Libl Hypocrit Watch-GroundZero Mosque = freedom, but cigarrettes and transfat don't??

[johnrocks]

I am for freedom of all. again you have freedom until you tread on my turf. meaning:

1) build the mosque

2) build the greek place (again its the owners fault its not done, not the city)

3) smoke weed but keep it out of my face

4) smoke cigs but do it in private

5) eat trans fat but get private insurance, don't make me pay for your obesity and eventual cancer

as long as you don't tread on my turf by blowing cancer in my face or using my tax money for your health insurance do all of the above

I will add a caveat though, private property owners such as those that own the clubs and restaurants should be able to say for themselves weather a place is smoke free or not, I'm not a smoker but I do believe in private property rights that much.

That's the point!

He doesn't believe in freedom.

Look at his number 4!

It starts and ends with personal freedom and private property rights with me, freedom is messy, it will lead to imperfections such as discriminating and such but it beats the alternatives invented thus far.

 

[blu]

I am for freedom of all. again you have freedom until you tread on my turf. meaning:

1) build the mosque

2) build the greek place (again its the owners fault its not done, not the city)

3) smoke weed but keep it out of my face

4) smoke cigs but do it in private

5) eat trans fat but get private insurance, don't make me pay for your obesity and eventual cancer

as long as you don't tread on my turf by blowing cancer in my face or using my tax money for your health insurance do all of the above

I will add a caveat though, private property owners such as those that own the clubs and restaurants should be able to say for themselves weather a place is smoke free or not, I'm not a smoker but I do believe in private property rights that much.

That's the point!

He doesn't believe in freedom.

Look at his number 4!

my number 4 agrees with john???

they have private balconies and rooms for smokers at many bars/restraunts/hotels etc do it there. my position aligns exactly with john's.

 

[johnrocks]

I don't mind the listing of ingredients, in this day and age though, if freedom of choice were truly allowed. I could find a niche in the market by catering to smokers or catering to the more health conscience, with government dictating and limiting freedom of choice, it is limiting our freedom of choices,imho anyway.

i don't even think they should have to list all the ingredients since that would let the competition eventually figure out how to steal the recipe. I just want a simple checklist of things such as:

trans fat: yes or no
hf corn syrup: yes or no

that would be about it

Seems reasonable I suppose.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Have you heard of teachers trying to stop kids from carrying Bibles at school?????

do you have a link to this? I assume there is more to the story than you are saying, but if there isn't thats bullshit.

Honey there have been SO many cases of this happening.

Student sent to office for carrying Bible to school and free speech

Lawsuit claims students not allowed to carry Bibles

By: Harvey Rice
Date: 23 May 2000
URL: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/560670
Copyright 2000 Houston Chronicle

WILLIS -- School officials were silent Tuesday about a federal lawsuit filed on behalf of three pupils, accusing the Willis school district of refusing to allow children to carry or read the Bible.
The lawsuit, filed in Houston, alleges that a teacher at Lynn Lucas Middle School pulled two sisters from class after discovering that they were carrying Bibles and threatened to have them picked up by child-welfare authorities.
Another teacher told a pupil he was not allowed to read the Bible during free reading time and forced him to put it away, the lawsuit alleges. The boy also was required to remove a Ten Commandments book cover from another book, the lawsuit states.
School district officials did not respond to requests for comment.
Mathew Staver, a [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]lawyer[/COLOR][/COLOR] whose Liberty Counsel legal defense organization filed the lawsuit Friday on behalf of the three pupils and their parents, said the district was served with the lawsuit Monday. Liberty Counsel is based in Orlando, Fla.

The lawsuit accuses the district of four violations of the U.S. Constitution, three violations of the Texas Constitution and two violations of state laws. It asks that a judge order the district to allow the carrying of Bibles in school and the use of book covers printed with the Ten Commandments or other religious content.
"My daughters called me, were hysterical, and said, 'Mama, they took our Bibles and called them garbage and threw them in the garbage and then threatened to call Child Protective Services,' " Deborah Bedenbender, 37, a Willis homemaker, said Tuesday.

