ACLU finally wakes up?

[Quantum Windbag]

When you do something you are not supposed to do you are doing wrong.

There you go saying stupid things again.

Rosa Parks wasn't supposed to sit in the front of the bus, but everyone who isn't hanging themselves knows she was right.

According to the law of the time she was doing something wrong and unconstitutional ,funny how such things work.

She did something illegal, but right, and Constitutional.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am always amazed at the conservative lack of the concept of a gray area.

Let me get this straight. You made a claim that the ACLU is always right, and that anyone who did not agree with them 100% is on the other side of the Constitution. I state that I can find a case where you disagree with them, and prove actually back it up. Now I am the one that doesn't understand about shades of grey.

The real truth is that you were wrong, and do not want to admit it.

I didnt say they were always right I said they were always on the side of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Again, what side does that put you one since you, noose4, disagree with them and oppose their side.

 

[Synthaholic]

Let me get this straight. You made a claim that the ACLU is always right, and that anyone who did not agree with them 100% is on the other side of the Constitution. I state that I can find a case where you disagree with them, and prove actually back it up. Now I am the one that doesn't understand about shades of grey.

The real truth is that you were wrong, and do not want to admit it.

I didnt say they were always right I said they were always on the side of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Again, what side does that put you one since you, noose4, disagree with them and oppose their side.

It's all about sides with you.

 

[Luissa]

I didnt say they were always right I said they were always on the side of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Again, what side does that put you one since you, noose4, disagree with them and oppose their side.

It's all about sides with you.

Plus he loves to assume what people's opinions are.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I didnt say they were always right I said they were always on the side of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Again, what side does that put you one since you, noose4, disagree with them and oppose their side.

It's all about sides with you.

He is the one that said that anyone who opposes the ACLU is against the Constitution, not me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Again, what side does that put you one since you, noose4, disagree with them and oppose their side.

It's all about sides with you.

Plus he loves to assume what people's opinions are.

Did someone call in the idiot squad?

I am trying to get noose to admit that he is an idiot, that has nothing to do with whatever his opinion might be. I honestly think he isn't smart enough to have an opinion.

 

[Luissa]

It's all about sides with you.

Plus he loves to assume what people's opinions are.

Did someone call in the idiot squad?

I am trying to get noose to admit that he is an idiot, that has nothing to do with whatever his opinion might be. I honestly think he isn't smart enough to have an opinion.

You are here, so I guess so.

And I am guessing you changed the argument at least three times.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Plus he loves to assume what people's opinions are.

Did someone call in the idiot squad?

I am trying to get noose to admit that he is an idiot, that has nothing to do with whatever his opinion might be. I honestly think he isn't smart enough to have an opinion.

You are here, so I guess so.

And I am guessing you changed the argument at least three times.

If you go back and read the thread you would see you are wrong.

Unless you think that noose is my sock.

 

[Luissa]

Did someone call in the idiot squad?

I am trying to get noose to admit that he is an idiot, that has nothing to do with whatever his opinion might be. I honestly think he isn't smart enough to have an opinion.

You are here, so I guess so.

And I am guessing you changed the argument at least three times.

If you go back and read the thread you would see you are wrong.

Unless you think that noose is my sock.

I really don't care.
Why don't you post about the topic, not whether or not Noose always agree with the ACLU?
How many pages have you devoted to trying to prove Noose is an idiot?
Who is the real idiot here?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You are here, so I guess so.

And I am guessing you changed the argument at least three times.

If you go back and read the thread you would see you are wrong.

Unless you think that noose is my sock.

I really don't care.
Why don't you post about the topic, not whether or not Noose always agree with the ACLU?
How many pages have you devoted to trying to prove Noose is an idiot?
Who is the real idiot here?

Because noose was stupid enough to claim that anyone that disagrees with the ACLU is against the Constitution. I provided two examples of where he disagrees with them, and he waffled, then ran away. Now, for some reason, you are defending him.


By the way, I have consistently defended the ACLU in this thread, so any beef you have with me here is in your head.

