Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Too much time on that guys hands.

 

 

I politely disagree.

 

Its not a matter of too much time, but too much influence from those who falsely claim that religion should only be in the home, and government should enforce that.

Posted

I think "paid" is the operative word there. If the loser has a problem with the paper making money on ads like this, he should pony up the dough and put an ad in dismissing Christianity.

Posted

.....from those who falsely claim that religion should only be in the home, and government should enforce that.

it's amusing how many people will try to make that point by quoting the first ammendment. :lol:
Posted

it's amusing how many people will try to make that point by quoting the first ammendment. :lol:

 

True.

 

But TYTT reponse covers that well

 

Freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.

Posted

I think "paid" is the operative word there. If the loser has a problem with the paper making money on ads like this, he should pony up the dough and put an ad in dismissing Christianity.

 

Or, you know, turn the page. Or stop getting the newspaper.

Posted

Exactly. For decades the Left has trumpeted the right to use the airwaves and all media without restriction and censorship of any kind. Parents against violence and sex on public broadcast TV - forgetaboutit! "Control your children, you bad parent," "If you don't want to watch it - turn the channel," "kids should be taught about sex in schools - like putting condoms on bananas in Kindergarten," and on and on.

 

They're all about diversity and choice except when the viewpoints they're interested in are challenged, then it's "silence those hocus-pocus believing neanderthals."

 

My advice to the chosen "spokesperson" for the group - STFU you moron. If you don't like what you're reading - don't read it.

Posted
If you don't like what you're reading - don't read it.

 

I used to get the LA Times delivered every day and read it front to back, but they were so hard left, I cancelled my subscription and opted for the more local OC Register. Surprisingly, they turned left, too. So I cancelled their subscription, and now I just get my news from what is essentially the last place I trust: Infowars.

Posted (edited)

I used to get the LA Times delivered every day and read it front to back, but they were so hard left, I cancelled my subscription and opted for the more local OC Register. Surprisingly, they turned left, too. So I cancelled their subscription, and now I just get my news from what is essentially the last place I trust: Infowars.

 

I got the SF Chronicle when I moved north. I don't give a **** if they're left. I'm a big boy I can get what I need regardless of where they lean. Who cares. But I did cancel the Chronicle because that !@#$ couldn't get my paper to me until after I left for work.

 

Oh and BTW I have many of my right leaning friends ask how I can handle it up here with all the liberals. I just tell them it's easy. Just proves we're right.

Edited by Chef Jim
Posted

I got the SF Chronicle when I moved north. I don't give a **** if they're left. I'm a big boy I can get what I need regardless of where they lean. Who cares. But I did cancel the Chronicle because that !@#$ couldn't get my paper to me until after I left for work.

 

Oh and BTW I have many of my right leaning friends ask how I can handle it up here with all the liberals. I just tell them it's easy. Just proves we're right.

 

Not tolerating the leftish crap doesn't make someone less of a "big boy." But when the massive front-page story on the day of the recall election is an interview they were sitting on with a woman who claimed Arnold groped her, then I have no need for it any more.

 

What I want is unbiased news on the front page, a decent crossword puzzle and, if possible, Get Fuzzy and Pearls Before Swines. Not necessarily in that order.

 

On the other hand, once I quit smoking, my morning ritual changed and newspapers were doomed anyway.

Posted

I could be wrong - frequently am, but I believe the point is one of religious tolerance. The Left have preached tolerance of differences for decades. But if things don't conform to their secularist religion, then they won't tolerate it. They want nothing to do with anything religious that isn't secularist.

Posted

I could be wrong - frequently am, but I believe the point is one of religious tolerance. The Left have preached tolerance of differences for decades. But if things don't conform to their secularist religion, then they won't tolerate it. They want nothing to do with anything christian religious that isn't secularist.

 

Fixed

×
×
  • Create New...