Rutgers student told not to quote Bible in essay because of 'separation of church and state'

[martybegan]

Going with absurdity shows your "arguments" have no real basis.

How is it "absurd"? You're buying the same crapola from this fake 'journalism' website and you're not calling that "absurd" .

That's not "argument" btw -- it's analogy. If you believe them with no source but themselves, then you should believe me too. Sameo-sameo. Kif-kif. Now where are them there keys, I ain't got all day and these Neptunians mean business. Literally.

Your dismissal of the site out of hand just shows you can't deal with anything that impacts your cherished wibble worldview.

Ummm nnnnnno, it just shows I won't deal with fantasy that can't prove it's real.

Flimsy rationalization on Aisle 4.

Complete lack of credible evidence on Aisle Post One.

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

 

[Pogo]

How is it "absurd"? You're buying the same crapola from this fake 'journalism' website and you're not calling that "absurd" .

That's not "argument" btw -- it's analogy. If you believe them with no source but themselves, then you should believe me too. Sameo-sameo. Kif-kif. Now where are them there keys, I ain't got all day and these Neptunians mean business. Literally.

Your dismissal of the site out of hand just shows you can't deal with anything that impacts your cherished wibble worldview.

Ummm nnnnnno, it just shows I won't deal with fantasy that can't prove it's real.

Flimsy rationalization on Aisle 4.

Complete lack of credible evidence on Aisle Post One.

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

 

[martybegan]

Your dismissal of the site out of hand just shows you can't deal with anything that impacts your cherished wibble worldview.

Ummm nnnnnno, it just shows I won't deal with fantasy that can't prove it's real.

Flimsy rationalization on Aisle 4.

Complete lack of credible evidence on Aisle Post One.

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

View attachment 300900​

So do you support impeachment or not? I was going off your general Prog whining.

 

[bodecea]

That’s not how it works.

Annual cost to attend Rutgers: $30,572

Rutgers student told not to quote Bible in essay because of 'separation of church and state'

Got a legitimate source, or just this blog?

By the way, wanna buy a bridge?

Three days later, still nothing.

Ah feel your pain. I couldn't find any either.

Yeah....figured the OP was just ANOTHER "I'm persecuted" lie.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Either debate the article in question or sod off.

FAIK NOOZ

 

[Pogo]

Ummm nnnnnno, it just shows I won't deal with fantasy that can't prove it's real.

Flimsy rationalization on Aisle 4.

Complete lack of credible evidence on Aisle Post One.

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

View attachment 300900​

So do you support impeachment or not? I was going off your general Prog whining.

Maybe you should have "gone off" actual evidence huh.

What have we learned today?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Flimsy rationalization on Aisle 4.

Complete lack of credible evidence on Aisle Post One.

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

View attachment 300900​

So do you support impeachment or not? I was going off your general Prog whining.

Maybe you should have "gone off" actual evidence huh.

What have we learned today?

We're not here to learn. What the hell is wrong with you, libtard?!?

 

[martybegan]

Flimsy rationalization on Aisle 4.

Complete lack of credible evidence on Aisle Post One.

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

View attachment 300900​

So do you support impeachment or not? I was going off your general Prog whining.

Maybe you should have "gone off" actual evidence huh.

What have we learned today?

How about you answer my question, Dodgeball soy boi?

 

[Pogo]

Complete lack of credible evidence on Aisle Post One.

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

View attachment 300900​

So do you support impeachment or not? I was going off your general Prog whining.

Maybe you should have "gone off" actual evidence huh.

What have we learned today?

How about you answer my question, Dodgeball soy boi?

How about you should have posed that question before you ASS-sumed the answer, Dimbulb?

My posts are not held in secret. Go search 'em. Who knows, maybe I'm bluffing. There's always a first time.

Ya feel lucky, punk?

 

[martybegan]

any reference to credible evidence from someone who supports Impeachment is laughable.

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

View attachment 300900​

So do you support impeachment or not? I was going off your general Prog whining.

Maybe you should have "gone off" actual evidence huh.

What have we learned today?

How about you answer my question, Dodgeball soy boi?

How about you should have posed that question before you ASS-sumed the answer, Dimbulb?

Answer the question.

 

[bodecea]

That’s not how it works.

Annual cost to attend Rutgers: $30,572

Rutgers student told not to quote Bible in essay because of 'separation of church and state'

I didn't know Rutgers was the state.

And it is separation of church FROM the state. The intention was to prevent the state from telling you how to practice your faith, not for universities to bar you from even accessing or referencing it. The former is freedom from censorship; the latter is the left's way of twisting it into TOTAL censorship.

It's a Public University which means Constitutional restrictions on government apply to it as well.

You are actually backing this professor in stating the Separations Clause of the Constitution as a reason for limiting direct quotation?

OMFG

It didn't happen.

 

[martybegan]

That’s not how it works.

Annual cost to attend Rutgers: $30,572

Rutgers student told not to quote Bible in essay because of 'separation of church and state'

I didn't know Rutgers was the state.

And it is separation of church FROM the state. The intention was to prevent the state from telling you how to practice your faith, not for universities to bar you from even accessing or referencing it. The former is freedom from censorship; the latter is the left's way of twisting it into TOTAL censorship.

It's a Public University which means Constitutional restrictions on government apply to it as well.

You are actually backing this professor in stating the Separations Clause of the Constitution as a reason for limiting direct quotation?

OMFG

It didn't happen.