 

[Luissa]

If you go back and read the thread you would see you are wrong.

Unless you think that noose is my sock.

I really don't care.
Why don't you post about the topic, not whether or not Noose always agree with the ACLU?
How many pages have you devoted to trying to prove Noose is an idiot?
Who is the real idiot here?

Because noose was stupid enough to claim that anyone that disagrees with the ACLU is against the Constitution. I provided two examples of where he disagrees with them, and he waffled, then ran away. Now, for some reason, you are defending him.


By the way, I have consistently defended the ACLU in this thread, so any beef you have with me here is in your head.

To address your second paragraph first.. What are you even talking about? Did I say you disagreed with the ACLU?
There ya go assuming something once again.
And I saw what Noose claimed, and I saw your response and your many other responses. Instead of dealing with the subject of thread you once again tried to pick apart one post for the rest of the thread.
Have you ever tried posting on a subject, and not on a single poster? I have seen you try, but then you just regress into old habits.
My personal favorite is when you try to claim to have great intelligence.

Anyways, just wanted to let you know most see through your bullshit. Carry on.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I really don't care.
Why don't you post about the topic, not whether or not Noose always agree with the ACLU?
How many pages have you devoted to trying to prove Noose is an idiot?
Who is the real idiot here?

Because noose was stupid enough to claim that anyone that disagrees with the ACLU is against the Constitution. I provided two examples of where he disagrees with them, and he waffled, then ran away. Now, for some reason, you are defending him.


By the way, I have consistently defended the ACLU in this thread, so any beef you have with me here is in your head.

To address your second paragraph first.. What are you even talking about? Did I say you disagreed with the ACLU?
There ya go assuming something once again.
And I saw what Noose claimed, and I saw your response and your many other responses. Instead of dealing with the subject of thread you once again tried to pick apart one post for the rest of the thread.
Have you ever tried posting on a subject, and not on a single poster? I have seen you try, but then you just regress into old habits.
My personal favorite is when you try to claim to have great intelligence.

Anyways, just wanted to let you know most see through your bullshit. Carry on.

Me arguing with multiple posters that the ACLU defends religious rights and gun rights when the OP argued otherwise is not me posting on the subject? Maybe you should stop pretending you can read.

By the way, where did I say you said I disagreed with the ACLU. What I said is that all the problems you have with me are in your head. You just made my point for me.

 

[Luissa]

Because noose was stupid enough to claim that anyone that disagrees with the ACLU is against the Constitution. I provided two examples of where he disagrees with them, and he waffled, then ran away. Now, for some reason, you are defending him.


By the way, I have consistently defended the ACLU in this thread, so any beef you have with me here is in your head.

To address your second paragraph first.. What are you even talking about? Did I say you disagreed with the ACLU?
There ya go assuming something once again.
And I saw what Noose claimed, and I saw your response and your many other responses. Instead of dealing with the subject of thread you once again tried to pick apart one post for the rest of the thread.
Have you ever tried posting on a subject, and not on a single poster? I have seen you try, but then you just regress into old habits.
My personal favorite is when you try to claim to have great intelligence.

Anyways, just wanted to let you know most see through your bullshit. Carry on.

Me arguing with multiple posters that the ACLU defends religious rights and gun rights when the OP argued otherwise is not me posting on the subject? Maybe you should stop pretending you can read.

By the way, where did I say you said I disagreed with the ACLU. What I said is that all the problems you have with me are in your head. You just made my point for me.

Re-read your last paragraph smart one.
And then realize your statement about pretending to know how to read is fucking stupid. If you didn't want to imply my beef was over not agreeing with the ACLU you should have first off used a period not a comma. You are too dumb to either realize you implied my problem with you was over the ACLU, or you are just a liar.
I think I will go with a little of both. You always seem to forget what you just posted.