Houston School Officials Call Bible 'Garbage'

School Official: Carrying Bible Could Lead to Fight

By Erik Bilstad

Story Created: Mar 1, 2010
Story Updated: Mar 1, 2010

RACINE - An expression of faith could lead to a fist fight, or so that's what a school official told a high school student.
A 16-year-old boy from Racine was recently sent to the principal's office for carrying his Bible.

Nathan de La Garza tells the Racine Journal Times his pastor had challenged him to carry his Bible with him at all times.

It didn't go over well at Park High School, where an assistant principal told him to keep religion discussions out of school.

De La Garza tells the Journal Times the assistant principal was concerned he might offend somebody and entice a physical fight.

School Official: Carrying Bible Could Lead to Fight | Newsradio 620 - Milwaukee, Wisconsin News, Talk, Sports, Weather | Local Headlines

TO TEST BAN ON BIBLE IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS; Churches Unite to Carry Washin... - Article Preview - The New York Times

 

[teapartysamurai]

cigarettes in public places.... where the smoke affects other people who aren't smoking. freedom only extends as far as the other persons nose as they say. once you cross into my territory by blowing cancer in my face, you are then violating my rights

And a Mosque at Ground Zero doesn't affect anyone?????

I guess you haven't heard of what the 9/11 families think of that!

The 9/11 families who oppose this mosque are blaming innocent Muslims for the crime of the guilty.

Not much is more UN-AMERICAN than that.

So, 9/11 families are being "Little Adolf Eichmans."

Thank you Ward Churchill!

 

[teapartysamurai]

as they should, and the compromise that came is the best result. schools have 'prayer time' now where students can silently pray whatever they want and the teacher isn't allowed to lead the class in a prayer as that would violate the students who aren't of the teacher's religion. why do you want kids who aren't christian to have it forced on them every day?

Why do liberals want a mosque on ground zero forced on us?????

Because you wingnut extremists don't get to force your unconstitutional anti-Muslim bigotry on "us"...

..."we" have the Constitution on our side.

BWAHAHAAA!

WHEN do liberals EVER care about the Constitution??????????

Show me where in the Constitution it says you can force us to buy health insurance?

Show me where it says you can ban guns??????

Liberals care about the Constitution?????

That's the laugh of the day!

 

[johnrocks]

Having religious activities on public property simply is not the same as having it on private property, it is like a school outlawing the Confederate flag on School property but they aren't going to tell me that I can't fly it on my private property, it may piss others off but hey;freedom is messy and if someone get's pissed by my actions on my property.....fuck em!

 

[teapartysamurai]

Why aren't you opposed to a Greek Orthodox church near ground zero?

That is such a stupid question, I'm not even going to bother.

You are still just desperately looking for something to put me on the defensive.

You're accusing others of being inconsistent by FABRICATING positions they hold. I would just like to know your actual position on the same issues.

You've accused me of being a hypocrite, yet you haven't shown one shred of evidence that I am, not a single example,

and yet you claim you're winning the argument.

How do you win an argument without even making a good case for it?

Then why are you taking this so personally if you haven't "held a position."

I'm telling you what liberals are for.

They are for the cigarette ban.

They are for the transfat ban.

If you aren't, I sure haven't seen you come out against them, that's for sure!

I haven't heard a Peep out of you, why NY is dragging their feet on the Greek Orthodox Church DESTROYED ON 9/11.

But you SURE ARE VOCAL about getting the mosque built.

FUNNY!!!!!!!

