primitives being moronic again

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3483046

Oh my.

The stupidity just fills, flows, overflows, and floods on Skins's island.

Midwest_Doc  Donating Member  (488 posts) Thu Jun-19-08 11:09 AM
Original message

The Christian Taliban Are At It Again!
   
I considered posting this on R/T, but I think the core issue is beyond a discussion of belief.

*******

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today filed a lawsuit in federal district court on behalf of several religious leaders and a religious organization whose First Amendment rights are violated by South Carolina’s “I Believe” license plate.  blah blah blah blah blah

Anybody heard about any Unitarians running amok and chopping off heads?

Remember, to the primitives, even Unitarians are "fundies," the "Christian Taliban," much less other denominations.

Anyway.

This bonfire is beyond absurd.

Gawd, the primitives are stupid.

This time, I'm posting the sensible comments, because it's a big bonfire, and those are fewer, much fewer, than the really stupid crap the primitives are spewing, thus less copying-and-pasting.

MrCoffee  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 11:16 AM
Response to Original message

4. These are specialty plates, right?
   
The ones you have to pay extra for? South Carolina isn't changing the standard plate design to reflect a religious preference, are they?

MrCoffee  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #7

14. Has anyone called their state legislator to propose one?
   
The state can acknolegdge religion, it just can't prefer one. Unless someone can show that the state flat-out rejected a Hindu or Muslim or any other plate, there's nothing wrong with this.

MrCoffee  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #15

19. Can't happen and shouldn't? Why on earth not?
   
The state isn't establishing a religion, nor is it prohibiting the free exercise thereof. What is your problem with the plates? You don't like Christianity?

lukasahero  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #14

84. If I understand correctly - there's a minimum interest requirement
   
While someone can propose a specific license plate, there needs to be enough interest in one to make it happen and there aren't enough, say, Buddhists in the area to meet the requirement even if all of them knew to express an interest. (Heard on NR a week or two ago - don't remember exact details but I'll look it up if pressed.)

MrCoffee  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #17

18. If they did not get similar treatment, that would be excellent grounds to sue
   
This, however, is not.

hfojvt  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #9

39. I believe people pay extra for such license plates thus the cost will be fully borne by the people choosing to purchase them. The state is collecting that money from willing citizens that it is using to reimburse the Lt. Gov., not collecting it from taxpayers at large.

bullwinkle428  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #11

46. Wow, what a list of options they offer! I must admit that I found the NASCAR favorite drivers series amusing, although I did notice that the Dale Earnhardt Jr. plate was inaccurate - his current number is 88, not 8!

DadOf2LittleAngels  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #12

28. Right fcsk people who believe differently than you
   
What business do they have being in your diverse society..

NeedleCast  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #12

31. It's self-righteous to display a religious symbol on a bumper?
   
Hmmmm, I better go scrape those Obama stickers off. Wouldn't want to be self righteous....

hfojvt  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #16

85. No. It is clear that crosses cannot be prohibited unless all others are too.
   
there needs to be enough of a demand for a crescent plate.

The state plays these 'games' because there is popular support for it. I think it's more puzzling why we progressives play this 'game' of 'let's try to alienate the majority.'

DadOf2LittleAngels  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 12:14 PM
Response to Original message

26. Im sorry this is just crying for no good reason
   
Its a stupid license plate, I mean people get them for football teams! I suppose the fact my bro cant get an NHL place in Carolina but others can get their Nascar plate means he is 'A second Class Citizen'...

NeedleCast  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 12:15 PM
Response to Original message

27. Just Goes to Show People Will Get Worked Up About Anything
   
In Virginia, we have a "Children First" license plate that's become very popular. Does that mean the state is giving preferential treatment to children?

NeedleCast  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #29

30. Look, Unless I can get a plate that says
   
White, Middle-Aged, somewhat overweight, shaved headed, goatee sporting people first, I'm going to get offended and file a lawsuit! Everyone else is doing it, might as well get my piece of the pie. Stupid state government and their pro-children policies.

Sarcasm aside, I just don't see this as a state endorsement of a certain religion as it appears no other religions have attempted to get a plate adorned with their various symbols made. If Muslims or Jews were to try and fail to get a similar plate done, THEN I'd have a problem with it. Not before. But don't let that stop you from being all offended about a license plate. I know that's what we're supposed to do here in the states when someone expresses a thought or opinion we disagree with.

hfojvt  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message

37. isn't that the wrong headline?
   
Sounds like the anti-Christian taliban are at it again with their stupid lawsuit.

hfojvt  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #42

48. no sillier than comparing a license plate option to taliban-like oppression. But it's easier to oppress a majority by using a court. That's why the anti-christian brigade is working through the court instead of through the legislature.

hfojvt  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #49

60. I did forget that
   
I had this silly notion that the Bill of Rights safeguarded everybody's rights, not just the rights of minorities. How undemocratic is it for the legislature to pander to the will of the voters? Obviously we cannot have that.