Like I said it is hilarious when you try to play intelligent. I also don't want to deal with the cluster fuck you call a debate so, have a good night. Try to remember what you post next time, dumb ass.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

To address your second paragraph first.. What are you even talking about? Did I say you disagreed with the ACLU?
There ya go assuming something once again.
And I saw what Noose claimed, and I saw your response and your many other responses. Instead of dealing with the subject of thread you once again tried to pick apart one post for the rest of the thread.
Have you ever tried posting on a subject, and not on a single poster? I have seen you try, but then you just regress into old habits.
My personal favorite is when you try to claim to have great intelligence.

Anyways, just wanted to let you know most see through your bullshit. Carry on.

Me arguing with multiple posters that the ACLU defends religious rights and gun rights when the OP argued otherwise is not me posting on the subject? Maybe you should stop pretending you can read.

By the way, where did I say you said I disagreed with the ACLU. What I said is that all the problems you have with me are in your head. You just made my point for me.

Re-read your last paragraph smart one.
And then realize your statement about pretending to know how to read is fucking stupid. If you didn't want to imply my beef was over not agreeing with the ACLU you should have first off used a period not a comma. You are too dumb to either realize you implied my problem with you was over the ACLU, or you are just a liar.
I think I will go with a little of both. You always seem to forget what you just posted.

Like I said it is hilarious when you try to play intelligent. I also don't want to deal with the cluster fuck you call a debate so, have a good night. Try to remember what you post next time, dumb ass.

Your problem is in your head, so you can have the last word.

You win.

 

[noose4]

There you go saying stupid things again.

Rosa Parks wasn't supposed to sit in the front of the bus, but everyone who isn't hanging themselves knows she was right.

According to the law of the time she was doing something wrong and unconstitutional ,funny how such things work.

She did something illegal, but right, and Constitutional.

At the time segregation was constitutional, hell a hundred years before that event owning people was constitutional and some of the people who wrote the constitution were slave owners, that is why we can amend the constitution when necessary, it is not perfect like some seem to think.

 

[noose4]

It's all about sides with you.

Plus he loves to assume what people's opinions are.

Did someone call in the idiot squad?

I am trying to get noose to admit that he is an idiot, that has nothing to do with whatever his opinion might be. I honestly think he isn't smart enough to have an opinion.

Sorry but the idiot spot is taken by you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

According to the law of the time she was doing something wrong and unconstitutional ,funny how such things work.

She did something illegal, but right, and Constitutional.

At the time segregation was constitutional, hell a hundred years before that event owning people was constitutional and some of the people who wrote the constitution were slave owners, that is why we can amend the constitution when necessary, it is not perfect like some seem to think.

The Constitution did not change between the time when you claim segregation was constitutional and when it wasn't. That means that you actually have two choices here, either it was always unconstitutional, or it still is constitutional.

Let me point out the right answer, at the time segregation was legal, but it was always unconstitutional because it was forced on people by the government.

 

[whitehall]

Oklahoma has issued a license plate that contains a depiction of a well known Native American sculpture of an Indian shooting an arrow into the air to call attention to the rain spirit. Apparently a Methodist minister is offended by the spiritual nature of the license plate that he is forced to display on his car. A spiritual orientated license plate is clearly a violation of the well known regulations of the modern version of "separation of church/state but apparently the ACLU has decided that Native American spirituality in the public domain is less offensive than Christian displays of spirituality in the public domain.

 

[sparky]

The ACLU answers complaints of civil liberty abuse

In fact, they'd go to bat for satan

doesn't make them very popular

but what other entity have we got to do the job?

~S~

 

[PaulS1950]

The rain spirit... wouldn't that be God?

Most religions have one thing in common - the Creator is God. It matters not what name they use it is always the One who creates.

In ancient Sumer (4000 BCE) the name they used for God was fairly intuitive, Anki, which transliterates to "all that is". In Hindu it is Brahma before Brahma He was called Prajapati. The ancient Jews called the Creator El. Elohim translterates to the many personalities of El. Israel translates as the people of El. In Islam the creator is Allah which is the name of God in Aramaic - the early language of the Jews.
I won't go through all of them but the point is that different languages have different names for God.