 

[teapartysamurai]

I am for freedom of all. again you have freedom until you tread on my turf. meaning:

1) build the mosque

2) build the greek place (again its the owners fault its not done, not the city)

3) smoke weed but keep it out of my face

4) smoke cigs but do it in private

5) eat trans fat but get private insurance, don't make me pay for your obesity and eventual cancer

as long as you don't tread on my turf by blowing cancer in my face or using my tax money for your health insurance do all of the above

But Blu that's a hypocrisy.

We say build the mosque somewhere else (in other words "do it in private.")

It's not freedom if you can decide WHERE a person can smoke.

So, if you can decide where people smoke, why can't we decide where the mosque goes?

as john stated, the owner of a private place can certainly decide where smokers can smoke in their building and many of them have done that now. in publicly owned buildings, many cities have done the same and the citizens there are free to vote against if it they wish.

stopping people from smoking outside is a whole other thing though as the smoke has much more room to disperse. I think what ruined outside smoking is the lazy fucks who throw the cig butts on the ground and litter a place, which of course has nothing to do with the smoking of it.

Wait, are you telliing me that a privately owned restaurant in NY City can allowing people to smoke on their premises????

Yeah right!

 

[teapartysamurai]

so sam do you agree that people who eat trans fat should be barred from receiving public paid health care?

Man they want this to be about me.

And get how they are trying to make this about me.

One socialist policy against another socialist policy!

Too funny!

 

[teapartysamurai]

Let me put it this way: most people (and if you're anti-stomach knifing, you're among them) believe some degree of regulation of behavior and products is acceptable. What that degree is would be something decided by the community or its duly elected representatives. Municipalities can ban smoking, transfats, foie gras, they can even stop you from building things by requiring permits and having zoning laws. All of this is perfectly acceptable in our society, even if your personal vision of freedom is regulation-less anarchy.

In this particular instance, the relevant New York City community board has approved this mosque or community center or whatever it is. So your claim is that the people that didn't protest when NYC representatives banned transfats aren't protesting when community representatives didn't disallow this mosque to be built? And somehow there's hypocrisy in there on someone's part?

I don't live in New York. As such, I don't give two shits what the city bans or what structures it allows to be built. Those are municipal issues and I don't live in that municipality.

The point is, liberals are ALL for bans on cigarrettes and transfat.

But when they get a chance to put a mosque on ground zero. A huge statement that the muslims won on 9/11? OH!!!!!!!! They preach to us about freedom????????

FUNNY!!!!!!!!!

I am not for Bans on cigarettes and transfats.

Good!

How about lets get the Greek Orthodox Church that was destroyed on 9/11 rebuilt first?

 

[teapartysamurai]

did the government force it on you? nope a group of private citizens are on private land. they can do as they wish.

your lack of response shows that you have no argument to my post

As usual you are wrong.

The City of NY are allowing this mosque despite the fact most of their tax paying voters are against it.

And despite the obvious fact most of the COUNTRY is against it.

The US was attacked on 9/11, not just the City of NY.

every poll I saw about NY people only was something like:

50% for
30% against
20% undecided/don't care

if you have other recent polls to disprove those numbers I would like to see it

As I stated before, the COUNTRY was attacked on 9/11, not just NY City.

 

[blu]

The point is, liberals are ALL for bans on cigarrettes and transfat.

But when they get a chance to put a mosque on ground zero. A huge statement that the muslims won on 9/11? OH!!!!!!!! They preach to us about freedom????????

FUNNY!!!!!!!!!

I am not for Bans on cigarettes and transfats.

Good!

How about lets get the Greek Orthodox Church that was destroyed on 9/11 rebuilt first?

I showed you the link where the church is their own enemy, the city is already willing to let them build it

 

[teapartysamurai]

Because you wingnut extremists don't get to force your unconstitutional anti-Muslim bigotry on "us"...

..."we" have the Constitution on our side.

FUNNY!

Liberals don't mind forcing their hate of religion on us in schools!

They don't mind removing the word God from state seals (or trying to).

They don't mind removing 150 year old crosses from state buildings!

