

Not that I disagree, we have 'hate speech' restrictions in Canada, and I do believe they have been beneficial.




posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Furbs
The Educational System isn't going to tolerate Hate Speech. Denigrating children solely on the fact that they are Gay would be Hate Speech.


I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

Not that I disagree, we have 'hate speech' restrictions in Canada, and I do believe they have been beneficial.


The United States Constitution doesn't need to be amended for The United States Supreme Court to put restrictions on The First Amendment. Every ruling they make gives legal precedence, and Hate Speech has a long list of legal precedences.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Furbs
The Educational System isn't going to tolerate Hate Speech. Denigrating children solely on the fact that they are Gay would be Hate Speech.


I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

Not that I disagree, we have 'hate speech' restrictions in Canada, and I do believe they have been beneficial.


The United States Constitution doesn't need to be amended for The United States Supreme Court to put restrictions on The First Amendment. Every ruling they make gives legal precedence, and Hate Speech has a long list of legal precedences.


I'd love to see this hate speech precedent be applied to the hateful rhetoric of atheists and seculars against Christians. That would be interesting.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Furbs
The Educational System isn't going to tolerate Hate Speech. Denigrating children solely on the fact that they are Gay would be Hate Speech.


I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

Not that I disagree, we have 'hate speech' restrictions in Canada, and I do believe they have been beneficial.


The United States Constitution doesn't need to be amended for The United States Supreme Court to put restrictions on The First Amendment. Every ruling they make gives legal precedence, and Hate Speech has a long list of legal precedences.


I'd love to see this hate speech precedent be applied to the hateful rhetoric of atheists and seculars against Christians. That would be interesting.


Yea and the same applied to the hateful rhetoric of christians against Atheists and Seculars.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 


Thank you, I did not know that.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Furbs
The Educational System isn't going to tolerate Hate Speech. Denigrating children solely on the fact that they are Gay would be Hate Speech.


I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

Not that I disagree, we have 'hate speech' restrictions in Canada, and I do believe they have been beneficial.


The United States Constitution doesn't need to be amended for The United States Supreme Court to put restrictions on The First Amendment. Every ruling they make gives legal precedence, and Hate Speech has a long list of legal precedences.


I'd love to see this hate speech precedent be applied to the hateful rhetoric of atheists and seculars against Christians. That would be interesting.


The Human Tribunals in Canada are a joke. It is a tool used only by leftist interest groups. If you are white, Christian - good luck in getting anything addressed by them.
edit on 17-2-2012 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Furbs
The United States Constitution doesn't need to be amended for The United States Supreme Court to put restrictions on The First Amendment. Every ruling they make gives legal precedence, and Hate Speech has a long list of legal precedences.


Funny.

I always tell posters I use the legal precedence set from the continued progression of court cases won in the separation of church and state argument - - when they try to throw the 1st amendment at me.

Few continue to argue.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

The Human Tribunals in Canada are a joke. It is a tool used only by leftist interest groups. If you are white, Christian - good luck in getting anything addressed by them.


Great!

I'm so over the "whiny white Christians" and their persecution complex.

(IMO - - the whiny white Christians tend to be the conservatives losing their "lock grip" control. Again NOT Christian bashing. Its about that group that thinks they have all the answers and expect everyone else to snap to their belief/control.)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by andersensrm
Yea and the same applied to the hateful rhetoric of christians against Atheists and Seculars.


No lie!!!

I think Atheists and Secular's - - - fall below the homosexuals.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by andersensrm
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


You posted just to say that?? Says a lot about your character. And yea I posted just to say this.


Well at least my post had the minimum of two lines.
Let's see how else I could fill up two lines. Oh yes, let's address the seculars and the Christians. Nobody had a problem with the Pledge of Allegiance in schools till the liberal left decided to attack Christianity. Secular Humanism was considered a religion when it emerged, and it wasn't till Christians said, but you insist on separation of church and state and you are a religion teaching your theories in the public schools, and they took it to court.


Here's a short bit about the religion of secular humanism


John Dewey described Humanism as our "common faith." Julian Huxley called it "Religion without Revelation." The first Humanist Manifesto spoke openly of Humanism as a religion. Many other Humanists could be cited who have acknowledged that Humanism is a religion. In fact, claiming that Humanism was "the new religion" was trendy for at least 100 years, perhaps beginning in 1875 with the publication of The Religion of Humanity by Octavius Brooks Frothingham (1822-1895),


But then Christians began to challenge the "establishment of religion" which Secular Humanism in public schools represented. They used the same tactic Atheists had used to challenge prayer and Bible reading under the "Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment. Now the ACLU is involved. Now the question is controversial. Now Secular Humanists have completely reversed their strategy, and claim that Humanism is not at all religious, but is "scientific."


