O'Reilly's War on Xmas = Owned

Pale Rider said:
I made NO MENTION OF KILLING ANYONE pinhead. I was returning comment to you saying this about RELIGOUS SYMBOLS. And as you can see, it was not "I" that suggested we, how do you say... "they should all be ELIMINATED"!
Oh, I'm sorry, when you were comparing me to Nazi Germany, what exactly were you talking about?
The building of the autobahn?

Give it a rest.

You liberal heathens WILL NOT BE HAPPY until CHRISTIANITY in this country is GONE. It's not just about Christmas. You're all out attack on Christmas is just one more opportunity beat Christians up. We stand in the way of your rush to promote your godless agenda, and throw morality to the wind.
Do whatever you want... on YOUR OWN PROPERTY. Leave it off of my property, and leave it off of public property.

It's that simple.
Nobody's attacking Christian displays on church lawns, think about that for a second...
 
Max Power said:
Oh, I'm sorry, when you were comparing me to Nazi Germany, what exactly were you talking about?
The building of the autobahn?

Give it a rest.


Do whatever you want... on YOUR OWN PROPERTY. Leave it off of my property, and leave it off of public property.

It's that simple.
Nobody's attacking Christian displays on church lawns, think about that for a second...

I know you liberal heathens want ALL us Christians to "give it a rest" don't you? So that you can proceed on your way to ridding America of everything Christian. Well... ain't gonna happen son. You'll just have to deal with it. And if you're this easily disrailed off a topic, then debating with you is more of chore than I think I need. You're a typical liberal, good at the old shuck and jive game. When the point at hand is something you can't defend, you just change the topic and pretend you never heard anything the other person was saying. I guess maybe I should read Anne Coulter's book, "How to talk to a liberal... if you have to". Maybe that would help here.
 
The ClayTaurus said:
Hobbit, do you really think that people make nativity scenes for Jesus the philosopher? You're stretching a bit much.

No, but as long as they're willing to put up displays for other holidays (note: are willing to. This means that if nobody cares, they don't have to put up anything else.), why should we care so much? A fish is just a fish, but some people put one on a car as a religious symbol. Does this make fish markets churches? Candles are a common religious display, but they don't have to be if you don't want them to be. Basically, what I'm saying is that many of these displays are only as religious as you want to make them.

Basically, my point is that if you don't believe in Christianity, remember that Jesus was a famous teacher and philosopher and that's as far as it has to go. So instead of crapping on everybody else, do unto others for a while and leave Christmas alone, because it doesn't have to be about religion if you don't want it to be. So if you're one of these sensitive types, look at it as a statue of a baby and some poor people from 2000 years ago, or even a monument to a great man, but stop interpereting it as proselytizing for the purpose of taking it down.
 
Pale Rider said:
I know you liberal heathens want ALL us Christians to "give it a rest" don't you? So that you can proceed on your way to ridding America of everything Christian. Well... ain't gonna happen son. You'll just have to deal with it. And if you're this easily disrailed off a topic, then debating with you is more of chore than I think I need. You're a typical liberal, good at the old shuck and jive game. When the point at hand is something you can't defend, you just change the topic and pretend you never heard anything the other person was saying. I guess maybe I should read Anne Coulter's book, "How to talk to a liberal... if you have to". Maybe that would help here.
You're the one who's making references to Nazi Germany, not me.

Since you apparently missed it last time, go read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
 
Hobbit said:
No, but as long as they're willing to put up displays for other holidays (note: are willing to. This means that if nobody cares, they don't have to put up anything else.), why should we care so much? A fish is just a fish, but some people put one on a car as a religious symbol. Does this make fish markets churches? Candles are a common religious display, but they don't have to be if you don't want them to be. Basically, what I'm saying is that many of these displays are only as religious as you want to make them.

Basically, my point is that if you don't believe in Christianity, remember that Jesus was a famous teacher and philosopher and that's as far as it has to go. So instead of crapping on everybody else, do unto others for a while and leave Christmas alone, because it doesn't have to be about religion if you don't want it to be. So if you're one of these sensitive types, look at it as a statue of a baby and some poor people from 2000 years ago, or even a monument to a great man, but stop interpereting it as proselytizing for the purpose of taking it down.

Fair enough. I was just making sure you weren't trying to insult my intelligence by claiming that nativity scenes on public property are constructed with Jesus the philosopher in mind. I don't care either way about nativity scenes, just don't be dishonest about it (which you proved you weren't being).
 
Max Power said:
You're the one who's making references to Nazi Germany, not me.

Since you apparently missed it last time, go read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

*Sigh*.... let me try again... "YOU" suggested ALL religous related things, and "in your own words, THEY SHOULD ALL BE ELIMINATED". You have also made clear that you're OK with these same religous items being displayed on private property. My point is, removing them from public and government property is very "Nazi-esk". Where does it end? Where WILL it end? Where you suggest? I'm saying it won't. You liberals are simply gaining ground against Christianity, and you won't stop until it's COMPLETELY gone. You can't eat the whole pie with just one bite, so you take many small ones. What's happening to Christmas and Christianity right now is just you taking small bites. But you're not done, and I know it.

Your people are already arguing to have "In God We Trust" removed from our money. They're already arguing to have the same removed from all government buildings. You also want "under God" removed from the Pledge of Alliegance. Again I ask, where does this end? I predict it won't. I predict you liberal heathens won't rest until you see churches torn down and Bibles burnt, and THAT my liberal heathen, will be just like Nazi Germany. Think I'm crazy? Well we'll see won't we?
 
Pale Rider said:
*Sigh*.... let me try again... "YOU" suggested ALL religous related things, and "in your own words, THEY SHOULD ALL BE ELIMINATED". You have also made clear that you're OK with these same religous items being displayed on private property. My point is, removing them from public and government property is very "Nazi-esk". Where does it end?
It ends with public property.