They don't mind censoring the religious views of students.

They don't mind threatening students with not graduating that pray at their graduations.

But suddenly they are for religious freedom when it comes to a mosque at ground zero??????

Everything you listed to rebuke the Mosque being built on private property concerns religion on public property

And where in the Constitution does it say you can ban religion on public property?????

 

[blu]

As usual you are wrong.

The City of NY are allowing this mosque despite the fact most of their tax paying voters are against it.

And despite the obvious fact most of the COUNTRY is against it.

The US was attacked on 9/11, not just the City of NY.

every poll I saw about NY people only was something like:

50% for
30% against
20% undecided/don't care

if you have other recent polls to disprove those numbers I would like to see it

As I stated before, the COUNTRY was attacked on 9/11, not just NY City.

so you lied about NY people being against it and my numbers are correct?

and from what I remember the physical attack relevant to this concussion happened in NY and the property of NY and its landowners so they should be able to do as they please without worrying about other states tax payers

 

[teapartysamurai]

Liberals don't mind forcing their hate of religion on us in schools!

false. many people (both liberal and consv) simply don't want teachers forcing their religion on kids

They don't mind removing the word God from state seals (or trying to).

it should be removed. this country allows for atheism



debatable. it shouldn't be in/on/around courthouses, but others its okay. preserving history is a good thing, whether good or bad or indifferent



you have yet to show where kids weren't allowed to bring bibles. I would be very interested to hear about this

They don't mind threatening students with not graduating that pray at their graduations.

pray out loud? they shoulnd't be allowed to if everyone int he room isn't of the same religion

But suddenly they are for religious freedom when it comes to a mosque at ground zero??????

they have been all along

So thank you for proving my point. You are NOT for the freedom of religion, so don't use that argument for the ground zero mosque.

 

[blu]

FUNNY!

Liberals don't mind forcing their hate of religion on us in schools!

They don't mind removing the word God from state seals (or trying to).

They don't mind removing 150 year old crosses from state buildings!

They don't mind censoring the religious views of students.

They don't mind threatening students with not graduating that pray at their graduations.

But suddenly they are for religious freedom when it comes to a mosque at ground zero??????

Everything you listed to rebuke the Mosque being built on private property concerns religion on public property

And where in the Constitution does it say you can ban religion on public property?????

it says you can't force it on other people which is exactly what teacher led prayer does

 

[teapartysamurai]

I will add a caveat though, private property owners such as those that own the clubs and restaurants should be able to say for themselves weather a place is smoke free or not, I'm not a smoker but I do believe in private property rights that much.

That's the point!

He doesn't believe in freedom.

Look at his number 4!

It starts and ends with personal freedom and private property rights with me, freedom is messy, it will lead to imperfections such as discriminating and such but it beats the alternatives invented thus far.

In other words it's okay to infringe on "freedom" when it comes to someone's pet peeves, but THAT MOSQUE ON GROUND ZERO!!!!!! Well that's different!

 

[teapartysamurai]

I will add a caveat though, private property owners such as those that own the clubs and restaurants should be able to say for themselves weather a place is smoke free or not, I'm not a smoker but I do believe in private property rights that much.

That's the point!

He doesn't believe in freedom.

Look at his number 4!

my number 4 agrees with john???

they have private balconies and rooms for smokers at many bars/restraunts/hotels etc do it there. my position aligns exactly with john's.

So, you can decide WHERE people do things?

Why can't we decide where a mosque goes?

 

[teapartysamurai]

Having religious activities on public property simply is not the same as having it on private property, it is like a school outlawing the Confederate flag on School property but they aren't going to tell me that I can't fly it on my private property, it may piss others off but hey;freedom is messy and if someone get's pissed by my actions on my property.....fuck em!

So censorship on public property is okay, according to you!

Thank you Mr. Hypocrite.

And the confederate flag is the same as religion!

Boy THAT sure betrays a bias!