Simon Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 All of this is fine. It is also inconsistent with what you said earlier wrt Charlie Brown as well as your uneven treatment of the FCC and schools. Order up!
GG Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 I remember him. Pretty good pickup. He went to Johns Hopkins right? Do you think he'd get any sacks in Rex's D? Columbia.
4merper4mer Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 Order up! Ok fine. You don't want to have a discussion. I'll again attempt to explain. If you don't want to respond with anything rational that is your choice. 1: Linus' remarks are certainly religious in nature....at least in my opinion. They are also roughly 15 seconds in a show that is 20+ minutes long which contains a dog that plays shortstop and employs his doghouse as a WW1 fighter plane. You used the term indoctrination to describe Linus' speech. An argument can certainly be made for that. An argument can also be made against calling it indoctrination. Some might point out that Linus is not real, nor is Snoopy. As cartoon characters, some might think of them as less than coercive figures. It is also true that some might say they are a mechanism to fool children into believing a certain message. It is also possible for someone to point out that Christianity exists.....because it does. Linus explains one of the basic tenets of Christianity in that program. He reads the passage and the other children respond. He does not engage in a sermon. IIRC he reads the passage in an attempt to juxtapose the behavior of Lucy and crew at Christmas against the origin of Christmas. He uses this mechanism to encourage a change in behavior. I don't think that is really debatable. What is debatable is whether he does it to encourage belief in Christ, to reinforce behavior preference to children who already believe, or simply to get them to stop screwing around and being jerks. At no point does Linus say "you should believe that Christ is your savior". He wants them all to change their behavior. He reminds them of the origin of Christmas and they change their behavior. Mission accomplished Linus. He recites from the Bible which is absolutely a document that has shaped part of human history. Whether you or I believe all, some or none of it, there is no denying it has had a significant impact on history. Would you have every reference to Christianity and religion of any sort taken out of every government institution, regulation, or building? Can that be done? If not, where is the line drawn? I think these are fair questions without easy answers. Is what Linus said enough to have the Charlie Brown special removed from schools? If so, who judges what is on one side of the line and what is one the other? Is it like porn at the Supreme Court? We'll all know it when we see it? I asked you to provide the name of a movie or show commonly shown in schools. You have apparently refused and chosen to mock my request. That's fine. The request stands. Fulfill it if you wish. Whatever you name I am fairly certain I'll be able to view it and point out something that can be interpreted as promotion of a religion or something that restricts religion....probably both. These may or may not be as overt as Linus' speech but they will be in there. 2: I'm not 100% sure I understand your comment about CBS and the founding fathers. I took it to mean that the founders did not anticipate television or radio. If I have that wrong please explain. In any event, the FCC regulates the airwaves and what goes out via broadcast. I won't pretend to know everything that comes under their jurisdiction, but they are certainly a government agency. How would allowing a religious message to go over public airwaves controlled by the government differ from a school allowing a religious message to be displayed in your humble opinion? Each is a case of government having the ability to regulate a message. One, the school, is seen as having an absolute requirement to squelch this message, while the other, the FCC, is seen has having an absolute requirement to allow it to pass. How is that consistent? On a side note, if I understand your FF comment correctly I agree that they likely did not foresee TV and the like. Do you think they envisioned schools coming under Federal jurisdiction? Columbia. Are you asking about CBS like Simon? Because I know what the C stands for. Thanks anyway though. Or are you saying that Marsellus Wallace was South American. If so, I did not know that.
IDBillzFan Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 I see that some people do not understand that the constitutional freedoms of religion and expression are meant to apply to such activities performed in public places, not just on private property. There is no constitutional separation of church and state, such practice is not indoctrination, and the fact that adults are now being "triggered" by this shows what a bunch of ignorant $#@@#%@ people are starting to become. Oddly enough, those same dumbasses who feel triggered by a reference to Christmas are the very first ones who look forward to their paid federal Christmas holiday. Order up! Says the guy who worries that people will be indoctrinated by a 50-year-old Christmas cartoon.
GG Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 Are you asking about CBS like Simon? Because I know what the C stands for. Thanks anyway though. Or are you saying that Marsellus Wallace was South American. If so, I did not know that. If he was South American, I'd have written Colombia.
Azalin Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 (edited) Well it's good to know that you're cool with our public schools having the freedom to hang Church of Satan posters anywhere they please. I'm sure anybody triggered by that is just an ignorant $#@@#%@. You're drawing a false comparison between what one person - in this case a school nurse - hangs on her door, and the policy and participation of what the entire school does. When taken in the context of a holiday which celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ, there is absolutely nothing unconstitutional about her hanging that poster on her door. And just for the record, were there a national holiday which celebrated Satan, I wouldn't have a problem with a teacher or a school nurse hanging a poster to that effect. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion allows people to openly and publicly celebrate their beliefs regardless of what others think. And yes, any adult who is actually 'triggered' by anything is a complete $#@@%. Edited December 15, 2016 by Azalin
IDBillzFan Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 And just for the record, were there a national holiday which celebrated Satan, I wouldn't have a problem with a teacher or a school nurse hanging a poster to that effect. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion allows people to openly and publicly celebrate their beliefs regardless of what others think. The other stupidity tied the that false equivalent is that -- policies and laws aside -- in places where you ARE free to hang Church of Satan posters, you wouldn't need a person of authority to decree against it because most people simply wouldn't tolerate it and would take it down, much like you see bikers to line up to protect grieving families from the Westboro nutbags. And the reason the Church of Satan banner would never fly is because a majority of Americans believe in God, but the number of Americans who vow their souls to Satan is second only to the number of people who actually believe Benghazi was started because of a Youtube video.