I did not say anything about oppression. That was a red herring you dragged into the argument, and I foolishly snapped at it. What I said is that some people seemingly hate Christianity and thus wanna make an issue every time a President says 'under God' or has a prayer service with the Armed Forces or allows a specialty license plate with a cross on it to be sold to people who want one.

In their eyes, we cannot allow Christianity out of the closet because doing so oppresses minorities. When I was an atheist at the University of Minnesota, I never once felt oppressed because a Christian fraternity put up a banner that said "Jesus Christ is Lord of the University of Minnesota". It was their free speech right, IMO, and by putting up a banner did not make it either true, nor official University policy. The first amendment also includes the line 'nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof.'

Marrah_G  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 01:00 PM
Response to Original message

40. For you to relate this to the oppression the Taliban inflicts on its people makes you look foolish

leftynyc  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 03:26 PM
Response to Original message

67. I'm sorry, but comparing a vanity license plate to the Taliban is - and do forgive me for being blunt - moronic.

texasleo  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 03:42 PM
Response to Original message

75. I love how the extreme left compares obnoxious plates to keeping women in bee keeper suits.

DadOf2LittleAngels  (1000+ posts) Thu Jun-19-08 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #77

89. whos religious freedom is being violated?
   
I guess the problem here is some people think they have a right to *not* be offended and Im sorry peeps, that just does not exist..

If I were an Atheist or a Muslim a license plate with a cross in *no* conceivable way limits my ability to freely practice my religion... It is not establishing a religion nor is it restricting the free practice and all 50 people who will buy this plate will not intimidate folks into renouncing their faith..

That's it for now; it's a bonfire that's obviously going to be burning for a long time.

[djones520]

Sanity at the DUmp?  Undies agreeing with me?  Maybe I was wrong all along.  Maybe the Rapture has come.

[Texacon]

I take issue with your title Frank.  It is redundant.

KC

[MrsSmith]

MattBaggins  (1000+ posts)      Thu Jun-19-08 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
110. We have a problem Houston
 If you look down on that page of plates; SC all ready has a plate for Secular Humanists.

Secular Humanists of the Low Country Plate


 
  To apply for a Secular Humanist plate, you must present a current organizational membership showing that you are a current and active member of the organization. The fee for the plate is $30.00 every two years in additional to the regular registration fee. As a non-profit organization, the Secular Humanists of the Low Country do not receive any portion of the funds generated from the license plate sales.


 

[MrsSmith]

Wow!!   

hfojvt  (1000+ posts)       Thu Jun-19-08 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #45
56. did the South Carolina legislature suddenly become 'Congress'?
 Can you tell me how many of the original 13 colonies had state religions when the Bill of Rights was written? I know Virginia did.  
====================================

 Tierra_y_Libertad  (1000+ posts)       Thu Jun-19-08 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #56
68. Federal laws override state laws. 
 Virginia also had slavery. 
 
=======================================

 hfojvt  (1000+ posts)       Thu Jun-19-08 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. they didn't until approximately 1957
 Then suddenly the SCOTUS decided that the 100 year old 14th Amendment should be applied to everything. Even if that wasn't the intention when it was passed. Slavery was overturned by the will of the northern people willing to kill or die to make it happen, and then by amending the Constitution.
 
=========================================
 
 Umbram (1000+ posts)      Thu Jun-19-08 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #70
73. Yea, those damn activist judges extending liberty... {insert sarcasm tag}
   
 =============================================
 
 hfojvt  (1000+ posts)       Thu Jun-19-08 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #73
98. What is liberty?
 If 80% want to do something, and the court sides with the 20%, then it seems to me that the 80% have LOST liberty. You see it differently perhaps, since you are with the 20%. I am against the idea of top down rule.

 

[Red October]

I seriously wonder how so many people could be so professionally ****ing stupid.  A state can't REQUIRE anyone to be any particular religion.  That's what the First Ammendment stipulates.  Nothing more.  All this complaining about "endorsement" and "foisting it on the public" is a bunch of horseshit.  I'd like to send liberals to prison for unlawful "foisting" every time they blather on about one of their sacred cows.   

[Crazy Horse]

Here is the kinda plate I had in Virginia and pissed off a lot of primitives.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,many cuss words and them telling me I was number one or 11. Come to think of it, other than profanity and vulgar gestures..........there was no speaking truth to power, no moment of conversion............



[attachment deleted by admin]

[Carl]

By their intsant and insane hatred of anything representing Christianity they name who their master is.