Lounge of Tomorrow

€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides.  


Go Back   Lounge of Tomorrow > Squaresville > Daily Grind
Swank Swag
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Clear Unread

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 12-06-2008, 11:02 AM   #11
Sir Dillon
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 48
Sir Dillon is coming on coolSir Dillon is coming on coolSir Dillon is coming on coolSir Dillon is coming on cool
Quote:
Originally Posted by flippyshark View Post
Sir Dillon,

That reply doesn't appear to be addressing the issue (the right for the sign to be there as opposed to the merits of its content), and it's confusing in the bargain. Again, please clarify.
Sorry for the confusion.

Just as much as religious people read the Bible in ways (not what it actually says, but what they want it to say) that to suit their own ends; they also read into the Constitution the same way.

As referenced in the OP, Lars and his caller claimed the 1st Amendment (reading into it what they want it to say, not what it actually does) supported the religious display but not the atheist display. Then claiming it was hate speech and was tantamount to being agents of the government in proliferating that particular belief, they concluded it was an unconstitutional display.

That position is a special pleading fallacy. Holding others to their rules while not holding themselves equally accountable.

The "I'm right...you're wrong" mentality previously mentioned by one of your cohorts.

Anyhow...

Thanks for the response.
Sir Dillon is offline   Submit to Quotes Reply With Quote
 



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:17 PM.


Lunarpages.com Web Hosting

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.