Post #114,927
8/22/03 12:58:11 PM
|
I don't agree
You think the current interpretation is a perversion. I think it's a logical outgrowth. You don't agree with current case law in this matter, I do.
-----------------------------------------
[link|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html|?W]
Where were you in 72?
[link|http://www.blah3.com/graymatter/archives/00000420.html|Fair and Balanced] sig
|
Post #114,930
8/22/03 1:04:15 PM
|
And its discriminatory.
Just as much so as separate toilets. ...without regard to race, color, religion, creed, gender, national origin, age, disability, marital or veteran status, sexual orientation... If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #114,935
8/22/03 1:28:16 PM
|
Don't see how you can call that logical.
For the reasons I stated.
Whether that is the current interpretation or not, I don't care. Argument from authority. Make your own argument, not someone else's.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #115,158
8/24/03 9:18:29 AM
|
Argument from authority
A complaint about being illogical in an argument about religion.
Good one, Scott.
And the complaint is about using the argument from authority.
About religion.
Better one.
-----------------------------------------
[link|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html|?W]
Where were you in 72?
[link|http://www.blah3.com/graymatter/archives/00000420.html|Fair and Balanced] sig
|
Post #115,160
8/24/03 9:37:07 AM
8/24/03 9:37:20 AM
|
Wrong. Lame attempt at misdirection.
This is an argument about politics. We're not arguing faith. We're arguing law. Try again.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Edited by admin
Aug. 24, 2003, 09:37:20 AM EDT
|
Post #115,279
8/25/03 10:26:49 AM
|
The law is in regards to faith.
The point is proposed that there is "no difference" in laws regarding hobbyists use of public facilities and laws regarding religious groups use of those facilities. I am saying you can't divorce the religious aspect from the discussion. There is a difference.
-----------------------------------------
[link|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html|?W]
Where were you in 72?
[link|http://www.blah3.com/graymatter/archives/00000420.html|Fair and Balanced] sig
|
Post #115,284
8/25/03 10:48:16 AM
|
Doesn't matter what the law is about.
We're discussing law primarily about religion secondarily. Your previous objection is therefore ridiculous.
Religion is a (strange) hobby, as far as I am concerned. There is no difference. And as pointed out elsewhere, apparently current case law supports my view on this manner, since you seem to be impressed with authority.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #115,297
8/25/03 11:58:23 AM
|
Ok
We are done. The impasse is obvious. The "no difference" position is what it all boils down to and I don't see any way of convincing you of the error of your conviction.
-----------------------------------------
[link|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html|?W]
Where were you in 72?
[link|http://www.blah3.com/graymatter/archives/00000420.html|Fair and Balanced] sig
|
Post #115,298
8/25/03 12:07:51 PM
|
Heh heh...
...because his isn't in error.
Nudge ;-)
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #115,300
8/25/03 12:11:57 PM
|
Braap
I make rude mouth noises in your general direction.
Nudge ;-) backatcha
-----------------------------------------
[link|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html|?W]
Where were you in 72?
[link|http://www.blah3.com/graymatter/archives/00000420.html|Fair and Balanced] sig
|
Post #115,299
8/25/03 12:11:49 PM
|
...
You're treating religious groups differently. This is, by all definitions applicable, discrimination. The Constitution specifically disallows this kind of discrimination. I'm at a loss as to how you can't see that.
Impasse indeed. You've managed to present nothing that explains why your position isn't illogical, yet you're convinced that my "conviction" is in error. None so blind...
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #115,303
8/25/03 12:47:07 PM
|
I agree with your point, Don.
Not all "clubs" and "hobbies" are equivalent. Plug in "man boy love" or "child porn photo exchange" or "animal sacrifice" or "masochist sadist interaction" group. Yeah, they deserve to meet in public facilities as well.
Maybe NOT!
One needs to have a blind spot not to see the evil baggage that comes with religions.
Alex
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something." -- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
|
Post #115,309
8/25/03 1:16:21 PM
|
Er... *legal* groups.
Which is a perfectly valid distinction to make.
I'm certainly not blind to the danger of religion. However, making the distinction on religion is in direct contradiction to the Constitution.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #115,313
8/25/03 2:34:16 PM
|
But ritual animal sacrifice is perfectly legal.
[link|http://www.religioustolerance.org/santeri1.htm|SUPREME COURT RULING ON SANTERIA ANIMAL SACRIFICES].
And so are consensual [link|http://www.geocities.com/rhsmcjrotc/parrisisland.html|power mind games].
Alex
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something." -- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
|
Post #115,314
8/25/03 2:38:18 PM
|
Cool...
...school barbecue!
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #115,315
8/25/03 2:47:07 PM
|
Goes in same category as the rest of the legal groups then.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #115,310
8/25/03 1:25:47 PM
|
And I know those...
One needs to have a blind spot not to see the evil baggage that comes with religions.
...that hold the same opinion about certain minority groups. Understand his point or not...its not illegal to be religious (unlike the other examples)...and as such that makes the view bigoted and prejudicial. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #115,318
8/25/03 4:00:14 PM
|
OK for just now: perhaps made illegal____just after WW-III?
|
Post #115,132
8/24/03 2:44:21 AM
|
Um, no . Current case law says the opposite
If a school allows the use of facilities by outside groups, it has to allow them whether religious or not.
----
Sometime you the windshield, sometime you the bug, sometime you the driver you turn on the windshield washer you keep going.
|
Post #115,161
8/24/03 9:37:58 AM
|
Good, that's how it should be.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