The same first amendment that prevents an establishment of religion, also protects the private practice of religion.

Where WILL it end? Where you suggest? I'm saying it won't. You liberals are simply gaining ground against Christianity, and you won't stop until it's COMPLETELY gone. You can't eat the whole pie with just one bite, so you take many small ones. What's happening to Christmas and Christianity right now is just you taking small bites. But you're not done, and I know it.
Your argument suffers from the slippery slope fallacy.

Your people are already arguing to have "In God We Trust" removed from our money. They're already arguing to have the same removed from all government buildings. You also want "under God" removed from the Pledge of Alliegance. Again I ask, where does this end? I predict it won't. I predict you liberal heathens won't rest until you see churches torn down and Bibles burnt, and THAT my liberal heathen, will be just like Nazi Germany. Think I'm crazy? Well we'll see won't we?
Everything you mentioned is within the public domain, so the "where does it end," question has the same answer.
 
For anyone who feels we shouldn't have religious symbols on public property, I would remind you of what libs always tell us when we object to sex and violence on TV: If you find it offensive, just don't look at it.
 
Abbey Normal said:
For anyone who feels we shouldn't have religious symbols on public property, I would remind you of what libs always tell us when we object to sex and violence on TV: If you find it offensive, just don't look at it.
Oooooh does that mean live sex shows on the town square? :69: :wank: :ssex: :kiss2:

EDIT: This is satire
 
Max Power said:
It ends with public property.


Max Power said:
Your argument suffers from the slippery slope fallacy.

I don't think so. I think recent history paints a different picture, and the slope isn't slippery at all. It's a sheer cliff when it comes to Christmas. Christmas has become something competely different in a very brief time. And as I say, it won't end there. Mark my words. Keep in mind, I'm fifty years old. I've seen these changes with my own eyes, and in my own life time, and there's no sign of any of these changes ending, as with "public property" you idicated above. It won't end there. Maybe for you it does, but it won't.

In any case, we've at least found where our opinions differ.
 
Pale Rider said:
I don't think so. I think recent history paints a different picture, and the slope isn't slippery at all. It's a sheer cliff when it comes to Christmas. Christmas has become something competely different in a very brief time. And as I say, it won't end there. Mark my words. Keep in mind, I'm fifty years old. I've seen these changes with my own eyes, and in my own life time, and there's no sign of any of these changes ending, as with "public property" you idicated above. It won't end there. Maybe for you it does, but it won't.

In any case, we've at least found where our opinions differ.
Can I just ask what leads you to believe it won't stop where he suggests? What in your life have you experienced that leads you to that conclusion?
 
The ClayTaurus said:
Oooooh does that mean live sex shows on the town square? :69: :wank: :ssex: :kiss2:

Is this in line with your new title of "MOST IMPROVED POSTER AWARD"? :cool:
 
The ClayTaurus said:
Can I just ask what leads you to believe it won't stop where he suggests? What in your life have you experienced that leads you to that conclusion?

The only constant is change. Ever heard that?
 
Pale Rider said:
Is this in line with your new title of "MOST IMPROVED POSTER AWARD"? :cool:
It was satirical. Perhaps I should have labeled it as such so you wouldn't have taken it so seriously.
 
Abbey Normal said:
For anyone who feels we shouldn't have religious symbols on public property, I would remind you of what libs always tell us when we object to sex and violence on TV: If you find it offensive, just don't look at it.

The first amendment doesn't protect people from being offended.

It does, however, prevent an establishment of religion.
 
Pale Rider said:
I don't think so. I think recent history paints a different picture, and the slope isn't slippery at all. It's a sheer cliff when it comes to Christmas. Christmas has become something competely different in a very brief time. And as I say, it won't end there. Mark my words. Keep in mind, I'm fifty years old. I've seen these changes with my own eyes, and in my own life time, and there's no sign of any of these changes ending, as with "public property" you idicated above. It won't end there. Maybe for you it does, but it won't.

In any case, we've at least found where our opinions differ.

You mention recent history painting a different picture... do you have an example?
 
The ClayTaurus said:
I guess you don't feel like sharing?

I'll tell ya Clay, between you and MP's propensity to selectively recall things I've said and then twist it, I'm not sure anything I could relate to either of you would register. On top of that, do you have any idea how long it would take to condense and put in story form fifty years of life and what has changed in that period?

Let me ask you, how old are you, and can you tell me that in your world, everything has remained the same for your whole life? Nothing has changed?
 
The ClayTaurus said:
It was satirical. Perhaps I should have labeled it as such so you wouldn't have taken it so seriously.

Abby's my friend. I was just looking out for her. Big brother syndrome.
 
Pale Rider said:
I'll tell ya Clay, between you and MP's propensity to selectively recall things I've said and then twist it, I'm not sure anything I could relate to either of you would register. On top of that, do you have any idea how long it would take to condense and put in story form fifty years of life and what has changed in that period?

Let me ask you, how old are you, and can you tell me that in your world, everything has remained the same for your whole life? Nothing has changed?
Now I'm selectively recalling and twisting your words? :wtf: I'd like to see where. All I was wondering was if you had some specific example that related to this, or if it was just the sum of your life's experience. It sounds like it's the latter, so, cool. If it was something specific, I figured it would have been beneficial for the rest of us to hear about it, thats all.

Plenty in my life has changed. Does that mean all things change? No. For instance: there will always be charitable people in this world. Also, there will always be assholes in the world. Concrete or not, those are constants. Things change, things stay the same. As far as worldly life experience, you trump me by about 2 to 1, so I respectfully bow to you in that department.
 

Forum List

Back
Top