grinreaper Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 (edited) You're drawing a false comparison between what one person - in this case a school nurse - hangs on her door, and the policy and participation of what the entire school does. When taken in the context of a holiday which celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ, there is absolutely nothing unconstitutional about her hanging that poster on her door. And just for the record, were there a national holiday which celebrated Satan, I wouldn't have a problem with a teacher or a school nurse hanging a poster to that effect. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion allows people to openly and publicly celebrate their beliefs regardless of what others think. And yes, any adult who is actually 'triggered' by anything is a complete $#@@%. NSFW Edited December 15, 2016 by SDS
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 Jeez, man. How about some not safe for work tags? FFS
grinreaper Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 Jeez, man. How about some not safe for work tags? FFS Sorry.
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 Sorry. No worries. I'd also suggest hiding it with a spoilers tag.
Azalin Posted December 15, 2016 Posted December 15, 2016 And the reason the Church of Satan banner would never fly is because a majority of Americans believe in God, but the number of Americans who vow their souls to Satan is second only to the number of people who actually believe Benghazi was started because of a Youtube video. For what it's worth, the church of Satan are actually atheist. They just like to use the names and symbols associated with Satan strictly to piss off Christians. Anton Lavey based their philosophy largely on the 'rugged individualism' found in the works of Ayn Rand. I've known a couple church members over the years. To borrow a phrase from Tom, they're idiots.
GG Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 I've known a couple church members over the years. To borrow a phrase from Tom, they're idiots. Tom may think he's smart, but he did not invent the term "idiot"
DC Tom Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 Tom may think he's smart, but he did not invent the term "idiot" Dan Snyder didn't invent the term "Redskin," either. Yet he took it, branded it, and made it into the powerful, sincere compliment we all know and love today...
LA Grant Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 Hey, speaking of Satan... http://www.king5.com/news/local/tacoma/after-school-satan-club-concerns-tacoma-parents/370418113 Here we have crybaby parents protesting the after-school Satan Club, even though it is allowed under state and federal law, and that the club itself is in response to similar Christian after-school clubs. Typical special snowflake Christians, always trying to regulate our speech. You know how they are, if it isn't "Merry Christmas" or "under God" they throw their usual tantrums. I know a few! Ah, what a dumb country. Anyway, happy holidays and Hail Satan, everyone.
GG Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 Dan Snyder didn't invent the term "Redskin," either. Yet he took it, branded it, and made it into the powerful, sincere compliment we all know and love today... Same point applies, Snyder may be smart, but he didn't brand or trademark the Redskins name either. He's maximizing the commercial use of the word though, but it's not his term.
unbillievable Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 Hey, speaking of Satan... http://www.king5.com/news/local/tacoma/after-school-satan-club-concerns-tacoma-parents/370418113 Here we have crybaby parents protesting the after-school Satan Club, even though it is allowed under state and federal law, and that the club itself is in response to similar Christian after-school clubs. Typical special snowflake Christians, always trying to regulate our speech. You know how they are, if it isn't "Merry Christmas" or "under God" they throw their usual tantrums. I know a few! Ah, what a dumb country. Anyway, happy holidays and Hail Satan, everyone. Did you notice any riots breaking out? Any fights? Fire alarm being pulled? How about protests blocking the entrance? A bunch of Christians voiced their concern about a club specifically named to make fun of their religious belief... when was the last time something similar was allowed by the left without violent retaliation? Not even for BlueLivesMatter.
boyst Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 (edited) The other stupidity tied the that false equivalent is that -- policies and laws aside -- in places where you ARE free to hang Church of Satan posters, you wouldn't need a person of authority to decree against it because most people simply wouldn't tolerate it and would take it down, much like you see bikers to line up to protect grieving families from the Westboro nutbags. And the reason the Church of Satan banner would never fly is because a majority of Americans believe in God, but the number of Americans who vow their souls to Satan is second only to the number of people who actually believe Benghazi was started because of a Youtube video. im curious as to what % still do. The number is falling quickly No worries. I'd also suggest hiding it with a spoilers tag. what did I miss? Edited December 16, 2016 by Boyst62
Azalin Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 Hey, speaking of Satan... http://www.king5.com/news/local/tacoma/after-school-satan-club-concerns-tacoma-parents/370418113 Here we have crybaby parents protesting the after-school Satan Club, even though it is allowed under state and federal law, and that the club itself is in response to similar Christian after-school clubs. Typical special snowflake Christians, always trying to regulate our speech. You know how they are, if it isn't "Merry Christmas" or "under God" they throw their usual tantrums. I know a few! Ah, what a dumb country. Anyway, happy holidays and Hail Satan, everyone. They're welcome to do as they please, but to pretend that their motivation is anything other than to incite and upset is ridiculous. To insist otherwise is to be obtuse.
DC Tom Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 They're welcome to do as they please, but to pretend that their motivation is anything other than to incite and upset is ridiculous. To insist otherwise is to be obtuse. Just like Christians during the Crusades! [/Frenkle]
Recommended Posts