In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Secular Humanism was a religion.


But when Christians attempt to get the religion of Secular Humanism out of the government schools, based on the same emotional frame of mind which atheists had when they went to court against God in schools, then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.

vftonline.org...



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Im sorry but you make absolutely no sense. I don't know how anything your saying has anything to do with me. You keep assuming that I want double standards of some kind, when you don't even know what I want.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by andersensrm
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Im sorry but you make absolutely no sense. I don't know how anything your saying has anything to do with me. You keep assuming that I want double standards of some kind, when you don't even know what I want.


I really should have directed the part about the religion of humanism to the other guy, but I needed another line in my post so I put it in this one. Why not hit two birds with one stone.
I'm sorry you didn't understand my point about how the seculars wanted to get everything Christian out of the schools but they wanted to teach their religion of humanism(by their own definition, and please note that Dewey himself was noted as a secular humanist, and please note his involvement in the school system) and how the Christians fought back by taking them to court over separation of church and state. I'm sorry you did not see how it relates to the promotion of an agenda in the schools.

Here's more on the religious aspect


For further reading, see R.J. Rushdoony, The Messianic Character of American Education, chapter 27, "Education as a Religion." He writes,
[T]he state school is a religious institution. As pointed out in Intellectual Schizophrenia, the public school is the established church of today and a substitute institution for the medieval church, dedicated to the same monolithic conception of society. Some years ago, Dewey very candidly discussed "Education as a Religion" (John Dewey, "Education as a Religion," The New Republic, August, 1922, p. 64f.) As Whitehead observed, "The essence of education is that it be religious." (Alfred North Whitehead, The Aims of Education, NY: Mentor Books, 1952, p. 26)
The public or state schools have thus been inescapably religious. Their "common faith" has been described as "made up of elements provided by Rousseau, Jefferson, August Comte, and John Dewey. 'Civil religion' is an apt designation for this faith." (G.H. Williams, Harvard Divinity School Bulletin, 1948-1949, p. 41.)


vftonline.org...

And since Annie also invoked the Separation of Church and State, I now include her in my rebuttal.
edit on 17-2-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Oh I see how it relates, just not to me. I'm not for teaching any kind of beliefs in schools, just facts.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by andersensrm
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Oh I see how it relates, just not to me. I'm not for teaching any kind of beliefs in schools, just facts.


Oh yes, I did see your post on that involving the facts of human reproduction. That is science. I do not have a problem with that. I just have a problem with the proposal to do it in kindergarten. And I have already said here what lobby is involved in that process.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by andersensrm
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Oh I see how it relates, just not to me. I'm not for teaching any kind of beliefs in schools, just facts.


Oh yes, I did see your post on that involving the facts of human reproduction. That is science. I do not have a problem with that. I just have a problem with the proposal to do it in kindergarten. And I have already said here what lobby is involved in that process.


Yea, it doesn't make sense in kindergarten, at that stage they won't understand.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by MidnightTide
I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

The Human Tribunals in Canada are a joke. It is a tool used only by leftist interest groups. If you are white, Christian - good luck in getting anything addressed by them.


Great!

I'm so over the "whiny white Christians" and their persecution complex.

(IMO - - the whiny white Christians tend to be the conservatives losing their "lock grip" control. Again NOT Christian bashing. Its about that



See Annie, I knew you were a Christian basher. I called it in my very first post in this thread.


And who else has a persecution complex and has to force their ideas onto 3rd graders in public school under the guise of stopping bullying....


edit on 17-2-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-2-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


Liberal types don't like to be questioned, its all for the people you know....if you question anything you are against the people, so they say. (liberals like to say they are for freedom, but only when you follow what they believe in)

As to these tribunals....

-they target white, usually poor (who are unable to even afford a lawyer, while the complainants are paid for by the government ) while Muslims who practice hate speech the Tribunal turns a blind eye (dismisses those cases, they are not in the public interest, so they say)

www.sunnewsnetwork.ca...
edit on 17-2-2012 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Furbs
The Educational System isn't going to tolerate Hate Speech. Denigrating children solely on the fact that they are Gay would be Hate Speech.


I didn't realise that the US Constitution had been amended to include 'Hate Speech'.

Not that I disagree, we have 'hate speech' restrictions in Canada, and I do believe they have been beneficial.


The United States Constitution doesn't need to be amended for The United States Supreme Court to put restrictions on The First Amendment. Every ruling they make gives legal precedence, and Hate Speech has a long list of legal precedences.


I'd love to see this hate speech precedent be applied to the hateful rhetoric of atheists and seculars against Christians. That would be interesting.
Sure, if there's proof that such a thing is happening, and that's it's not just something being made up by the religious right to try make their idiotic idea of Christians being persecuted appear plausible.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 47  48  49    51  52 >>

log in

join