How do you know it didn't happen?

 

[bodecea]

That’s not how it works.

Annual cost to attend Rutgers: $30,572

Rutgers student told not to quote Bible in essay because of 'separation of church and state'

Got a legitimate source, or just this blog?

By the way, wanna buy a bridge?

Three days later, still nothing.

Ah feel your pain. I couldn't find any either.

Attacking the source, the first and last refuge of the person with nothing else to argue about.

What a lazy twat you are.

The question stands untouched. Find us any legitimate source reporting that this event happened at all.

I already tried. Every single one referred back to this unsourced article. All of them. Every last one.

CHRIST you people are gullible.

I could point out here that this makes three threads in a row by the same OP that I cited and easily-found gap in his credibility that he can't answer.

Still going for the "it never happened" trope.

I lean towards it never happened about 51% to 49%....it MAY have happened because some professors think of themselves as god on earth and have the weirdest requirements. But I lean MORE towards it didn't happen because CRCs are known for making up shi-it in order to make themselves victims of religious persecution rather than take personal responsibility for screwing up.

 

[martybegan]

Got a legitimate source, or just this blog?

By the way, wanna buy a bridge?

Three days later, still nothing.

Ah feel your pain. I couldn't find any either.

Attacking the source, the first and last refuge of the person with nothing else to argue about.

What a lazy twat you are.

The question stands untouched. Find us any legitimate source reporting that this event happened at all.

I already tried. Every single one referred back to this unsourced article. All of them. Every last one.

CHRIST you people are gullible.

I could point out here that this makes three threads in a row by the same OP that I cited and easily-found gap in his credibility that he can't answer.

Still going for the "it never happened" trope.

I lean towards it never happened about 51% to 49%....it MAY have happened because some professors think of themselves as god on earth and have the weirdest requirements. But I lean MORE towards it didn't happen because CRCs are known for making up shi-it in order to make themselves victims of religious persecution rather than take personal responsibility for screwing up.

wow, talk about some bullshit assumptions being made on your part.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That’s not how it works.

Annual cost to attend Rutgers: $30,572

Rutgers student told not to quote Bible in essay because of 'separation of church and state'

"“Avoid quoting scripture in academic papers unless you are commenting on scripture,” Sandler wrote.... "

Spot on. It's an academic paper, not a Jehovah's witness flyer.

 

[martybegan]

That’s not how it works.

Annual cost to attend Rutgers: $30,572

Rutgers student told not to quote Bible in essay because of 'separation of church and state'

"“Avoid quoting scripture in academic papers unless you are commenting on scripture,” Sandler wrote.... "

Spot on. It's an academic paper, not a Jehovah's witness flyer.

Try reading the article. In it the writer was using scripture to support HIS position on acceptance of LGBT people against a friends mother's belief against it. The topic was about a woman's view of her son's homosexuality based on said woman's faith.

In his paper, Cordi referenced a personal friend of his who struggles with his own homosexual identity, especially given the views of the individual’s mother. Cordi wrote about how his friend's mother cites her Christian religion and beliefs to justify her opinion of people who identify as gay.

Cordi is a Christian who disagrees with his friends’ mother's views toward members of the LGBT community and quoted scripture from the Bible to support his position. Cordi quoted the popular verse John 3:16 from the Bible: “For God so loved the WORLD that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life."

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In it the writer was using scripture to support HIS position on acceptance of LGBT people against a friends mother's belief against it.

And, if preferenced by something like, "I can find basis for this in biblical scripture", then it's appropriate.

And if his professor still has a problem, there are academic boards at every University which exist precisely to arbitrate these disputes. You will have to excuse me if I am not buying every word of that article as fact.

 

[martybegan]

In it the writer was using scripture to support HIS position on acceptance of LGBT people against a friends mother's belief against it.

And, if preferenced by something like, "I can find basis for this in biblical scripture", then it's appropriate.

And if his professor still has a problem, there are academic boards at every University which exist precisely to arbitrate these disputes. You will have to excuse me if I am not buying every word of that article as fact.

Nice to see you actually read it this time instead of just making blanket assumptions.

The crux of the article is that the instructor used a worthless rationale for not using scripture in the essay.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In it the writer was using scripture to support HIS position on acceptance of LGBT people against a friends mother's belief against it.

And, if preferenced by something like, "I can find basis for this in biblical scripture", then it's appropriate.

And if his professor still has a problem, there are academic boards at every University which exist precisely to arbitrate these disputes. You will have to excuse me if I am not buying every word of that article as fact.

Nice to see you actually read it this time instead of just making blanket assumptions.

The crux of the article is that the instructor used a worthless rationale for not using scripture in the essay.

So, a human made a mistake. We should start a misleading website and rile up Christians immediately!

Sorry, just felt like making fun of that garbage website.

 

[Pogo]

Uh HUH.

Leaving aside the wankily fallacious impotence of that particular nonconclusion for the moment, where do you have any credible evidence (or, for that matter, incredible evidence) that I "support impeachment", whatever that means?

See what I mean? Oh look, Buddy Holly's back.

View attachment 300900​

So do you support impeachment or not? I was going off your general Prog whining.

Maybe you should have "gone off" actual evidence huh.

What have we learned today?

How about you answer my question, Dodgeball soy boi?

How about you should have posed that question before you ASS-sumed the answer, Dimbulb?

Answer the question.

Too late. Answer it yourself. See the search box?